Another Republican breaks ranks on Scalia replacement.

Jarod

Jarod

Well-known member
Contributor
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) a Republican Member of the Judiciary Committee said refusing a vote before an appointment is even made is simply obstructionist.

"I think we fall into the trap, if we just simply say [no], sight unseen, we fall into the trap of being obstructionist," Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said in a radio interview Tuesday, first reported by ThinkProgress.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/thom-tillis-supreme-court-nominee_us_56c3702be4b0b40245c8173f


We got two Republican members of the Judiciary Committee out today calling Mitch McConnell OUT!

Looks like the Republicans are slowly starting to Cave on their leadership's hasty political comments made at the time of the announcement of Scalia's death.
 
I think the White House is right, the Republican Senate is starting to fold!
 
Jarod said:
I think the White House is right, the Republican Senate is starting to fold!
Click to expand...


There's too many Republicans in the Senate worried about losing their seat come November.

As long as Obama nominates someone who isn't a complete leftwing kook, they will have NO CHOICE but to hold a vote.

And like it or not, there WILL be a few Republican Senators who won't want to be viewed as just party stooges and who will vote to confirm.
 
Senator Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa and chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said Tuesday that he had not ruled out holding hearings on President Obama’s eventual nominee to replace Justice Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court.

“I would wait until the nominee is made before I would make any decisions,” Mr. Grassley said, according to Radio Iowa. “This is a very serious position to fill and it should be filled and debated during the campaign and filled by either Hillary Clinton, Senator Sanders or whoever’s nominated by the Republicans.”

The remarks seemed to be a step back from Mr. Grassley’s statement on Saturday, in which he concurred with Senator Mitch McConnell, the majority leader, and several other Republican senators, who said the vacancy ought to be filled by the next president.


http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/17/us/politics/senator-charles-grassley-hearings-supreme-court-nominee.html?_r=0
 
ZappasGuitar said:
There's too many Republicans in the Senate worried about losing their seat come November.

As long as Obama nominates someone who isn't a complete leftwing kook, they will have NO CHOICE but to hold a vote.

And like it or not, there WILL be a few Republican Senators who won't want to be viewed as just party stooges and who will vote to confirm.
Click to expand...

What else would you expect a leftwing kook to nominate but a leftwing kook.

I bet the Democrat Senators will be stooges for Obama regardless of who he picks. Your problem is as long as they vote for Obama's pick, they're OK. If they vote no, you believe they're wrong and it doesn't matter who it is.
 
Jarod said:
I think the White House is right, the Republican Senate is starting to fold!
Click to expand...

Thats how it usually goes......tough talk from Republicans and then they cave in to the Democrats.....

Dems call that negotiating....if the Reps ever don't fold, they call that obstruction.....
 
I can understand the hesitation to talk about nominees and especially to vote on one. You have a president that is basically a lame duck with less than a year left in office. You have national elections coming up in the fall including for president. With those elections we will see which direction the country is truly leaning towards with power shifts possible in the White House and congress. And with all that considered you have a Supreme Court nominee that will lean left or right for the rest of their lives unless something happens on a personal level in the unknown future. Enormous stakes for both sides. For me I can completely understand and see why people would want to wait until after the election.
 
Cowgirl Tuff said:
I can understand the hesitation to talk about nominees and especially to vote on one. You have a president that is basically a lame duck with less than a year left in office. You have national elections coming up in the fall including for president. With those elections we will see which direction the country is truly leaning towards with power shifts possible in the White House and congress. And with all that considered you have a Supreme Court nominee that will lean left or right for the rest of their lives unless something happens on a personal level in the unknown future. Enormous stakes for both sides. For me I can completely understand and see why people would want to wait until after the election.
Click to expand...

Sure I also understand why, but that's not how our system is designed to work.
 
CFM said:
What else would you expect a leftwing kook to nominate but a leftwing kook.

I bet the Democrat Senators will be stooges for Obama regardless of who he picks. Your problem is as long as they vote for Obama's pick, they're OK. If they vote no, you believe they're wrong and it doesn't matter who it is.
Click to expand...

I agree with you as long as each senator is on record with a vote, I'll be happy.
 
Jarod said:
Sure I also understand why, but that's not how our system is designed to work.
Click to expand...

Our system says the President nominates and the Senate denies or confirms. Is there a timeline of how our system is supposed to work?
 
CFM said:
Our system says the President nominates and the Senate denies or confirms. Is there a timeline of how our system is supposed to work?
Click to expand...

Nothing in writing - but you could use that to justify any length of time. A Dem Congress could stonewall a GOP President for his entire term referencing that kind of logic.

There is a court vacancy right now. The current President is in office until January of 2017. There is ample time to name & confirm a replacement to fill the vacancy. Every current justice on the court was confirmed in much less time.
 
CFM said:
Our system says the President nominates and the Senate denies or confirms. Is there a timeline of how our system is supposed to work?
Click to expand...

I think the founders expected timing would be reasonable, they expected our leaders to be statesmen.
 
Thing1 said:
Nothing in writing - but you could use that to justify any length of time. A Dem Congress could stonewall a GOP President for his entire term referencing that kind of logic.

There is a court vacancy right now. The current President is in office until January of 2017. There is ample time to name & confirm a replacement to fill the vacancy. Every current justice on the court was confirmed in much less time.
Click to expand...

If the R'sstone wall for 10 months.... Let the voters decide if that was reasonable!
 
Jarod said:
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) a Republican Member of the Judiciary Committee said refusing a vote before an appointment is even made is simply obstructionist.

"I think we fall into the trap, if we just simply say [no], sight unseen, we fall into the trap of being obstructionist," Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) said in a radio interview Tuesday, first reported by ThinkProgress.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/thom-tillis-supreme-court-nominee_us_56c3702be4b0b40245c8173f


We got two Republican members of the Judiciary Committee out today calling Mitch McConnell OUT!

Looks like the Republicans are slowly starting to Cave on their leadership's hasty political comments made at the time of the announcement of Scalia's death.
Click to expand...

When are you going to call out Obama and Schumer?
 
NOVA said:
Thats how it usually goes......tough talk from Republicans and then they cave in to the Democrats.....

Dems call that negotiating....if the Reps ever don't fold, they call that obstruction.....
Click to expand...

ITs because they shoot their mouths off before thinking about it, then they go back to their offices and look at it and say, "Oh, shit, that plan sucks, we will get slaughtered at the polls if we do that, its not what the American people want."
 
Cowgirl Tuff said:
I can understand the hesitation to talk about nominees and especially to vote on one. You have a president that is basically a lame duck with less than a year left in office. You have national elections coming up in the fall including for president. With those elections we will see which direction the country is truly leaning towards with power shifts possible in the White House and congress. And with all that considered you have a Supreme Court nominee that will lean left or right for the rest of their lives unless something happens on a personal level in the unknown future. Enormous stakes for both sides. For me I can completely understand and see why people would want to wait until after the election.
Click to expand...

yeah because they hate the democratic party in this country.


wanting to?


they don't have the RIGHT to put this off



Scalia said when he was alive that this congress needs to stoop blocking all of Obamas nominees.



he republicans wont let Obamas nominees for any courts get through.


our courts are way backlogged


the current republican party is trying to cripple this nation in punishment for the people not giving them power.



republicans say government doesn't work


then they get in office and prove it
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top