aceofspadeshq at gee mail.com
CBD:
cbd.aoshq at gee mail.com
Buck:
buck.throckmorton at protonmail.com
joe mannix:
mannix2024 at proton.me
MisHum:
petmorons at gee mail.com
J.J. Sefton:
sefton at cutjibnewsletter.com
Hillary: Doing What Obama Did To Alito To Obama's Nominee is Racist
They gon' put y'all back in chains.
By the way, Guy Benson found this in the NY Times' archives from 1987, urging the Senate to fillibuster the hell out of any Reagan nominee until after the 1988 presidential election:The President’s supporters insist vehemently that, having won the 1984 election, he has every right to try to change the Court’s direction. Yes, but the Democrats won the 1986 election, regaining control of the Senate, and they have every right to resist. This is not the same Senate that confirmed William Rehnquist as Chief Justice and Antonin Scalia as an associate justice last year.Hm... gee who won the 2014 election, I wonder?
Comments
(Jump to bottom of comments)Posted by: CSMBigBird at February 17, 2016 01:21 PM (jsWA8)
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 17, 2016 01:22 PM (FkBIv)
Posted by: Buzzsaw at February 17, 2016 01:22 PM (XtAzU)
Posted by: CSMBigBird at February 17, 2016 01:23 PM (jsWA8)
Posted by: Henry Ford Teh Democrats at February 17, 2016 01:23 PM (HtLSE)
Posted by: Make America Great Again at February 17, 2016 01:23 PM (LXJ1e)
Posted by: CSMBigBird at February 17, 2016 01:24 PM (jsWA8)
Posted by: CSMBigBird
Grassley sounds like he is starting that process.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 17, 2016 01:24 PM (FkBIv)
Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 17, 2016 01:24 PM (WLpmE)
Posted by: broseidon king of the brocean at February 17, 2016 01:24 PM (4/i9Y)
It's a legitimate use of power by Obama to appoint.
It's a legitimate use of power by the Senate to say hahahaha that's adorbs.
And, yes, I would say the same if the roles were reversed.
Posted by: alexthechick - Here SMOD SMOD SMOD at February 17, 2016 01:24 PM (mf5HN)
Posted by: giftogab at February 17, 2016 01:25 PM (ysKvq)
"So we need to dress Turtle McConnell up as the Swedish Chef? I could go for that.
Posted by: broseidon king of the brocean at February 17, 2016 01:25 PM (4/i9Y)
Posted by: giftogab at February 17, 2016 01:26 PM (ysKvq)
Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at February 17, 2016 01:26 PM (iQIUe)
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 17, 2016 01:27 PM (FkBIv)
That's when you trot out the 1960/Eisenhower resolution precedent. The Dems drafted a resolution that they were against the idea of voting on a nominee even in theory.
Posted by: Sporkatus at February 17, 2016 01:27 PM (HtLSE)
Plus to point out we can't endure any more decisions based on "wise Latinas" rather than the constitution. Maybe they could manage to push that only Congress can change the constitution, not five leftists that feel the love, for communism.
Posted by: Illiniwek at February 17, 2016 01:27 PM (5Gpe2)
Hillary can bark all she wants. She's never getting a treat from me.
Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at February 17, 2016 01:27 PM (iQIUe)
Posted by: MTF at February 17, 2016 01:27 PM (TxJGV)
Posted by: Hillary Clinton at February 17, 2016 01:27 PM (FkBIv)
Posted by: Draki at February 17, 2016 01:28 PM (0eidE)
Say nothing.
Do nothing.
Ignore the issue completely.
Let Roberts deal with the court calendar, for better or worse. What matters isn't the next year, it's the next thirty.
Posted by: JEM at February 17, 2016 01:28 PM (o+SC1)
Posted by: Count de Monet at February 17, 2016 01:28 PM (JO9+V)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 17, 2016 01:28 PM (FsuaD)
Posted by: garrett at February 17, 2016 01:28 PM (91LL3)
Posted by: CSMBigBird at February 17, 2016 01:29 PM (jsWA8)
It's a legitimate use of power by the Senate to say hahahaha that's adorbs.
>>>
The President courageously nominated XXXX who will be a fair and impartial addition to the Supreme court. In respose the Republicans racictly oppressed Obama's right as President to pick the new SCOTUS.
With MSM spin.
Posted by: Buzzsaw at February 17, 2016 01:29 PM (XtAzU)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 17, 2016 01:30 PM (FsuaD)
Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at February 17, 2016 01:30 PM (iQIUe)
Posted by: nip at February 17, 2016 01:30 PM (r73Jl)
Posted by: Dr Spank at February 17, 2016 01:31 PM (TJCSB)
Has the GOP learned nothing at all from Donaldo?
Posted by: MTF at February 17, 2016 01:31 PM (TxJGV)
Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 17, 2016 01:31 PM (FsuaD)
I have never had a good thing to say about Rep. Peter King (Paranoid -- Long Island).
He just repudiated his support for Trump on Wolf. Said the Saturday debate was the last straw. I've been waiting for anything to actually be changed by that clown car fire.
He also said that tough guys don't have orange hair.
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Tough Love Version at February 17, 2016 01:32 PM (1xUj/)
"Just don't call me a racist!"
Posted by: *Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet has Glower Sticks and Other Emergency Supplies! at February 17, 2016 01:32 PM (hLRSq)
Posted by: Buzzsaw at February 17, 2016 01:29 PM (XtAzU) "
But that's the spin no matter what the GOP does. Refusing to nominate anybody is a calculated risk. Nominating a lefty who will sit on the court for the next 30-40 years is party suicide.
Posted by: broseidon king of the brocean at February 17, 2016 01:32 PM (4/i9Y)
Posted by: BeckoningChasm at February 17, 2016 01:32 PM (B8JRQ)
33 It's not hard to resist, if SCOAMF nominates Lynch or even Biden. Just do it, loud and proud.
Hahaha, Jaun Mclame. for realz
Posted by: CSMBigBird at February 17, 2016 01:32 PM (jsWA8)
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 17, 2016 01:32 PM (FkBIv)
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Tough Love Version at February 17, 2016 01:32 PM (1xUj/)
YOU TAKE THAT BACK!
Posted by: Heat Miser at February 17, 2016 01:32 PM (mf5HN)
True - that is what the rule book says. But doing that is very different for the Stockholm Senators the GOP has.
Posted by: *Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet has Glower Sticks and Other Emergency Supplies! at February 17, 2016 01:33 PM (hLRSq)
Posted by: nip
I think the GOPe believes their careers depend on not understanding.
Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 17, 2016 01:34 PM (WLpmE)
In the coming weeks it will be their turn when McConnell and other Republicans completely cave to Obama's "sensible" nominee who thinks the 14th amendment guarantees slavery reparations.
Posted by: gwelf at February 17, 2016 01:34 PM (+7Usq)
It's like dealing with your ex but they don't get that.
We can be Dreamers too....
Posted by: torabora at February 17, 2016 01:34 PM (6GV/b)
Posted by: MTF at February 17, 2016 01:34 PM (TxJGV)
Posted by: gwelf at February 17, 2016 01:35 PM (+7Usq)
Posted by: garrett at February 17, 2016 01:28 PM (91LL3)
You'd get a high heel in the ear drum for this in Alextopia.
Posted by: Draki at February 17, 2016 01:35 PM (0eidE)
Posted by: TheQuietMan at February 17, 2016 01:36 PM (493sH)
Posted by: JackStraw at February 17, 2016 01:36 PM (/tuJf)
Posted by: Dr Spank
Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others.
Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 17, 2016 01:36 PM (WLpmE)
What, was Miguel Estrada some kinda White Hispanic or something? There's a damn lot of that going around, I guess.
Posted by: Qoheleth at February 17, 2016 01:36 PM (iIzG7)
Posted by: nip
I think the GOPe believes their careers depend on not understanding.
Posted by: weft cut-loop at February 17, 2016 01:34 PM (WLpmE)
If they keep getting elected, they'll think they can continue being wussies.
Posted by: Draki at February 17, 2016 01:36 PM (0eidE)
I half expect her to show up at an event one day wearing pants around her thighs, gold chains and rappin' about da man.
Posted by: Cheri at February 17, 2016 01:36 PM (oiNtH)
That's interesting considering most of teh Bern's support is from the under 50 crowd.
Posted by: Hadoop at February 17, 2016 01:37 PM (2X7pN)
Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at February 17, 2016 01:37 PM (09f2I)
Posted by: Ezra Klein at February 17, 2016 01:37 PM (MSOpC)
Posted by: ugg boots at February 17, 2016 01:37 PM (fbovC)
Iran?
The Climate Change Alarmists?
The Castro Brothers?
Anyway, this is just another one of those times when the Democrats will admit that they were wrong until they can do it again.
Posted by: Satan of Teufelheim VT at February 17, 2016 01:37 PM (qSIlh)
Posted by: Dr Spank at February 17, 2016 01:37 PM (TJCSB)
Dont forget Judge Janice Rogers Brown. She was an ideal candidate: black, conservative, single mom, worked her way thru law school, father a share cropper, pop pop a slave, smart as a whip.
Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at February 17, 2016 01:38 PM (iQIUe)
Think about it: if the SC decides in a couple of years that the second amendment doesn't mean what it says, the GOPe can then say - 'sorry, that was the supreme court, not us. Go ahead and turn in your guns."
Posted by: Vashta Nerada at February 17, 2016 01:38 PM (Qvgg/)
"Of course we will fairly consider Obama's appointment of anyone who will fairly rule using the actual text of the constitution and the record of writings left behind by our founders."
Posted by: Global Warming made Hillary bark like a dog at February 17, 2016 01:38 PM (Z+7WE)
The ONLY question is... do Turtles have backbone?
or at least... one specific Turtle...
Posted by: Don Quixote at February 17, 2016 01:38 PM (f7rv6)
There's a whole meme's worth of replies available.
https://www.bing.com/images/search?q=NopeFORM=HDRSC2
Posted by: DaveA at February 17, 2016 01:38 PM (DL2i+)
Posted by: DaveA at February 17, 2016 01:39 PM (DL2i+)
What, was Miguel Estrada some kinda White Hispanic or something? There's a damn lot of that going around, I guess.
Posted by: Qoheleth at February 17, 2016 01:36 PM (iIzG7)
I hear we can just beat peruvian americans like estrada and zimmerman on the street.....
Posted by: Draki at February 17, 2016 01:39 PM (0eidE)
As the great political philosopher Hunter Hearst Helmsley might say, "suck it."
Posted by: broseidon king of the brocean at February 17, 2016 01:39 PM (4/i9Y)
I hope not. McCain and Graham came out pretty strong against Barry, and they are usually the leaders of the squishes. The Dems are always hypocritical liars, but this time it is so blatant, so recent, and all on tape.
Maybe I am CHarlie Brown getting ready to kick the football....
Posted by: Benji Carver at February 17, 2016 01:40 PM (OD2ni)
That's interesting considering most of teh Bern's support is from the under 50 crowd.
Posted by: Hadoop at February 17, 2016 01:37 PM (2X7pN)
I'm with Drew on this that Bernie could be more electable than canklesaurus.
Posted by: Draki at February 17, 2016 01:40 PM (0eidE)
Posted by: Chupacabra at February 17, 2016 01:40 PM (V40IZ)
I don't have to imagine it. Have you been on a college campus recently? They are amoral (they don't even know what the word "moral" means), and they vote.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 17, 2016 01:40 PM (Zu3d9)
That terrorist doc still has me spooked. Not only bc of the little shit families but how they families see themselves as victims bc they are muslims. They are nasty crazy or crazy nasty.
Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at February 17, 2016 01:40 PM (iQIUe)
As the great political philosopher Hunter Hearst Helmsley might say, "suck it."
Posted by: broseidon king of the brocean"
I still remember a smirking Nancy Pelosi saying "we won the election, we wrote the bill."
Posted by: Benji Carver at February 17, 2016 01:41 PM (OD2ni)
Posted by: Dr Spank
Who gives a shit. All you need to know is it's going to be really great and terrific. Not like that nasty liar Cruz.
Posted by: Arson Wells at February 17, 2016 01:42 PM (UnJ7w)
Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at February 17, 2016 01:43 PM (iQIUe)
/sarc
Posted by: *Mikey NTH - The Outrage Outlet has Glower Sticks and Other Emergency Supplies! at February 17, 2016 01:43 PM (hLRSq)
Jeff Sessions: "Mr. Biden, I assume that Mr. Reid's comment was directed at you and your strategy in the Bork confirmation hearings. Would you like an opportunity to rebut Mr. Reid?"
Posted by: Qoheleth at February 17, 2016 01:43 PM (iIzG7)
I guess she is just looking out for us.
Posted by: RWC-Team BOHICA at February 17, 2016 01:43 PM (Lixdp)
Posted by: Dr Spank at February 17, 2016 01:43 PM (TJCSB)
No really! That's rain....of course it isn't piss!
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at February 17, 2016 01:45 PM (Zu3d9)
Posted by: Soona at February 17, 2016 01:45 PM (Fmupd)
Posted by: Bruce With a Wang!"
Thomas was an ideal candidate, but look at what they did to that decent man. I know he got through, but that was brutal. For God's sake, we had Ted Kennedy giving lectures on sexual harassment. TED FUCKING KENNEDY!!!
Posted by: Benji Carver at February 17, 2016 01:45 PM (OD2ni)
For a better understanding of the above, read 'Confederacy Of Dunces'
Posted by: Eromero at February 17, 2016 01:45 PM (zLDYs)
That's a trick question. Since Obama has been in office they have never not caved.
And since, history always repeats itself, they will cave again.
GEICO should use this in an ad in their It's What You Do series. "Cave to Obama, it's what Republicans do. Want to save 15% on car insurance, call GEICO".
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 17, 2016 01:46 PM (aScxp)
Posted by: Buzzsaw at February 17, 2016 01:46 PM (XtAzU)
Posted by: Larry Craig at February 17, 2016 01:46 PM (91LL3)
Posted by: Feh at February 17, 2016 01:46 PM (Fx8O+)
Par for the course. No, seriously, he's really trying to make par that day.
Consistent with his record of behavior.
Posted by: Qoheleth at February 17, 2016 01:47 PM (iIzG7)
Hatch
Sessions
Graham
Cornyn
Lee
Cruz
Flake
Vitter
Perdue
Tillis
Leahy
Feinstein
Schumer
Durbin
Whitehouse
Klobuchar
Franken
Coons
Blumenthal
Posted by: Feh at February 17, 2016 01:47 PM (Fx8O+)
That's a trick question. Since Obama has been in office they have never not caved.
And yet, all I ever hear from Obama supporters is that the GOP has obstructed him at every turn.
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 17, 2016 01:47 PM (FkBIv)
Posted by: Feh at February 17, 2016 01:48 PM (Fx8O+)
Posted by: Dr Spank at February 17, 2016 01:43 PM (TJCSB) "
The only way Obama would show up to Scalia's funeral is if you buried him under one of the holes on the Back 9. And even then he'd just hit his ball into a water hazard and skip the green.
Posted by: broseidon king of the brocean at February 17, 2016 01:48 PM (4/i9Y)
Yes, and anyone who cannot flush a toilet shouldn't be able to vote.
Posted by: Hadoop at February 17, 2016 01:48 PM (2X7pN)
It's a legitimate use of power by the Senate to say hahahaha that's adorbs.
And, yes, I would say the same if the roles were reversed.
Posted by: alexthechick - Here SMOD SMOD SMOD at February 17, 2016 01:24 PM
I, for one, would love to see Senator AtC's "that's adorbs" read into the Congressional Record. Just before she whistled for the Ravage.
Posted by: RedMindBlueState at February 17, 2016 01:49 PM (bzd8I)
which is WHY the GOPe caves
hmm
I don't get it
Posted by: JEB 2016 at February 17, 2016 01:49 PM (Fx8O+)
Posted by: Bertram Cabot Jr. at February 17, 2016 01:47 PM (FkBIv)
____
Well they do obstruct for a while and then eventually cave. But the leftist retards only remember the obstructing part, not the eventual cave.
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 17, 2016 01:49 PM (aScxp)
Cut him some slack.
Forecast calls for rain and those umbrella are just so damned vexing.
Posted by: garrett at February 17, 2016 01:49 PM (91LL3)
They have the worldview of a five year old; I want it because it's what I want, and if you won't give it to me you are the worst person in the world.
Posted by: sock_rat_eez at February 17, 2016 01:49 PM (Z8DIA)
what a dick
Posted by: Feh at February 17, 2016 01:48 PM (Fx8O+)
Maybe he'd get booed at the funeral. Might be a lose situation for him to show up.
Posted by: Draki at February 17, 2016 01:49 PM (0eidE)
http://tinyurl.com/hg8hwyq
Posted by: The Great White Snark at February 17, 2016 01:49 PM (Nwg0u)
Posted by: Feh at February 17, 2016 01:50 PM (Fx8O+)
Posted by: gp at February 17, 2016 01:50 PM (mk9aG)
We did, silly rabbit!
And we'll make sure the President's nominee is waved right through. First, though, we'll have to put on a show for the rubes in flyover country. They'll fall for it. They always do. Then they'll keep voting us in. They always do.
Posted by: The Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party at February 17, 2016 01:50 PM (noWW6)
what a dick
It's for the best. Obama would make it all about him - the bride at every wedding and the corpse at every funeral.
Posted by: *Mikey NTH - Adopt a Hot Air Refugee, get free pack of Argue-Mints at the Outrage Outlet! at February 17, 2016 01:50 PM (hLRSq)
Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at February 17, 2016 01:43 PM (iQIUe)
I cannot remember where I saw this and thus I may be remembering in an alternately correct fashion but I was sure I saw somewhere that the final version of the bill wasn't even finished being typed up when the vote was taken. As in there were entirely blank sections.
It's so stupid I believe it.
Posted by: alexthechick - love and despair bitches at February 17, 2016 01:50 PM (mf5HN)
The GOPe will fold like cheapo furniture.
Ditto. I've got twenty bucks in my pocket that says our stalwart solons will confirm the dog-eating crackhead's nominee before the month is out. Any takers?
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at February 17, 2016 01:50 PM (X6fMO)
what a dick
Posted by: Feh a"
Just as well. The jerk would probably have presented himself for communion at the Basilica.
Posted by: Benji Carver at February 17, 2016 01:50 PM (OD2ni)
Posted by: Feh at February 17, 2016 01:50 PM (Fx8O+)
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 17, 2016 01:49 PM (aScxp)
Hah. Yep. Memories of a goldfish.
The tasty snack kind.
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 17, 2016 01:50 PM (xuouz)
Precisely why the comprehensive immigration reform and common sense gun control Obama wanted has been passed into law.
Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at February 17, 2016 01:51 PM (09f2I)
did that LI idiot ever say that about Boehner? I mean, I know we all know Boehner was as tough as jello, the kind with the fruit salad and little marshmallows floating in suspended animation, but it's King's opinion I want to pretend to be interested in.
Posted by: Satan of Teufelheim VT at February 17, 2016 01:51 PM (qSIlh)
As inappropriate as it is for a President to act this way, I can take not seeing Barack and FLOTUS doing the Kid-n-Play.
Posted by: garrett at February 17, 2016 01:52 PM (91LL3)
Posted by: broseidon king of the brocean at February 17, 2016 01:52 PM (4/i9Y)
Posted by: Feh at February 17, 2016 01:50 PM (Fx8O+)
Maybe, but I've got some kin in my family that would boo at Obama anytime they see him. Don't know about Scalia's.
Posted by: Draki at February 17, 2016 01:52 PM (0eidE)
I was beginning to worry that calling the POTUS a "dick" was challenging to ye olde code of civilitie
Posted by: Feh at February 17, 2016 01:52 PM (Fx8O+)
Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at February 17, 2016 01:52 PM (iQIUe)
Dear Barry-
We won.
Posted by: JackStraw at February 17, 2016 01:36 PM (/tuJf)
_________
All the handwringing from the GOPe about the so-called shutdown. Did they learn anything at all? No.
Cruz for the win.
Posted by: mustbequantum at February 17, 2016 01:52 PM (MIKMs)
Posted by: Terry at February 17, 2016 01:52 PM (jAz6P)
Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at February 17, 2016 01:51 PM (09f2I)
_____
In the senate the amnesty bill passed with 62 votes dumbass. And it was a Republican - Pat Toomey - that initiated the gun control bill in the first place.
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 17, 2016 01:53 PM (aScxp)
The GOP will cave. Oh, they'll spin it in a way that they hope will fool enough people on November. Trust them to work their asses off to do that.
Spoiler alert: it won't fool anyone. The GOP will not be appearing in the sequel.
Posted by: BeckoningChasm at February 17, 2016 01:53 PM (B8JRQ)
Posted by: Feh at February 17, 2016 01:53 PM (Fx8O+)
Posted by: Draki at February 17, 2016 01:53 PM (0eidE)
Posted by: McCool at February 17, 2016 01:53 PM (nCSwS)
I have no class
Posted by: Feh at February 17, 2016 01:53 PM (Fx8O+)
Posted by: Draki at February 17, 2016 01:53 PM (0eidE)
Wasn't Alito confirmed unanimously?
Posted by: Terry at February 17, 2016 01:54 PM (jAz6P)
Posted by: Satan of Teufelheim VT at February 17, 2016 01:55 PM (qSIlh)
did that LI idiot ever say that about Boehner? I mean, I know we all know Boehner was as tough as jello, the kind with the fruit salad and little marshmallows floating in suspended animation, but it's King's opinion I want to pretend to be interested in."
Is King supporting Hillary now? It would not surprise me.
Posted by: Benji Carver at February 17, 2016 01:55 PM (OD2ni)
There is no special occasion, no birthday in the building, or any retirements...
....this is a Suspicious Cake.
*shifty eyes*
Posted by: Bigby's Red Palm at February 17, 2016 01:55 PM (3ZtZW)
Maybe the SCOAMF's got a legitimate concern that God would let Scalia come back long enough to publicly call him out and remind him that judgment is coming for him, just like the Ghost of Samuel coming back to bitchslap King Saul.
Posted by: Qoheleth at February 17, 2016 01:55 PM (iIzG7)
what a dick
Posted by: Feh at February 17, 2016 01:48 PM (Fx8O+)
Can't step foot in a Catholic Church, or he'll burst into flame.
or
May not want to risk the priest throwing Holy Water on him, and melting.
Posted by: Iblis at February 17, 2016 01:55 PM (9221z)
Posted by: Baron Von Ottomatic at February 17, 2016 01:51 PM (09f2I)
___
No it was pretty much party line vote.
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 17, 2016 01:55 PM (aScxp)
CO-EQUAL BRANCHES! His nomination is not a coronation! Wait....never mind...King Obama Speaks!
Posted by: giftogab at February 17, 2016 01:26 PM (ysKvq)
You misspelled Tyrant.
Posted by: kathysaysso at February 17, 2016 01:55 PM (43OZ6)
alternately correct fashion but I was sure I saw somewhere that the
final version of the bill wasn't even finished being typed up when the
vote was taken. As in there were entirely blank sections."
Anyone else remember the far-distant era of 2008? With candidate Obama pledging to rigorously observe a "public comment period" in between Congress sending him a bill, and his signing it into law, to allow the public an opportunity to read the bill and weigh in with their responses?
Good times.
Posted by: torquewrench at February 17, 2016 01:55 PM (noWW6)
___________________
To our country, not his.
The Vatican generously agreed to let one Syrian refugee family into its realm, for all of one year.
This pope is always extraordinarily generous with other peoples' (mainly Americans') resources, but never with his own.
Posted by: TrivialPursuer at February 17, 2016 01:56 PM (df5V4)
Posted by: Northernlurker at February 17, 2016 01:56 PM (hJrjt)
Wasn't Alito confirmed unanimously?
Posted by: Terry
No, but Scalia was I believe.
But Democrats certainly have a history of torpedoing nominations, even for the most disgusting of reasons like what movies they rented
Posted by: Kal at February 17, 2016 01:56 PM (74hKk)
In the interest of the American people and the middle class, the Senate should deeply and thoughtfully consider Obama's nomination.
Until Jan 21st, 2017.
Posted by: MJ at February 17, 2016 01:56 PM (2gYQK)
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo at February 17, 2016 01:56 PM (aScxp)
MURICA!
Posted by: President Donald Herbert Mountain Dew Comancho Trump at February 17, 2016 01:57 PM (lHWU9)
Posted by: Krebs v Carnot, 'Who Decides?' at February 17, 2016 01:57 PM (BK3ZS)
Posted by: torquewrench at February 17, 2016 01:55 PM (noWW6) "
But that was...the before time. The long long ago. Year BO -1, before glorious godkaiser Obama.
Posted by: broseidon king of the brocean at February 17, 2016 01:57 PM (4/i9Y)
the optics are best for Obama to go to the visitation: he'd be offended by the whole Christ thing and wouldn't want to be seen suppressing a smile when Scalia's body is lain into the ground
Posted by: Feh at February 17, 2016 01:58 PM (Fx8O+)
Posted by: Northernlurker at February 17, 2016 01:58 PM (hJrjt)
nyti.ms/1RNVh0x
Fucka you Paur Lyan
Fucka you Lomney
Posted by: Ghost of kari - WAR at February 17, 2016 01:58 PM (xuouz)
Yeah, if Hills cant control her bladder, should she really be living in the WH with all those expensive carpets???
Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at February 17, 2016 01:58 PM (iQIUe)
They can go Bork themselves. Frankly, the high court(s) have begun to lose some serious legitimacy.
In fact, given that only lawyers are permitted in an entire branch of government, it seems to me that the entire Judiciary is now unconstitutional, after Obergefell.
Non-lawyers should not be second-class citizens.
Posted by: AmishDude at February 17, 2016 01:58 PM (Xd2w5)
or
May not want to risk the priest throwing Holy Water on him, and melting."
Is Cardinal Wuerl presiding? I believe he is an Obama lover.
Posted by: Benji Carver at February 17, 2016 01:59 PM (OD2ni)
___
Yay.
Posted by: SMFH at February 17, 2016 01:59 PM (rlfds)
Posted by: The Donald at February 17, 2016 01:59 PM (c7vUv)
Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at February 17, 2016 01:59 PM (iQIUe)
Is King supporting Hillary now? It would not surprise me.
Posted by: Benji Carver at February 17, 2016 01:55 PM (OD2ni)
He is the sort of supporter I wish on my political foes.
Posted by: *Mikey NTH - Adopt a Hot Air Refugee, get free pack of Argue-Mints at the Outrage Outlet! at February 17, 2016 01:59 PM (hLRSq)
Posted by: Monsieur Moo Moo
Lincoln Chaffee was the only Republican to vote no, and 4 Democrats voted "yes"
Posted by: Kal at February 17, 2016 01:59 PM (74hKk)
Posted by: garrett at February 17, 2016 02:00 PM (91LL3)
Q: Why is Shrillary like a barking dog?
A: I don't understand the question.
Q: Why is Shrillary like a barking dog?
A: Why is the word "like" in your question?
Q: Hmm. Good point...
Posted by: Krebs v Carnot, 'Who Decides?' at February 17, 2016 02:00 PM (BK3ZS)
Posted by: Emmett Milbarge at February 17, 2016 02:00 PM (nFdGS)
nominates. The Senate votes to confirm or not, or, hell, even whether
or not to vote.
It's a legitimate use of power by Obama to appoint.
It's a legitimate use of power by the Senate to say hahahaha that's adorbs.
And, yes, I would say the same if the roles were reversed.
Posted by: alexthechick - Here SMOD SMOD SMOD at February 17, 2016 01:24 PM (mf5HN)
I did say the same thing during W's administration (even though I hated it). Remember Miguel Estrada?
Posted by: redbanzai at February 17, 2016 02:00 PM (OrI3J)
Posted by: Northernlurker"
I will need to inspect his pants first.
Posted by: David Brooks at February 17, 2016 02:00 PM (OD2ni)
Anyone else remember the far-distant era of 2008? With candidate Obama pledging to rigorously observe a "public comment period" in between Congress sending him a bill, and his signing it into law, to allow the public an opportunity to read the bill and weigh in with their responses?
that was the other universe Obama. The real Obama is the One that said you could keep your health plan if you liked it and save $2500 a year to boot.
and at least he was telling the truth about the boot, just not where it would end up,
Posted by: Satan of Teufelheim VT at February 17, 2016 02:00 PM (qSIlh)
Posted by: Feh at February 17, 2016 02:00 PM (Fx8O+)
Posted by: Northernlurker at February 17, 2016 01:58 PM (hJrjt)
Brooks will be too busy buffing Obama's wingtips with his tongue to notice anything amiss.
Posted by: *Mikey NTH - Adopt a Hot Air Refugee, get free pack of Argue-Mints at the Outrage Outlet! at February 17, 2016 02:01 PM (hLRSq)
The Democrats
Posted by: steevy at February 17, 2016 02:02 PM (B48dK)
Posted by: redbanzai at February 17, 2016 02:00 PM (OrI3J)
Yup. Oh it was ridiculous and all the rest of it but it was completely legitimate.
Posted by: alexthechick - love and despair bitches at February 17, 2016 02:02 PM (mf5HN)
It is okay to resist.
It is okay to say one thing now and the opposite later.
It's a fight.
So fight.
Posted by: eman at February 17, 2016 02:02 PM (mR7Es)
I think you misspelled the word "sphincter" there.
Posted by: Qoheleth at February 17, 2016 02:02 PM (iIzG7)
Yes, apparently The Donald is the only person in America who doesn't realize SS and Medicare are circling the bowl.
Posted by: JackStraw at February 17, 2016 02:02 PM (/tuJf)
That was before Bork. Bork changed everything. Even that sniveling cock-weasel Kevin Drum admitted it yesterday.
Posted by: Benji Carver at February 17, 2016 02:02 PM (OD2ni)
This pope is always extraordinarily generous with other peoples' (mainly Americans') resources, but never with his own.
Posted by: TrivialPursuer at February 17, 2016 01:56 PM
-------
Plus, the Vatican has a wall. Nice for him.
Posted by: L, Elle at February 17, 2016 02:02 PM (2x3L+)
===
It's OK. He's robbing Peter to pay Paul.
Posted by: Bigby's Red Palm at February 17, 2016 02:03 PM (3ZtZW)
But the big prize is white voters with less than a college education, Trumps target demo. If he can improve GOP performance there just a little, and turn them out at a small increase in numbers, then he wins and potentially wins big.
He might even win Pennsylvania, where there are plenty of those working class voters of both races, making a certain someone here finally happy.
Posted by: MTF at February 17, 2016 02:03 PM (TxJGV)
It is okay to resist.
It is okay to say one thing now and the opposite later.
It's a fight.
So fight.
--------
Here here. The Constitution sets up most things as a political battle. But its only a battle if one side actually fights. Otherwise, its a slaughter.
Posted by: SH at February 17, 2016 02:04 PM (gmeXX)
Posted by: Qoheleth at February 17, 2016 02:02 PM (iIzG7)
I'm trying to keep up the standards of this here classy joint.
Posted by: *Mikey NTH - Adopt a Hot Air Refugee, get free pack of Argue-Mints at the Outrage Outlet! at February 17, 2016 02:04 PM (hLRSq)
This pope is always extraordinarily generous with other peoples' (mainly Americans') resources, but never with his own.
Posted by: TrivialPursuer at February 17, 2016 01:56 PM
-------
Plus, the Vatican has a wall. Nice for him.
Posted by: L, Elle at February 17, 2016 02:02 PM (2x3L+)
I would think there would be a shortage of rapable white women in Vatican City.
Posted by: Northernlurker at February 17, 2016 02:04 PM (hJrjt)
Posted by: Barack Obama at February 17, 2016 02:04 PM (FkBIv)
It's so stupid I believe it."
-Posted by: alexthechick - love and despair bitches at February 17, 2016 01:50 PM (mf5HN)
Much of the bill, (if I remember), was written out as "At the Direction of the HHS Director", which was Kathleen Sebilius.
It was open to all sorts of interpretation and "direction". That broad was too stupid for this administration.
...Which is saying a whole lot.
Posted by: Slapweasel, (Cold1), (T) at February 17, 2016 02:04 PM (OQ9R7)
The Pope, of all people, ought to know that Peter has no money to steal for Paul. "Silver and gold have I none," the fisherman said.
Posted by: Qoheleth at February 17, 2016 02:05 PM (iIzG7)
Posted by: redbanzai at February 17, 2016 02:00 PM (OrI3J)
Yup. Oh it was ridiculous and all the rest of it but it was completely legitimate.
Posted by: alexthechick
The difference there was the Democrats were basically saying ALL judicial nominations required 60 votes in the Senate and basically just stopped everything
I do think that is over the top obstructionist considering the Democrats didn't even have a majority
But for the Senate to vote down an Obama nominee though is exactly what the Constitution intended
Posted by: Kal at February 17, 2016 02:05 PM (74hKk)
I agree completely with this analysis. And yeah, same thing in 2014: the people clearly aren't very happy with the direction of Obama's leadership and the lunacy in the Democrat congress, so its time for a change in direction. Like it or not, such as in 2006 and 2008.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 17, 2016 02:05 PM (39g3+)
Posted by: alexthechick - love and despair bitches at February 17, 2016 02:02 PM (mf5HN)
-------------
Also legitimate to complain and say that the Senate Dems should have confirmed. You don't have to believe it to say it. Say what you need to win.
Posted by: SH at February 17, 2016 02:05 PM (gmeXX)
Posted by: Satan of Teufelheim VT at February 17, 2016 02:05 PM (qSIlh)
===========
Yet he has no fear of the destruction allowing the court to go full leftard will have... Traitor.
Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at February 17, 2016 02:06 PM (iQIUe)
It wasn't really legitimate; they never actually filibustered or took votes on cloture, they just counted and said "well it won't work" and gave up.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 17, 2016 02:06 PM (39g3+)
-Posted by: SH at February 17, 2016 02:04 PM (gmeXX)
The "R's" act all cute and roll over for a belly-rub. They never understand that the "D's" and the media only want to kick the damn dog.
Posted by: Slapweasel, (Cold1), (T) at February 17, 2016 02:06 PM (OQ9R7)
Posted by: Roy at February 17, 2016 02:06 PM (VndSC)
*tap tap tap*
You OK in there, boy?
Nothing but nonsense coming out of the box.
Posted by: Bandersnatch, Tough Love Version at February 17, 2016 02:07 PM (1xUj/)
_______________-
Pablo (and Raul and Maria and Jose' and all their assorted siblings, aunts, uncles, cousins . . . .)
Posted by: TrivialPursuer at February 17, 2016 02:07 PM (df5V4)
Posted by: Satan of Teufelheim VT"
She can sing back-up vocals on Who Let the Dogs Out.
Posted by: Benji Carver at February 17, 2016 02:07 PM (OD2ni)
-------------
I really do not think there is anything that is over the top obstruction. Sure I might claim it is but that is only to persuade people to put pressure on the side that is obstructing what I want.
The problem with the GOP in the Estrada battle was they were unwilling to exercise the nuclear option which the Dems then subsequently did.
Posted by: SH at February 17, 2016 02:07 PM (gmeXX)
our stalwart solons will confirm the dog-eating crackhead's nominee
before the month is out. Any takers?
Posted by: Mary Poppins' Practically Perfect Piercing at February 17, 2016 01:50 PM
Talk about a sucker bet....
The GOPe essentially has no choice, after stupidly telling Choom Boy they wouldn't play if he sent in a nomination. All they can do is appear Obstructionist/Racist, or whatever "ist" applies to the no-talent hack who suits the Traitor-in-Chief's fancy.
How hard would it be to simply go through the process and, after the various committee hearings, whip out the red-inked NOT QUALIFIED! rubber stamp? I know, I know: too hard for the Bitch and his winy Senatorial infants.
Posted by: MrScribbler at February 17, 2016 02:08 PM (JPmdJ)
Posted by: Slapweasel, (Cold1), (T) at February 17, 2016 02:08 PM (OQ9R7)
Posted by: Satan of Teufelheim VT at February 17, 2016 02:05 PM (qSIlh)
I have her Jingle Bells album. She's quite fetching as a singer!
Posted by: Count de Monet at February 17, 2016 02:08 PM (JO9+V)
Posted by: Ronster at February 17, 2016 02:09 PM (mUa7N)
Posted by: Slapweasel, (Cold1), (T) at February 17, 2016 02:08 PM (OQ9R7)
Her cellulite feels no pain.
Posted by: Northernlurker at February 17, 2016 02:09 PM (hJrjt)
Posted by: Qoheleth at February 17, 2016 02:09 PM (iIzG7)
Posted by: Ignoramus at February 17, 2016 02:09 PM (r1fLd)
Posted by: SH at February 17, 2016 02:09 PM (gmeXX)
(That was you, right? Or am I mixing you up with another Moron?)
Posted by: L, Elle at February 17, 2016 02:10 PM (2x3L+)
Short answer: Bwwaaaahahahahahahahahah!
Laconic answer: Yes.
(They have learned nothing at all.)
Posted by: Duncanthrax the Bellicose at February 17, 2016 02:10 PM (ml1PM)
Posted by: SH at February 17, 2016 02:05 PM (gmeXX)
Difference in kind. Arguing hey this guy is qualified and should be confirmed is utterly different than saying it is illegitimate to object in any way to the person that the President nominates.
Two completely different objections that must not be conflated.
Posted by: alexthechick - love and despair bitches at February 17, 2016 02:10 PM (mf5HN)
We are the ones that need to remind the senate of this. Not that it'll do any good at the end. The senate is going to cave. Fredo will get his nominee confirmed.
Posted by: Soona at February 17, 2016 02:10 PM (Fmupd)
Posted by: SH at February 17, 2016 02:05 PM (gmeXX)
"The truth of the allegation is in the uttering of it." - Senator Harry Reid
(I may have fabricated that last quote.)
Posted by: *Mikey NTH - Adopt a Hot Air Refugee, get free pack of Argue-Mints at the Outrage Outlet! at February 17, 2016 02:10 PM (hLRSq)
Posted by: joncelli, Boned like You at February 17, 2016 02:10 PM (RD7QR)
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 17, 2016 02:10 PM (39g3+)
Let's hope she becomes the nominee!
Posted by: Doomberg at February 17, 2016 02:11 PM (LRuoq)
-Posted by: Northernlurker at February 17, 2016 02:09 PM (hJrjt)
There will be be a certain resonance that eventually shakes her to pieces, I'd imagine.
Posted by: Slapweasel, (Cold1), (T) at February 17, 2016 02:11 PM (OQ9R7)
The GOP estabs will give Ofascist his way. Just like always, with just enough of the senators not up for election allowing it to go through.
Posted by: Guy Mohawk at February 17, 2016 02:11 PM (ODxAs)
Posted by: MTF at February 17, 2016 02:11 PM (TxJGV)
Conflated? You mean, like Joe Biden's blow-up date?
Posted by: Qoheleth at February 17, 2016 02:11 PM (iIzG7)
Two completely different objections that must not be conflated.
----------------
Just saying you use whatever argument that gets you the result you need. Who cares if you are consistent?
Posted by: SH at February 17, 2016 02:11 PM (gmeXX)
The problem with the GOP in the Estrada battle was they were unwilling to exercise the nuclear option which the Dems then subsequently did.
Posted by: SH
I think the filibuster in that case was "unconstitutional" in its application.
People like John McCain and other RINOs thought it was A-Ok and made a deal with Reid that he then broke.
If the Founders wanted 60 votes to confirm a judicial nomination, they would have put that in the Constitution
The first 100 years of American history, the filibuster was used something like 1 time as just a stalling technique.
I really don't care how we torpedo Obama's nominations, even if creates charges of hypocrisy. that's politics
Posted by: Kal at February 17, 2016 02:12 PM (74hKk)
Posted by: Demented Leftist at February 17, 2016 02:12 PM (ml1PM)
Posted by: *Mikey NTH - Adopt a Hot Air Refugee, get free pack of Argue-Mints at the Outrage Outlet! at February 17, 2016 02:04 PM (hLRSq)
_______________________________________________
Sort of like how Ron Burgundy is classy compared to the Kardashians.
Posted by: NotCoach at February 17, 2016 02:12 PM (rsudF)
Posted by: L, Elle at February 17, 2016 02:12 PM (2x3L+)
The Vatican generously agreed to let one Syrian refugee family into its realm, for all of one year.
This pope is always extraordinarily generous with other peoples' (mainly Americans') resources, but never with his own.
Posted by: TrivialPursuer at February 17, 2016 01:56 PM (df5V4)
What won't get reported in our press, was that the Pope was also chastising Mexico for having conditions where its people feel so hopeless that they have to flee to other countries. He told the clergy to stop sucking up to the elites, and push for real reform in government and against the cartels.
Posted by: Iblis at February 17, 2016 02:12 PM (9221z)
-Posted by: Northernlurker at February 17, 2016 02:09 PM (hJrjt)"
The booze helps too. Hic.
Posted by: Grandma Hillary at February 17, 2016 02:12 PM (OD2ni)
-----------
There is nothing unconstitutional with the filibuster. And there is nothing wrong with eliminating it.
Posted by: SH at February 17, 2016 02:13 PM (gmeXX)
Posted by: steevy at February 17, 2016 02:13 PM (B48dK)
(That was you, right? Or am I mixing you up with another Moron?)
Posted by: L, Elle at February 17, 2016 02:10 PM (2x3L+)
It was indeed me. The trip was awesome. The mosquitoes stayed away and I loved the people I met.
The poverty was mind blowing but that was expected. And the people were incredibly generous. (How does one react to an money gift from people who earn less in a year than I do in a couple of days?)
And the flight was exhausting--36 hours from departure to arrival back home with 24 hours in the air.
FYI I spent a day in Kisimu, which claims to be Obama's home town.
Posted by: Northernlurker at February 17, 2016 02:13 PM (hJrjt)
WaPo: 5 possible Supreme Court picks that could make Republicans squirm
1. Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch
2. Judge Sri Srinivasan
3. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.)
4. Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah
5. Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval
Sandoval is a nasty choice. Very GOPe moderate. He'd get 90 votes
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 17, 2016 02:14 PM (kdS6q)
That's all any Republican needs to say.
Posted by: JackStraw at February 17, 2016 02:14 PM (/tuJf)
Posted by: Count de Monet at February 17, 2016 02:14 PM (JO9+V)
Posted by: Satan of Teufelheim VT at February 17, 2016 02:14 PM (qSIlh)
Posted by: MTF at February 17, 2016 02:14 PM (TxJGV)
Posted by: Iblis"
Thanks for posting this. I was glad to read it.
Posted by: Benji Carver at February 17, 2016 02:14 PM (OD2ni)
===
Of course. But its at least official that Jeb is the not-favored son now. Wonder when he'll drop out? Do we have a pool?
Posted by: Bigby's Red Palm at February 17, 2016 02:15 PM (3ZtZW)
Did the family think of inviting Hillery in the name of non-partisanship so she could bark out "Amazing Grace"?----Satan of Teufelheim VT
Yes, but it wouldn't be barking...or coming from her mouth.
Posted by: Tilikum KAW at February 17, 2016 02:15 PM (m3iiU)
Thanks Thom!
Posted by: torquewrench at February 17, 2016 02:15 PM (noWW6)
Posted by: Iblis at February 17, 2016 02:12 PM (9221z
------
The link from Drudge did actually mention and quote him on that. So a lot of people probably did see that mentioned.
Posted by: L, Elle at February 17, 2016 02:15 PM (2x3L+)
________________
And they absolutely should vote down any and all leftist loons that Obama would nominate.
Take, for example, Loretta Lynch. She was confirmed as Attorney General, despite testifying that she believes illegal aliens have a "right" to jobs in the U.S., and despite testifying that she had no problem with Obama issuing his executive-order amnesties to millions of illegal aliens -- even though Obama, that noted legal scholar and self-professed expert in constitutional law -- had himself repeatedly admitted that the constitution gives him no authority to unilaterally issue those EO amnesties.
Here is a woman who admitted under oath that she does not take the constitution seriously, and yet she was confirmed for the top law enforcement job in the country -- and is now reported to be the leading contender for the SCOTUS nomination.
The Senate should be happy to vote against such an obviously unfit nominee, and they should be more than willing to step in front of cameras and explain their reasons for doing so.
Posted by: TrivialPursuer at February 17, 2016 02:15 PM (df5V4)
Posted by: Kal at February 17, 2016 02:12 PM (74hKk)
________________________________________________
They did.
Article I, Section 5, Clause 2
Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.
Posted by: NotCoach at February 17, 2016 02:15 PM (rsudF)
They couldn't even bring themselves to reject her as Attorney General.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 17, 2016 02:17 PM (39g3+)
I think the filibuster in that case was "unconstitutional" in its application.
Posted by: Kal
Given that the filibuster isn't in the Constitution, that's always the case.
Just another dopey rule of the Senate.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 17, 2016 02:17 PM (kdS6q)
So that gives C3-bio more high profile GOP-establishment endorsements (Haley, Scott, Gowdy) in SC than in any other state, but the Rube is still getting waxed by Trump in the polls in SC. What's _that_ indicate?
Posted by: torquewrench at February 17, 2016 02:18 PM (noWW6)
Posted by: Bigby's Red Palm at February 17, 2016 02:15 PM
As long as Momma and Daddy and Dubya are in his corner, Heb! will certainly Fight The Good Fight for as long as his campaign draws donations.
Posted by: MrScribbler at February 17, 2016 02:18 PM (JPmdJ)
http://giphy.com/gifs/best-gifs-buzzfeed-barack-obama-president-2HkTljfXKtBn2
Posted by: OneEyedJack at February 17, 2016 02:18 PM (kKHcp)
Sunday. I think he's done unless he performs unexpectedly well in SC, which is looking unlikely.
Posted by: Benji Carver at February 17, 2016 02:18 PM (OD2ni)
Posted by: NotCoach at February 17, 2016 02:12 PM (rsudF)
Exactly. The Outrage Outlet's ventilation system pumps in the scent of rich leather and polished mahogany.
Posted by: *Mikey NTH - Adopt a Hot Air Refugee, get free pack of Argue-Mints at the Outrage Outlet! at February 17, 2016 02:19 PM (hLRSq)
Posted by: Max Rockatansky at February 17, 2016 02:19 PM (1g+wZ)
Posted by: Northernlurker at February 17, 2016 02:13 PM
------
Did you find Aunt Zutini's hut?
jk
I'm glad to hear the trip went so well. It sounds wonderful and very fulfilling. I'm so glad you got home safely and undiseased.
Posted by: L, Elle at February 17, 2016 02:19 PM (2x3L+)
http://tinyurl.com/jalkmaf
Posted by: Satan of Teufelheim VT at February 17, 2016 02:19 PM (qSIlh)
If the Founders wanted 60 votes to confirm a judicial nomination, they would have put that in the Constitution
Posted by: Kal
They did. Article I, Section 5, Clause 2
Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.
Posted by: NotCoach
Completely unrelated in every possibly way.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 17, 2016 02:20 PM (kdS6q)
So? Again, who cares if the Dems call them obstructionist? Who will be upset at that? The people of the USA have made it pretty clear they are annoyed with how things have been going. The clear trend of voting is for reform and a new approach.
Being accused of opposing the old approach should be played up as a virtue, not feared.
"Yes, we are obstructing the old and failed ideas of this administration. They've failed to bring economic growth, failed to help the poorest and most needy among us, failed the African American community, and imposed a host of new ridiculous strictures and regulations upon us all. We're proud to obstruct this trend and welcome a new, fresh approach to government in the coming election."
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 17, 2016 02:20 PM (39g3+)
chastising Mexico for having conditions where its people feel so
hopeless that they have to flee to other countries. He told the clergy
to stop sucking up to the elites, and push for real reform in government
and against the cartels.
He should have said martyrs not clergy because that's what they'll be.
Posted by: Hadoop at February 17, 2016 02:20 PM (2X7pN)
Posted by: L, Elle at February 17, 2016 02:15 PM (2x3L+)
Hmm, didn't see the link from Drudge.
Even with the migrant crisis in Europe the Pope has called upon countries to reform themselves so their people don't have to flee. He does also call for the human treatment of refugees and migrants, which is all the press cares about. Its OK to make Westerners feel uncomfortable, but can't let the 3rd worlders feel bad. That would be oppressive.
Posted by: Iblis at February 17, 2016 02:20 PM (9221z)
I keep waiting for her to inhale her cough drop and then watch her aides do the Heimlich on teevee. I like it when she keeps holding up her "wait one minute" finger and keeps hacking up harf-balls. Each coughing fit represents a full diaper emergency.
Oh! And here staggering out of somewhere in NH (I guess) and exclaiming how "fresh" the newly snowed air is, cracks me up. She is hanging for life on the arm of some dude. Spazzing all over the icy sidewalk, I guess, or drunk.
Here's hoping for another coughing-fit at next debate. Maybe if Bernie asks her something hard (ha, I kid, I kid).
Posted by: ChristyBlinky, aging supermodel Redneck Queen at February 17, 2016 02:21 PM (cmXKg)
They couldn't even bring themselves to reject her as Attorney General.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor"
I hope they would know to apply a higher standard to a SC nominee. The AG is part of the Executive Branch and the President should be given some deference. But the SC, no way.
Posted by: Benji Carver at February 17, 2016 02:21 PM (OD2ni)
Posted by: Slapweasel, (Cold1), (T) at February 17, 2016 02:21 PM (OQ9R7)
Posted by: L, Elle at February 17, 2016 02:19 PM
Hell, I've lived near Boston for almost five years, and I never saw Auntie Zeituni's (tax-payer-provided)
Never been to Uncle Odinga's liquor store, either.
Posted by: MrScribbler at February 17, 2016 02:21 PM (JPmdJ)
Not really. The Constitution leaves the sausage making up to the chambers of the legislature: if they want to do things one way or another, its up to them within the limits of the law. How they get it done is a matter of rules.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 17, 2016 02:21 PM (39g3+)
nominee, and they should be more than willing to step in front of
cameras and explain their reasons for doing so."
And, geez, Lynch? Whose office covered the Wall Street beat?
You would think that with a public still viscerally pissed off with the high-finance class over the 2008 bust, rejecting a nominee who had gone to extraordinary lengths to avoid indicting obviously shady financiers (e.g. Jon Corzine) would be easy.
#PartyOfStupid found it too hard.
Posted by: torquewrench at February 17, 2016 02:22 PM (noWW6)
Posted by: Satan of Teufelheim VT at February 17, 2016 02:22 PM (qSIlh)
Posted by: Hadoop at February 17, 2016 02:20 PM (2X7pN)
I think there was a report that around 30 priests have already been killed in the past couple of years. I can't find it right now. Might've been Breitbart.
Posted by: Iblis at February 17, 2016 02:22 PM (9221z)
Posted by: Kal at February 17, 2016 02:12 PM (74hKk)
They did.
Article I, Section 5, Clause 2
Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.
Posted by: NotCoach
What if the Senate made a "rule" that Republican Senators can no longer vote on bills?
By that definition, Democrats could make a rule like that and unless they had a majority in the Senate, they couldn't override such a rule.
Don't you think that would be unconstitutional?
The idea that a Republican President is not allowed to have any judicial nominations even voted on without 60 votes first to proceed is "unconstitutional" from where I'm standing.
I have ZERO problem using this on Democrats because that's politics, but I don't agree with it in principle
Posted by: Kal at February 17, 2016 02:22 PM (74hKk)
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 17, 2016 02:20 PM (kdS6q)
_____________________________________________
No it isn't. Congress decides for itself how legislation/confirmations are brought up for a vote. They make their own rules. And the requirement that the Senate confirm all nominations lays out no set of special rules separate from their everyday rules.
Posted by: NotCoach at February 17, 2016 02:23 PM (rsudF)
If the Founders wanted 60 votes to confirm a judicial nomination, they would have put that in the Constitution
Posted by: Kal
They did. Article I, Section 5, Clause 2
Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.
Posted by: NotCoach
Completely unrelated in every possibly way.
Posted by: Laurie David's Cervix at February 17, 2016 02:20 PM (kdS6q)
Totally on point, actually. If the Senate wants to have 60 votes for a confirmation then it can do that; all the Constitution says is that the two houses can make their own rules.
Posted by: joncelli, Boned like You at February 17, 2016 02:24 PM (RD7QR)
They couldn't even bring themselves to reject her as Attorney General.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor"
I hope they would know to apply a higher standard to a SC nominee. The AG is part of the Executive Branch and the President should be given some deference. But the SC, no way.
Posted by: Benji Carver
Something like a Loretta Lynch nom would be a gift to Republicans
I can almost guarantee you an Obama nom will be a female.
Posted by: Kal at February 17, 2016 02:24 PM (74hKk)
___________________
I know, and that was idiotic. They were terrified of voting against a black woman. Never mind that her own words demonstrated a complete lack of basic fitness for the job. It's all about tribalism now, and the GOPe are so cowed by the prospect of somebody calling them raaaaacist or sexist that they will jump to confirm a minority nominee who walks into the senate chambers, squats to take a dump, and wipes his/her ass with the constitution, before they'll simply vote no.
Posted by: TrivialPursuer at February 17, 2016 02:24 PM (df5V4)
-----
Yeah, it's very sad to see what a tool this Pope is allowing himself to be. He seems to really court the press but has no understanding of how he is being manipulated by the media.
Posted by: L, Elle at February 17, 2016 02:25 PM (2x3L+)
Posted by: ChristyBlinky, aging supermodel Redneck Queen at February 17, 2016 02:25 PM (cmXKg)
Posted by: Kal at February 17, 2016 02:22 PM (74hKk)
________________________________________________
What if congress only those who could stand on their head could vote on legislation?
What if congress decided only those who could hold their liquor could vote on legislation?
What if congress decided only those who kissed the Pope's ring could vote on legislation?
See, I can write silly shiite too.
There are no rules stipulating who can or can not vote on legislation. There are rules on how that legislation comes up for a vote. And often times the party in power (all the time?) shuts out the party out of power when deciding these things. So what?
Posted by: NotCoach at February 17, 2016 02:26 PM (rsudF)
Posted by: L, Elle at February 17, 2016 02:26 PM (2x3L+)
===
Which, allow me to add, warms my heart! I have the opportunity to utterly dismiss the entire clan!
Posted by: Bigby's Red Palm at February 17, 2016 02:27 PM (3ZtZW)
Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at February 17, 2016 02:28 PM (iQIUe)
But this is an election year, and just this once they may respect our memories in that many of them need our vote to survive.
They're dunderheads, or they're on the other team, it really doesn't matter at this point. If they feel their vote could affect they Nov elections at the Senate AND presidential level, they may just stand strong long enough.
So call. Or Email your Senator. Even if they aren't on the judiciary committee.
Go further than that, is you have an R for a state assembly person, or state senator, or governor, and tell them to call or email the senator too.
As a brilliant economist once said, make the wrong person do the right thing.
But for once, sitting on hands, or just bitching here, or crossing our fingers and hoping for the best.
I let my senator know in no uncertain terms that if a nominee even gets out of committee, he's toast. I won't vote for him. But I won't stay home either.
If they can't stand for this one thing, they are useless.
Posted by: OneEyedJack at February 17, 2016 02:28 PM (kKHcp)
Posted by: NotCoach
If the silly rules get in the way of a Senator not being able to fulfill something the Constitutions says they are allowed to perform, it becomes an issue.
So just for clarification, you think Reid making a rule that no judicial nominations from Bush were able to even be voted on without 60 votes in the Senate first? You were on the side of John McCain and Lyndsey Graham?
Posted by: Kal at February 17, 2016 02:31 PM (74hKk)
Then that would be a violation of the constitution, and outside the law. This is not particularly confusing.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 17, 2016 02:32 PM (39g3+)
----------------
Then that would be a violation of the constitution, and outside the law. This is not particularly confusing.
Outside the spirit of the Constitution and un-American, though perhaps not outright unconstitutional.
Civil War 2.0 would quickly ensue. The Democrats should remember who has the guns.
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 17, 2016 02:35 PM (uURQL)
Posted by: Kal at February 17, 2016 02:31 PM (74hKk)
_________________________________________________
Their roll is to cast votes on legislation. Congress decides, in their own way, what legislation will be voted on.
______________________________________________
So just for clarification, you think Reid making a rule that no judicial nominations from Bush were able to even be voted on without 60 votes in the Senate first? You were on the side of John McCain and Lyndsey Graham?
_________________________________________________
Apples and oranges. That is a political struggle that I may or may not disagree with. But my disagreement does not make it unconstitutional.
Posted by: NotCoach at February 17, 2016 02:36 PM (rsudF)
Then that would be a violation of the constitution, and outside the law. This is not particularly confusing.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor
I would say the same about requiring 60 votes before a nominee even gets to the "advise and consent" part of the Senate's duty.
If you want a President Cruz to be able to make judicial nominations, he's not going to be able to make a single one if it requires 60 to merely get the right to have one voted on, unless you want shitty judicial nominees.
Posted by: Kal at February 17, 2016 02:36 PM (74hKk)
Directly unconstitutional to deny a duly elected representative from ever voting in congress. Absolutely and blatantly illegal.
I would say the same about requiring 60 votes before a nominee even gets to the "advise and consent" part of the Senate's duty.
You can say that, but it holds no rational or legal weight. Your argument is basically that unless everyone wins, some are being oppressed. Its nonsense.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor at February 17, 2016 02:37 PM (39g3+)
http://spotlights.fold3.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/washington_zoom.jpg
Posted by: De Medici Tires and Trannies of Florence, SC at February 17, 2016 02:38 PM (K/MPD)
Posted by: Make America Great Again at February 17, 2016 02:39 PM (LXJ1e)
Posted by: Ignoramus at February 17, 2016 02:39 PM (r1fLd)
Posted by: SH at February 17, 2016 02:41 PM (gmeXX)
Directly unconstitutional to deny a duly elected representative from ever voting in congress. Absolutely and blatantly illegal.
Posted by: Christopher Taylor
If the Senate can make its rules, who's to say?
The Constitution also says a simple majority is all that's needed for a nominee to be confirmed, yet now it requires 60 votes because of "Senate rules"
Posted by: Kal at February 17, 2016 02:41 PM (74hKk)
Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at February 17, 2016 02:42 PM (iQIUe)
Posted by: Make America Great Again
Maybe Cruz has got another great pick like John Roberts
Posted by: Kal at February 17, 2016 02:42 PM (74hKk)
Make that $319,385,5360 post taxes...
Posted by: Bruce With a Wang! at February 17, 2016 02:44 PM (iQIUe)
"Arf!"
Posted by: Jane D'oh at February 17, 2016 01:31 PM (FsuaD)
----
hmmm, i guess i won't have to make you bark like a dog
Posted by: Carl Spackler at February 17, 2016 02:45 PM (oGRue)
Depends on the exact rule ... It is one thing to vote, another thing to weight the vote and decide what the result is.
The Senate has the power and authority to create unfair rules that do not outright contradict the Constitution. but doing it on partisan lines is a very very bad idea with severe consequences.
Posted by: ReactionaryMonster browsing Bravely at February 17, 2016 02:45 PM (uURQL)
Posted by: saf at February 17, 2016 02:52 PM (qKiBT)
Posted by: Punching up at February 17, 2016 03:01 PM (szCLr)
Posted by: bour3 at February 17, 2016 03:02 PM (5x3+2)
Posted by: Geoffrey at February 17, 2016 03:10 PM (LoRcb)
Posted by: FenelonSpoke at February 17, 2016 04:05 PM (w4NZ8)
Supreme Court.
Posted by: Sometimes I Crack Myself Up at February 17, 2016 04:33 PM (nbGZj)
Posted by: torabora at February 17, 2016 05:37 PM (eKBtI)
Processing 0.03, elapsed 0.0381 seconds.
14 queries taking 0.0142 seconds, 295 records returned.
Page size 157 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.8 beta.
Real Clear Politics
Gallup
Paul Anka Haiku Contest Announcement
Integrity SAT's: Entrance Exam for Paul Anka's Band
AllahPundit's Paul Anka 45's Collection
AnkaPundit: Paul Anka Takes Over the Site for a Weekend (Continues through to Monday's postings)
George Bush Slices Don Rumsfeld Like an F*ckin' Hammer
Democratic Forays into Erotica
New Shows On Gore's DNC/MTV Network
Nicknames for Potatoes, By People Who Really Hate Potatoes
Star Wars Euphemisms for Self-Abuse
Signs You're at an Iraqi "Wedding Party"
Signs Your Clown Has Gone Bad
Signs That You, Geroge Michael, Should Probably Just Give It Up
Signs of Hip-Hop Influence on John Kerry
NYT Headlines Spinning Bush's Jobs Boom
Things People Are More Likely to Say Than "Did You Hear What Al Franken Said Yesterday?"
Signs that Paul Krugman Has Lost His Frickin' Mind
All-Time Best NBA Players, According to Senator Robert Byrd
Other Bad Things About the Jews, According to the Koran
Signs That David Letterman Just Doesn't Care Anymore
Examples of Bob Kerrey's Insufferable Racial Jackassery
Signs Andy Rooney Is Going Senile
Other Judgments Dick Clarke Made About Condi Rice Based on Her Appearance
Collective Names for Groups of People
John Kerry's Other Vietnam Super-Pets
Cool Things About the XM8 Assault Rifle
Media-Approved Facts About the Democrat Spy
Changes to Make Christianity More "Inclusive"
Secret John Kerry Senatorial Accomplishments
John Edwards Campaign Excuses
John Kerry Pick-Up Lines
Changes Liberal Senator George Michell Will Make at Disney
Torments in Dog-Hell
The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)