13 replies to this topic

[Rhizoctonia]

 

[Lysistrata]

John Oliver is trying to be funny... that's okay it's his job. He also has a political bias and tries to influence elections that he cannot possibly participate in... he's not an American citizen. So, stick it up your ass Oliver.

 

On to the Supreme Court issue he brings up. He failed to tell you that Justice Kennedy was not the first nominee. Ronald Reagan nominated Robert Bork to the Court, July 1st of 1987, a full six months before the election year began, and was rejected by the Democrat controlled Senate. Kennedy was nominated after that on November 11, 1987, confirmed on February 3rd 1988, and sworn in February 11, 1988... yes it was an election year, but the process to fill the vacancy took 8 months, and two nominees.

 

Whatever, and however anyone wishes to think about this... Barack Obama will not get another appointment to the Supreme Court. Democrats have to bitch about it to keep their jobs, and Republicans have to do nothing to keep their jobs... and Republicans hold the Ace of Spades this time. Get over it.

[onbekende]

Cellphone baboon does a better job then most politicians!

 

 

Also, is there any way the senate can nominate or at minimum put forth a candidate, obviously running him past the White House then?

[Lysistrata]

Cellphone baboon does a better job then most politicians!

 

 

Also, is there any way the senate can nominate or at minimum put forth a candidate, obviously running him past the White House then?

I agree... the baboon would do nothing, which is better than doing something.

 

No... the President nominates, the Senate confirms. If Obama wanted to get another pick, he should nominate Ted Cruz... he would be wearing a black robe before summer. The Senate would rejoice to get rid of him for life.

[onbekende]

Well they don't have to do it in the name of the Senate, but they can drop a few names to atleast seem somewhat bothered by the year-long standstill of the court (when faced by 4-4 rulings). heck I have already heared some names could be floated around to appease both sides during a non-election year, so who knows

 

Or would that make them seem to be complacent? >_>

[Lysistrata]

Well they don't have to do it in the name of the Senate, but they can drop a few names to atleast seem somewhat bothered by the year-long standstill of the court (when faced by 4-4 rulings). heck I have already heared some names could be floated around to appease both sides during a non-election year, so who knows

 

Or would that make them seem to be complacent? >_>

Of course... anyone can offer their opinion, no law against that.

[onbekende]

But would they, would they want to seem "helpfull"? Cause there is suggesting a candidate and there is suggesting a candidate

[Lysistrata]

But would they, would they want to seem "helpfull"? Cause there is suggesting a candidate and there is suggesting a candidate

Yes, but the politics is already cooked, and no matter what, or who, the politics will ensure nothing gets done until next February. They won't even have hearings... they won't even allow any Obama nominations to breathe into next year. There is too much of a chance for the Senate to flip back to Democrat control in November. Nothing will be done.

[onbekende]

But that just caters to both sides of the isle, namely the Democrats can go on about "ludricous stonewalling" while the more reactionary Republicans can go "Look politics doesn't work!"

 

Both just makes them dig their own grave, would there be someone running for re-election who might consider going for a more "interactive" senate position on this?

[Lysistrata]

The move can also go horribly wrong for Republicans... the Democrats can win President and take back control of the Senate in November... then it would be considered the biggest blunder in American history. It is what it is, and we just have to take the risks and wait for it to play out. I am a Republican, and I support my party, but I'm also aware of the consequences of our decisions.

[Sir Robert de Dudley]

Whatever if the Senate holds out a nominee for over a year they are fucking idiots and you party will never recover from that. Sometimes you lose and must get over it. Obama is president and this is his job people elected him twice your party lose twice get over it. The last year of a president's term doesn't mean vacation time to do nothing because we hate the president. Yes the same applies to the Senate they were elected and can do what the people want but most people want them to do their job and confirm someone, it doesn't have to be the first nommie but how long should it take to nominate and confirm someone to the Supreme Court. The real reason Republicans are doing this is because some of their bills and laws from state level are being question by the Supreme Court and if there is a 4-4 split the lesser court's decision is upheld. 

 

This whole situation is just showing how bad our government has gotten and that they can't just get over shit to work together and do their stupid job. 

[iSocialism]

The whole Obama is the president deal with it is a 3 year old excuse. We did deal with it and elected a majority rule republican senate less then two years. Obama nominates and the majority of the senate tell him yay or nah. Also the only reason democrats want to choose the nominee is for their past/future bills/agendas as well. To complain about the government when they are elected is just silly to me. There's more then the two jokers that a person can vote for each election. Until people do something about that, then it's everyone's problem.

[Lysistrata]

Whatever if the Senate holds out a nominee for over a year they are fucking idiots and you party will never recover from that.

 

This is the position of Democrats. Republicans believe if they give Obama another court Justice, they will then be fucking idiots, and the "country" will never recover. We have a higher calling, and we'll put our faith in the people to make that choice. They can always vote us out.

 

Sometimes you lose and must get over it.

 

I agree... when will you get over the loss of the Senate in 2014?

 

Obama is president and this is his job people elected him twice your party lose twice get over it.

 

His job here is to nominate replacements. No one is trying to stop him from doing his job that he was elected to do.

 

The last year of a president's term doesn't mean vacation time to do nothing because we hate the president.

 

The last year of the Presidents' last term, is called the "lame duck"... for many reasons, this is one of them.

 

Yes the same applies to the Senate they were elected and can do what the people want but most people want them to do their job and confirm someone, it doesn't have to be the first nommie but how long should it take to nominate and confirm someone to the Supreme Court.

 

You mean most Democrats want them to do it. The people who elected the new Republican majority, all say no. It takes as long as they want to take.

 

The real reason Republicans are doing this is because some of their bills and laws from state level are being question by the Supreme Court and if there is a 4-4 split the lesser court's decision is upheld.

 

We will do everything the law allows to keep Justice Antonin Scalia from being replaced by any Progressive. I said this before... is it politics?... you're damn fuckin' right it is.

 

This whole situation is just showing how bad our government has gotten and that they can't just get over shit to work together and do their stupid job.

You can join us anytime you want. We understand that everyone makes mistakes... we're Americans.

[Sir Robert de Dudley]

 

Whatever if the Senate holds out a nominee for over a year they are fucking idiots and you party will never recover from that.

 

This is the position of Democrats. Republicans believe if they give Obama another court Justice, they will then be fucking idiots, and the "country" will never recover. We have a higher calling, and we'll put our faith in the people to make that choice. They can always vote us out.

 

Sometimes you lose and must get over it.

 

I agree... when will you get over the loss of the Senate in 2014?

 

Obama is president and this is his job people elected him twice your party lose twice get over it.

 

His job here is to nominate replacements. No one is trying to stop him from doing his job that he was elected to do.

 

The last year of a president's term doesn't mean vacation time to do nothing because we hate the president.

 

The last year of the Presidents' last term, is called the "lame duck"... for many reasons, this is one of them.

 

Yes the same applies to the Senate they were elected and can do what the people want but most people want them to do their job and confirm someone, it doesn't have to be the first nommie but how long should it take to nominate and confirm someone to the Supreme Court.

 

You mean most Democrats want them to do it. The people who elected the new Republican majority, all say no. It takes as long as they want to take.

 

The real reason Republicans are doing this is because some of their bills and laws from state level are being question by the Supreme Court and if there is a 4-4 split the lesser court's decision is upheld.

 

We will do everything the law allows to keep Justice Antonin Scalia from being replaced by any Progressive. I said this before... is it politics?... you're damn fuckin' right it is.

 

This whole situation is just showing how bad our government has gotten and that they can't just get over shit to work together and do their stupid job.

You can join us anytime you want. We understand that everyone makes mistakes... we're Americans.

 

1. And we just may this year

2. I am it's election year and I will do my part and vote Blue

3. Yes they aren't stopping him from nominating someone but to just say out right you won't even consider his nomination is ridiculous.

4. Yes it may be called Lame Duck but it doesn't mean he will stop trying to get things done.

5. I am talking about many of the actually American citizens, yes the hard core Republicans say no but few Republicans have came out in support of Obama and telling the Senate to go with the process. Example was a retired Justice.

6. Yep and politics is a game of Hardball, who said progressive I am sure Obama will nominate a Liberal, now if they are the same to you than yea. I guess it's so bad to have Liberal Justices. Just like every other part of the government you need balance.

7. And so are the liberals who actually like fixing mistakes.