PDA

View Full Version : So Much for the Excuse of Let The People Decide



Cigar
04-06-2016, 07:19 AM
Mitch McConnell Wakes Up To Nasty Surprise: 16 GOP Senators Defect And Will Meet With Obama’s SCOTUSMitch McConnell Wakes Up To Nasty Surprise: 16 GOP Senators Defect And Will Meet With Obama’s SCOTUS Nominee

NBC News is reporting that some Republican senators are starting to change their “tone” about Obama’s Supreme Count nominee, Merrick Garland. In spite of the “wall of opposition” brought about by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell against any nominee President Obama puts forward, a quarter of Republican senators 16 in total – have stated that they will “meet” with Garland about his nomination.


Progress? Perhaps, but only slightly. The fact remains that a majority of Republican senators will not even meet with Garland to discuss his potential nomination. This doesn’t even include putting it to a vote. This is literally just sitting down and talking with the man about potentially filling the vacant seat left by Justice Antonin Scalia following his death. Most remain completely hell-bent on blocking anybody Obama sends forward, no matter who it is.

This opposition is in spite of the fact that, according to recent polling, 61 percent of Americans believe that Republican Senators should do their job and put Garland’s nomination to a vote. The Senators remain firmly opposed to the American people who elected them. Only 31 percent agree that the next president should appoint the new justice.

http://i1.wp.com/media1.s-nbcnews.com/j/newscms/2016_11/1464336/when_should_congress_vote_on_scotus_nominee-_chartbuilder_cf08a26bf9602f546a3dd134ab527790.nbc news-ux-600-480.png

Mark Kirk, the first Republican senator who has officially met with Garland, is currently up for re-election in Illinois, a blue state. After his meeting earlier today, he told ABC News the following:

‘Obviously, I would consider voting for him. I think we should do our job’

http://bipartisanreport.com/2016/03/30/mitch-mcconnell-wakes-up-to-nasty-surprise-16-gop-senators-defect-and-will-meet-with-obamas-scotus-nominee/

hanger4
04-06-2016, 07:37 AM
Those Senator's can meet with whom they choose.

And the Senate's job is advice and consent not hearings and vote on nominations.

Your OP set up the strawman for the uninformed and then beat up the nonexistent fact.

Are you proud of your uninformedness ??

Quicksilver
04-06-2016, 07:40 AM
meh... I'll just bet the 16 that agreed to meet Garland are sniveling little $hits scared to death of losing their seats to Democrats in November.. I know Mark Kirk is one...

MisterVeritis
04-06-2016, 10:03 AM
meh... I'll just bet the 16 that agreed to meet Garland are sniveling little $hits scared to death of losing their seats to Democrats in November.. I know Mark Kirk is one...
I hope they are all faced with Primary challenges.

Bo-4
04-06-2016, 10:18 AM
Yep, this is going to backfire on Mitch the Turtle as more and more folks get fed up with the obstructionism.

Once that number hits 70% it'll be all over but the shouting.

If i'm wrong? Fine - Hillary or Bernie can name the next one and it won't be a moderate.

In the unlikely event Republicans regain the White House?

Payback's a beotch!

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-TakayGFLO84/UfYiGJRRQ0I/AAAAAAAAQO4/XpKv4oF70Rc/s1600/mitch-mcconnell-cecil-turtle-totally-looks-like.jpg

Bo-4
04-06-2016, 11:13 AM
Just in:


“I found Judge Garland to be well-informed, thoughtful, impressive, extraordinarily bright and with a sensitivity that I look for [regarding the] appropriate roles that the Constitution assigns to the three branches,” she said.

Some more hard-line Republicans and conservative activist groups have tried to paint Garland as an unrestrained liberal, but Collins did not seem to get that impression.

“The meeting left me more convinced than ever that the process should proceed,” she said. “The next step in my view should be public hearings.”
Ruh-Row :D

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/susan-collins-merrick-garland-praise_us_5703eaf7e4b083f5c609005a?utm_hp_ref=poli tics

Quicksilver
04-06-2016, 12:02 PM
If the GOP were smart.. they would take Garland and get him confirmed ASAP. I would hope Clinton would nominate someone a bit more liberal when she is President. BUT.. then again.. waiting for the GOP to be smart is a bit of a hopeless cause

Peter1469
04-06-2016, 02:53 PM
As soon as this guy was nominated, I said this was going to happen.

del
04-06-2016, 03:01 PM
he should just show up in october with a black robe and take a seat.

tacit consent

Cigar
04-06-2016, 03:04 PM
Those Senator's can meet with whom they choose.

And the Senate's job is advice and consent not hearings and vote on nominations.

Your OP set up the strawman for the uninformed and then beat up the nonexistent fact.

Are you proud of your uninformedness ??


Remember that if a Repub ever get's there again

hanger4
04-06-2016, 03:17 PM
Remember that if a Repub ever get's there again

I don't have to remember, I already know. Tis fun watchin' y'all whine when ya don't get your way.

Standing Wolf
04-06-2016, 03:38 PM
I don't have to remember, I already know. Tis fun watchin' y'all whine when ya don't get your way.

The President does his Constitutional duty, Senate Republicans refuse to do theirs and justify it with an imaginary mandate from the people, and Democrats are the ones who are whining? :rollseyes:

hanger4
04-06-2016, 03:50 PM
The President does his Constitutional duty, Senate Republicans refuse to do theirs and justify it with an imaginary mandate from the people, and Democrats are the ones who are whining? :rollseyes:

They did their duty, they denied consent.

Geebus what's wrong with y'all ?? Was high school civics an elective ??

Safety
04-06-2016, 03:54 PM
They did their duty, they denied consent.

Geebus what's wrong with y'all ?? Was high school civics an elective ??

LoL, they denied consent before the nomination was announced. I think most are just verifying that is sitting well with the right, because I don't think anyone wants to hear whining and complaining about being un-patriotic or not doing their jobs when a different captain is at the helm.

Bo-4
04-06-2016, 04:01 PM
As soon as this guy was nominated, I said this was going to happen.

Your like Svengali Peter! :D

hanger4
04-06-2016, 04:05 PM
LoL, they denied consent before the nomination was announced. I think most are just verifying that is sitting well with the right, because I don't think anyone wants to hear whining and complaining about being un-patriotic or not doing their jobs when a different captain is at the helm.

"they denied consent before the nomination was announced"

So ??

Safety
04-06-2016, 04:07 PM
"they denied consent before the nomination was announced"

So ??

"we must pass the bill before we know what's in it".

- Pelosi

Birds of a feather and all that jazz.

Standing Wolf
04-06-2016, 04:17 PM
They did their duty, they denied consent.

The Constitutional mandate is for "advice and consent" - not something you can do when you don't even show up.

It's like the guy whose job is to stand on the line and toss out the apples that aren't big enough. He can't just say, "I'm sure they're okay" and go have some beers. That's not what he's being paid to do.

hanger4
04-06-2016, 04:39 PM
"we must pass the bill before we know what's in it".

- Pelosi

Birds of a feather and all that jazz.
But they didn't 'pass a bill' they 'denied a bill'.

Actually that happens quite often.

hanger4
04-06-2016, 04:40 PM
The Constitutional mandate is for "advice and consent" - not something you can do when you don't even show up.

It's like the guy whose job is to stand on the line and toss out the apples that aren't big enough. He can't just say, "I'm sure they're okay" and go have some beers. That's not what he's being paid to do.

They denied consent. What part of that can't you wrap your head around ??

del
04-06-2016, 06:27 PM
it's amazing the lengths some will go to to defend behavior that would embarrass a three year old.

MisterVeritis
04-06-2016, 06:31 PM
it's amazing the lengths some will go to to defend behavior that would embarrass a three year old.
True. But we still love tolerate you.

del
04-06-2016, 06:49 PM
True. But we still love tolerate you.

that's nice.

i wouldn't piss on you if you were fully engulfed in flames.