It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama: 'It will be difficult' for McConnell to explain decision to block Supreme Court nominee

page: 1
7
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 24 2016 @ 12:37 PM
link   
As the article discusses, there are many good candidates. I am curious who the top contender would be for YOU, ATS, and why? I am going to reserve my opinion, as I want to see what the different common folk nationwide think, or not?

Who will it be, and who would you vote for? Is The top clown going to pull one more over us before he is out for good?

Lets here it ATS-ers!





President Barack Obama said Wednesday it would be "difficult" for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to explain his decision not to consider a Supreme Court nominee without looking like he's motivated by politics.

"I recognize the politics are hard for them because the easier thing to do is to give in to the most extreme voices within their party and stand pat and do nothing. But that's not our job. Our job is to fulfill our constitutional duties," Obama said in the Oval Office, noting he felt sympathy for Republicans under pressure to block his judicial appointment.

He said none of the country's founding fathers believed a president should stop doing his job in his final year in office. And he argued that Republicans risked damaging the ability of any president to appoint judges if they proceed with blocking his Supreme Court pick.

"If, in fact, the Republicans in the Senate take a posture that defies the Constitution, defies logic, is not supported by tradition simply because of politics, then invariably what you're going to see is a further deterioration in the ability of any president to make any judicial appointments," Obama said.



L I N K



+4 more 
posted on Feb, 24 2016 @ 12:40 PM
link   
It shouldn't be that difficult. Just quote the speeches that Chuck Schumer, Joe Biden and Obama himself made when they did the same thing to Bush.



posted on Feb, 24 2016 @ 12:50 PM
link   
Obama keeps getting weaker and more desperate by the day it seems.

Why would anybody even assume the Republicans will confirm any radicalized Left Wing judge to the Supreme Court?





posted on Feb, 24 2016 @ 12:56 PM
link   
a reply to: ReadLeader


"difficult" for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to explain his decision not to consider a Supreme Court nominee without looking like he's motivated by politics.


Shouldn't be at all. From the beginning of his terms, the Rebublican's have taken a completely political stance of obstructionism that is clear to half the country. The other half see, and will continue to see this stance as a forthright stand for conservatism. I think Obama is only pretending that his choice for SCOTUS will be considered in any other light.



posted on Feb, 24 2016 @ 01:07 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Actually Mr Obama is strong and totally has the Constitution on his side in the matter of replacing Justice Scalia. The Supreme Court is in mid-session and has a number of significant cases to decide that will not be decided because most will lead to a 4-4 deadlock thus affirming the lower court holding.

The Senate Republicans are the ones who look weak here. While the Senate certainly can refuse to hold hearings on Mr Obama's forthcoming nominee and also deny that person a confirmation vote acting in such a manner will violate the spirit if not the letter of the Constitution. Indeed in recent times the Republicans have morphed from the party of strong governance into the party of no governance (all the government shutdowns, as well as silly politically theatrical nonsense legislation instead of needed legislation).

Now there is no doubt Mr Obama is going to send a nominee to the Senate who is both highly qualified and possesed of a moderate judicial philosophy. If that is not enough to persuade the Republican Senate to do their job. Democrats can and should campaign against such sabotage and win back the Senate in the 2016 elections. Then President Clinton or Sanders can proceed to fill the vacancy



posted on Feb, 24 2016 @ 01:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: ReadLeader


"difficult" for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell to explain his decision not to consider a Supreme Court nominee without looking like he's motivated by politics.


Shouldn't be at all. From the beginning of his terms, the Rebublican's have taken a completely political stance of obstructionism that is clear to half the country. The other half see, and will continue to see this stance as a forthright stand for conservatism. I think Obama is only pretending that his choice for SCOTUS will be considered in any other light.


Just like the Democrats did when they ruled Congress. People will see that, too. What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. That Obama can stand up and say what he has with a straight face without laughing at his own hypocrisy considering what he did as a Senator is nothing short of amazing.



posted on Feb, 24 2016 @ 01:10 PM
link   
Meh, Obama will nominate an already (lower court) republican approved judicial nominee. This will demonstrate that the Republican congress doesn't actually care if its a left or right leaning judge, merely that they only want to stop Obama regardless of whether he's giving them what they want or doing what the left wants.

Granted, this changes very little with avowed die hard far right conservatives, who for the most part view any obstruction of Obama's powers a good thing (despite the nonsensical nature of suddenly vowing to fight your own already party-approved nominee). This will however, make it more difficult for the Republican's to court independent and centrist conservatives during the upcoming election (on account of the bad publicity that this will generate, and be leveraged extensively by the Democrats).

The end game I believe is to assume Trump will be the presumptive nominee, and to start isolating his(and by proxy the Republican's) ability to gain traction in the other 30% of the electorate he needs to win the vote.

End result:

The Republican's gain nothing (the base to which this stalling panders is/was already firmly entrenched in the Republican camp, and already committed to voting Republican) - net gain zero.

The Independent voters and Centrist/Moderate Conservatives have a chance to potentially be affected by the influx/bombardment of advertising the Democrats will muster to showcase the obstructionism, which (although its exact effect can't be definitively determined) is guarantee'd to help generate momentum for that voting block to lean left. net gain is some increase in Democratic votes come election time.



That being said, I think there is a fairly good chance that the Republicans will be successful in stalling long enough to prevent an Obama nomination, but I honestly don't think its going to matter. I would also suspect that if they succeed in stalling for such a record breaking period of time, then they will run with that strategy for as long as they can into the next Democratic President's stewardship (regardless of McConnel's statement that they really want the people to decide by who they vote for the next president; its pretty clear McConnel was referring only to the next Republican president).



posted on Feb, 24 2016 @ 01:10 PM
link   
I heard Trump wants to put Chuck Norris on the Court.

I can't confirm it...

Seriously, Doesn't matter who Obama wants...

Never going to happen.



posted on Feb, 24 2016 @ 01:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: whyamIhere
I heard Trump wants to put Chuck Norris on the Court.

I can't confirm it...

Seriously, Doesn't matter who Obama wants...

Never going to happen.


That's the point though, if he appoints a moderate conservative and they still refuse to have hearings, that just proves the only reason they are doing it is because Obama put them up.

Which is sad as all hell..

~Tenth



posted on Feb, 24 2016 @ 01:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: lunatux
a reply to: xuenchen

Actually Mr Obama is strong and totally has the Constitution on his side in the matter of replacing Justice Scalia. The Supreme Court is in mid-session and has a number of significant cases to decide that will not be decided because most will lead to a 4-4 deadlock thus affirming the lower court holding.

The Senate Republicans are the ones who look weak here. While the Senate certainly can refuse to hold hearings on Mr Obama's forthcoming nominee and also deny that person a confirmation vote acting in such a manner will violate the spirit if not the letter of the Constitution. Indeed in recent times the Republicans have morphed from the party of strong governance into the party of no governance (all the government shutdowns, as well as silly politically theatrical nonsense legislation instead of needed legislation).

Now there is no doubt Mr Obama is going to send a nominee to the Senate who is both highly qualified and possesed of a moderate judicial philosophy. If that is not enough to persuade the Republican Senate to do their job. Democrats can and should campaign against such sabotage and win back the Senate in the 2016 elections. Then President Clinton or Sanders can proceed to fill the vacancy


The entire system was designed to cause as little legislation as possible to pass, that way only legislation that was actually important would be passed.

It wasn't designed to pass hundreds or thousands of laws per year.

I don't think you understand how it was meant to work, because it is working as intended.



posted on Feb, 24 2016 @ 01:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: tothetenthpower

originally posted by: whyamIhere
I heard Trump wants to put Chuck Norris on the Court.

I can't confirm it...

Seriously, Doesn't matter who Obama wants...

Never going to happen.


That's the point though, if he appoints a moderate conservative and they still refuse to have hearings, that just proves the only reason they are doing it is because Obama put them up.

Which is sad as all hell..

~Tenth


It's the Conservatives last desperate power grab.

Hell, it's their Crown Jewel to shove their social agenda.

Seriously, never going to happen.



posted on Feb, 24 2016 @ 01:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: lunatux
a reply to: xuenchen

Actually Mr Obama is strong and totally has the Constitution on his side in the matter of replacing Justice Scalia. The Supreme Court is in mid-session and has a number of significant cases to decide that will not be decided because most will lead to a 4-4 deadlock thus affirming the lower court holding.

The Senate Republicans are the ones who look weak here. While the Senate certainly can refuse to hold hearings on Mr Obama's forthcoming nominee and also deny that person a confirmation vote acting in such a manner will violate the spirit if not the letter of the Constitution. Indeed in recent times the Republicans have morphed from the party of strong governance into the party of no governance (all the government shutdowns, as well as silly politically theatrical nonsense legislation instead of needed legislation).

Now there is no doubt Mr Obama is going to send a nominee to the Senate who is both highly qualified and possesed of a moderate judicial philosophy. If that is not enough to persuade the Republican Senate to do their job. Democrats can and should campaign against such sabotage and win back the Senate in the 2016 elections. Then President Clinton or Sanders can proceed to fill the vacancy


The senate is under no obligation to approve an appointment. If the President wants to appoint someone, he will need to appoint someone who can get approved. Part of the job is compromise.



posted on Feb, 24 2016 @ 01:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: whyamIhere

originally posted by: tothetenthpower

originally posted by: whyamIhere
I heard Trump wants to put Chuck Norris on the Court.

I can't confirm it...

Seriously, Doesn't matter who Obama wants...

Never going to happen.


That's the point though, if he appoints a moderate conservative and they still refuse to have hearings, that just proves the only reason they are doing it is because Obama put them up.

Which is sad as all hell..

~Tenth


It's the Conservatives last desperate power grab.

Hell, it's their Crown Jewel to shove their social agenda.

Seriously, never going to happen.


Yea, to hell with the Constitution right? Obama gets nothing!



posted on Feb, 24 2016 @ 01:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

How do you meet someone halfway that isn't willing to do the same for you? It's always "compromise", but all I ever see from the Republicans is "My way or nothing."
edit on 24-2-2016 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2016 @ 01:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: lunatux
a reply to: xuenchen

Actually Mr Obama is strong and totally has the Constitution on his side in the matter of replacing Justice Scalia. The Supreme Court is in mid-session and has a number of significant cases to decide that will not be decided because most will lead to a 4-4 deadlock thus affirming the lower court holding.

The Senate Republicans are the ones who look weak here. While the Senate certainly can refuse to hold hearings on Mr Obama's forthcoming nominee and also deny that person a confirmation vote acting in such a manner will violate the spirit if not the letter of the Constitution. Indeed in recent times the Republicans have morphed from the party of strong governance into the party of no governance (all the government shutdowns, as well as silly politically theatrical nonsense legislation instead of needed legislation).

Now there is no doubt Mr Obama is going to send a nominee to the Senate who is both highly qualified and possesed of a moderate judicial philosophy. If that is not enough to persuade the Republican Senate to do their job. Democrats can and should campaign against such sabotage and win back the Senate in the 2016 elections. Then President Clinton or Sanders can proceed to fill the vacancy


Ever hear of "election mandate"?



posted on Feb, 24 2016 @ 01:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: whyamIhere

originally posted by: tothetenthpower

originally posted by: whyamIhere
I heard Trump wants to put Chuck Norris on the Court.

I can't confirm it...

Seriously, Doesn't matter who Obama wants...

Never going to happen.


That's the point though, if he appoints a moderate conservative and they still refuse to have hearings, that just proves the only reason they are doing it is because Obama put them up.

Which is sad as all hell..

~Tenth


It's the Conservatives last desperate power grab.

Hell, it's their Crown Jewel to shove their social agenda.

Seriously, never going to happen.


Yea, to hell with the Constitution right? Obama gets nothing!


I didn't start the party...

But, I am enjoying the fun.



posted on Feb, 24 2016 @ 01:23 PM
link   
Who's it going to be difficult to explain to? The only people who still respect Obama are people that don't really pay that much attention to politics or are so delusional about his legacy they think he's histories most deserving Nobel Laureate



posted on Feb, 24 2016 @ 01:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: whyamIhere

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: whyamIhere

originally posted by: tothetenthpower

originally posted by: whyamIhere
I heard Trump wants to put Chuck Norris on the Court.

I can't confirm it...

Seriously, Doesn't matter who Obama wants...

Never going to happen.


That's the point though, if he appoints a moderate conservative and they still refuse to have hearings, that just proves the only reason they are doing it is because Obama put them up.

Which is sad as all hell..

~Tenth


It's the Conservatives last desperate power grab.

Hell, it's their Crown Jewel to shove their social agenda.

Seriously, never going to happen.


Yea, to hell with the Constitution right? Obama gets nothing!


I didn't start the party...

But, I am enjoying the fun.


You are enjoying the Constitution being ripped to shreds over petty partisanship? The very petty partisanship that has led to one of the most dysfunctional and donothing Congresses ever?



posted on Feb, 24 2016 @ 01:26 PM
link   
"he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint"

That last sentence is part of Article Two of The Constitution.

So...yes it is constitutional for the Senate to "Advise", and act
as a Senate, which convenes and votes.

Nothing in Article 2 says they have to approve the nominee,
to the contrary actually! It would be wrong for The Senate
to appoint someone just based on the fact that Obama nominated them.
edit on 24-2-2016 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 24 2016 @ 01:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: whyamIhere

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: whyamIhere

originally posted by: tothetenthpower

originally posted by: whyamIhere
I heard Trump wants to put Chuck Norris on the Court.

I can't confirm it...

Seriously, Doesn't matter who Obama wants...

Never going to happen.


That's the point though, if he appoints a moderate conservative and they still refuse to have hearings, that just proves the only reason they are doing it is because Obama put them up.

Which is sad as all hell..

~Tenth


It's the Conservatives last desperate power grab.

Hell, it's their Crown Jewel to shove their social agenda.

Seriously, never going to happen.


Yea, to hell with the Constitution right? Obama gets nothing!


I didn't start the party...

But, I am enjoying the fun.


You are enjoying the Constitution being ripped to shreds over petty partisanship? The very petty partisanship that has led to one of the most dysfunctional and donothing Congresses ever?


If Obama nominates a Conservative I'm sure there would be agreement.

The sad fact is, ever single thing he has done in DC is political.

He never compromised on anything. The only thing worse than Obama.

Is the joke that calls themselves United States Congress.

Everybody, both sides need to go.

They are thieves that need to be stopped.

So, I kind of feel Niether side has honored the Constitution.






edit on 24-2-2016 by whyamIhere because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
7
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join