Obama "regrets" Alito filibuster decision

[TNHarley]

White House: Obama 'regrets' decision to filibuster Supreme Court Justice Alito | Fox News
“Looking back on it, the president believes that he should have just followed his own advice and made a strong public case on the merits about his opposition to the nomination that President Bush had put forward,” he told reporters.
Earnest said that Republicans are going further than Obama did, with a pledge to not consider anyone the president nominates.
“There is a pretty stark difference here. What Republicans are advocating is wrong and is inconsistent with the requirements of the Constitution, primarily because the wording of the Constitution is unambiguous and does not provide an exception for election years,” he said.
Earnest also argued that the 2006 filibuster of Alito was different, because it was not likely to succeed since the votes already existed for him to be confirmed and was based on “substance.”
“What the president regrets is that Senate Democrats didn't focus more on making an effective public case about those substantive objections,” he said. “Instead, some Democrats engaged in a process of throwing sand in the gears of the confirmation process. And that's an approach that the president regrets.”

----
How convenient.
I do think it is different. I also think they should bring it to a vote. If it isn't a freakin hack, why stress? If he appoints a hack, do YOUR constitutional duty.
Granted, Republican Congressman are known for being idiots.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Of course he does....now

 

[martybegan]

White House: Obama 'regrets' decision to filibuster Supreme Court Justice Alito | Fox News
“Looking back on it, the president believes that he should have just followed his own advice and made a strong public case on the merits about his opposition to the nomination that President Bush had put forward,” he told reporters.
Earnest said that Republicans are going further than Obama did, with a pledge to not consider anyone the president nominates.
“There is a pretty stark difference here. What Republicans are advocating is wrong and is inconsistent with the requirements of the Constitution, primarily because the wording of the Constitution is unambiguous and does not provide an exception for election years,” he said.
Earnest also argued that the 2006 filibuster of Alito was different, because it was not likely to succeed since the votes already existed for him to be confirmed and was based on “substance.”
“What the president regrets is that Senate Democrats didn't focus more on making an effective public case about those substantive objections,” he said. “Instead, some Democrats engaged in a process of throwing sand in the gears of the confirmation process. And that's an approach that the president regrets.”

----
How convenient.
I do think it is different. I also think they should bring it to a vote. If it isn't a freakin hack, why stress? If he appoints a hack, do YOUR constitutional duty.
Granted, Republican Congressman are known for being idiots.

"I'm not sorry I did it, I'm sorry this has come back to bite me in the ass".

 

[SassyIrishLass]

White House: Obama 'regrets' decision to filibuster Supreme Court Justice Alito | Fox News
“Looking back on it, the president believes that he should have just followed his own advice and made a strong public case on the merits about his opposition to the nomination that President Bush had put forward,” he told reporters.
Earnest said that Republicans are going further than Obama did, with a pledge to not consider anyone the president nominates.
“There is a pretty stark difference here. What Republicans are advocating is wrong and is inconsistent with the requirements of the Constitution, primarily because the wording of the Constitution is unambiguous and does not provide an exception for election years,” he said.
Earnest also argued that the 2006 filibuster of Alito was different, because it was not likely to succeed since the votes already existed for him to be confirmed and was based on “substance.”
“What the president regrets is that Senate Democrats didn't focus more on making an effective public case about those substantive objections,” he said. “Instead, some Democrats engaged in a process of throwing sand in the gears of the confirmation process. And that's an approach that the president regrets.”

----
How convenient.
I do think it is different. I also think they should bring it to a vote. If it isn't a freakin hack, why stress? If he appoints a hack, do YOUR constitutional duty.
Granted, Republican Congressman are known for being idiots.

"I'm not sorry I did it, I'm sorry this has come back to bite me in the ass".

Obungles has a habit of having shit bite him in his dumbass

 

[Freewill]

“There is a pretty stark difference here. What Republicans are advocating is wrong and is inconsistent with the requirements of the Constitution, primarily because the wording of the Constitution is unambiguous and does not provide an exception for election years,” he said.

Yes, the words are ambiguous, thus tradition usually take precedence. Tradition is that no SCOTUS are confirmed in an election year. Obama just wants it his way when he wants it.

 

[SwimExpert]

 

[TheOldSchool]

“There is a pretty stark difference here. What Republicans are advocating is wrong and is inconsistent with the requirements of the Constitution, primarily because the wording of the Constitution is unambiguous and does not provide an exception for election years,” he said.

Yes, the words are ambiguous, thus tradition usually take precedence. Tradition is that no SCOTUS are confirmed in an election year. Obama just wants it his way when he wants it.

[VIDEO]Fact-checking claims about the 80-year SCOTUS nomination ‘tradition’

 

[the_human_being]

What boggles my mind is who told Obama what the Constitution said concerning the issue. He's never read it himself.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

White House: Obama 'regrets' decision to filibuster Supreme Court Justice Alito | Fox News
“Looking back on it, the president believes that he should have just followed his own advice and made a strong public case on the merits about his opposition to the nomination that President Bush had put forward,” he told reporters.
Earnest said that Republicans are going further than Obama did, with a pledge to not consider anyone the president nominates.
“There is a pretty stark difference here. What Republicans are advocating is wrong and is inconsistent with the requirements of the Constitution, primarily because the wording of the Constitution is unambiguous and does not provide an exception for election years,” he said.
Earnest also argued that the 2006 filibuster of Alito was different, because it was not likely to succeed since the votes already existed for him to be confirmed and was based on “substance.”
“What the president regrets is that Senate Democrats didn't focus more on making an effective public case about those substantive objections,” he said. “Instead, some Democrats engaged in a process of throwing sand in the gears of the confirmation process. And that's an approach that the president regrets.”

----
How convenient.
I do think it is different. I also think they should bring it to a vote. If it isn't a freakin hack, why stress? If he appoints a hack, do YOUR constitutional duty.
Granted, Republican Congressman are known for being idiots.

Just something you need to understand on how a liberal thinks.

How to spot a sociopath - 10 red flags that could save you from being swept under the influence of a charismatic nut job

#3) Sociopaths are incapable of feeling shame, guilt or remorse. Their brains simply lack the circuitry to process such emotions. This allows them to betray people, threaten people or harm people without giving it a second thought. They pursue any action that serves their own self interest even if it seriously harms others.
#5) Sociopaths seek to dominate others and "win" at all costs. They hate to lose any argument or fight and will viciously defend their web of lies, even to the point of logical absurdity.

Why was there no autopsy performed on the most conservative supreme court judge? Why did Justice Scalia go to a liberals resort (gifted to him) and at his age of 79 not bring a doctor along to make sure he doesn't over do his fun? Or was there a chance to change the setting of the supreme court by(see #3) having a dinner or drink provided to the judge(on the house of course) and then when he has a heart attack, there is a call in doctor to confirm he is dead. Seems strange that when a liberal needs to hide something or get more power , those around them tend to die.

THE CLINTON BODY-COUNT | WHAT REALLY HAPPENED

THE CLINTON BODY-COUNT
Don Adams- Don Adams was a lawyer in Arkansas who got involved trying to help the people who were being swindled out of their life savings. Died January 7, 1997
Gandy Baugh-Attorney representing Mr. Lassater in a case concerning alleged financial misconduct. - Died: January 8, 1994
Admiral Jeremy Boorda - Chief of Naval Operations - Died May 16th, 1996
Ron Brown - Former Chairman, DNC; Commerce Secretary - Died: May 3, 1996
Eric Butera - Witness - Died: December 4, 1997
There are many more

So when Obama was asked if he would appoint a moderate Supreme Court Justice, he laughed and said no way. So to infuriate the normal US citizen, he must FORCE upon us a Justice as far left radical as himself, to shove his immorality upon US once again. Only Lucifer is more EVIL than O.

 

[OldLady]

Of course he does....now

At least he knew who he was objecting to!

 

[TheOldSchool]

White House: Obama 'regrets' decision to filibuster Supreme Court Justice Alito | Fox News
“Looking back on it, the president believes that he should have just followed his own advice and made a strong public case on the merits about his opposition to the nomination that President Bush had put forward,” he told reporters.
Earnest said that Republicans are going further than Obama did, with a pledge to not consider anyone the president nominates.
“There is a pretty stark difference here. What Republicans are advocating is wrong and is inconsistent with the requirements of the Constitution, primarily because the wording of the Constitution is unambiguous and does not provide an exception for election years,” he said.
Earnest also argued that the 2006 filibuster of Alito was different, because it was not likely to succeed since the votes already existed for him to be confirmed and was based on “substance.”
“What the president regrets is that Senate Democrats didn't focus more on making an effective public case about those substantive objections,” he said. “Instead, some Democrats engaged in a process of throwing sand in the gears of the confirmation process. And that's an approach that the president regrets.”

----
How convenient.
I do think it is different. I also think they should bring it to a vote. If it isn't a freakin hack, why stress? If he appoints a hack, do YOUR constitutional duty.
Granted, Republican Congressman are known for being idiots.

Just something you need to understand on how a liberal thinks.

How to spot a sociopath - 10 red flags that could save you from being swept under the influence of a charismatic nut job

#3) Sociopaths are incapable of feeling shame, guilt or remorse. Their brains simply lack the circuitry to process such emotions. This allows them to betray people, threaten people or harm people without giving it a second thought. They pursue any action that serves their own self interest even if it seriously harms others.
#5) Sociopaths seek to dominate others and "win" at all costs. They hate to lose any argument or fight and will viciously defend their web of lies, even to the point of logical absurdity.

Why was there no autopsy performed on the most conservative supreme court judge? Why did Justice Scalia go to a liberals resort (gifted to him) and at his age of 79 not bring a doctor along to make sure he doesn't over do his fun? Or was there a chance to change the setting of the supreme court by(see #3) having a dinner or drink provided to the judge(on the house of course) and then when he has a heart attack, there is a call in doctor to confirm he is dead. Seems strange that when a liberal needs to hide something or get more power , those around them tend to die.

THE CLINTON BODY-COUNT | WHAT REALLY HAPPENED

THE CLINTON BODY-COUNT
Don Adams- Don Adams was a lawyer in Arkansas who got involved trying to help the people who were being swindled out of their life savings. Died January 7, 1997
Gandy Baugh-Attorney representing Mr. Lassater in a case concerning alleged financial misconduct. - Died: January 8, 1994
Admiral Jeremy Boorda - Chief of Naval Operations - Died May 16th, 1996
Ron Brown - Former Chairman, DNC; Commerce Secretary - Died: May 3, 1996
Eric Butera - Witness - Died: December 4, 1997
There are many more

So when Obama was asked if he would appoint a moderate Supreme Court Justice, he laughed and said no way. So to infuriate the normal US citizen, he must FORCE upon us a Justice as far left radical as himself, to shove his immorality upon US once again. Only Lucifer is more EVIL than O.

View attachment 63869

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Of course he does....now

At least he knew who he was objecting to!

And, he was voted on, and sits on the court today...

 

[OldLady]

“There is a pretty stark difference here. What Republicans are advocating is wrong and is inconsistent with the requirements of the Constitution, primarily because the wording of the Constitution is unambiguous and does not provide an exception for election years,” he said.

Yes, the words are ambiguous, thus tradition usually take precedence. Tradition is that no SCOTUS are confirmed in an election year. Obama just wants it his way when he wants it.

14 have been! That is the tradition! There is nothing in the Constitution saying that work stops in the President's final year.

 

[easyt65]

He regrets attacking the GOP then getting caught being a HYPOCRITE, THAT is what he regrets.

 

[Wildman]

He's never read it himself.

just toilet paper to him!!

 

[Freewill]

“There is a pretty stark difference here. What Republicans are advocating is wrong and is inconsistent with the requirements of the Constitution, primarily because the wording of the Constitution is unambiguous and does not provide an exception for election years,” he said.

Yes, the words are ambiguous, thus tradition usually take precedence. Tradition is that no SCOTUS are confirmed in an election year. Obama just wants it his way when he wants it.

14 have been! That is the tradition! There is nothing in the Constitution saying that work stops in the President's final year.

I am not sure your 14 number is correct.

Here is a chart that shows those nominated and in what year of the president's term. Make out of it what you will. But it does seem that since 1945 there has not been 14 confirmed.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/...rt-nominations-election-year-scalia.html?_r=0

 

[Freewill]

What boggles my mind is who told Obama what the Constitution said concerning the issue. He's never read it himself.

Give him time, he is not done rewriting it yet.

 

[TNHarley]

Of course he does....now

At least he knew who he was objecting to!

And, he was voted on, and sits on the court today...

" Well, Obama failed, so its cool." lol moron

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Of course he does....now

At least he knew who he was objecting to!

And, he was voted on, and sits on the court today...

" Well, Obama failed, so its cool." lol moron

Tell us, do two wrongs make a right?

And isn't your side supposed to be better than Obama? Prove it...


“Every day that passes with a Supreme Court below full strength impairs the people’s business in that crucially important body.” - Ronald Reagan

 

[SuperDemocrat]

Obama is now just realizing how much of belligerent asshole he seems to everyone else. It is a little to late because some of us knew that the whole time.