Debates
16 Mar 16
16 Mar 16
Obama has bent over backwards to Republicans and nominated moderate judge Merrick Garland to the SCOTUS vacancy. A discussion of Garland's record is here: http://time.com/4261489/merrick-garland-supreme-court-nominee/
Garland is also the oldest pick for the Court at 63 since Lewis Powell in 1971; another seeming sop to the GOP. In a rather embarrassing moment now, Orrin Hatch, the longest tenured Senator on the Judiciary Committee said of him last week:
"The President told me several times he’s going to name a moderate [to fill the court vacancy], but I don’t believe him," Hatch told us.
"[Obama] could easily name Merrick Garland, who is a fine man,
http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/john-gizzi-orrin-hatch-obama-will-nominate/2016/03/13/id/718871/
Hatch also supported the idea of a Garland nomination to the SCOTUS in 2010:
But Hatch has also been a long-time advocate for Merrick Garland, who President Obama will nominate to the Supreme Court on Wednesday. In 2010, when he was considered for the slot that ultimately went to Elena Kagan, Hatch said that he had known Garland for years. He added that, if nominated, he would be a “consensus nominee” and that there was “no question” he would be confirmed
https://newrepublic.com/minutes/131676/orrin-hatch-said-no-question-merrick-garland-confirmed-supreme-court
It will be interesting to see if the Party of Obstruction sticks to its guns and refuses even to meet with Garland, never mind scheduling some hearings and an actual vote.
Of course, there is a compromise way out of the mess which fills the 9th seat AND allows the next President to decide who ultimately sits in it; simply follow Constitutional procedure and let Obama make a recess appointment during the next Senate recess. But I doubt that would satisfy the right wing rabble, so I'm sure they will engage in the charade of pro forma sessions to avoid the Senate being considered in recess even though no actual business will be conducted (a joke that the SCOTUS unfortunately said was consistent with the Constitution a year or so ago).
16 Mar 16
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderI think the GOP may have finally stumbled onto the fact that their base voters hate them with the heat of a thousand suns, and they are now frozen in fear. Works out great for you because Hillary will get to appoint a commie down the road.
Obama has bent over backwards to Republicans and nominated moderate judge Merrick Garland to the SCOTUS vacancy. A discussion of Garland's record is here: http://time.com/4261489/merrick-garland-supreme-court-nominee/
Garland is also the oldest pick for the Court at 63 since Lewis Powell in 1971; another seeming sop to the GOP. In a rather embarrassin ...[text shortened]... joke that the SCOTUS unfortunately said was consistent with the Constitution a year or so ago).
16 Mar 16
Originally posted by SleepyguyI'm surprised that Hatch made such a statement last week given that Garland was on the short list of the 5 or 6 names that Obama was considering for the vacancy. Of course, Hatch is a RINO sellout, isn't he?
I think the GOP may have finally stumbled onto the fact the their base voters hate them with the heat of a thousand suns, and they are now frozen in fear. Works out great for you because Hillary will get to appoint a commie down the road.
16 Mar 16
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderYes he is. It does seem like an unforced error, since Obama's only play here is to troll the GOP, and he had already started to nominate another moderate before the guy took himself out of the running.
I'm surprised that Hatch made such a statement last week given that Garland was on the short list of the 5 or 6 names that Obama was considering for the vacancy. Of course, Hatch is a RINO sellout, isn't he?
EDIT: Memory lane on Hatch:
Did the 2014 midterms really happen? Less than three months after a red tide rolled over the country, the Senate Republican Rollover Caucus is back to its default position in Washington, D.C.: Hands up, bow down.
Last week, senior GOP supplicant Sen. Orrin Hatch announced that he will support the confirmation of President Obama's attorney general nominee, Loretta Lynch. He praised her "qualifications" and decried the Justice Department's previous leaders who "have facilitated executive abuses by this president rather than upholding the rule of law."
Guffaw. A Utah Republican, Hatch was one of the biggest, fattest facilitators of that lawlessness from the first days of the reign of Obama. Beltway amnesia among entrenched incumbents is a chronic disorder.
"I like Barack Obama and want to help him if I can," Hatch declared in January 2009, just weeks before the Senate voted on President Obama's attorney general nominee, career corruptocrat Eric Holder. In the interest of "comity," Hatch and 16 other Senate Republicans backed Holder, despite his long, sordid history of questionable ethics and national security-undermining politicking in the Clinton administration — from the Marc Rich pardon scheme with former White House counsel Jack Quinn to the clemency deal for 16 members of the violent terrorist groups Fuerzas Armadas de Liberacion Nacional (FALN) and Los Macheteros, which the FBI had linked to more than 130 bombings and six murders.
With the blessing of Senate Republican enablers, Holder went on to preside over the bloody malfeasance of the Fast and Furious scandal; the Gitmo jihad evacuations and recidivist release program; installment of far-left lawyers who had represented our worst enemies; and the establishment of a "culture of hostility" toward Justice Department employees committed to election integrity, immigration enforcement and equal treatment under the law.
Now, Holder's Senate GOP handmaidens are shocked and dismayed at the cesspool Holder is leaving behind. Their solution? Replacing him with a woman who explicitly championed and defended Obama's executive power grabs on illegal immigration, crusaded for the manufactured "right" of illegal aliens to work in the U.S., and refused to answer GOP Sen. Ted Cruz's questions last week about whether any limits on a president's executive discretion to choose or ignore laws (Tax law? Labor law? Environmental law?) exist at all.
Beltway Republican poseurs claimed a victory for the right after the 2014 midterms. But conservatives knew the crusty barnacles who habitually use and abuse grassroots voters would immediately revert to form. Or rather: formlessness.
Let's face it: Seven-term incumbent Hatch embodies everything that's wrong with the GOP brand. He's a mascot for the Big Government Republican parade and masquerade of career politicians who stand for nothing and roll over for everything.
In addition to supporting Holder and now Lynch, Hatch embraced tax cheat Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner and the TARP bailout, lavished praise on Joe Biden's manhood and spoke kindly of Obamacare implementer Kathleen Sebelius upon her departure.
In case you'd forgotten, Hatch co-sponsored the $6 billion national service boondoggle and dedicated it to his good friend Teddy Kennedy, with whom he also joined hands to create the ever-expanding SCHIP entitlement. That program is now an $8-billion-a-year entitlement and growing.
At a time when Obama's executive amnesty measures are wreaking havoc on the border, public schools, public safety and the American workforce, don't forget: Hatch was an original sponsor of the open-borders DREAM Act illegal alien student bailout and voted to fully fund the Obama amnesty during the lame-duck session.
Hatch was joined by GOP Sens. Jeff Flake of Arizona and Lindsey Graham of South Carolina in announcing support for Lynch last week. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Tuesday he will let her nomination come to a vote out of "courtesy" rather than block it in protest of Obama's continued lawlessness on deportations and mass issuance of work permits to countless foreign criminals.
Cruz, who called on McConnell to put the screws on Obama over the Lynch nomination, diagnosed the bipartisan Beltway corruptocracy perfectly: "Far too many Americans are losing faith in our elected officials," he told Politico this week. "They've seen too many times politicians who say one thing and do another."
Unfortunately, it's difficult to play hardball with deflated ones.
http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/michelle-malkin/gops-orrin-hatch-problem
16 Mar 16
Originally posted by SleepyguyI'm well aware that present day right wingers consider any efforts to compromise on anything ideological treason. Hatch was ideologically almost identical to Ronald Reagan, who had the good sense to pass away before people like you and Ted Cruz declared him to be a RINO.
Yes he is. It does seem like an unforced error, since Obama's only play here is to troll the GOP, and he had already started to nominate another moderate before the guy took himself out of the running.
EDIT: Memory lane on Hatch:
Did the 2014 midterms really happen? Less than three months after a red tide rolled over the country, the Senate Republica ...[text shortened]... ith deflated ones.
http://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/michelle-malkin/gops-orrin-hatch-problem
16 Mar 16
Originally posted by no1marauderPeople like me have the same right to demand what we want from our representatives as anyone else, and it should have been clear to Hatch and all the rest what we did and didn't want from them in the era we are in. They failed us and we went another way. I feel zero obligation to you or Reagan's ghost to pass some anachronistic ideological purity test. And I will donate to any primary opponent to the right of Hatch for as long as he is in office and I am alive.
I'm well aware that present day right wingers consider any efforts to compromise on anything ideological treason. Hatch was ideologically almost identical to Ronald Reagan, who had the good sense to pass away before people like you and Ted Cruz declared him to be a RINO.
16 Mar 16
5 edits
Originally posted by no1marauderAgreed. In refusing to vote on a judge they previously supported, this is going to come back to bite the GOP badly. They now look like narrow minded obstructionists...not to mention hypocrites! Judge Garland is very well qualified for the high court, and refusing to even vote on his nomination is pathetic.
Obama has bent over backwards to Republicans and nominated moderate judge Merrick Garland to the SCOTUS vacancy. A discussion of Garland's record is here: http://time.com/4261489/merrick-garland-supreme-court-nominee/
Garland is also the oldest pick for the Court at 63 since Lewis Powell in 1971; another seeming sop to the GOP. In a rather embarrassin ...[text shortened]... joke that the SCOTUS unfortunately said was consistent with the Constitution a year or so ago).
16 Mar 16
Originally posted by SleepyguyAnd what you demand is clear - defeat before compromise, posturing before progress.
People like me have the same right to demand what we want from our representatives as anyone else, and it should have been clear to Hatch and all the rest what we did and didn't want from them in the era we are in. They failed us and we went another way. I feel zero obligation to you or Reagan's ghost to pass some anachronistic ideological purity test. And ...[text shortened]... ate to any primary opponent to the right of Hatch for as long as he is in office and I am alive.
16 Mar 16
1 edit
Originally posted by KazetNagorraThe GOP has compromised on their purported conservative principles so much and for so long that continued compromise is synonymous with defeat. I hate the Republican party. Destroying it as it currently exists is the only progress I have to look forward to.
And what you demand is clear - defeat before compromise, posturing before progress.
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
17 Mar 16
Originally posted by bill718"They now look like narrow minded obstructionists..."
Agreed. In refusing to vote on a judge they previously supported, this is going to come back to bite the GOP badly. They now look like narrow minded obstructionists...not to mention hypocrites! Judge Garland is very well qualified for the high court, and refusing to even vote on his nomination is pathetic.
But... proud of it.
17 Mar 16
Originally posted by SleepyguyWhen did the GOP abandon these "conservative principles" and what did they do before?
The GOP has compromised on their purported conservative principles so much and for so long that continued compromise is synonymous with defeat. I hate the Republican party. Destroying it as it currently exists is the only progress I have to look forward to.
17 Mar 16
Originally posted by bill718Your memory is short. You don't remember the threats leading up to the nomination of Roberts, and the flat rejection of several nominees.
Agreed. In refusing to vote on a judge they previously supported, this is going to come back to bite the GOP badly. They now look like narrow minded obstructionists...not to mention hypocrites! Judge Garland is very well qualified for the high court, and refusing to even vote on his nomination is pathetic.
The hypocrisy is that of the lefties who want it all their way.
18 Mar 16
Originally posted by normbenignYour memory is flawed. Never before in US history has the Senate ever refused to even consider a President's SCOTUS nominee even before he was named.
Your memory is short. You don't remember the threats leading up to the nomination of Roberts, and the flat rejection of several nominees.
The hypocrisy is that of the lefties who want it all their way.