C
Con_Alma
Posts: 12,198
Feb 15, 2016 9:13pm
Just remember the framers explicitly made the process political.
I
isadore
Posts: 7,762
Feb 15, 2016 9:14pm
gosh a ruddies what is the basis for your statement about Thomas being a moderate or non-partisan. He is consistently rated as one of the most conservative members of the courtgut;1781590 wrote:I don't think that means what your or the blogger does....it's about recess appointments, meaning when Congress is out-of-session confirmation is circumvented. This was used not that long ago with respect to the NLRA, I believe.
If Obama puts up a moderate, I don't see how Repubs can't confirm. The grandstanding will be a moot point if Hillary is elected, and if a Repub does win they will get to replace possibly 2-3 judges, restoring or changing the balance again. And if they lose control of the Senate, a moderate is the best you can hope for even with a Repub POTUS.
IMO, the ideal balance is 2-5-2 or possibly 3-3-3 (which is closer to what it was with Scalia). It's popular to say the court was 5-4 conservative, and no doubt that's the story being pushed to pressure Repubs to confirm a liberal, but Kennedy and Thomas vote with liberals enough to be considered moderate or non-partisan.
http://www.usnews.com/news/national/articles/2008/05/12/ranking-the-politics-of-supreme-court-justices
G
gut
Posts: 15,058
Feb 15, 2016 10:29pm
He ruled for Obamacare twice. And he's closer to the center than any of the 4 liberal justices, and has been for the past 10 years.isadore;1781662 wrote:gosh a ruddies what is the basis for your statement about Thomas being a moderate or non-partisan. He is consistently rated as one of the most conservative members of the court
http://www.usnews.com/news/national/articles/2008/05/12/ranking-the-politics-of-supreme-court-justices
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideological_leanings_of_U.S._Supreme_Court_justices
Look at the voting records - if Thomas is ultra-conservative, his decisions don't reflect it. Unlike the 4 liberal justices who vote predictably in lock-step. Thomas and Kennedy do not.
majorspark
Posts: 5,122
Feb 15, 2016 10:31pm
Chuck Schumer.Heretic;1781604 wrote:So, since both sides are loaded with hypocrites, what next?
[video=youtube;zyp0x-cNuyE][/video]
I
isadore
Posts: 7,762
Feb 15, 2016 11:01pm
hey dumbo are you confusing Associate Justice Clarence Thomas with Chief Justice John Robertsgut;1781667 wrote:He ruled for Obamacare twice. And he's closer to the center than any of the 4 liberal justices, and has been for the past 10 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideological_leanings_of_U.S._Supreme_Court_justices
Look at the voting records - if Thomas is ultra-conservative, his decisions don't reflect it. Unlike the 4 liberal justices who vote predictably in lock-step. Thomas and Kennedy do not.
B
BoatShoes
Posts: 5,703
Feb 15, 2016 11:42pm
Dude I think you mean Roberts and not Thomas. Thomas is more Conservative than Scalia ever was.gut;1781667 wrote:He ruled for Obamacare twice. And he's closer to the center than any of the 4 liberal justices, and has been for the past 10 years.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideological_leanings_of_U.S._Supreme_Court_justices
Look at the voting records - if Thomas is ultra-conservative, his decisions don't reflect it. Unlike the 4 liberal justices who vote predictably in lock-step. Thomas and Kennedy do not.
You mean Chief Justice Roberts methinks - even though he is also Conservative and there was never any doubt that Obamacare was constitutional because of course Congress has the power to tax. The only thing that created any ambiguity was the Obama Administration making the argument that taxing people who didn't have insurance wasn't actually a tax for political reasons.
Just because he is not as Conservative as Thomas doesn't mean he isn't generally conservative.
B
BoatShoes
Posts: 5,703
Feb 15, 2016 11:47pm
Let's face it. If the pubs had the presidency the arguments would be the exact same except on different sides.
majorspark
Posts: 5,122
Feb 15, 2016 11:52pm
I think nearly everyone acknowledges this. You could take the Schumer video I posted and substitute Mcconnell in that case nearly verbatim.BoatShoes;1781702 wrote:Let's face it. If the pubs had the presidency the arguments would be the exact same except on different sides.
majorspark
Posts: 5,122
Feb 16, 2016 12:07am
Such a great mind and beyond that a great person. The guy really was not the right wing nutjob he was perceived by some to be. A true jurist that had the ability to set aside his personal convictions and base them on an originalist interpretation of the constitution. the 60 minutes interview I linked is well worth taking the time to watch.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/justice-scalia-on-the-record/
Boatshoes see if you can catch just how strongly his textualist approach to interpreting the constitution was in this interview. Hint abortion.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/justice-scalia-on-the-record/
Boatshoes see if you can catch just how strongly his textualist approach to interpreting the constitution was in this interview. Hint abortion.
Glory Days
Posts: 7,809
Feb 17, 2016 12:02am
not sure what all the fuss is, Ruth Bader Ginsburg already has her foot in the door. its only a matter of time before they are nominating someone for her spot. If they focus on winning the oval office, they can control that nominee and its right back to the status quo.
Q
QuakerOats
Posts: 8,740
Feb 18, 2016 10:46am
THE WHITE HOUSE says President Obama believes his 2006 decision to filibuster the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court was a mistake – after being accused of hypocrisy for blasting Senate Republicans for vowing to block his next high court nominee.
And of course, he is skipping Scalia's funeral.
And of course, he is skipping Scalia's funeral.
CenterBHSFan
Posts: 6,115
Feb 18, 2016 4:29pm
It seems a little odd to skip the funeral of a SCJ.
ptown_trojans_1
Posts: 7,632
Feb 19, 2016 12:49pm
Very. I am not a fan of it and the President should be there.CenterBHSFan;1782174 wrote:It seems a little odd to skip the funeral of a SCJ.
bases_loaded
Posts: 6,912
Feb 19, 2016 5:37pm
The great unifier is too busy perpetuating a race war.CenterBHSFan;1782174 wrote:It seems a little odd to skip the funeral of a SCJ.
Q
queencitybuckeye
Posts: 7,117
Feb 19, 2016 7:19pm
Forgot about this, changed my mind. The president earned the penalty of sitting out this term as far as this subject is concerned.QuakerOats;1782062 wrote:THE WHITE HOUSE says President Obama believes his 2006 decision to filibuster the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court was a mistake – after being accused of hypocrisy for blasting Senate Republicans for vowing to block his next high court nominee.
majorspark
Posts: 5,122
Feb 19, 2016 8:35pm
In his speech on the floor of the Senate, one of his big concerns with Alito were the checks and balances in the federal government. Noting specifically his fear that Alito would rule on cases concerning the executive to affirm the power of the executive branch. I found that quite interesting.queencitybuckeye;1782399 wrote:Forgot about this, changed my mind. The president earned the penalty of sitting out this term as far as this subject is concerned.
G
gut
Posts: 15,058
Feb 19, 2016 9:56pm
Especially interesting after 7 years of executive actions and orders.majorspark;1782403 wrote:In his speech on the floor of the Senate, one of his big concerns with Alito were the checks and balances in the federal government. Noting specifically his fear that Alito would rule on cases concerning the executive to affirm the power of the executive branch. I found that quite interesting.
G
gut
Posts: 15,058
Feb 20, 2016 12:09am
Ehhhh, basically the only thing that gets Obama to cancel a tee-time is if his people tell him the optics are beneficial. Skipping the funeral probably plays better with most of his base.bases_loaded;1782384 wrote:The great unifier is too busy perpetuating a race war.
It's possible Obama the perpetual campaigner and Commander-in-Speech is simply a product of the social media age. I'm not sure Trump/Cruz/Rubio will be any different. Again, it could be Obama or simply a function of the times where popularity and support among your base is better achieved through demagoguing and propaganda than compromise and deal-making. Being accomplished at pointing fingers trumps getting things done. Certainly a formula Cruz has followed in his short time in the Senate.
J
jmog
Posts: 6,567
Feb 20, 2016 9:02am
saying he was wrong years later does not preclude him from the consequences of his actions. He should come out and say that due to his own actions when Bush was POTUS that the SCOTUS nomination will wait until the new POTUS has been inaugurated.QuakerOats;1782062 wrote:THE WHITE HOUSE says President Obama believes his 2006 decision to filibuster the nomination of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court was a mistake – after being accused of hypocrisy for blasting Senate Republicans for vowing to block his next high court nominee.
And of course, he is skipping Scalia's funeral.
That would be if he has any integrity left.
B
BR1986FB
Posts: 24,104
Feb 22, 2016 2:34pm
Sounds like he skipped the funeral to go golfing. At least the POS' had his round cut short by rain.bases_loaded;1782384 wrote:The great unifier is too busy perpetuating a race war.
Q
QuakerOats
Posts: 8,740
Feb 22, 2016 2:50pm
Yeah, I didn't realize he was golfing until somebody told me over the weekend. What a leader.
J
jmog
Posts: 6,567
Feb 22, 2016 4:28pm
Please tell me that isn't true. He was really golfing on the same day as the funeral he skipped?
Q
QuakerOats
Posts: 8,740
Feb 22, 2016 4:32pm
I cannot say definitively; but that is what a fairly reliable source told me.
like_that
Posts: 26,625
Feb 22, 2016 4:33pm
Link?
Q
QuakerOats
Posts: 8,740
Feb 22, 2016 4:35pm
The golf may have been on Sunday, not Saturday ..........
http://www.redstate.com/absentee/2016/02/21/obama-busy-work-couldnt-attend-justice-scalias-funeral-...-golf-bet/
http://www.redstate.com/absentee/2016/02/21/obama-busy-work-couldnt-attend-justice-scalias-funeral-...-golf-bet/