Master Index of Archived Threads


Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 2016)

El Segundo Escupidor Feb 13 2016 04:19 PM

Justice Antonin Scalia After a spate of ridiculous decisions, the last thing SCOTUS needs is another liberal appointment.

Frayed Knot Feb 13 2016 05:31 PM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

Whoa! Didn't see that one coming.

El Segundo Escupidor Feb 13 2016 05:38 PM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

Even in his current state, he still shows more signs of life than Anthony Kennedy.

batmagadanleadoff Feb 13 2016 05:50 PM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

El Segundo Escupidor wrote: After a spate of ridiculous decisions, the last thing SCOTUS needs is another liberal appointment. After a spate of ridiculous decisions, the last thing SCOTUS needs is another conservative appointment.

El Segundo Escupidor Feb 13 2016 06:00 PM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

batmagadanleadoff wrote: El Segundo Escupidor wrote: After a spate of ridiculous decisions, the last thing SCOTUS needs is another liberal appointment. After a spate of ridiculous decisions, the last thing SCOTUS needs is another conservative appointment. Yeah sure thing. Next year a man will be able to marry a pig.

batmagadanleadoff Feb 13 2016 06:22 PM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

El Segundo Escupidor wrote: El Segundo Escupidor wrote: After a spate of ridiculous decisions, the last thing SCOTUS needs is another liberal appointment. After a spate of ridiculous decisions, the last thing SCOTUS needs is another conservative appointment. Yeah sure thing. Next year a man will be able to marry a pig. At least maybe now, a man won't be allowed to marry a corporation -- a seeming inevitability before today. And why would I give a flying fuck what some stranger does with a consenting pig?

MFS62 Feb 13 2016 06:38 PM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

He had as much to do with making dubya president as Mariano Rivera had in making Joe Torre look smart. Considering the raw material, both things looked impossible. Later

El Segundo Escupidor Feb 13 2016 06:51 PM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

batmagadanleadoff wrote: And why would I give a flying fuck what some stranger does with a consenting pig? Because it offends my spiritual sensibilities and infringes my faith. HTH.

batmagadanleadoff Feb 13 2016 07:53 PM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

El Segundo Escupidor wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: And why would I give a flying fuck what some stranger does with a consenting pig? Because it offends my spiritual sensibilities and infringes my faith. HTH. What are you, the lord of the pigs? You conservatives have had a majority edge on that court for far too long, including Thomas, one of the worst justices ever and that nasty scumbag Alito. The court is long overdue for a shift to the left. The current presidential campaigns are gonna go to 11 real soon, now.

Lefty Specialist Feb 13 2016 08:21 PM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

Yeah, the stakes just got raised, big-time. Republicans won't allow hearings on any Obama nominee; that's a given. They'll stall for 9 months and hope a Republican wins the presidency in the fall. It's despicable, but completely to be expected. For all you people that say, "My vote for President doesn't matter, they're all the same", well it's really going to matter now. Votes for Senate races all over the country also just got whole lot more important.

Edgy MD Feb 13 2016 08:39 PM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

Born and raised in Queens, but no word on whether he joined Associate Justice Kagan in her Mets fandom. When was the last time we had a Supreme Court justice die on the job? OE: Looked it up. The answer is Chief Justice Reinquist, who died in office September 3, 2005. The three justices who've vacated their appointment since then have done so via retirement. Before Justice Reinquist, we have go all the way back to 1954 to find a justice who died in office — Robert Jackson, whom Reinquist clerked under.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 13 2016 08:48 PM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

Rehnquist, no? Edgy MD wrote: Born and raised in Queens, but no word on whether he joined Kagan in her Mets fandom. Guy like that? No fuggin' way. Had to be, like, a Brooklyn Bridegrooms diehard.

Frayed Knot Feb 13 2016 09:42 PM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016 Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Feb 15 2016 08:50 AM

Edgy MD wrote: When was the last time we had a Supreme Court justice die on the job? OE: Looked it up. The answer is Chief Justice Reinquist, who died in office September 3, 2005. The three justices who've vacated their appointment since then have done so via retirement. Before Justice Reinquist, we have go all the way back to 1954 to find a justice who died in office — Robert Jackson, whom Reinquist clerked under. Neither died on the bench, but justices Hugo Black and John Harlan II* -- who, like Scalia & Ginsberg, were ideological opposites yet good friends -- resigned nearly simultaneously and both essentially from their deathbeds. Harlan, only 72 but ill from cancer and essentially blind, allowed Black to resign first so as to not interfere with the recognition his friend was due from sitting on the SC for 34 years (5th longest ever) and his 10 years as a Senator from Alabama prior to being nominated to the bench by FDR. Harlan then resigned six days later. Black was dead two days after that. Harlan died three months later. Black was replaced by Lewis Powell, Harlan by Renquist. * his namesake grandfather, John Marshall Harlan I, was also a SC justice

dgwphotography Feb 14 2016 07:26 AM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

I am disgusted by both sides of the aisle. Justice Scalia's body isn't even cold, and the political chess game has already begun. Don't get me started on those on the left actually celebrating the man's death, including a few from here. Just disgusting.

MFS62 Feb 14 2016 08:53 AM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

El Segundo Escupidor wrote: Yeah sure thing. Next year a man will be able to marry a pig. Is that why Roger Clemens hasn't tied the knot yet? Later

batmagadanleadoff Feb 14 2016 11:53 AM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

dgwphotography wrote: I am disgusted by both sides of the aisle. Justice Scalia's body isn't even cold, and the political chess game has already begun. Don't get me started on those on the left actually celebrating the man's death, including a few from here. Just disgusting. Like who?

MFS62 Feb 14 2016 01:50 PM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

Here's a list of potential replacements I just saw. http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/a ... ent-219271 The first one would be tough for the Republicans to oppose, since they approved him for a lower court bench. It was a unanimous approval. Later

Edgy MD Feb 14 2016 02:12 PM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

Lefty Specialist wrote: Republicans won't allow hearings on any Obama nominee; that's a given. I'll take that bet.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 14 2016 03:55 PM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

Our friend Sal Q suggested BHO nominate one minority after another, with an eye on letting each of the R rejections win more of that group's support for the blue team.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 14 2016 06:38 PM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

batmagadanleadoff wrote: dgwphotography wrote: I am disgusted by both sides of the aisle. Justice Scalia's body isn't even cold, and the political chess game has already begun. Don't get me started on those on the left actually celebrating the man's death, including a few from here. Just disgusting. Like who? I posted this, and cracked wise about whether the minority-opinion eulogists would be a little more civil than he tended to be in his. Perhaps that's what he meant. Frankly, he made it to his eighties in good health, having had nine kids, a reportedly happy marriage, and the respect of his peers. So, outside of his close friends and family and certain retrograde-thinkers/fans of bullheaded, florid legal prose, there's no tragedy here.

themetfairy Feb 14 2016 08:15 PM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

Apparently his closest friend on the court was Ruth Bader Ginsberg It says a lot that these ideological adversaries had so much respect and amity for each other.

Lefty Specialist Feb 14 2016 08:26 PM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

Well, Mitch McConnell made it clear within hours that no Obama nominee would even be considered, so he was the one heating things up as the body cooled. The president has the power to nominate justices during his entire term, not just up until some arbitrary time before an election dictated by his opponents. The Senate has the duty to vote to confirm or reject those nominations. They also have the ability to delay or refuse to take up those nominations through parliamentary inaction. Obama's nomination will probably be less about who will be on the court (because they'll never even get a hearing) than it will be about setting the terms of the debate, and in a larger sense, the terms of the 2016 election. Republicans say that the American people should choose through an election who should be on the Supreme Court, Well, they did: they voted for Barack Obama in 2012. Frankly, by waiting, the Republicans run the chance of losing the presidency PLUS their majority in the Senate as well, making a candidate nominated in 2017 likely to be more liberal than one nominated in 2016. But that's the high-stakes poker game they've apparently chosen to play.

Edgy MD Feb 14 2016 08:33 PM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

Again, I'll happily take a bet on the nominee getting a hearing. Senator McConnell was just blowing smoke.

Gwreck Feb 14 2016 11:05 PM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

The nominee will get a hearing, and probably a vote (rejection along party lines). -- Lyle Denniston of SCOTUS Blog had this to say, which I think is a very good summary: History will be kind to Justice Antonin Scalia — if the future fully appreciates his scholarship, his inventiveness in legal thinking, and his beguiling cleverness with words. It will not remember him well for his air of superiority, the sting of his rhetoric, his frequent disdain for collegiality, his exaggerated estimate of himself as a comedian and thespian.

MFS62 Feb 15 2016 08:11 AM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

Gwreck wrote: The nominee will get a hearing, and probably a vote (rejection along party lines). -- Lyle Denniston of SCOTUS Blog had this to say, which I think is a very good summary: History will be kind to Justice Antonin Scalia — if the future fully appreciates his scholarship, his inventiveness in legal thinking, and his beguiling cleverness with words. It will not remember him well for his air of superiority, the sting of his rhetoric, his frequent disdain for collegiality, his exaggerated estimate of himself as a comedian and thespian. And for all of those things, Scalia, the strict Constitutionalist, would have voted to allow Obama to name a nominee now. And he probably would have chided those who opposed it. And, Obama will probably point that out when he names his nominee. Later

Frayed Knot Feb 15 2016 08:27 AM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

I think the Repubs are going to make themselves look worse by trying to run out the clock for the next 11 months (which certainly seemed like the strategy of choice among the Prez contenders Sat night) than they would by holding a hearing then simply rejecting Obama's nominee. With a super-majority of 60 needed to confirm, the Dems would need to get unanimous support on their side plus get at least 1/4 (14 or more) from the other side to go along in order to get his man/woman through so this would be a tough process to confirm even if it were under the best of circumstances. I'd say that if there were any channels of communication between the two ends of Pennsylvania Avenue then a chat prior to placing a name up for consideration could maybe suggest to the President that nominating a less ideological jurist who wouldn't necessarily "tilt" the court would have a better chance of getting through. But Obama seems to rarely even talk to the members of his own party in Congress much less to the opposition so I doubt there's much chance of that happening.

Frayed Knot Feb 15 2016 08:47 AM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

MFS62 wrote: ... Scalia, the strict Constitutionalist, would have voted to allow Obama to name a nominee now. And he probably would have chided those who opposed it. And, Obama will probably point that out when he names his nominee. It's not a case of "allowing" Obama to put forth a nominee; no one has the power to prevent him from putting up a name as soon as tomorrow if he wants. The question is what the Senate, and specifically the leadership and committee chairman which are all republican by virtue of their 54-46 majority, are going to do with it when they get it.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 15 2016 08:54 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Exactly. What all the grandstanding GOPpers refuse to acknowledge is that it's the President's Constitutional duty to do so.

MFS62 Feb 15 2016 09:12 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

That's what I meant. I used allow, because if it got to the Supreme Court, there would have been an effort to block it. Allow meant to remove that obstruction to the process and let it proceed. Of course he can and it is his duty. Later

Edgy MD Feb 15 2016 09:15 AM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

The nominee will get a hearing, and probably a vote (rejection along party lines). -- Lyle Denniston of SCOTUS Blog had this to say, which I think is a very good summary: History will be kind to Justice Antonin Scalia — if the future fully appreciates his scholarship, his inventiveness in legal thinking, and his beguiling cleverness with words. It will not remember him well for his air of superiority, the sting of his rhetoric, his frequent disdain for collegiality, his exaggerated estimate of himself as a comedian and thespian. And for all of those things, Scalia, the strict Constitutionalist, would have voted to allow Obama to name a nominee now. And he probably would have chided those who opposed it. And, Obama will probably point that out when he names his nominee. While I agree that it's the Constitutional duty of the Senate to proceed with the review of nominees, and it's contradictory to pay tribute to the Constitutional fealty of Justice Scalia while threatening (or implying to threaten) to shirk one's own Constitutional duty, Justice Scalia would have been in no position to allow or disallow the president's nomination, and would be highly unlikely to have chided any senator for his positions unless those positions brought him before the Supreme Court bench, as it would have been injecting himself into current politics. But of course the Senate isn't going to refuse to give the president's nominee a hearing. It's just stupid political gamesmanship.

Lefty Specialist Feb 15 2016 09:22 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

The 60 votes that are needed are only to bring the matter to a vote and end discussion. Once holding a vote is approved, it's a simple majority vote. Long before that, there have to be hearings in the Judiciary committee. As Republics have a majority there, they can kill a nominee before it ever comes to a vote of the full Senate. Plus they can just refuse to schedule hearings in the first place, which is most likely. There will be a lot of hue and cry, but there are a lot of hurdles a nominee has to go through, even when one party ISN'T determined to gum up the works. Obama will nominate someone, they won't even get a hearing, the Republics will pretend there's nothing wrong, and the whole mess will carry over into next year. Sure, you can say that would be ridiculously stupid, but so was shutting the government down over Obamacare or Planned Parenthood funding. If there's a Democratic president but not a Democratic Senate after 2016, we may go a couple of years without a full Supreme Court.

Edgy MD Feb 15 2016 09:57 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

And I continue to be happy to take that bet. There will be a nominee. There will be hearings.

Chad Ochoseis Feb 15 2016 10:01 AM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

Frayed Knot wrote: I think the Repubs are going to make themselves look worse by trying to run out the clock for the next 11 months (which certainly seemed like the strategy of choice among the Prez contenders Sat night) than they would by holding a hearing then simply rejecting Obama's nominee. With a super-majority of 60 needed to confirm, the Dems would need to get unanimous support on their side plus get at least 1/4 (14 or more) from the other side to go along in order to get his man/woman through so this would be a tough process to confirm even if it were under the best of circumstances. I'd been thinking this, too. But here's an article that says that Senate Rs need to be strident opponents of any Obama pick if they want to keep their jobs. Don't think I agree. It should be simple enough to get a coalition of Democrats and moderate state Republicans to approve a Sri Srinivasan, leaving the Rs who are vulnerable to right wing challenges free to vote no so they can tell their constituencies that they fought the good fight. But it's an interesting point.

Edgy MD Feb 15 2016 10:31 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

They can give a candidate a hearing and be strident opponents.

Frayed Knot Feb 15 2016 11:13 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Lefty Specialist wrote: If there's a Democratic president but not a Democratic Senate after 2016, we may go a couple of years without a full Supreme Court. I don't see that at all. Their entire argument is essentially one of not allowing this President to name a third justice just a few short (eight) months prior to the people expressing their preference of direction for the country. That's all gone come November and by January 21st Bernary Sandton will have a nominee in front of their faces. Now they can set about rejecting candidates and keep things empty for a while (Nixon had two appointments in his first year-plus of office but it took four nominations to get two approvals) but that strategy will clog up a lot of court business and look worse and worse as time goes on especially as it would all be coming on top of the eleven months they already let it sit one chair short if this scenario we're talking about comes to pass..

Ashie62 Feb 15 2016 11:14 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

I don't care. Our politics are beyond broken. R.I.P and thank you for your service.

Ashie62 Feb 15 2016 11:15 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Edgy MD wrote: They can give a candidate a hearing and be strident opponents. de-lay de-lay de-lay.

Benjamin Grimm Feb 15 2016 11:22 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Here's an unlikely scenario, but on the far fringe of what's possible. If the Democrats retake the Senate in November, the new Senate will be seated in early January, while President Obama still has a few weeks left in office. Could a nominee for whom hearings had been held in the old Senate get voted on in the new Senate? This kind of hurried confirmation, even if it is in fact possible, would probably only be attempted if there was a Republican President-elect. So to see this happen, you'd need the Democrats to win a super majority in the Senate (they'd probably need 60 seats to pull this off) in a year in which the Republicans took the White House. It would make for a zany three weeks, if nothing else.

Edgy MD Feb 15 2016 11:30 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Ashie62 wrote: Edgy MD wrote: They can give a candidate a hearing and be strident opponents. de-lay de-lay de-lay. Will anybody take my bet? Benjamin Grimm wrote: Here's an unlikely scenario, but on the far fringe of what's possible. If the Democrats retake the Senate in November, the new Senate will be seated in early January, while President Obama still has a few weeks left in office. Could a nominee for whom hearings had been held in the old Senate get voted on in the new Senate? This kind of hurried confirmation, even if it is in fact possible, would probably only be attempted if there was a Republican President-elect. So to see this happen, you'd need the Democrats to win a super majority in the Senate (they'd probably need 60 seats to pull this off) in a year in which the Republicans took the White House. It would make for a zany three weeks, if nothing else. That would take the Democrats holding the 10 seats that they have up for re-election, along with winning 2/3 of the seats Republicans are defending, for a Yu Darvishian .765 winning percentage. Unlikely indeed. And it would be staggering to think the Democrats could have such a juggernaut of a sweep and lose the presidency in the same year.

batmagadanleadoff Feb 15 2016 11:31 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201 Edited 4 time(s), most recently on Feb 15 2016 11:56 AM

Benjamin Grimm wrote: Here's an unlikely scenario, but on the far fringe of what's possible. If the Democrats retake the Senate in November, the new Senate will be seated in early January, while President Obama still has a few weeks left in office. Could a nominee for whom hearings had been held in the old Senate get voted on in the new Senate? This kind of hurried confirmation, even if it is in fact possible, would probably only be attempted if there was a Republican President-elect. So to see this happen, you'd need the Democrats to win a super majority in the Senate (they'd probably need 60 seats to pull this off) in a year in which the Republicans took the White House. It would make for a zany three weeks, if nothing else. I don't know what the answer is, but assuming that the new Senate could, I could make your hypothetical even zanier: Obama's nominee is a moderate liberal. On election day, the Democrats keep the Presidency and regain the Senate. The new Senate then purposely rejects the moderate nominee because the new President, with the backing of the new Senate, will now be able to successfully appoint a hard-core liberal to the bench.

d'Kong76 Feb 15 2016 11:33 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Edgy MD wrote: Will anybody take my bet? I'd wager no.

batmagadanleadoff Feb 15 2016 11:36 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Does anyone think that the Republicans would have a problem with a lame duck Republican President filling a Supreme Court vacancy?

El Segundo Escupidor Feb 15 2016 11:39 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Edgy MD wrote: Edgy MD wrote: They can give a candidate a hearing and be strident opponents. de-lay de-lay de-lay. Will anybody take my bet? Not me. And if I was a Republican with an expiring term I sure as heck wouldn't be supporting such a measure.

Edgy MD Feb 15 2016 11:41 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Does anyone think that the Republicans would have a problem with a lame duck Republican President filling a Supreme Court vacancy? Of course they wouldn't. And Senator McConnell doesn't have a leg to stand on. He's just trying to foment more antagonism toward the president, and after he's successfully advanced the antagonism factor by 0.24%, he'll back off.

Edgy MD Feb 15 2016 11:44 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

batmagadanleadoff wrote: On election day, the Democrats keep the Presidency and retain the Senate. Psst... Republicans have control of the Senate.

batmagadanleadoff Feb 15 2016 11:47 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Edgy MD wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: On election day, the Democrats keep the Presidency and retain the Senate. Psst... Republicans have control of the Senate. I know. Otherwise this potential run out the clock ploy wouldn't be so much of an issue and Obama would nominate a strong liberal. I meant "regain". (earlier post fixed)

Frayed Knot Feb 15 2016 12:01 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

btw, is it true that Bill O'Reilly signed a new contract for a book today called 'Killing Scalia' ?

Edgy MD Feb 15 2016 12:22 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

batmagadanleadoff wrote: batmagadanleadoff wrote: On election day, the Democrats keep the Presidency and retain the Senate. Psst... Republicans have control of the Senate. I know. Otherwise this potential run out the clock ploy wouldn't be so much of an issue and Obama would nominate a strong liberal. I meant "regain". (earlier post fixed) Sorry. Yeah, that's two adjacent keys (G-T) giving opposite meanings in the word.

MFS62 Feb 15 2016 02:50 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Frayed Knot wrote: btw, is it true that Bill O'Reilly signed a new contract for a book today called 'Killing Scalia' ? My own book would focus on the delay from the time he was seen going to his room after dinner until after lunch the following day, when it was discovered he had died. Hadn't he told his wife he wasn't feeling well before he left for the trip? Didn't she try to call him the following morning to ask how he was feeling? Didn't anyone else in his party? My theory will be that they had cleared the Boy Scouts out of the room and were waiting for Tom Hagen. It will be just as plausible as the stuff O'Reilly writes that nobody can confirm. OK, that was more of a comment on O'Reilly than on Scalia. But seriously, folks, wouldn't it be ironic if the Presidential election comes down to a "hanging chads" kind of situation, and the Supreme Court is still tied 4-4 on election day and can't resolve it. Later

Ashie62 Feb 15 2016 03:29 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

There will be hearings. I was thinking of a filibuster type dingy. There is an Indian Sri Seravistan. One Nascar driver and the Indians are fully vested. The guy has a terrific background. Fine by me.

Ashie62 Feb 15 2016 07:00 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Lortta Lynch? A true affirmative action pick if so.

themetfairy Feb 16 2016 12:00 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

A Nice Memory From Stephen Colbert

dgwphotography Feb 16 2016 12:26 PM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

I am disgusted by both sides of the aisle. Justice Scalia's body isn't even cold, and the political chess game has already begun. Don't get me started on those on the left actually celebrating the man's death, including a few from here. Just disgusting. Like who? I posted this, and cracked wise about whether the minority-opinion eulogists would be a little more civil than he tended to be in his. Perhaps that's what he meant. Frankly, he made it to his eighties in good health, having had nine kids, a reportedly happy marriage, and the respect of his peers. So, outside of his close friends and family and certain retrograde-thinkers/fans of bullheaded, florid legal prose, there's no tragedy here. Actually, I really shouldn't have lumped you in with what really pissed me off. From an old classmate of mine: To paraphrase Betty Davis, Antonin Scalia is dead. Good.

Nymr83 Feb 16 2016 07:51 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Been away from the forum a few days, i can't respond to everything but a few thoughts: -While I don't like the political games, lets be clear that both sides play them and have done so for as long as we can all remember. don't be the asshole demanding "fairness" only now that your guy is in office. -While Obama has a right to nominate, the Senate has an equal right to reject anyone THEY see as unfit. Ashie62 wrote: Lortta Lynch? A true affirmative action pick if so. -No way. this nomination would give Republicans the right to demand all kinds of papers from her time as Attorney General so that they can either score political points with what they can reveal or so they can rightfully reject her when the White House refuses to provide things. Obama would be turning the whole thing around on himself if he nominated an administration insider, especially her. doubling-down on the "this is a terrible idea" theory: she already went through a confirmation hearing in which most Republicans voted against her. If Obama wants to score political points, he is far better off doing so with a candidate that has PASSED Republican-led votes before without opposition, like Paul Wolford or Sri Seravistan. -Seravistan looks like the type of center-left but not leftist guy that could easily make it through if Hillary is President and the Republicans control the Senate - she would have far more reason to compromise, far less reason to try and score political points at that time, etc -I don't like the political-ization of his death either, but thats pretty much inevtiable when you hold a lifetime appointment.

Edgy MD Feb 16 2016 08:00 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

While both sides may play games, it hasn't gone on as long as I can remember. At least, not with Supreme Court nominees. I'm old, but not that old. It's been join going on since 1987. And obviously, threatening to delay the process by a year is a new sort of gamesmanship. It's not fairness, it's duty — duty that folks swore to perform, presumably on bibles for many of them. The president is not my guy and I'm embarrassed that Senator McConnell made such a statement while Justice Scalia's remains were barely on ice. To threaten to forsake your Constitutional duty, while simultaneously praising the late justice for his Constitutional fealty, makes me doubly embarrassed for the senators that voted for him to be their leader.

Nymr83 Feb 16 2016 08:03 PM Re: Guess Who Died in 2016

dgwphotography wrote: To paraphrase Betty Davis, Antonin Scalia is dead. Good. I don't know this person, but I wish the same on them.

Frayed Knot Feb 16 2016 09:42 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Edgy MD wrote: While both sides may play games, it hasn't gone on as long as I can remember. At least, not with Supreme Court nominees. I'm old, but not that old. It's been join going on since 1987. And obviously, threatening to delay the process by a year is a new sort of gamesmanship. It's not fairness, it's duty — duty that folks swore to perform, presumably on bibles for many of them. The president is not my guy and I'm embarrassed that Senator McConnell made such a statement while Justice Scalia's remains were barely on ice. To threaten to forsake your Constitutional duty, while simultaneously praising the late justice for his Constitutional fealty, makes me doubly embarrassed for the senators that voted for him to be their leader. Saw a clip earlier tonight of Senator Schumer saying -- back in mid-2007 while G.W. Bush's tenure still had 1-1/2 years to go -- that only under "extreme circumstances" should the Democrats approve any further Supreme Court nominees that the President might appoint. Now, as it turned out, none happened to come up for the remainder of his term, but it certainly was an example of the Senator urging his side to decide, in advance, not to play along simply because they had the numbers to make it happen.

Edgy MD Feb 16 2016 10:24 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Yeah, I wouldn't put that beneath him. So the threat isn't so much outrightly new, so much as a little more concrete.

Frayed Knot Feb 16 2016 10:43 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Yeah, well the pledge now is more concrete because the "threat" is also more concrete in this case; a real vacancy as opposed to an imagined one. And both sides seemed to be using reasoning that's no more complex than that they simply didn't want to give the sitting Prez a 3rd appointment (Reagan was the last to have three and the Dems of that era were getting pretty sick of his guys by the end too). The Repubs this year are throwing in the additional baggage that Obama hasn't been to keen on working with them or following the rules himself such as by using recess appointments when Congress wasn't actually in recess, or executive orders and law-altering acts that were extra-constitutional (Orrin Hatch went that route) but of course that's mainly just piled-on rationale after the fact.

Gwreck Feb 16 2016 11:32 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Nymr83 wrote: -No way. this nomination would give Republicans the right to demand all kinds of papers from her time as Attorney General so that they can either score political points with what they can reveal or so they can rightfully reject her when the White House refuses to provide things. Obama would be turning the whole thing around on himself if he nominated an administration insider, especially her. There's a whole lot of assumptions there, but even if we accept all them as true, she's still only been AG for less than a year. There aren't "all kinds of papers" from her time as AG that are significant. Seravistan looks like the type of center-left but not leftist guy that could easily make it through if Hillary is President and the Republicans control the Senate - she would have far more reason to compromise, far less reason to try and score political points at that time, etc Srinivasan could easily make it through the Senate tomorrow. He was confirmed to the DC Court of Appeals 97-0 in 2013. Short of committing felonies in the last couple of years, there's not a logically sound argument in the world that he could be unanimously deemed qualified to serve on the nation's second highest court three years ago but not its highest court today. --- I see this as a political calculation by both sides. Srinivasan could be nominated, and barring the Senate refusing to perform its constitutional responsibility, he gets confirmed. However, since Senate leaders already telegraphed that's exactly what they will do (refuse to perform their duties), Obama is necessarily motivated to nominate a candidate that, if not given a fair hearing, will help his political party. The third option is that a nominee is given a hearing and is rejected (probably along party lines). If it is Srinvasan (or Jane Kelly of the 8th Circuit) then the rejection hurts the Senate more. If it is someone like Lynch (or, say, Patricia Millett of the DC Circuit), who had more trouble getting confirmed to her current position, it's a tougher call as to how much it will hurt the Senate. --- The Republican position certainly makes sense, because the only outcome that helps them is (a) the seat remaining open, (b) maintaining control of the Senate and (c) winning the Presidency. It is a huge gamble though, because (b) is going to be seriously jeopardized if (a) happens. And (c) - winning the presidency - is hardly assured either.

Lefty Specialist Feb 17 2016 08:32 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

The knee-jerk opposition within hours is taking it up a notch from previously. It shows the box McConnell's in, where even the slightest compromise is considered traitorous. Five of the six presidential candidates said Repubs should boycott any selection (Jeb! was wishy-washy) so no help there. A way out of the box is if Trump looks to be the nominee and a sure loser in the fall, and Obama nominates a middle-of-the roader. At that point the calculus changes. McConnell and Grassley (who's also up for re-election) may choose to have hearings just to help out their Senate candidates, as the pressure will be high. This way they probably get a less-liberal justice than if there's a new Democratic president with a new Democratic Senate that decides to scuttle the filibuster for Supreme Court nominations, ramming through a forty-something liberal who'll be on the bench for another 30 or 40 years. Of course, that being said, just because they hold hearings doesn't mean any nominee will be confirmed. I'm pretty sure this seat will still be vacant in January.

Edgy MD Feb 17 2016 08:38 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

I'd like to think Jeb! would get points for being responsible and honorable, rather than docked as wishy-washy.

Ceetar Feb 17 2016 08:44 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

I'm curious about the logic that Congress dragging their feet (and not like they haven't been doing that for years) is necessarily going to hurt them in the election. Who exactly is suddenly going to come out and vote for the democratic challenger that wasn't going to do so already? Are there Republicans that going to be so annoyed at them not doing their job that they're going to vote a democrat or not vote at all? Is the lack of a decision not going to reflect badly on EVERYONE and push more voters to a third party candidate, which generally means more democrats losing votes? If the seat goes unfilled, the Republicans are going to see the value in winning the presidency and come out to vote too right?

Frayed Knot Feb 17 2016 09:09 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

The two sides are generally fighting for a small percentage of votes in the middle and the Repubs flat-out refusing to even consider an Obama nominee, while at the same time trying to claim that they're the one that are going to make gov't work, would be enough to piss-off at least some of that vulnerable middle. It's why I've said they'd be better off holdings hearing and rejecting than stamping their collective feet and pre-deciding that anyone is dead on arrival. btw, in imitation of the old Letterman 'Brush with Greatness' skits: Justice Scalia's body has been resting in the same funeral home where my mother's was last summer.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 17 2016 09:53 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

whoa. That's spooky.

Frayed Knot Feb 23 2016 08:32 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Frayed Knot wrote: Saw a clip earlier tonight of Senator Schumer saying -- back in mid-2007 while G.W. Bush's tenure still had 1-1/2 years to go -- that only under "extreme circumstances" should the Democrats approve any further Supreme Court nominees that the President might appoint. Now, as it turned out, none happened to come up for the remainder of his term, but it certainly was an example of the Senator urging his side to decide, in advance, not to play along simply because they had the numbers to make it happen. And now video emerges of Senator Biden, then chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, saying back during the final year of the elder G. Bush administration that; "Once the political season is underway [any] Supreme Court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign is over." This was said in June rather than in February and, like the Schumer statement (above) during the younger Bush's term, no such vacancy wound up emerging. But it still makes it tougher for the Dems to argue they're on the side of the angels in this case because the duties to nominate and consider are sacred and the timing irrelevant.

Nymr83 Feb 23 2016 08:36 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Both sides play the same games and anyone who says otherwise is either completely uninformed or a liar.

Ceetar Feb 23 2016 08:40 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Frayed Knot wrote: But it still makes it tougher for the Dems to argue they're on the side of the angels in this case because the duties to nominate and consider are sacred and the timing irrelevant. No it doesn't. It makes it harder to really criticize Republicans for their stance maybe, because many of them would do the same thing. Or really it makes it harder for those two specific people to, because had the situation emerged back then maybe they would've been the only two to really balk. In any case, it doesn't really matter what's said. That's all just the political jockeying that keeps anything from getting done in general. the rules and laws are in place. Replace the justice and make the court whole. now.

Edgy MD Feb 23 2016 08:42 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

The truth is that it's always "political season," but that doesn't mean every last one of youse shouldn't feel compelled to do your jobs right up until the last second you are required to do so. Anyhow, I think somebody is trying to pull a fast one, claiming that's Senator Biden. The guy in the tape has less hair than Vice President Biden, and it's 24 years later.

Lefty Specialist Feb 23 2016 12:41 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Well, Obama's going to nominate someone, whether they want him to or not. They can refuse to hold a hearing if they want, with the attendant damage that incurs, because every Democratic Senate candidate will wield it like a cudgel against his Republican opponent. No surprise that one of only two Repub Senators who think there should be hearings is Mark Kirk, who's on the endangered list. And even if McConnell somehow relented and allowed hearings, any nominee is (sorry for the pun, Antonin) dead on arrival. So the real game here is to make refusal and rejection as costly as possible. An added bonus is if the candidate is really good, after the primaries are decided Hillary or Bernie can say that they'll renominate them once they're in office. Ready-made general election issue, because any potential skeletons will be hashed over well before then, you can bet your fair n' balanced booties.

dgwphotography Feb 23 2016 12:49 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

If any nominee does in fact become Borked, it would be a practice learned from Democrats.

Edgy MD Feb 23 2016 12:51 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

I don't think it's true that any nominee is dead on arrival.

Lefty Specialist Feb 23 2016 01:28 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Frayed Knot wrote: Frayed Knot wrote: Saw a clip earlier tonight of Senator Schumer saying -- back in mid-2007 while G.W. Bush's tenure still had 1-1/2 years to go -- that only under "extreme circumstances" should the Democrats approve any further Supreme Court nominees that the President might appoint. Now, as it turned out, none happened to come up for the remainder of his term, but it certainly was an example of the Senator urging his side to decide, in advance, not to play along simply because they had the numbers to make it happen. And now video emerges of Senator Biden, then chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, saying back during the final year of the elder G. Bush administration that; "Once the political season is underway [any] Supreme Court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign is over." This was said in June rather than in February and, like the Schumer statement (above) during the younger Bush's term, no such vacancy wound up emerging. But it still makes it tougher for the Dems to argue they're on the side of the angels in this case because the duties to nominate and consider are sacred and the timing irrelevant. Aaaaand then we find that a two minute clip of a 35-minute speech is cherry-picked out of context. http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/0 ... tion-year/

Chad Ochoseis Feb 24 2016 07:02 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

dgwphotography wrote: If any nominee does in fact become Borked, it would be a practice learned from Democrats. Not the same thing. Sure, there were political motivations behind rejecting Bork, but there was also the fact that he'd followed Richard Nixon's order to fire a special prosecutor for subpoenaing evidence that would have implicated Nixon in various illegal abuses of power against his political enemies, possibly including a burglary of DNC headquarters. He did this after two other Republicans resigned rather than follow Nixon's order. So there was a strong non-political case for rejecting Bork, and the guy who got the seat (Kennedy) isn't exactly a lefty. The Rs simply want to try to run out the clock on Obama, for no non-political reason at all.

Edgy MD Feb 24 2016 07:35 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

The case was certainly there. And there's a case against most candidates, whether or not it's as strong as the case against Judge Bork. But the real issue is the tactics, and they all changed when that nomination came down.

Lefty Specialist Feb 24 2016 11:12 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

At least Bork got a hearing.

Nymr83 Feb 24 2016 03:41 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

NBC News says Obama is looking at naming Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval to the court. I could have made a list 100 names long and not thought of him. Nominated and confirmed to a district court 10 years ago by Bush and a sitting Republican governor, this is a reall "i dare you to say no" move isn't it?

Benjamin Grimm Feb 24 2016 03:52 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

I think so. Part of the Republican Senator's calculation should be, what if Hillary wins in November and the Democrats take the Senate? Then Scalia's replacement will likely be someone considerably further to the left.

Edgy MD Feb 24 2016 05:08 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

It would preserve the court's nominal Catholic majority!

Lefty Specialist Feb 24 2016 06:51 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

And Mitch McConnell says no. Not even Republicans. No visits. No hearings. No vote. Personally I thing Obama was trolling them and they fell for it. They rejected it out of hand making them look more ridiculous. I'm sure the White House has had their short list for SCOTUS for quite a while now. I doubt Sandoval was on it.

Nymr83 Feb 24 2016 07:02 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

an excellent trolling if that was the case, i wonder if he could float Ted Cruz's name out there just to see what they say

Edgy MD Feb 24 2016 07:29 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Senator McConnell needs to zip it. It's bad enough that his party is being hijacked by a grossly unqualified narcissist sociopath. Stop being a dope and act like a civilized human, and so contrast yourself with Donald Trump. The more actual professional politicians act like children, the more plausible you make Donald Trump's candidacy.

Lefty Specialist Feb 24 2016 09:01 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Actually, what we need to do is prevent senators in the last year of their term from voting on anything. I mean, it's only fair that we should let the American people decide whether they should be allowed to vote, right? And there are 24 Republicans up for re-election this year against only 10 Democrats, so I think it's a smashing idea.

seawolf17 Feb 24 2016 09:08 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Lefty Specialist wrote: Actually, what we need to do is prevent senators in the last year of their term from voting on anything. I mean, it's only fair that we should let the American people decide whether they should be allowed to vote, right? And there are 24 Republicans up for re-election this year against only 10 Democrats, so I think it's a smashing idea. Good play. I like it.

John Cougar Lunchbucket Feb 24 2016 11:14 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

ditto

Lefty Specialist Feb 25 2016 02:24 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Sandoval removes himself from consideration. But the trolling was delicious while it lasted.

Nymr83 Feb 25 2016 08:53 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

seawolf17 wrote: Lefty Specialist wrote: Actually, what we need to do is prevent senators in the last year of their term from voting on anything. I mean, it's only fair that we should let the American people decide whether they should be allowed to vote, right? And there are 24 Republicans up for re-election this year against only 10 Democrats, so I think it's a smashing idea. Good play. I like it. I actually DO think that the entire government should be shut down in an election year until the next government is sworn in, maybe with some sort of emergency exception that they can still pass bills by a 2/3 majority of both houses to respond to anything truly urgent in a bipartisan fashion.

Edgy MD Feb 25 2016 09:42 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

There's always an emergency. Veterans dying waiting for their benefits. Poison water in Michigan that got EPA approval. Coast Guard scandals. The director of intelligence amazingly caught with his pants down. Comic ineptitude in the secret service. Apparently arbitrary audits of enemy political groups in the IRS. A big part of what Congess is responsible for is providing oversight of the federal bureaucracy, who wouldn't be shutting down. They use that responsibility too often as an opportunity for political theater, but I sure would hate to see them abdicate it entirely for a year. People run for Congress because they think something needs to be done. They see an emergency they want to address. Let them address it. Giving them the year off (which is half the term of a US Representative) is just too quitastic for me.

Vic Sage Feb 26 2016 08:52 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

i looked up "quitastic." It's not a thing.

LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr Feb 26 2016 08:56 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Well, yeah, when you leave out the hyphen and double-capitalization, it isn't.

Lefty Specialist Feb 26 2016 10:11 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Nymr83 wrote: seawolf17 wrote: Lefty Specialist wrote: Actually, what we need to do is prevent senators in the last year of their term from voting on anything. I mean, it's only fair that we should let the American people decide whether they should be allowed to vote, right? And there are 24 Republicans up for re-election this year against only 10 Democrats, so I think it's a smashing idea. Good play. I like it. I actually DO think that the entire government should be shut down in an election year until the next government is sworn in, maybe with some sort of emergency exception that they can still pass bills by a 2/3 majority of both houses to respond to anything truly urgent in a bipartisan fashion. So the House of Representatives only works one year out of two? What needs to happen is that people do their jobs for their entire term. There's always an election around the corner.

Nymr83 Feb 26 2016 01:03 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

i wrote that late at night, i actually meant t osay they should be shut down between election day and the beginning of the new terms.

batmagadanleadoff Mar 01 2016 10:30 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

So how much time has to pass before it's okay to say that the man was a fucking scumbag and that conservative is too nice a word to describe him? More like Nazi, or at least half a Nazi.

Ceetar Mar 01 2016 10:32 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

batmagadanleadoff wrote: So how much time has to pass before it's okay to say that the man was a fucking scumbag and that conservative is too nice a word to describe him? More like Nazi, or at least half a Nazi. how much time does it take to switch the word is to was? about that much time.

Frayed Knot Mar 16 2016 09:37 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

And the answer is ... Merrick Garland (because you just can't have enough SC justices named after towns on Long Island.) 63 y/o, Chief judge - US Court of Appeals in Washington DC I was just about to post that Obama isn't doing himself any favors by burning five weeks of his short tenure left just to get a name out, particularly when the opposition has openly stated that they intend to run out the clock rather than approve someone.

MFS62 Mar 16 2016 09:44 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

He's a New Yorker who graduated Harvard with honors. If elected President, Trump promises to nominate someone who flunked out of a Tennessee High School. Later

Edgy MD Mar 16 2016 10:39 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

I get it. Tennessee! Because funny!! Who ever came out of there?! [fimg=500]http://floridapolitics.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/AlGore.jpg[/fimg] Hi, I'm Al Gore. Vanderbilt Law dropout. That's in Tennessee.

Benjamin Grimm Mar 16 2016 10:42 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Vic Sage Mar 16 2016 10:46 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Given Merrick's positions in favor of D.C.'s gun-control laws, Obama is throwing red meat in front of the NRA. Maybe he's giving the Dems the gun-control issue to beat up Repubs with in the general, but it's a double-edged sword. Either way, he's certainly assuring that the nomination won't come to a vote (given the ability of the NRA to control our political process), but he probably assumed that would true no matter who he nominated, so maybe this is just a demonstration of his frustration with his 8 years of failure with regard to federal gun control legislation.

d'Kong76 Mar 16 2016 11:11 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

[fimg=600:2vjymzgi]https://s.yimg.com/fz/api/res/1.2/fPMzehYGar4ePvOpWYSyOQ--/YXBwaWQ9c3JjaGRkO2g9NTAwO3E9OTU7dz03MzY-/http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/bb/22/d1/bb22d1a84b895f4105689900699ae260.jpg[/fimg:2vjymzgi] Some dude from Connecticut is making fun of Tennessee? Connecticut! No, really.

G-Fafif Mar 16 2016 01:29 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

[fimg=300:2sao7lt9]http://mets.lohudblogs.com/files/2012/11/Cy-Young-Awards-Baseb_Megd.jpg[/fimg:2sao7lt9]

batmagadanleadoff Mar 16 2016 01:39 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Garland's about as palatable a nominee as the Republicans are gonna get. I'm hoping the R's play their cutthroat games and come 2017, HRC is able to ram a Judge that's 20 years younger and far more liberal than Garland is down their throats. Then they'll regret blocking Garland, which I assume they will.

Lefty Specialist Mar 16 2016 03:12 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

batmagadanleadoff wrote: Garland's about as palatable a nominee as the Republicans are gonna get. I'm hoping the R's play their cutthroat games and come 2017, HRC is able to ram a Judge that's 20 years younger and far more liberal than Garland is down their throats. Then they'll regret blocking Garland, which I assume they will. And this is exactly Obama's game. There's already talk about confirming him in the lame-duck session if the R's lose the Senate and the presidency. But then Obama can just withdraw the nomination, just to troll them again. Garland's taking one for the team here. And I'm sure this was discussed with him in depth before he was selected.

Frayed Knot Mar 16 2016 03:41 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Lefty Specialist wrote: Garland's taking one for the team here. And I'm sure this was discussed with him in depth before he was selected. Also the likely reason for nominating the older man (63) rather than a younger 'remake the court for a generation' type.

MFS62 Mar 16 2016 10:19 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

While you are dwelling on my choice of Tennessee, you're missing my point. It was about the contrast between an intelligent Obama nominee and they type of person who supporters of Trump might like. I wasn't making fun of Tennessee. I was serious.I picked Tennessee for a reason. I could have chosen a state that made industrial pollution famous. But I picked one that made ignorance famous. Remember the Scopes Trial? It was about a Tennessee law that made the teaching of evolution illegal. And many of the evangelical conservatives in Congress who would vote on the nominee feel that way. Al Gore is not a high school dropout be any means. And Vanderbilt is an excellent school. But it is not Yale, which is in Connecticut. Later

Edgy MD Mar 16 2016 10:25 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

I got your meaning ENTIRELY.

d'Kong76 Mar 16 2016 10:27 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Sorry!

batmagadanleadoff Mar 20 2016 10:30 AM RR Split

This is disappointing: White House chief of staff Denis McDonough, for what it's worth, just said on "Fox News Sunday" that Obama would stick with Garland's nomination in the lame-duck session even if Democrats win the 2016 election. MCDONOUGH: We will stand by him from now until he is confirmed and he’s sitting on the Supreme Court. CHRIS WALLACE: Through the end of the president’s term? MCDONOUGH: That is correct. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... eme-court/ The GOP should get punished if it refuses to vote in good faith on Garland. That punishment should be the nomination of a more progressive Judge. I hope Obama's comments aren't etched in stone, or are a ruse.

MFS62 Mar 20 2016 05:19 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Mitch McConnell is saying there are other qualifications http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/0 ... e-nominee/ The corrupt bastards. Later

batmagadanleadoff Mar 20 2016 07:24 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

[fimg=222]https://a1.nyt.com/assets/article/20160317-095304/images/foundation/logos/nyt-logo-185x26.svg[/fimg] Garland Shouldn’t Be Considered After Election, McConnell Says opening: WASHINGTON — The Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, on Sunday dismissed the possibility of Republicans considering President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee after the November election, even if a Democrat were elected president or Republicans lost their majority.... “That’s not going to happen,” Mr. McConnell said of such an arrangement on “Fox News Sunday.” “The principle is the same. Whether it’s before the election or after the election. The principle is the American people are choosing their next president, and their next president should pick this Supreme Court nominee.” http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/21/us/po ... nnell.html I'm sure that if the Democrats win the Presidential election and regain the Senate, the R's'll move to confirm Garland quicker than it took Mookie Wilson to go from home to first. This is so insulting. If it's to the Republicans advantage, the next thing you know, they'll claim that a sitting Democrat President shouldn't be allowed to nominate a Supreme Court Judge in the mid-term year because the people haven't yet weighed in by voting on the upcoming Senate races.

batmagadanleadoff Mar 21 2016 11:05 AM Re: RR Split

batmagadanleadoff wrote: This is disappointing: White House chief of staff Denis McDonough, for what it's worth, just said on "Fox News Sunday" that Obama would stick with Garland's nomination in the lame-duck session even if Democrats win the 2016 election. MCDONOUGH: We will stand by him from now until he is confirmed and he’s sitting on the Supreme Court. CHRIS WALLACE: Through the end of the president’s term? MCDONOUGH: That is correct. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the ... eme-court/ The GOP should get punished if it refuses to vote in good faith on Garland. That punishment should be the nomination of a more progressive Judge. I hope Obama's comments aren't etched in stone, or are a ruse. Endless possibilities for gamesmanship here. If Obama refuses to withdraw Garland in the lame duck session after an election day Dem win, and Garland himself doesn't remove himself from consideration, and the R's suddenly show interest in confirming Garland recognizing that the alternative nominee will be more liberal, and the R's are able to move the procedure to the vote stage in time, (here's where the gamesmanship comes in) the Dem senators might reject Garland so that HRC can nominate a more liberal justice.

Lefty Specialist Mar 21 2016 12:00 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

In that scenario, the Democrats would have to filibuster Garland because there'd theoretically be enough R votes to confirm. I don't see that happening. It'll be up to Obama to pull the nomination if Hillary wins and brings in a Democratic Senate with her. And I think he'd relish the opportunity to stick it to McConnell one last time.

batmagadanleadoff Mar 21 2016 12:23 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Lefty Specialist wrote: In that scenario, the Democrats would have to filibuster Garland because there'd theoretically be enough R votes to confirm. I don't see that happening. It'll be up to Obama to pull the nomination if Hillary wins and brings in a Democratic Senate with her. And I think he'd relish the opportunity to stick it to McConnell one last time. I was assuming a Dem senate majority. I should've made that clearer.

batmagadanleadoff Mar 21 2016 12:44 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Ahh. never mind. The lame duck session senate would be R controlled.

Benjamin Grimm Mar 21 2016 12:56 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

BUT, there would be a few weeks in January (in this scenario) where Obama would still be president and the Senate would have the Democratic majority. You'd have the lame-duck president, but the new Congress.

Lefty Specialist Mar 21 2016 02:57 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

17 days, basically. But I believe nominations expire with the ending of a session of Congress. He'd need to be re-nominated and voted on. I don't think the Senate can move that fast. If Hillary wins and there's a Democratic Senate, there's no rush. Dial up the 45-year-old Anti-Scalia.

Nymr83 Mar 21 2016 08:55 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Lefty Specialist wrote: Dial up the 45-year-old Anti-Scalia. so someone who has no respect for the Constitution or Congress and thinks the bench is where laws should be made? got it.

MFS62 Mar 21 2016 10:18 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

How about someone who has experience in the Legislative and Executive branches of our Government, and also taught Constitutional Law? When President Hillary Clinton nominates Barak Obama, will you be satisfied? Later

batmagadanleadoff Mar 21 2016 11:10 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

[fimg=222]https://a1.nyt.com/assets/article/20160318-132229/images/foundation/logos/nyt-logo-185x26.svg[/fimg] Garland Shouldn’t Be Considered After Election, McConnell Says excerpt: WASHINGTON — The Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, on Sunday dismissed the possibility of Republicans considering President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee after the November election, even if a Democrat were elected president or Republicans lost their majority. In doing do, Mr. McConnell tried to shut the door on a scenario that some Republicans in the Senate have said could allow them to prevent a more liberal jurist than Mr. Obama’s nominee, Judge Merrick B. Garland, from reaching the court, should a Democrat win the White House. “That’s not going to happen,” Mr. McConnell said of such an arrangement on “Fox News Sunday.” “The principle is the same. Whether it’s before the election or after the election. The principle is the American people are choosing their next president, and their next president should pick this Supreme Court nominee.” How come no reporter has yet to ask McConnell (AFAIK) if this principle were to apply to a current lame duck Republican President?

Nymr83 Mar 22 2016 09:10 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

MFS62 wrote: How about someone who has experience in the Legislative and Executive branches of our Government, and also taught Constitutional Law? When President Hillary Clinton nominates Barak Obama, will you be satisfied? Later no, because Obama has ZERO respect for the separation of powers between the branches of our government. I'm not saying a liberal president shouldn't try to appoint a liberal judge, my issue is the reasoning (or lack thereof) that most of these liberal judges would apply - unlike Scalia, they vote their politics. certainly there are conservative justices who are guilty of this as well - Rehnquist sucked. President Hillary would do well by all of us to find a modern day Hugo Black.

Lefty Specialist Mar 22 2016 09:26 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Or maybe the Republicans can allow a vote right now on the candidate Obama nominated in performance of his Constitutional duties. Garland is about as anti-political as they get, yet he won't sniff a hearing room because suddenly there's a new rule about nominating in the last year of your term that Republicans just made up for the occasion.

Edgy MD Mar 22 2016 09:29 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Maybe he won't. But I'll believe they'll run out the clock when it happens. In the meantime, I expect a capitulation, albeit one with enough twisted logic by Senator McConnell to suggest they've in fact stood by their principles.

Vic Sage Mar 22 2016 09:51 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201 Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Mar 22 2016 11:00 AM

unlike Scalia, they vote their politics. Are you kidding? ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING? Scalia's brand of "judicial restraint" is a myth being perpetuated by the hagiographers anxious to build monuments to the man, but his voting record proves otherwise. He was an idealogue of the first stripe, and his veneer of scholarly detachment slipped away as he went along. Bush v Gore was one of the most blatant partisan decisions in the history of the court, Citizen's United struck down congressional legislation in favor of the legal fiction of corporate personhood, His failed attempt to overturn Affordable Care Act was judicial activism of the highest order, and in Lawrence v Texas, then again in Obergefell, his blatant homophobic bigotry didn't even have a rational basis in law at all, and was just his cultural objection to "the homosexual agenda". The only way for one to view Scalia as a justice who didn't vote his politics is if one's politics agrees with his, and is therefore "right" and natural. From any objective view, he was a font of judicial activism, and his hypocrisy on that subject will be his lasting contribution to American jurisprudence.

Nymr83 Mar 22 2016 09:55 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Edgy MD wrote: Maybe he won't. But I'll believe they'll run out the clock when it happens. In the meantime, I expect a capitulation, albeit one with enough twisted logic by Senator McConnell to suggest they've in fact stood by their principles. is there any other kind of capitulation in Washington? they'll talk tough through the election, but will probably confirm afterwards, would they really trust Trump to do better? the only scenario where they do better right now is not-Trump winning the nomination at a contested convention and then beating Hillary while also holding the Senate. chances of all these things happening is probably what? 5%?

Edgy MD Mar 22 2016 10:43 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Unless there's an alternative end game you and I are not seeing, yeah.

batmagadanleadoff Mar 22 2016 11:37 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Supreme Court Trivia: Who was the last Supreme Court Justice to be confirmed for the position by a Senate that was not controlled by the President's party?

Chad Ochoseis Mar 22 2016 11:59 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Reaching back to dark recesses of my memory for this. I think Breyer was a Clinton appointee confirmed by a Republican Senate. OE - close, but not quite. He was confirmed by a Democratic Senate in 1994 (the same Senate confirmed RBG). The Dems lost control of the Senate that November.

Gwreck Mar 22 2016 12:33 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Thomas was the last. Kennedy, Souter and Thomas were all confirmed by Democratically-controlled Senates.

batmagadanleadoff Mar 22 2016 12:38 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Gwreck wrote: Thomas was the last. Kennedy, Souter and Thomas were all confirmed by Democratically-controlled Senates. Clarence Thomas it is. It's unimaginable that Thomas would get confirmed by a Dem senate in today's political climate, and this is before even considering the sexual allegations made against him --- given how ideologically apart Thomas and Thurgood Marshall -- the judge Thomas would replace -- were.

Lefty Specialist Mar 22 2016 01:26 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

You could say that Thomas was a 43-year-old anti-Marshall.

TransMonk Mar 22 2016 02:32 PM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

HBO has a bio-pic about the Thomas hearings airing in a few weeks. [youtube:1x0bh9gg]iHIvZuypso4[/youtube:1x0bh9gg]

batmagadanleadoff May 23 2016 11:24 AM Re: Antonin Scalia is dead (split from Guess Who Died in 201

Edgy MD wrote: Edgy MD wrote: On election day, the Democrats keep the Presidency and retain the Senate. Psst... Republicans have control of the Senate. I know. Otherwise this potential run out the clock ploy wouldn't be so much of an issue and Obama would nominate a strong liberal. I meant "regain". (earlier post fixed) Sorry. Yeah, that's two adjacent keys (G-T) giving opposite meanings in the word. ___________________________ Looks like Bernie Sanders made the same mistake recently, also in referring to the US Senate: "Any objective assessment of our campaign versus Clinton's campaign, I think, will conclude we have the energy, we have the excitement, we have the young people, we have the working people, we can drive a large voter turnout, so that we not only win the White House, but we retain, regain control of the Senate, do well in the House and in governor's chairs up and down the line," Sanders told Tapper. http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/23/politics/ ... rump-2016/