Scalia

Carl

RIP Brother
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
1,372
Well that would be impossible...

I'm not a fan of Sotomayor at all which was one of his choices. I'd prefer a candidate who actually believes in upholding the constitution. I don't know enough about the possible choices to say who that would be though.

Also, I guess we can assume the nomination will be a female by Obama?
And states rights, except for 2000.
 

Carl

RIP Brother
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
1,372
So, the Republican Pty will block President Obama's nominee; though they don't know who it will be. That's where we are?
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
So, the Republican Pty will block President Obama's nominee; though they don't know who it will be. That's where we are?
Probably so and for obvious reasons. His choice will not be what the Republicians are looking for.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,465
So, the Republican Pty will block President Obama's nominee; though they don't know who it will be. That's where we are?
Yeah, because Supreme Court Justices seem to be less about the law and more about political parties anymore. Which means Obama is essentially going to try and stack the court with a liberal Justice and the Republicans will want to fill that slot with a conservative Justice. It's a stupid system but I obviously can't blame the Dems for wanting to push someone through before possibly losing the Presidency and I can't blame the Republicans for wanting a shot at getting who they want. It's more about the broken system then bitching about either side.
 

BipolarFuk

Demoted
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
11,464
It really is a fucking joke that clowns like Rubio are saying the NEXT president must nominate a nominee blah blah blah.

The fucktard running the Senate says the American people should get a say in who takes Scalia's place. :lol
 

Carl

RIP Brother
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
1,372
Yeah, because Supreme Court Justices seem to be less about the law and more about political parties anymore. Which means Obama is essentially going to try and stack the court with a liberal Justice and the Republicans will want to fill that slot with a conservative Justice. It's a stupid system but I obviously can't blame the Dems for wanting to push someone through before possibly losing the Presidency and I can't blame the Republicans for wanting a shot at getting who they want. It's more about the broken system then bitching about either side.

Yes, good post; but that's what every Presidential election is basically about. Justice Kennedy is about 80. He is next to be replaced.

I am not a constitutional scholar; but doesn't the President have a responsibility and a right, constitutionally, to nominate someone?
 

Genghis Khan

The worst version of myself
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
37,486
Stay classy, San Diego.
Seriously. The same guy who admonished smitty for making fun of Bowlen's wife, goes and says something like that, which is a way worse thing to say.

Hypocritical douche bag.
 

Genghis Khan

The worst version of myself
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
37,486
Yeah, because Supreme Court Justices seem to be less about the law and more about political parties anymore. Which means Obama is essentially going to try and stack the court with a liberal Justice and the Republicans will want to fill that slot with a conservative Justice. It's a stupid system but I obviously can't blame the Dems for wanting to push someone through before possibly losing the Presidency and I can't blame the Republicans for wanting a shot at getting who they want. It's more about the broken system then bitching about either side.
Yep, it's a shame but that's pretty much how it goes. Not sure what the alternative is though.
 

Clay_Allison

Old Bastard
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
5,488
Yes, good post; but that's what every Presidential election is basically about. Justice Kennedy is about 80. He is next to be replaced.

I am not a constitutional scholar; but doesn't the President have a responsibility and a right, constitutionally, to nominate someone?
Pretty much, but the nominee being confirmed by the Senate is also constitutional. Obama's been all about his no compromise "I've got a pen and a phone" attitude since Republicans took congress, so you can expect them to play hardball just as much as he has.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,465
Yes, good post; but that's what every Presidential election is basically about. Justice Kennedy is about 80. He is next to be replaced.

I am not a constitutional scholar; but doesn't the President have a responsibility and a right, constitutionally, to nominate someone?
Isn't Ginsberg the oldest? She can't be far either. She is like going to be 83 soon.

And yes Obama has the constitutional right to nominate someone and the Senate has the constitutional right to block that someone. So basically I don't think there is anything wrong with Obama doing his job. But that doesn't mean there is anything wrong with that being blocked either.
 
Last edited:

Carl

RIP Brother
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
1,372
Seriously. The same guy who admonished smitty for making fun of Bowlen's wife, goes and says something like that, which is a way worse thing to say.

Hypocritical douche bag.
So, when is the appropriate time lapse to say what you think? 72 hours? Just curious and I will write it down for future reference.
 

L.T. Fan

I'm Easy If You Are
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
21,689
Yes, good post; but that's what every Presidential election is basically about. Justice Kennedy is about 80. He is next to be replaced.

I am not a constitutional scholar; but doesn't the President have a responsibility and a right, constitutionally, to nominate someone?
To nominate yes to confirm no.
 

Genghis Khan

The worst version of myself
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
37,486
So, when is the appropriate time lapse to say what you think? 72 hours? Just curious and I will write it down for future reference.
it's not about that, you fucking moron. You admonished someone else for essentially saying something mean about a public figure. A week later you say something even worse about a public figure. I guess it's ok when you disagree with a person's opinions and stuff.

You called someone a wanker and rejoiced at his death. All because you disagree with his political opinions. That makes you a hypocrite and a douche. Congrats.
 

BipolarFuk

Demoted
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
11,464
Obama should nominate a black female for the job.

Put the heat on a bunch of old whitey men to block that one.
 

Carl

RIP Brother
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
1,372
it's not about that, you fucking moron. You admonished someone else for essentially saying something mean about a public figure. A week later you say something even worse about a public figure. I guess it's ok when you disagree with a person's opinions and stuff.

You called someone a wanker and rejoiced at his death. All because you disagree with his political opinions. That makes you a hypocrite and a douche. Congrats.
But he is a public figure who has dabbled; Bowlen's wife is not a public figure, unless perhaps to people in Denver. Anyway carry on with your name calling, swear words and mud-slinging. It is very entertaining.
 

Genghis Khan

The worst version of myself
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
37,486
But he is a public figure who has dabbled; Bowlen's wife is not a public figure, unless perhaps to people in Denver. Anyway carry on with your name calling, swear words and mud-slinging. It is very entertaining.
Ah, I see, it's different when you do it, because reasons.

You're proving me right so you carry on.
 

Cowboysrock55

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 7, 2013
Messages
52,465
Obama should nominate a black female for the job.

Put the heat on a bunch of old whitey men to block that one.
I'm sure the nomination will be a minority, female or both. Look at the previous 2 nominations he made.
 
Top Bottom