~Lauren~
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,876 
|
Post by ~Lauren~ on Feb 15, 2016 22:27:19 GMT
I've already done that. I'll repeat, since you seem to have missed the post in which I set forth my rationale. The Constitution gives the Congress the right to confirm presidential appointments. It does not place limits, time or otherwise, on that right. Therefore, although you may not like the fact that this Congress may draw out the process, it is not Unconstitutional for them to do so; just as it would not be Unconstitutional for a Democratic Congress to do it to a Republican President. Now the Supreme Court may at some time render a decision interpreting the Constitution in the way you espouse but as of right now, that is not the case now.
I consider that to be a rational basis for supporting the Congressional decisions in this matter. You don't like my reasoning therefore you attack my statements, my intellect with patronizing comments and continue to assert that I have no basis for my "opinion". It seems to me that you are being intentionally obtuse simply because you disagree with my rationale. Are you "smart enough" to understand what I've said? I think so but you can't seem to get over the idea that you're right and anyone with a different viewpoint or interpretation simply MUST be wrong.
FWIW, I think you make a good argument and who knows, the SCOTUS may agree with you. But until that time, I don't think your's is the only correct position
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 18, 2024 16:18:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2016 22:47:21 GMT
(Sorry, I can't quote, my phone is being a PITA)
Re: Warren saying that the people did choose by electing Obama
That was more than 4 years ago and perhaps they have changed their mind since the body that actually confirms is Republican held.
|
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Feb 15, 2016 23:27:26 GMT
I've already done that. I'll repeat, since you seem to have missed the post in which I set forth my rationale. The Constitution gives the Congress the right to confirm presidential appointments. It does not place limits, time or otherwise, on that right. Therefore, although you may not like the fact that this Congress may draw out the process, it is not Unconstitutional for them to do so; just as it would not be Unconstitutional for a Democratic Congress to do it to a Republican President. Now the Supreme Court may at some time render a decision interpreting the Constitution in the way you espouse but as of right now, that is not the case now. I consider that to be a rational basis for supporting the Congressional decisions in this matter. You don't like my reasoning therefore you attack my statements, my intellect with patronizing comments and continue to assert that I have no basis for my "opinion". It seems to me that you are being intentionally obtuse simply because you disagree with my rationale. Are you "smart enough" to understand what I've said? I think so but you can't seem to get over the idea that you're right and anyone with a different viewpoint or interpretation simply MUST be wrong. FWIW, I think you make a good argument and who knows, the SCOTUS may agree with you. But until that time, I don't think your's is the only correct position OK - if the congress blocks the nominations of a sitting president for almost a full year, until that president's term is over, would you consider that the president's rights had been withheld? Or to put it another way - let's consider the second amendment - if a state puts an undetermined waiting period in the right to purchase guns, and draws out the waiting period for decades, such that people often die before the waiting period is up, would you consider that the citizens' second amendment rights had been withheld? And if so, why? After all, the constitution puts no time limit under which the state must allow said purchase. In fact there is no constitutional right I'm aware of that can be arbitrarily withheld just because the constitution does not guarantee it within a certain time frame. In fact, I would say that the explicit right to a speedy trial shows that the founders recognized the potential to effectively deny rights through delay, and were opposed to it. It's not that I think only my opinion can be right; it's that I think (and believe I've shown) that it is more well-supported in this particular case. But I'm open to reading your further arguments. And FWIW, as of 2005, Mitch McConnell agreed with me: |
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Feb 15, 2016 23:37:56 GMT
Yes, our Congress has an obligation to confirm a presidential appointment. However, the Constitution places no time deadlines for doing so nor is there any articulation of the grounds on which they may refuse to confirm an appointment. As the Constitution does not prohibit them from refusing to confirm an appointment, they are within their Constitutional rights to do so. Thus, your claims of the Constitution really don't support your argument that the Congress must act on and confirm appointees nominated by this president prior to his leaving office. And if you don't like the fact that Congress (the elected body) chooses to do it's Constitutional duties in its own time, that's, to quote you "too dang bad". While that is all fine and dandy, those who are trying to hide behind what the Constitution says or not, THIS TIME--at THIS MOMENT, it is pure political manipulation. On Saturday GOP were clearly stating that they would not approve ANYONE that our current sitting president of these United States would recommend--and they did this not knowing ANYONE who would be on the list. That is total political BULLSHIT. It is nothing more than what Boehner orchestrated time and time again with the house--they made it crystal clear that they were going to upset and impede any and all plans this president was trying to do. It's one thing to follow the Constitution in approving a SC JUSTICE, taking the time to make a short list and vett that person, but what all these GOP candidates are doing now is bullshit. And I would say the same if it were the Democrats doing the same. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 18, 2024 16:18:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2016 23:38:57 GMT
(Sorry, I can't quote, my phone is being a PITA) Re: Warren saying that the people did choose by electing Obama That was more than 4 years ago and perhaps they have changed their mind since the body that actually confirms is Republican held. Ah no. Like it or not he IS the President for roughly 330 more days. As far using the argument that because the Senate is now controlled by the Republicans is no argument. You are trying to use a state election to dictate what you think the "People" of the entire country want. As opposed to a national election where the majority of voters of this country voted for President Obama to be president not for 3 years and 1 month but for the ENTIRE 4 years. |
|
|
|
Post by snowsilver on Feb 16, 2016 0:59:28 GMT
Dear Dems: Why are you acting so horrified that the Reps might try to block a SC nominee of Obama's? Surely you know you are just as guilty and have played this game yourself! Maybe you aren't aware of influential Senator Charles Schumer's insistence that the Democratic party attempt to block ANY of George Bush's nominees (should he get the chance to make any) based on the fact that he was a lame duck president. Just for the record, it was 2007 and Bush had 18 MONTHS left on his term. Apparently the press has been trying to contact Schumer to ask why it was OK to do this in 2007, and NOT OK for the Republicans to do it in 2016. From what I hear, he's been strangely silent on the subject.
|
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Feb 16, 2016 1:08:02 GMT
(Sorry, I can't quote, my phone is being a PITA) Re: Warren saying that the people did choose by electing Obama That was more than 4 years ago and perhaps they have changed their mind since the body that actually confirms is Republican held. you could say that at anytime though. |
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Feb 16, 2016 1:11:21 GMT
Dear Dems: Why are you acting so horrified that the Reps might try to block a SC nominee of Obama's? Surely you know you are just as guilty and have played this game yourself! Maybe you aren't aware of influential Senator Charles Schumer's insistence that the Democratic party attempt to block ANY of George Bush's nominees (should he get the chance to make any) based on the fact that he was a lame duck president. Just for the record, it was 2007 and Bush had 18 MONTHS left on his term. Apparently the press has been trying to contact Schumer to ask why it was OK to do this in 2007, and NOT OK for the Republicans to do it in 2016. From what I hear, he's been strangely silent on the subject. o would be horrified no matter the party. I don't like blocking based on being assholian no matter how much time is left. If the person is a brilliant jurist and doesn't have any skeletons and has proven the ability to rule and write opinions, then they should be confirmed. |
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Feb 16, 2016 1:20:51 GMT
Dear Dems: Why are you acting so horrified that the Reps might try to block a SC nominee of Obama's? Surely you know you are just as guilty and have played this game yourself! Maybe you aren't aware of influential Senator Charles Schumer's insistence that the Democratic party attempt to block ANY of George Bush's nominees (should he get the chance to make any) based on the fact that he was a lame duck president. Just for the record, it was 2007 and Bush had 18 MONTHS left on his term. Apparently the press has been trying to contact Schumer to ask why it was OK to do this in 2007, and NOT OK for the Republicans to do it in 2016. From what I hear, he's been strangely silent on the subject. I'll concede that it wasn't ok for the Democrats in 2007 as its not ok for the Republicans in 2016. I think there are some big differences in the two scenarios, though. One, in 2007, it was a hypothetical situation, not the reality currently facing our country; and two, as far as I can tell, in 2007 Schumer was the only one blowing hot air on the subject. Now, we have half the republicans in congress so far - including two presidential candidates - lining up to join McConnell. That feels like a more real and substantial threat to me. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 18, 2024 16:18:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2016 1:30:48 GMT
Dear Dems: Why are you acting so horrified that the Reps might try to block a SC nominee of Obama's? Surely you know you are just as guilty and have played this game yourself! Maybe you aren't aware of influential Senator Charles Schumer's insistence that the Democratic party attempt to block ANY of George Bush's nominees (should he get the chance to make any) based on the fact that he was a lame duck president. Just for the record, it was 2007 and Bush had 18 MONTHS left on his term. Apparently the press has been trying to contact Schumer to ask why it was OK to do this in 2007, and NOT OK for the Republicans to do it in 2016. From what I hear, he's been strangely silent on the subject. Yes just like the Republicans did to Clinton and the Democrats did to Bush and the Republicans have been doing to Obama. In spite of this each president was, as part of his job requirement, able to fill the spots on the Supreme Court. Even W after he had to replace one candidate with a different one. However for the Speaker of the House to tell the sitting President, who has over 300 days left in office, that they are not going to even bring his choice for Supreme Court justice to the floor for a vote, regardless of who it is, is different and a new low for the Republicans. And sets it up for the Democrats to do the same to a sitting Republican President some time down the road. If McConnell gets away with this now what's to stop this Speaker of the House or those in the future from deciding to do the same thing to another president who has two years left of his term left. You know wait until the people have their say when the next president is elected two years down the road. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 18, 2024 16:18:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2016 1:43:09 GMT
They need to do an autopsy. I feel so bad for his family and 9 kids. He left a great legacy.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 18, 2024 16:18:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2016 1:54:10 GMT
They need to do an autopsy. I feel so bad for his family and 9 kids. He left a great legacy. Please tell me you aren't one of those crackpots who thinks he was murdered? |
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Feb 16, 2016 1:56:39 GMT
Dear Dems: Why are you acting so horrified that the Reps might try to block a SC nominee of Obama's? Surely you know you are just as guilty and have played this game yourself! Maybe you aren't aware of influential Senator Charles Schumer's insistence that the Democratic party attempt to block ANY of George Bush's nominees (should he get the chance to make any) based on the fact that he was a lame duck president. Just for the record, it was 2007 and Bush had 18 MONTHS left on his term. Apparently the press has been trying to contact Schumer to ask why it was OK to do this in 2007, and NOT OK for the Republicans to do it in 2016. From what I hear, he's been strangely silent on the subject. I'm not surprised at all. I would be shocked if they were willing to hold a vote. Short-term, with 8 justices, the outcome of many of these cases will work in my side's favor. Plus, look for Obama to appoint someone who, if not confirmed, can be used during the election to hammer Republican candidates. This is going to be interesting. www.scotusblog.com/2016/02/how-the-politics-of-the-next-nomination-will-pay-out/So even though I hate these games, I'm ok with it. |
|
|
|
Post by bc2ca on Feb 16, 2016 2:34:12 GMT
They need to do an autopsy. I feel so bad for his family and 9 kids. He left a great legacy. He died peacefully in his sleep a month before his 80th birthday. TBH, I'd take that end of life any day over illness or dementia for my parents. I feel bad if the family is having to listen to conspiracy theories while grieving their husband, father & grandfather. |
|
|
|
Post by pierogi on Feb 16, 2016 2:36:00 GMT
Scalia's family were the ones who requested no autopsy. I can't imagine what the conspiracy theories are doing to them.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 18, 2024 16:18:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2016 2:37:31 GMT
They need to do an autopsy. I feel so bad for his family and 9 kids. He left a great legacy. Please tell me you aren't one of those crackpots who thinks he was murdered? Well that was RUDE! |
|
|
|
Post by pierogi on Feb 16, 2016 2:38:43 GMT
They need to do an autopsy. I feel so bad for his family and 9 kids. He left a great legacy. He died peacefully in his sleep a month before his 80th birthday. TBH, I'd take that end of life any day over illness or dementia for my parents. I feel bad if the family is having to listen to conspiracy theories while grieving their husband, father & grandfather. We were posting at the same time.  It's boggling that people find it strange that a 79 year old man who smoked cigars and had health issues passed away. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 18, 2024 16:18:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2016 2:40:38 GMT
They need to do an autopsy. I feel so bad for his family and 9 kids. He left a great legacy. He died peacefully in his sleep a month before his 80th birthday. TBH, I'd take that end of life any day over illness or dementia for my parents. I feel bad if the family is having to listen to conspiracy theories while grieving their husband, father & grandfather. It would just put it all to rest. I am not saying I do believe any conspiracy theories. I feel awful for the family. And I know 80 is older. ( We live forever in our family). But I do believe he left a great legacy behind and I support his family in not wanting an autopsy. Being called a crack pot by the other poster...yah not so much. I am not into conspiracy theories but I AM into treating others with kindness. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 18, 2024 16:18:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2016 2:51:14 GMT
I just read about his health issues. I think I need to sit out of politics with the peas. I don't like getting attacked. I am very political but think it's better for me just to stick to other posts, especially dealing with what I am right now.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 18, 2024 16:18:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2016 2:59:45 GMT
Put what to rest? That an almost 80 year old man that smoked, was overweight and had health issues died in his sleep?
By the way, you weren't attacked...you were asked a question, that is all. Crackpot is the word I use for those conspiracy theorists who think he was murdered. If you don't think that, then you're not a crackpot.
|
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Feb 16, 2016 6:46:40 GMT
Dear Dems: Why are you acting so horrified that the Reps might try to block a SC nominee of Obama's? Surely you know you are just as guilty and have played this game yourself! Maybe you aren't aware of influential Senator Charles Schumer's insistence that the Democratic party attempt to block ANY of George Bush's nominees (should he get the chance to make any) based on the fact that he was a lame duck president. Just for the record, it was 2007 and Bush had 18 MONTHS left on his term. Apparently the press has been trying to contact Schumer to ask why it was OK to do this in 2007, and NOT OK for the Republicans to do it in 2016. From what I hear, he's been strangely silent on the subject. I think I posted upthread that I believe judicial nominees should be routinely confirmed except under extraordinary circumstances. That goes for both parties. In this case, Republicans are behaving badly to begin with and then doubling down by being belligerent about it. |
|
|
|
Post by blondiec47 on Feb 16, 2016 12:04:32 GMT
I was talking with my mom over the weekend and she brought up an interesting point. Scalia was overweight and could have had type 2 diabetes. If so and he was taking one of the new medications it could have caused his heart to stop (it is one of the side effects). Something similar happened to my dad. Either was so sad and my heart goes out to his family.
|
|
|
|
Post by jenis40 on Feb 16, 2016 12:10:33 GMT
My condolences to the Scalia family on the loss of their loved one. I may have disagreed with his decisions, but Justice Scalia provided many years of service to the country and should be commended for his dedication and hard work.
However, I am sick and tired of Congress using obstructionism rather than doing their damn job! I don't care which side does it, knock it off. Schumer was wrong in 2007 and Congressional leadership is wrong now. I am so tired of these people holding the country hostage instead of figuring out how to compromise and actually govern, you know that thing you were elected to do.
|
|
|
|
Post by pierkiss on Feb 16, 2016 14:02:28 GMT
However, I am sick and tired of Congress using obstructionism rather than doing their damn job! I don't care which side does it, knock it off. Schumer was wrong in 2007 and Congressional leadership is wrong now. I am so tired of these people holding the country hostage instead of figuring out how to compromise and actually govern, you know that thing you were elected to do. Yes!!!! This x 1000!!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Feb 16, 2016 14:42:23 GMT
However, I am sick and tired of Congress using obstructionism rather than doing their damn job! I don't care which side does it, knock it off. Schumer was wrong in 2007 and Congressional leadership is wrong now. I am so tired of these people holding the country hostage instead of figuring out how to compromise and actually govern, you know that thing you were elected to do. Yes!!!! This x 1000!!!!! I'll add to that...this x 1,000,000!!!!! |
|
|
|
Post by anxiousmom on Feb 16, 2016 15:16:32 GMT
They need to do an autopsy. I feel so bad for his family and 9 kids. He left a great legacy. He died peacefully in his sleep a month before his 80th birthday. TBH, I'd take that end of life any day over illness or dementia for my parents. I feel bad if the family is having to listen to conspiracy theories while grieving their husband, father & grandfather. I started down the rabbit hole yesterday reading about this...all starting with one tweet from one man who is apparently known for his conspiratorial thoughts where he speculated that the death was perhaps not natural. It has spiraled from there and now there are those that think that President Obama is responsible so that he can nominate 'a Muslim who will force Sharia Law on the US' or that the nominee will be so liberal (read communist or socialist or whatever other ist people think they understand but really don't) that you can kiss your civil rights goodbye and start planning your move to the FEMA camps for your RFD chip. I finally had to stop reading because I simply couldn't wrap my brain around having that kind level of concern over the government the energy that kind negative thinking requires on a day to day basis. |
|
|
|
Post by bc2ca on Feb 16, 2016 17:22:16 GMT
He died peacefully in his sleep a month before his 80th birthday. TBH, I'd take that end of life any day over illness or dementia for my parents. I feel bad if the family is having to listen to conspiracy theories while grieving their husband, father & grandfather. I started down the rabbit hole yesterday reading about this...all starting with one tweet from one man who is apparently known for his conspiratorial thoughts where he speculated that the death was perhaps not natural. It has spiraled from there and now there are those that think that President Obama is responsible so that he can nominate 'a Muslim who will force Sharia Law on the US' or that the nominee will be so liberal (read communist or socialist or whatever other ist people think they understand but really don't) that you can kiss your civil rights goodbye and start planning your move to the FEMA camps for your RFD chip. I finally had to stop reading because I simply couldn't wrap my brain around having that kind level of concern over the government the energy that kind negative thinking requires on a day to day basis. LOL because it will be so easy to get a "Sharia Law enforcing Muslim" approved and confirmed by the Senate  . For me, the biggest surprise was how poor Scalia's health was, especially being considered too weak to undergo rotator cuff/shoulder surgery last week. |
|
|
|
Post by Tamhugh on Feb 17, 2016 2:15:35 GMT
He died peacefully in his sleep a month before his 80th birthday. TBH, I'd take that end of life any day over illness or dementia for my parents. I feel bad if the family is having to listen to conspiracy theories while grieving their husband, father & grandfather. We were posting at the same time. It's boggling that people find it strange that a 79 year old man who smoked cigars and had health issues passed away. Not to mention that he had an incredibly stressful job. That can't be easy on the heart. And I have to agree that if I could choose, I would want to die the same way. |
|
|
|
Post by freecharlie on Feb 17, 2016 2:34:39 GMT
He died peacefully in his sleep a month before his 80th birthday. TBH, I'd take that end of life any day over illness or dementia for my parents. I feel bad if the family is having to listen to conspiracy theories while grieving their husband, father & grandfather. I started down the rabbit hole yesterday reading about this...all starting with one tweet from one man who is apparently known for his conspiratorial thoughts where he speculated that the death was perhaps not natural. It has spiraled from there and now there are those that think that President Obama is responsible so that he can nominate 'a Muslim who will force Sharia Law on the US' or that the nominee will be so liberal (read communist or socialist or whatever other ist people think they understand but really don't) that you can kiss your civil rights goodbye and start planning your move to the FEMA camps for your RFD chip. I finally had to stop reading because I simply couldn't wrap my brain around having that kind level of concern over the government the energy that kind negative thinking requires on a day to day basis. I know people IRL like this. It boggles my mind. |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 18, 2024 16:18:31 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 17, 2016 4:57:28 GMT
He died peacefully in his sleep a month before his 80th birthday. TBH, I'd take that end of life any day over illness or dementia for my parents. I feel bad if the family is having to listen to conspiracy theories while grieving their husband, father & grandfather. I started down the rabbit hole yesterday reading about this...all starting with one tweet from one man who is apparently known for his conspiratorial thoughts where he speculated that the death was perhaps not natural. It has spiraled from there and now there are those that think that President Obama is responsible so that he can nominate 'a Muslim who will force Sharia Law on the US' or that the nominee will be so liberal (read communist or socialist or whatever other ist people think they understand but really don't) that you can kiss your civil rights goodbye and start planning your move to the FEMA camps for your RFD chip. I finally had to stop reading because I simply couldn't wrap my brain around having that kind level of concern over the government the energy that kind negative thinking requires on a day to day basis. And for the love of all that is holy that is not me. But there are some things that ARE happening and people are blind. Not conspiracy theories though. Things in plain sight. |
|
My original pea date was November 1999 and my number was 1803
It's boggling that people find it strange that a 79 year old man who smoked cigars and had health issues passed away.
.