Scalia dunzo

You Heard Me

Scalia dunzo

Postby Cortez the Killer » Sat Feb 13, 2016 9:14 pm

not really interested if he rests in peace but this makes the months leading up to November very interesting.

Barry names the next justice.

The GOP stalls for several months.

Dems win November in a landslide.

President Hil-dawg names Barry to the Supreme Court.

The GOP eats itself.

Thoughts?
User avatar
Cortez the Killer
Legend
 
Posts: 2490
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 8:45 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby Hoosier Fan » Sat Feb 13, 2016 11:37 pm

Cortez the Killer wrote:not really interested if he rests in peace but this makes the months leading up to November very interesting.

Barry names the next justice.

The GOP stalls for several months.

Dems win November in a landslide.

President Hil-dawg names Barry to the Supreme Court.

The GOP eats itself.

Thoughts?


I would be good with him not getting another appointment. Guaranteed that Harry Reid would do the same if he were in the same position.

Does he really want to be a SC judge when he can dwarf Clinton money on the speaking circuit while simultaneously causing mischief on a global level vs deciding whether some schmoe in South Dakota can opt out of Obamacare or a couple in Topeka can get married?
"There you go. Givin' a fuck when it ain't your turn to give a fuck." - Bunk
User avatar
Hoosier Fan
Hall of Smack
 
Posts: 5639
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 6:15 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby Cortez the Killer » Sun Feb 14, 2016 12:31 am

he'll get his appointment - would be a huge mistake by the GOP to stall the vote. I think the new justice will be named in less than a week.
User avatar
Cortez the Killer
Legend
 
Posts: 2490
Joined: Wed Jan 04, 2012 8:45 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby SLAYER666 » Sun Feb 14, 2016 8:11 am

I have never killed any one, but I have read some obituary notices with great satisfaction - Clarence Darrow
SLAYER666
Legend
 
Posts: 2425
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 12:21 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby DDF » Mon Feb 15, 2016 10:18 pm

Hoosier Fan wrote:I would be good with him not getting another appointment. Guaranteed that Harry Reid would do the same if he were in the same position.


Bullshit!
"Mr. Cheney has been incredibly adroit for the last six years or so attacking the administration for not doing an adequate job of cleaning up the mess that he made. And I think it's unseemly." - Bill Clinton
User avatar
DDF
All Pro
 
Posts: 711
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2012 7:43 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby elprof » Mon Feb 15, 2016 11:37 pm

I believe a democratic senate approved a Reagan nominee with about a year left in his term. Kennedy?

As long as we're going to play "hey lookee over there" we might as well look carefully.
Virtually everything GOP critics have told us would follow from the policies put in place has not come to pass. You would think that this would occasion a few mea culpas, some rethinking, an admission of poor prognostication. But, alas, it continues.
elprof
Hall of Smack
 
Posts: 5245
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 2:34 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby Joe Sieve » Tue Feb 16, 2016 12:14 am

Hoosier Fan wrote:I would be good with him not getting another appointment. Guaranteed that Harry Reid would do the same if he were in the same position.


I'm good with the GOP driving more nails in it's collective coffin. Y'all go for it.

You know, it's bad enough to rationalize by saying it's okay for me to do a horrible thing because somebody I don't like did it. The hypothetical "I'm pretty sure the person I don't like would do it, so it's okay" justification is quite another leap. But again, go all in.
Joe Sieve
Starter
 
Posts: 349
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby SLAYER666 » Tue Feb 16, 2016 5:05 am

DDF wrote:
Hoosier Fan wrote:I would be good with him not getting another appointment. Guaranteed that Harry Reid would do the same if he were in the same position.


Bullshit!


Chuck Schumer circa 2007 basically said as much. Not Harry Reid, but pretty influential within the Dem Senate.
SLAYER666
Legend
 
Posts: 2425
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 12:21 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby SLAYER666 » Tue Feb 16, 2016 5:06 am

elprof wrote:I believe a democratic senate approved a Reagan nominee with about a year left in his term. Kennedy?

As long as we're going to play "hey lookee over there" we might as well look carefully.


Yes. Nominated late 1987. Confirmed early 1988 by a 97-0 vote.
SLAYER666
Legend
 
Posts: 2425
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 12:21 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby Hoosier Fan » Tue Feb 16, 2016 9:13 am

SLAYER666 wrote:
elprof wrote:I believe a democratic senate approved a Reagan nominee with about a year left in his term. Kennedy?

As long as we're going to play "hey lookee over there" we might as well look carefully.


Yes. Nominated late 1987. Confirmed early 1988 by a 97-0 vote.


After Bork had been "obstructed". Kennedy was a compromise nomination that the Senate Democrats had input into. Is anyone proposing the same input for Grassley?

Anybody that thinks Harry Reid would confirm a Republican president's nominee in these circumstances is delusional.

I think McConnell shouldn't have said anything. Or something like, "There is no nominee. Any comment would be speculation, so no comment." Then every nomination to the left of Scalia, vote down.

"We should reverse the presumption of confirmation."-Chuck Schumer, 2007

Serious question, does President Obama WANT to be on the SCOTUS? Never mind the financial opportunity he would be bypassing, it seems like his aspirations would be more global in nature.
"There you go. Givin' a fuck when it ain't your turn to give a fuck." - Bunk
User avatar
Hoosier Fan
Hall of Smack
 
Posts: 5639
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 6:15 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby Dauber Dybinski » Tue Feb 16, 2016 11:15 am

I haven't seen a legal rebuttal to this yet, but apparently Obama could push a nominee through next January if the Dems get the senate.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme ... 9121?nbc=4

The entire thing is comical to me. Reps keep digging themselves a hole because they won't stop talking. I agree with Hoosier. DON'T SAY ANYTHING.

For those who say we should wait for the next president to give the people a say, isn't that what we did by electing Obama in 2012?
Dauber Dybinski
Starter
 
Posts: 427
Joined: Mon Jan 23, 2012 6:41 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby Hoosier Fan » Tue Feb 16, 2016 12:04 pm

Dauber Dybinski wrote:For those who say we should wait for the next president to give the people a say, isn't that what we did by electing Obama in 2012?


Yes, I think the "waiting for the next president" argument t is a phony argument but exactly what Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer would be saying and doing right now.

I would let him nominate, have hearings and vote them down. Happened to Bork. Almost happened to Thomas. Bush's nominees regularly had historically high Nay votes. It's a new day since the Scalia and Kennedy confirmations.
"There you go. Givin' a fuck when it ain't your turn to give a fuck." - Bunk
User avatar
Hoosier Fan
Hall of Smack
 
Posts: 5639
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 6:15 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby cheapseats » Tue Feb 16, 2016 12:58 pm

Hoosier Fan wrote:I would let him nominate, have hearings and vote them down. Happened to Bork. Almost happened to Thomas. Bush's nominees regularly had historically high Nay votes. It's a new day since the Scalia and Kennedy confirmations.


sadly, you appear to be more rational than the GOP leadership.

Obama has 2 options (he WILL nominate, because it's his constitutional duty).
1) A solid candidate, reasonably moderate, who the GOP would allow if they weren't obstructionist. That's a great swap for Scalia on the off chance that GOP leadership gets it's head out of it's ass. But would most likely prove just how obstructionist and dysfunctional the GOP leadership is - hurting the GOP with moderate swing voters (if there are any left).

2) A progressive candidate, who is hits as many minority checkboxes as possible. The GOP leadership and conservative outrage media go crazy and they motivate turnout of the Obama base.

I think Obama will do #1, because he takes the SCOTUS seriously, though the downside is burning a good SCOTUS candidate.
User avatar
cheapseats
Legend
 
Posts: 2194
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 10:27 am

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby Joe Sieve » Tue Feb 16, 2016 2:05 pm

Hoosier Fan wrote:I would let him nominate, have hearings and vote them down.



I don't think the "vote them down" part is that simple. If you manage to bring it to the floor, you don't have complete control over those 54 senators - you just might lose 4 or more defectors. Too much risk there, now that they have all staked out their position.

Even if he tried, I don't think McConnell could overcome filibusters and Cruz and Rubio trying to out-obstruct each other.
Joe Sieve
Starter
 
Posts: 349
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby Hoosier Fan » Tue Feb 16, 2016 2:14 pm

Joe Sieve wrote:
Hoosier Fan wrote:I would let him nominate, have hearings and vote them down.



I don't think the "vote them down" part is that simple. If you manage to bring it to the floor, you don't have complete control over those 54 senators - you just might lose 4 or more defectors. Too much risk there, now that they have all staked out their position.

Even if he tried, I don't think McConnell could overcome filibusters and Cruz and Rubio trying to out-obstruct each other.


Probably. Well, I guess if they can't maintain the kind of discipline the other side does, they deserve whatever they get. I don't really support not letting the process play out, even though I believe 1000% that Reid and Leahy would hold up a Republican nominee given the same scenario.
"There you go. Givin' a fuck when it ain't your turn to give a fuck." - Bunk
User avatar
Hoosier Fan
Hall of Smack
 
Posts: 5639
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 6:15 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby Joe Sieve » Tue Feb 16, 2016 4:31 pm

Hoosier Fan wrote:
Joe Sieve wrote:
Hoosier Fan wrote:I would let him nominate, have hearings and vote them down.



I don't think the "vote them down" part is that simple. If you manage to bring it to the floor, you don't have complete control over those 54 senators - you just might lose 4 or more defectors. Too much risk there, now that they have all staked out their position.

Even if he tried, I don't think McConnell could overcome filibusters and Cruz and Rubio trying to out-obstruct each other.


Probably. Well, I guess if they can't maintain the kind of discipline the other side does, they deserve whatever they get. I don't really support not letting the process play out, even though I believe 1000% that Reid and Leahy would hold up a Republican nominee given the same scenario.


Perhaps I'm being a little idealistic or whatever, but I think that the discipline you refer to is not necessarily inherent to the Democratic Party or to liberals, but just a reflection of what's going on back home and what flank the senator in question is most worried about covering during the next election. Currently, the left isn't as fractured and doesn't have the "primary our own" and the establishment vs grass-roots dynamic that the right does. It's very easy to be disciplined on the left, but not at all on the right. It doesn't have to be that way, and it's not really a reflection of the character/nature of the people involved. It's just the situation right now.
Joe Sieve
Starter
 
Posts: 349
Joined: Wed Jan 18, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby juansamuel » Tue Feb 16, 2016 5:07 pm

If the shoe was on the Democrats' foot, there would be plenty of obstruction. You can point to the 80s as an example of the Dems confirming an election year nominee, but that was a different time in our history. That was the pre-Limbaugh/Fox News world. It's ridiculous that the Repubs wouldn't be above obstructing the nomination process, but I understand it. They're holding onto the very slim hope that there will be a Republican in office to replace a conservative with a conservative.
User avatar
juansamuel
Hall of Smack
 
Posts: 4894
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 5:02 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby elprof » Tue Feb 16, 2016 5:51 pm

Obstructing someone who doesn't belong on the bench (Bork, Thomas) is one thing. Obstructing for the sake of obstructing is something different. Obama hasn't even given a name and they are already talking about obstructing.

And if you want to reach back to a time before that 80s, look up Abe Fortas and see how the righty doodz treated him.
Virtually everything GOP critics have told us would follow from the policies put in place has not come to pass. You would think that this would occasion a few mea culpas, some rethinking, an admission of poor prognostication. But, alas, it continues.
elprof
Hall of Smack
 
Posts: 5245
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 2:34 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby DDF » Tue Feb 16, 2016 6:37 pm

Hoosier Fan wrote:
Dauber Dybinski wrote:For those who say we should wait for the next president to give the people a say, isn't that what we did by electing Obama in 2012?


Yes, I think the "waiting for the next president" argument t is a phony argument but exactly what Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer would be saying and doing right now.



I still say bullshit! That Schumer quote is not at all what McConnell is proposing. As has been pointed out, Democrats approved of Kennedy even though that was during an election year as well.
"Mr. Cheney has been incredibly adroit for the last six years or so attacking the administration for not doing an adequate job of cleaning up the mess that he made. And I think it's unseemly." - Bill Clinton
User avatar
DDF
All Pro
 
Posts: 711
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2012 7:43 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby DDF » Tue Feb 16, 2016 6:40 pm

Dauber Dybinski wrote:I haven't seen a legal rebuttal to this yet, but apparently Obama could push a nominee through next January if the Dems get the senate.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme ... 9121?nbc=4

The entire thing is comical to me. Reps keep digging themselves a hole because they won't stop talking. I agree with Hoosier. DON'T SAY ANYTHING.

For those who say we should wait for the next president to give the people a say, isn't that what we did by electing Obama in 2012?


If it comes to that, then I hope he gets the most liberal guy or gal he can find.
"Mr. Cheney has been incredibly adroit for the last six years or so attacking the administration for not doing an adequate job of cleaning up the mess that he made. And I think it's unseemly." - Bill Clinton
User avatar
DDF
All Pro
 
Posts: 711
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2012 7:43 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby DDF » Tue Feb 16, 2016 6:56 pm

I'm not just rolling my eyes over this. I'm really angry! Just when you think the GOP can't get get any lower when it comes to disrespecting him, they go ahead and go lower.
"Mr. Cheney has been incredibly adroit for the last six years or so attacking the administration for not doing an adequate job of cleaning up the mess that he made. And I think it's unseemly." - Bill Clinton
User avatar
DDF
All Pro
 
Posts: 711
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2012 7:43 pm
Location: Chicago

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby SLAYER666 » Tue Feb 16, 2016 7:34 pm

DDF wrote:
Dauber Dybinski wrote:I haven't seen a legal rebuttal to this yet, but apparently Obama could push a nominee through next January if the Dems get the senate.

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme ... 9121?nbc=4

The entire thing is comical to me. Reps keep digging themselves a hole because they won't stop talking. I agree with Hoosier. DON'T SAY ANYTHING.

For those who say we should wait for the next president to give the people a say, isn't that what we did by electing Obama in 2012?


If it comes to that, then I hope he gets the most liberal guy or gal he can find.


Could he nominate himself? Because that would be freaking amazing.

Obama steps down with 2 weeks to go. Biden becomes Prez and nominates Obama. Dems change filibuster rules and push the vote through. Heads explode.
SLAYER666
Legend
 
Posts: 2425
Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2012 12:21 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby Hoosier Fan » Tue Feb 16, 2016 11:22 pm

DDF wrote:I'm not just rolling my eyes over this. I'm really angry! Just when you think the GOP can't get get any lower when it comes to disrespecting him, they go ahead and go lower.


Cry me a river.

DDF wrote:
Hoosier Fan wrote:
Dauber Dybinski wrote:For those who say we should wait for the next president to give the people a say, isn't that what we did by electing Obama in 2012?


Yes, I think the "waiting for the next president" argument t is a phony argument but exactly what Harry Reid and Chuck Schumer would be saying and doing right now.



I still say bullshit! That Schumer quote is not at all what McConnell is proposing. As has been pointed out, Democrats approved of Kennedy even though that was during an election year as well.


And has been pointed out it was a compromise appointment that the Dems actually had input into. And Schumer's quote was 18 months before Bush left office.
Goose meet gander.
"There you go. Givin' a fuck when it ain't your turn to give a fuck." - Bunk
User avatar
Hoosier Fan
Hall of Smack
 
Posts: 5639
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 6:15 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby elprof » Tue Feb 16, 2016 11:47 pm

Well, the Hey Lookee Over There Trophy can be retired now.
Virtually everything GOP critics have told us would follow from the policies put in place has not come to pass. You would think that this would occasion a few mea culpas, some rethinking, an admission of poor prognostication. But, alas, it continues.
elprof
Hall of Smack
 
Posts: 5245
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 2:34 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby Hoosier Fan » Wed Feb 17, 2016 10:50 am

elprof wrote:Well, the Hey Lookee Over There Trophy can be retired now.


I'm proud but humble. Couldn't have done it without my teammates Senators Reid, Schumer and Leahy! Special shout out to Veep Biden for his and Senator Kennedy's (rip) groundbreaking smear campaigns and character assassinations in the '80's. We stand on the shoulders of giants.

Gonna go have a few Budweisers and some HGH with the fam.
"There you go. Givin' a fuck when it ain't your turn to give a fuck." - Bunk
User avatar
Hoosier Fan
Hall of Smack
 
Posts: 5639
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 6:15 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby juansamuel » Mon Feb 22, 2016 5:39 pm

User avatar
juansamuel
Hall of Smack
 
Posts: 4894
Joined: Tue Oct 04, 2011 5:02 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby elprof » Tue Feb 23, 2016 1:26 am

Virtually everything GOP critics have told us would follow from the policies put in place has not come to pass. You would think that this would occasion a few mea culpas, some rethinking, an admission of poor prognostication. But, alas, it continues.
elprof
Hall of Smack
 
Posts: 5245
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 2:34 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby Hoosier Fan » Tue Feb 23, 2016 9:43 am



I hadn't seen this when I wrote my acceptance post. I was giving props to Biden for his later work.

fwiw and apropos of nothing, I would be less uncomfortable with President Biden than pretty much any other viable name out there, assuming Rubio is currently in the not viable camp.
If you had told 1988 me that 2016 me would be saying that, I would have giggled uncontrollably.

Or cried.
"There you go. Givin' a fuck when it ain't your turn to give a fuck." - Bunk
User avatar
Hoosier Fan
Hall of Smack
 
Posts: 5639
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 6:15 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby BOUTSHATMADRAWZ » Tue Feb 23, 2016 2:27 pm

R.I.P. Justice Scalia

The opinion on Kennedy's love letter to his BF will live on forever as the greatest argument and warning against judicial tyranny written since Jefferson's time.
"He (OBAMA) could piss on the fanbois' backs and they'd say it was raining due to global warming caused by income inequality." PACER_FAN 12FEB2014
User avatar
BOUTSHATMADRAWZ
Legend
 
Posts: 1398
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 7:51 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby BOUTSHATMADRAWZ » Tue Feb 23, 2016 3:03 pm

DDF wrote:I'm not just rolling my eyes over this. I'm really angry! Just when you think the GOP can't get get any lower when it comes to disrespecting him, they go ahead and go lower.


DDF and ole Kuzzin E agree as much as they ever will on this one.

Big Govt. RINOs have joined together with Odama to form a one party totalitarian system.

Big Govt. RINOs are torpedoing the only true conservative to run on the R prez ticket since Reagan.

Where we don't agree is taking McConnell seriously.
#ActionNotWords
"He (OBAMA) could piss on the fanbois' backs and they'd say it was raining due to global warming caused by income inequality." PACER_FAN 12FEB2014
User avatar
BOUTSHATMADRAWZ
Legend
 
Posts: 1398
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 7:51 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby elprof » Tue Feb 23, 2016 6:44 pm

Some might want to look a bit more carefully at what Schumer actually said. The entire context has not been presented here.

Until now.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/20 ... efore.html
Virtually everything GOP critics have told us would follow from the policies put in place has not come to pass. You would think that this would occasion a few mea culpas, some rethinking, an admission of poor prognostication. But, alas, it continues.
elprof
Hall of Smack
 
Posts: 5245
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 2:34 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby cheapseats » Fri Feb 26, 2016 4:33 pm

BOUTSHATMADRAWZ wrote:Big Govt. RINOs are torpedoing the only true conservative to run on the R prez ticket since Reagan.



This is True Conservative Reagan(TM) who:
- Raised taxes 7 times
- tripled the deficit
- increased spending by $100B
- increased social security witholdings
- gave amnesty to 3 million illegal immigrants
- created a new cabinet level agency with 350,000 employees?
User avatar
cheapseats
Legend
 
Posts: 2194
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 10:27 am

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby Hoosier Fan » Wed Mar 16, 2016 4:37 pm

So he nominates a moderate judge making McConnell's knee jerk declaration, before Scalia's corpse was even cold, look even more ridiculous if that's possible.

They suspended themselves like a pinata, they might as well have just swung the stick too.

Jee-zus...
"There you go. Givin' a fuck when it ain't your turn to give a fuck." - Bunk
User avatar
Hoosier Fan
Hall of Smack
 
Posts: 5639
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 6:15 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby cheapseats » Tue Mar 22, 2016 4:51 pm

Hoosier Fan wrote:So he nominates a moderate judge making McConnell's knee jerk declaration, before Scalia's corpse was even cold, look even more ridiculous if that's possible.

They suspended themselves like a pinata, they might as well have just swung the stick too.

Jee-zus...


cheapseats wrote:Obama has 2 options (he WILL nominate, because it's his constitutional duty).
1) A solid candidate, reasonably moderate, who the GOP would allow if they weren't obstructionist. That's a great swap for Scalia on the off chance that GOP leadership gets it's head out of it's ass. But would most likely prove just how obstructionist and dysfunctional the GOP leadership is - hurting the GOP with moderate swing voters (if there are any left).
...
I think Obama will do #1, because he takes the SCOTUS seriously, though the downside is burning a good SCOTUS candidate.


what do I win?
User avatar
cheapseats
Legend
 
Posts: 2194
Joined: Fri Jan 06, 2012 10:27 am

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby BOUTSHATMADRAWZ » Thu Mar 24, 2016 12:35 am

LMAO @ at the concept of "Moderate Liberal"
You might as well say Robert Byrd was a moderate klan member
Wai...wut?!!!

This morning the President issued the following statement on the passing of Senator Robert Byrd:

I was saddened to hear this morning that the people of West Virginia have lost a true champion, the United States Senate has lost a venerable institution, and America has lost a voice of principle and reason with the passing of Robert C. Byrd.

Senator Byrd’s story was uniquely American. He was born into wrenching poverty, but educated himself to become an authoritative scholar, respected leader, and unparalleled champion of our Constitution. He scaled the summit of power, but his mind never strayed from the people of his beloved West Virginia. He had the courage to stand firm in his principles, but also the courage to change over time.

He was as much a part of the Senate as the marble busts that line its chamber and its corridors. His profound passion for that body and its role and responsibilities was as evident behind closed doors as it was in the stemwinders he peppered with history. He held the deepest respect of members of both parties, and he was generous with his time and advice, something I appreciated greatly as a young senator.

We take solace in the fact that he is reunited with his wife of nearly 69 years, Erma; and our thoughts and prayers are with their daughters, their grandchildren and great grandchildren, and all the people of West Virginia who loved Robert C. Byrd.

Vice President Biden also took a moment today to speak on the loss of his friend:

VICE PRESIDENT BIDEN: "As we used to say in my years in the Senate, if you’ll excuse a point of personal privilege here for a moment, a very close friend of mine, one of my mentors -- a guy who was there when I was a 29-year-old kid being sworn into the United States Senate shortly thereafter; a guy who stood in the rain, in a pouring rain, freezing rain outside a church as I buried my daughter and my wife before I got sworn in, Robert C. Byrd. He passed away today. He was the -- we lost the dean of the United States Senate, but also the state of West Virginia lost its most fierce advocate and, as I said, I lost a dear friend.

“Throughout his 51 years, the longest tenure of any member in Congress in the history of the United States, Robert C. Byrd was a tough, compassionate, and outspoken leader and dedicated above all else to making life better for the people of the mountain state -- his state, the state of West Virginia. He never lost sight of home. He may have spent half a century in Washington. But there’s a guy -- if anybody wondered -- he never, never, never, never took his eye of his beloved mountain state. And we shall not -- to paraphrase the poet -- we shall not see his like again. And the Senate is a lesser place for his going."
"He (OBAMA) could piss on the fanbois' backs and they'd say it was raining due to global warming caused by income inequality." PACER_FAN 12FEB2014
User avatar
BOUTSHATMADRAWZ
Legend
 
Posts: 1398
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 7:51 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby elprof » Thu Mar 24, 2016 12:50 am

Go wash your robe. Byrd would have loved your frawg ass.
Virtually everything GOP critics have told us would follow from the policies put in place has not come to pass. You would think that this would occasion a few mea culpas, some rethinking, an admission of poor prognostication. But, alas, it continues.
elprof
Hall of Smack
 
Posts: 5245
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 2:34 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby Hoosier Fan » Thu Mar 24, 2016 2:38 am

cheapseats wrote:
Hoosier Fan wrote:So he nominates a moderate judge making McConnell's knee jerk declaration, before Scalia's corpse was even cold, look even more ridiculous if that's possible.

They suspended themselves like a pinata, they might as well have just swung the stick too.

Jee-zus...


cheapseats wrote:Obama has 2 options (he WILL nominate, because it's his constitutional duty).
1) A solid candidate, reasonably moderate, who the GOP would allow if they weren't obstructionist. That's a great swap for Scalia on the off chance that GOP leadership gets it's head out of it's ass. But would most likely prove just how obstructionist and dysfunctional the GOP leadership is - hurting the GOP with moderate swing voters (if there are any left).
...
I think Obama will do #1, because he takes the SCOTUS seriously, though the downside is burning a good SCOTUS candidate.


what do I win?


6 hand massage from Kagan, Sotomayor and the notorious rbg.
"There you go. Givin' a fuck when it ain't your turn to give a fuck." - Bunk
User avatar
Hoosier Fan
Hall of Smack
 
Posts: 5639
Joined: Tue Jan 03, 2012 6:15 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby BOUTSHATMADRAWZ » Thu Mar 24, 2016 12:21 pm

A "Moderate Liberal" SC justice viewpoint is that we deserve a fair price under their mandatory firearms buy back witch hunt

#MyColdDeadHands
#CivilWar2
"He (OBAMA) could piss on the fanbois' backs and they'd say it was raining due to global warming caused by income inequality." PACER_FAN 12FEB2014
User avatar
BOUTSHATMADRAWZ
Legend
 
Posts: 1398
Joined: Fri Sep 14, 2012 7:51 pm

Re: Scalia dunzo

Postby elprof » Thu Mar 24, 2016 5:44 pm

BOUTSHATMADRAWZ wrote:A "Moderate Liberal" SC justice viewpoint is that we deserve a fair price under their mandatory firearms buy back witch hunt

#MyColdDeadHands
#CivilWar2


Yeppers. Obummer gonna take yer guns any day now.

What a complete moron you are. You used to at least act like you had some sense.
Virtually everything GOP critics have told us would follow from the policies put in place has not come to pass. You would think that this would occasion a few mea culpas, some rethinking, an admission of poor prognostication. But, alas, it continues.
elprof
Hall of Smack
 
Posts: 5245
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 2:34 pm


Return to Whatever

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest