Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-28-2016, 02:14 PM
 
11,186 posts, read 6,467,377 times
Reputation: 4619

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by TrexDigit View Post
Fast-forward to Republicans whining, "WAH WAH WAH!!!! Why'd we follow McConnell?!??!?!?"
Besides, you're really helping us on some key cases like ABORTION. Good job!!!!!
Go ahead - keep waving that victory flag!!! In an election year no less......



A New Supreme Court Challenge: The Erosion of Abortion Access in Texas


Key Case Goes to Supreme Court Without Abortion Foe Antonin Scalia


And poor, poor Dow decided to cough up $835 million.



Antonin Scalia: The Billion-Dollar Supreme Court Justice

And again.... What other important issues have you decided to forfeit?
• Affirmative Action
• Voting Rights
• Immigration
• Contraception
You keep supporting what the R's are doing. They can't possibly win those cases with another Sotomayor/Kagan type judge on the court. With only 8 judges, maybe they'll get some 4-4 votes and hope for an R prez come next year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-28-2016, 02:48 PM
 
58,547 posts, read 26,856,347 times
Reputation: 14120
Quote:
Originally Posted by legalsea View Post
For those of you rambling about how the Senate is to 'advise' the President about whom he may nominate, or even if he may nominate, here is an interesting article from the Heritage Foundation from 2005:

Advice and Consent: What the Constitution Says

I found this paragraph going to the heart of the matter:

"The practice of the first President and Senate supported the construction of the Appointments Clause that reserves the act of nomination exclusively to the President. In requesting confirmation of his first nominee, President Washington sent the Senate this message: "I nominate William Short, Esquire, and request your advice on the propriety of appointing him." The Senate then notified the President of Short's confirmation, which showed that they too regarded "advice" as a postnomination rather than a prenomination function: "Resolved, that the President of the United States be informed, that the Senate advise and consent to his appointment of William Short Esquire. . . ."

The Senate has continued to use this formulation to the present day. Washington wrote in his diary that Thomas Jefferson and John Jay agreed with him that the Senate's powers "extend no farther than to an approbation or disapprobation of the person nominated by the President, all the rest being Executive and vested in the President by the Constitution." Washington's construction of the Appointments Clause has been embraced by his successors."
"or even if he may nominate"

I DON'T believe ANY serious has said he CANNOT nominate anyone he wants.

"The Senate has continued to use this formulation to the present day."

Except when we had the 6th and 10th Presidents. So much for following that "formulation"!

"Ferd,
John Quincy Adams and John Tyler both had SCOTUS nominees who were not voted on.


at a minimum 450 judicial nominess have not received votes and did not withdraw. That is the most likely disposition of a presidential nominee other than confirmation.


Further I have quoted Article and Paragraph of the constitution that shows 2 things
1. The Senate sets its own rules, and that includes what Advice and Consent looks like.
2. The Senate does not have to hold a vote, to provide Advice and Consent."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2016, 03:28 PM
 
2,464 posts, read 1,276,616 times
Reputation: 668
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Hmmm... I'm not seeing it. The R Senate is taking one of the several options available to them in the nomination process.

Now, that's just funny.

You apparently didn't get the memo that the American electorate gave both the House and the Senate to the majority Rs because they were dissatisfied with Obama's and the Dems' actions.

ROFL!
Of course you don't see it, you agree with their feet stomping. You clearly don't understand how politics work....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2016, 04:29 PM
 
Location: CO
2,172 posts, read 1,446,866 times
Reputation: 972
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
No one has even expressed a remote interest in reversing Roe v Wade. What are you inanely babbling about?
HB2 in Texas.
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
See... that's the problem with not keeping up on what's going on in the real world.
Not surprising you'd have no clue about this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzarama View Post
You keep supporting what the R's are doing.
Celebrating the unintended consequences and positive outcomes of their obstruction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzarama View Post
They can't possibly win those cases with another Sotomayor/Kagan type judge on the court.
So what?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzarama View Post
With only 8 judges, maybe they'll get some 4-4 votes and hope for an R prez come next year.
4-4 votes would let lower standings rule - which usually lean liberal.

Hope for an R prez next year? lol - thanks for the laughs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2016, 04:56 PM
 
Location: Long Island
56,904 posts, read 25,835,547 times
Reputation: 15445
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
No one has even expressed a remote interest in reversing Roe v Wade. What are you inanely babbling about?

See... that's the problem with not keeping up on what's going on in the real world.
Scalia was very much in opposition to R vs Wade, he was consistently a dissenter in the challenges that came before the courts, in 1992 and 2007, both votes were 5-4. He felt that abortion should be left up to the states.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-28-2016, 05:23 PM
 
Location: Caverns measureless to man...
7,588 posts, read 6,582,149 times
Reputation: 17966
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Hmmm... I'm not seeing it. The R Senate is taking one of the several options available to them in the nomination process.

Now, that's just funny.

You apparently didn't get the memo that the American electorate gave both the House and the Senate to the majority Rs because they were dissatisfied with Obama's and the Dems' actions.

ROFL!
And what's going to be your spin on it this fall when the Republipunks lose the Senate over this? Got a news flash for you - just because every single person who calls in to Rush Limbaugh every day is in support of this crap doesn't mean the majority of Americans in general share that view. The fact is, the voters as a whole say (by about a 2-1 margin) that this is not what they want, and that the Republipunks are going too far. 2 to 1.

Maybe if I put it into different terms for you.... Another way of putting that is that if you hold up one finger on your right hand, and two fingers on your left hand, the left hand is showing twice as many fingers. If that helps you comprehend the mathematical realities we're discussing here.

So yeah. Go ahead and overplay your mandate. Poking your own eyeballs out is what the Republican party is best at, so yeah. Go for it. This'll be funny to watch.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-29-2016, 06:41 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,614 posts, read 44,334,570 times
Reputation: 13543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliftonpdx View Post
Of course you don't see it, you agree with their feet stomping.
The only people stomping their feet on this are Dems. I say if they didn't want to be put in the position of depending on an R majority Senate for an Obama SCOTUS nominee confirmation, they should have acted more responsibly for the American people and not lost the Senate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-29-2016, 06:44 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
88,614 posts, read 44,334,570 times
Reputation: 13543
Quote:
Originally Posted by Albert_The_Crocodile View Post
And what's going to be your spin on it this fall when the Republipunks lose the Senate over this?
They won't.

Obamacare is going to be even more painful this year than last, and by November the pain will be acute. Guess who the American electorate blames for that?

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/15/us...t-useless.html

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...ance/19841235/

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/04/opinio...-middle-class/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-29-2016, 06:53 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
7,214 posts, read 9,359,113 times
Reputation: 7802
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
When did Harry Reid ever present any of the 300+ House bills to the Senate for a vote?
That's a pretty weak deflection, even coming from you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-29-2016, 06:56 AM
 
Location: Wisconsin
7,214 posts, read 9,359,113 times
Reputation: 7802
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
They won't.

Obamacare is going to be even more painful this year than last, and by November the pain will be acute. Guess who the American electorate blames for that?

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/15/us...t-useless.html

Dilemma over deductibles: Costs crippling middle class

Why Obamacare fails poor and middle class - CNN.com
Another deflection. Some articles from last year about Obamacare, which have nothing to do with the topic at hand.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top