Sen Reid msg to Repubs about filling SCOTUS vacancy

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Scalia was admired by the Right for his strict interpretation of the literal constitution. Rightly so.

But today the Right is calling for the repression of the constitution by obstructing the enumerated power of the President to appoint a new justice to the Supreme Court.

Are the Conservatives maintaining that a President's term of office is only three years, not four as spelled out clearly in the constitution? Are the Conservatives maintaining that the duty of elected Senators is to obstruct rather than legislate and govern? Are the Conservatives maintaining that political power is more important than adhering to the constitution?

Is this strict adherence to the constitution, the quality most admired by the Right, or is it a plot to amass political power?

Where are the Conservative constitutionalists?

Clearly these questions are rhetorical.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Any republican who would vote for any of Obamas picks can kiss their political career good bye
This will wait for the elections imo...

the other 2 obama picks got ok'd.....who lost their seats because of those 2 votes?....i bet not many....

 

[eagle1462010]

What many on the right are advocating is as ridiculous as it is reprehensible, an example of conservative contempt for sound, responsible governance – the idiotic notion of leaving vacant an appointment to the Supreme Court for the remainder of the October 2015 term and most, if not all, of the October 2016 term, as it could be March or April 2017 before a new justice fills that vacancy.

A vacant appointment for well over a year is what republicans are calling for, completely unwarranted and unjustified – inappropriate, partisan, and irresponsible.

The Senate needs to confirm timely the president's nominee, where the new justice would be available at the start of the October 2016 term.

yep, if they can't have it their way, they shut down the gov't (AKA- go on Cruz Control) and that is somehow "how the Constitution is intended to work"

Well, people w/ an education above the 7th-grade call-

Like 19 Trillion in new taxes over 10 years................go back further in the education for that math.....

 

[Harry Dresden]

POTUS & Reid need to consult early Monday to get the ball rolling.

Maybe they should let them bury him first?

when you are as partisan as dottie is....decency plays no part in your actions...

 

[thereisnospoon]

Scalia was admired by the Right for his strict interpretation of the literal constitution. Rightly so.

But today the Right is calling for the repression of the constitution by obstructing the enumerated power of the President to appoint a new justice to the Supreme Court.

Are the Conservatives maintaining that a President's term of office is only three years, not four as spelled out clearly in the constitution? Are the Conservatives maintaining that the duty of elected Senators is to obstruct rather than legislate and govern? Are the Conservatives maintaining that political power is more important than adhering to the constitution?

Is this strict adherence to the constitution, the quality most admired by the Right, or is it a plot to amass political power?

Where are the Conservative constitutionalists?

You are already assuming any nominee Obama may trot out will be an ideological far left wing individual. And your side appears to be in a big hurry to install said type of Jurist.
And in this latest installment of "lets look like total hypocrites", you people who screech loudly of how the US Constitution is a living document, open to many interpretations, are suddenly quoting strict Constitutional provisions.....Yeah, right.

then he'll trot out someone else. The avg time is 2-3 months. Your point?

I'm done w/ you rw kool aid kid. You have failed 4-times in a row w/ your weak obfuscations

The point? Simple. The Senate is not going to permit the outgoing POTUS to stack the Court with ideological liberals...Plain and simple.
As much as you want to think this is party time fro your side, you are going to just have to deal with the fact that the Senate is going to confirm someone only THEY believe is worth of the SCOTUS.....
I will make a prediction.
Obama will hit hard with a far left wing nominee that will be basically DOA. Then with each succeeding nominee, one more moderate than the other, the Senate's most moderate GOP members will switch sides and confirm...
Look, I don't want a strict conservative on the court either. Especially one of these Bible thumping evangelicals.....IMO the ideal SCOTUS justice is one who looks at the issue at hand from a strictly legal and constitutional perspective, absent of ideological biases..
If Obama can find such a person, then by all means, get them confirmed and in place for the next (Oct 16) term....
No far left wingers on the court. There exists right now, a perfect balance.
On the left there are Assoc, Justices Sotomayor, Kagan, and Ginsberg. On the right we have Chief Justice Roberts, then Assoc Justices, Alito and Thomas.
Breyer has opined for both the left and right as has Assoc Justice Kennedy.
Adding another Constitutional moderate would be just fine with me, thank you

 

[Nosmo King]

Scalia was admired by the Right for his strict interpretation of the literal constitution. Rightly so.

But today the Right is calling for the repression of the constitution by obstructing the enumerated power of the President to appoint a new justice to the Supreme Court.

Are the Conservatives maintaining that a President's term of office is only three years, not four as spelled out clearly in the constitution? Are the Conservatives maintaining that the duty of elected Senators is to obstruct rather than legislate and govern? Are the Conservatives maintaining that political power is more important than adhering to the constitution?

Is this strict adherence to the constitution, the quality most admired by the Right, or is it a plot to amass political power?

Where are the Conservative constitutionalists?

You are already assuming any nominee Obama may trot out will be an ideological far left wing individual. And your side appears to be in a big hurry to install said type of Jurist.
And in this latest installment of "lets look like total hypocrites", you people who screech loudly of how the US Constitution is a living document, open to many interpretations, are suddenly quoting strict Constitutional provisions.....Yeah, right.

How do you interpret the constitution? Do you see it as a living, breathing document elastic enough to serve in contemporary times as well as the century in which it was drafted or do you see it as a document to be taken strictly in a literal sense?

If you interpret it literally, you must respect the power of the Executive to make appointments to the bench as well as the Legislative branch's duty to confirm those nominees through fair and open hearings and votes.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Harry Reid To Republicans: You Better Not Block Us From Replacing Scalia

“There is no doubt Justice Antonin Scalia was a brilliant man. We had our differences and I disagreed with many of his opinions, but he was a dedicated jurist and public servant. I offer my condolences to his family."

“The President can and should send the Senate a nominee right away. With so many important issues pending before the Supreme Court, the Senate has a responsibility to fill vacancies as soon as possible. It would be unprecedented in recent history for the Supreme Court to go a year with a vacant seat. Failing to fill this vacancy would be a shameful abdication of one of the Senate's most essential Constitutional responsibilities.”

Sen Reid is a true Statesman.

1. His opinion on the matter is moot as he is in the minority.
2. The GOP should block any nomination he puts forward.
3. If we're so far gone that it causes the GOP to lose control so be it.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Sen Reid is a true Statesman.

Sen Reid is a true crook, one does not become a multi millionaire by just being a senator.

they all must be crooks then.....

 

[thereisnospoon]

POTUS & Reid need to consult early Monday to get the ball rolling.

Reid is not the majority leader anymore and is for all intents and purposes, a non entity in the Senate.
In fact, it would probebly come as no surprise Reid has been spending most of his time AWAY from Capitol Hill.

 

[whitehall]

Remember Robert Bork? Democrats were so adamant about preventing his nomination by Reagan that it coined a new political phrase,"Borked." Reid was the same guy who told the Troops and the rest of America "the war is lost" just before the Troop Surge in Iraq. They should have locked up his sorry ass for treason at that time. Some statesman.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

That's also assuming Democrats don't win the Senate and confirm Obama's nominee before the next president is sworn in, should a Republican win the presidency.

It's unlikely Democrats would take the Senate if a Republican wins the White House.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

That's also assuming Democrats don't win the Senate and confirm Obama's nominee before the next president is sworn in, should a Republican win the presidency.

It's unlikely Democrats would take the Senate if a Republican wins the White House.

Not really. We traditionally like divided government here. And the GOP has 24 seats to defend versus 10 Dem. **** up the Supreme Court deal and the Dems could take the Senate no problems at all.

 

[Dot Com]

That's also assuming Democrats don't win the Senate and confirm Obama's nominee before the next president is sworn in, should a Republican win the presidency.

It's unlikely Democrats would take the Senate if a Republican wins the White House.

Not really. We traditionally like divided government here. And the GOP has 24 seats to defend versus 10 Dem. **** up the Supreme Court deal and the Dems could take the Senate no problems at all.

true. I thought he knew that. I posted it 2x

 

[the_human_being]

Scalia was admired by the Right for his strict interpretation of the literal constitution. Rightly so.

But today the Right is calling for the repression of the constitution by obstructing the enumerated power of the President to appoint a new justice to the Supreme Court.

Are the Conservatives maintaining that a President's term of office is only three years, not four as spelled out clearly in the constitution? Are the Conservatives maintaining that the duty of elected Senators is to obstruct rather than legislate and govern? Are the Conservatives maintaining that political power is more important than adhering to the constitution?

Is this strict adherence to the constitution, the quality most admired by the Right, or is it a plot to amass political power?

Where are the Conservative constitutionalists?

No one says the President doesn't have the right to nominate someone Fool. We're saying Congress doesn't have to take the matter up. Look at all the Bills Harry Reid refused to bring to the floor when he was Majority Leader. There were over 300 he refused to even assign to committee. Mitch McConnell is now the Majority Leader and has say over what business the Senate will take on. What goes around comes around. Suck it up. The Democrats are the minority now.

 

[the_human_being]

That's also assuming Democrats don't win the Senate and confirm Obama's nominee before the next president is sworn in, should a Republican win the presidency.

It's unlikely Democrats would take the Senate if a Republican wins the White House.

Not really. We traditionally like divided government here. And the GOP has 24 seats to defend versus 10 Dem. **** up the Supreme Court deal and the Dems could take the Senate no problems at all.

How about waiting until you actually win it?

 

[Faun]

Scalia was admired by the Right for his strict interpretation of the literal constitution. Rightly so.

But today the Right is calling for the repression of the constitution by obstructing the enumerated power of the President to appoint a new justice to the Supreme Court.

Are the Conservatives maintaining that a President's term of office is only three years, not four as spelled out clearly in the constitution? Are the Conservatives maintaining that the duty of elected Senators is to obstruct rather than legislate and govern? Are the Conservatives maintaining that political power is more important than adhering to the constitution?

Is this strict adherence to the constitution, the quality most admired by the Right, or is it a plot to amass political power?

Where are the Conservative constitutionalists?

No one says the President doesn't have the right to nominate someone Fool. We're saying Congress doesn't have to take the matter up. Look at all the Bills Harry Reid refused to bring to the floor when he was Majority Leader. There were over 300 he refused to even assign to committee. Mitch McConnell is now the Majority Leader and has say over what business the Senate will take on. What goes around comes around. Suck it up. The Democrats are the minority now.

Bullshit, they don't have to take they matter up. It's the responsibility of the Senate to advise and consent the president's nominees. That doesn't mean they have to approve whomever a president puts up; but it does mean they have to take the matter up.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

That's also assuming Democrats don't win the Senate and confirm Obama's nominee before the next president is sworn in, should a Republican win the presidency.

It's unlikely Democrats would take the Senate if a Republican wins the White House.

Not really. We traditionally like divided government here. And the GOP has 24 seats to defend versus 10 Dem. **** up the Supreme Court deal and the Dems could take the Senate no problems at all.

It would be highly unusual for the presidential race to not translate to down ballot races.

 

[the_human_being]

Scalia was admired by the Right for his strict interpretation of the literal constitution. Rightly so.

But today the Right is calling for the repression of the constitution by obstructing the enumerated power of the President to appoint a new justice to the Supreme Court.

Are the Conservatives maintaining that a President's term of office is only three years, not four as spelled out clearly in the constitution? Are the Conservatives maintaining that the duty of elected Senators is to obstruct rather than legislate and govern? Are the Conservatives maintaining that political power is more important than adhering to the constitution?

Is this strict adherence to the constitution, the quality most admired by the Right, or is it a plot to amass political power?

Where are the Conservative constitutionalists?

No one says the President doesn't have the right to nominate someone Fool. We're saying Congress doesn't have to take the matter up. Look at all the Bills Harry Reid refused to bring to the floor when he was Majority Leader. There were over 300 he refused to even assign to committee. Mitch McConnell is now the Majority Leader and has say over what business the Senate will take on. What goes around comes around. Suck it up. The Democrats are the minority now.

Bullshit, they don't have to take they matter up. It's the responsibility of the Senate to advise and consent the president's nominees. That doesn't mean they have to approve whomever a president puts up; but it does mean they have to take the matter up.

Show me where it states anywhere that thee exists a time limit placed upon Congress for doing anything about anything. I'm waiting.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

That's also assuming Democrats don't win the Senate and confirm Obama's nominee before the next president is sworn in, should a Republican win the presidency.

It's unlikely Democrats would take the Senate if a Republican wins the White House.

Not really. We traditionally like divided government here. And the GOP has 24 seats to defend versus 10 Dem. **** up the Supreme Court deal and the Dems could take the Senate no problems at all.

How about waiting until you actually win it?

How about doing your job for the next 350 days...

 

[the_human_being]

That's also assuming Democrats don't win the Senate and confirm Obama's nominee before the next president is sworn in, should a Republican win the presidency.

It's unlikely Democrats would take the Senate if a Republican wins the White House.

Not really. We traditionally like divided government here. And the GOP has 24 seats to defend versus 10 Dem. **** up the Supreme Court deal and the Dems could take the Senate no problems at all.

How about waiting until you actually win it?

How about doing your job for the next 350 days...

There's no cause to worry. I have already taken care of the problem for you folks. I sent an email to President-elect Donald Trump and suggested he appoint either Ted Cruz or Mark Levine to the SCOTUS. Both men are Constitutional authorities.