Left Should Blame Obama For Trump Supreme Court Majority

a reply to: IAMTAT


Obama didn't have guts to confront Assad of Syria. Asking Ruth Bader Ginsburg to retire would have been impossible for him.

a reply to: Allaroundyou

The investigation is about Russian interference. It is not about Trump specifically.

Star for that

That is what most of us have been saying from the get-go

Nobody denies Russia (along with how many other countries) attempt to influence our domestic affairs/elections/government/private sector/etc. The only dispute is that Trump had anything to do with it.

But having a couple advisers/staffers implicated in long-term financial/lobbying conspiracies does not equal "collusion" of any sort

As a side note, where has this rational and realistic narrative been all this time? I've seen folks flat out assert his guilt, and even that indictments would be "a sure thing along with impeachment/conviction"

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: Allaroundyou

The investigation is about Russian interference. It is not about Trump specifically.

Star for that

That is what most of us have been saying from the get-go

Nobody denies Russia (along with how many other countries) attempt to influence our domestic affairs/elections/government/private sector/etc. The only dispute is that Trump had anything to do with it.

But having a couple advisers/staffers implicated in long-term financial/lobbying conspiracies does not equal "collusion" of any sort

As a side note, where has this rational and realistic narrative been all this time? I've seen folks flat out assert his guilt, and even that indictments would be "a sure thing along with impeachment/conviction"

It’s been around, just mostly in my tailpipe

Left Should Blame Obama For Trump Supreme Court Majority

Hell would freeze over.

When has the left ever taken responsibility for any of the snip they've pulled?

NEVERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!

a reply to: kaylaluv

I mean but why didn't Obama pick a SC choice? Democrat Congress stalled on all the Trump cabinet appointments so I'm sure you are okay with Republicans doing the same.

Or maybe, Obama knew if he pushed the issue they would investigate how Scalia died? And also they were hoping Hillary would win so Obama didn't have to take responsibility for whatever nigthtmare the democrats had planned for the SC.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Is it Gas Huffin' Friday or something? Merrick Garland was nominated on March 16, 2016. Senate Republicans announced their intention to not hold ANY confirmation hearings for *ANY* Obama nominee a month before that.

IIRC, there's only been one similarly long gap in appointing a vacancy since the 1800's and that was in the 60's. It's funny how you completely ignored an overt and purely partisan scheme to obstruct normal operation of government to stack the highest court in the land by Republicans to have something to say about Democrats.

originally posted by: NthOther
a reply to: kaylaluv

They stopped him?

Lol. Your loser president was a lame duck and didn't have the balls to do anything about it.

The balls to do what? Do you need a civics primer? What should he have done? Knocked off the GOP leadership?

a reply to: IAMTAT

This is kind of gloating. Trump Picked Gorsusch, and will nominate a second replacement, and if Ginsberg retires, or other, he will have a third choice. There just doesn't seem to be many options for the left on this. Pouring salt in their wounds will just upset them. Lets all just smile and enjoy the current situation. It won't last forever, but it's nice today.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Allaroundyou

I disagree.


If there was any evidence of wrong-doing on the part of Trump then that information would have been released or leaked before he lowered taxes, ended the Obamacare mandate, appointed judges.


He has basically shredded Obama's legacy. If Obama had an ounce of damning evidence, it'd been out by now.

Yes, yes, yes

Trump just keeps on winning because they have nothing on him.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: IAMTAT

Is it Gas Huffin' Friday or something? Merrick Garland was nominated on March 16, 2016. Senate Republicans announced their intention to not hold ANY confirmation hearings for *ANY* Obama nominee a month before that.

IIRC, there's only been one similarly long gap in appointing a vacancy since the 1800's and that was in the 60's. It's funny how you completely ignored an overt and purely partisan scheme to obstruct normal operation of government to stack the highest court in the land by Republicans to have something to say about Democrats.

Ohhh, the pain and anguish in your post is a satisfying nectar to the victorious Trump voters. Save some for after we elect Trump to two terms, for when Ginsburg steps down.

Left this, left that. That's all I hear around here these days, everything being blamed on the nefarious "left" as if it is actually a real thing instead of an arbitrary label thrown onto anyone and everyone who doesn't fall in line with the status quo.

Congratulations, you guys are only carrying forward the plans of those in power, that of hate and division. Look in the mirror to find the ones who are at least half responsible for the current political climate. The other half? The ones you are not only bashing constantly but also emulating as if being a mirror image of.

You're just as bad as the amorphous blob you call "the left".

Since Obama had a chance to nominate a moderate,middle of the road candidate who wasn`t unacceptable to either side,and nominated a radical leftist to take Scalias place it`s clearly his fault.Now the Supreme Court is going conservative for years and that's the end of that.Disagree all you want,but if Obama had chose someone who wasn`t clearly a leftie,you would have a balanced court.Moderation is a good thing,seems like that's lost on people nowadays.Personally,I would be happy to see a court packed with strict constitutional judges-like Gorsuch.

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Left this, left that. That's all I hear around here these days, everything being blamed on the nefarious "left" as if it is actually a real thing instead of an arbitrary label thrown onto anyone and everyone who doesn't fall in line with the status quo.

Congratulations, you guys are only carrying forward the plans of those in power, that of hate and division. Look in the mirror to find the ones who are at least half responsible for the current political climate. The other half? The ones you are not only bashing constantly but also emulating as if being a mirror image of.

You're just as bad as the amorphous blob you call "the left".

Dude, be quiet.

Love how these self rightous types try to be some sort of neutral party when they themselves sling as much crap as everybody else.

...and when called out and confronted, they bust out these masks for themselves and call it centrist/libertarians, anything that suddenly isn't associated with what poo they were flinging from the leftist sideline.

Lol, yeah, no, you parallel much of what you try to preach against.

Blah blah, anything to say about the SCOTUS? I'm happy 😊

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

originally posted by: Teikiatsu
So we are to deduce you have zero anger with Trump as POTUS and making nominations, right.

Trump picking judges is his job as President. I may not like or agree with is choices, but that's his job and I'm not bitter about him doing it. No. Though I find it HILARIOUS that you are whatbouting Trump right now. Like I'm literally laughing out loud at you for even bringing this dumb point up.

I find it hilarious that you used the term 'whatbout'.

And yes, the Democrats are to blame and it circles back to them. The Senate's choice was correct to delay. How was waiting for the Presidential election and choice of the People not ethical? Again, spare us.

Correct choice? How so? That partisan trick had never been done before and McConnell just made that precedent up on the spot.

It wasn't a precedent, it was a choice. A correct choice, as the head of the Senate.

There is no place written in the Constitution where it says that SCOTUS decisions during an election year have to be determined by that election's results.

True. There is however a place written in the COTUS that says the Senate gives advice and consent to appojnt the justice. The Senate did not give consent.

Hell, such reasoning is underminding the current President's authority since we elect a President for a 4 year term. We don't elect them for 3 years and then let them do nothing for 1 year while we put off Presidential decisions until the next President assumes office.

I don't recall Obama doing nothing for 1 year. He was hard at work with other actions to damage the USA.

I know you agree with this now because it worked out for you, but it was NEVER the correct choice to make and was ALWAYS a self-serving partisan trick.

Choices can be both partisan and correct. Considering the current court has made (more often than not) the correct Constitutional decisions we know the choice to delay was a correct choice for a proper SCOTUS. You don't agree, that's fine.

Obama was a horrible leader, he delegated everything to Nancy and Harry, they were convinced the Republicans were a dead party and tried to ride roughshod over everything.

If he had tried to actively lead he might have been able to head some of this stuff off before we reached this point, but he had no interest in that and now here we are with a badly divided country.

I grew to dislike Bush Jr but the guy wasn't afraid to wade in and sort things out, Trump... can say a lot bad about him but the guy doesn't hesitate to say "this way" Obama hesitated for 8 years.

Why "blame" anyone for reality?

The Republican Senate blocked President Obama's constitutional right and duty to place a Justice on the SC.

Yes, the Democrats had talked about doing the same thing once upon a time but had never done so.

We will have an politically-biased Court; we have had them before.

To bad Ginsbergs mother was unable to get an abortion.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
Oh right, like the conservatives in Congress were going to let him do that. He had every right to replace Scalia, but they stopped him, remember?

Nope, this is all on conservatives and Trump, who is kissing conservative ass.

Democrats are the origin of the don't nominate in a POTUS election year.

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: kaylaluv
Oh right, like the conservatives in Congress were going to let him do that. He had every right to replace Scalia, but they stopped him, remember?

Nope, this is all on conservatives and Trump, who is kissing conservative ass.

Democrats are the origin of the don't nominate in a POTUS election year.

Yep, they talked about it, the Republicans did it.

Which group actually thwarted the Constitution?

a reply to: Gryphon66

They only did not do so because it never came up. They believe that how things happened is how they should happen.