Republiacn Senators ask Obama to violate the Constitution!

Jarod

Jarod

Well-known member
Contributor
Article II Section 2.

The President shall nominate Judges of the supreme Court.


It does not say that the president should, can or might nominate Judges of the Supreme Court... it says SHALL..


Now you have the Republican leader of the Senate calling for Obama to chose not to appoint a judge. You have Republican canididates, including strict constructionists, and self described defenders of "original intent" saying that the President should NOT appoint a judge.


I thought they claimed to be the ones demanding the Constitution be followed.... Shows how full of SHIT they are.
 
Jarod said:
Article II Section 2.
The President shall nominate Judges of the supreme Court.

It does not say that the president should, can or might nominate Judges of the Supreme Court... it says SHALL..

Now you have the Republican leader of the Senate calling for Obama to chose not to appoint a judge. You have Republican canididates, including strict constructionists, and self described defenders of "original intent" saying that the President should NOT appoint a judge.

I thought they claimed to be the ones demanding the Constitution be followed.... Shows how full of SHIT they are.
Click to expand...

Excellent. Now let's give them a few minutes to rev up the spin machine. :D
 
evince said:
but did you see the color of Obamas skin?
Click to expand...

And I'm going to tell you that has nothing whatsoever to do with it. Nothing. I get so tired of this tired response to everything anti-Obama. How abou you ask the "cons" if they'd like for Ben Carson to appoint a judge? Maybe JJ Watts? Allen West? The "color of their skin" has so little to do with the real reason you would prefer Obama pick one and I would prefer any of those I mentioned to pick one. But you can't admit to that. Maybe you can't see it. But your sad refrain of "racism" as the reason we disagree is just getting old.
 
McConnell's announcement, hours after Justice Scalia's death and before President Obama had even the slightest chance to nominate anyone, shows the true depths to which Republicans will sink to in order to obstruct the normal operation of the government, and their intention to strong-arm the People into a government run by a single party.

We had a rubber-stamp Republican government. It's what took us into the worst recession since the Great Depression, got us into two illegal quagmire wars, gave birth to ISIS, destabilized the middle east beyond repair, and made the world a more dangerous place.

The idea is for the government to have checks and balances between its branches. Republican obstructionism and outright contempt for the Constitution and the People is exactly the kind of thing to watch if you're waiting to see a new Totalitarian state rise out of the Oligarchy that currently is (and used to be) the Republic that the US hasn't been for a long, long time.
 
Last edited:
leaningright said:
And I'm going to tell you that has nothing whatsoever to do with it. Nothing. I get so tired of this tired response to everything anti-Obama. How abou you ask the "cons" if they'd like for Ben Carson to appoint a judge? Maybe JJ Watts? Allen West? The "color of their skin" has so little to do with the real reason you would prefer Obama pick one and I would prefer any of those I mentioned to pick one. But you can't admit to that. Maybe you can't see it. But your sad refrain of "racism" as the reason we disagree is just getting old.
Click to expand...

I've never mentioned race when it comes to this, myself, because I also believe it goes much further than the color of the President's skin.

So cutting that out of the equation, I'd be interested to know what your thoughts are on why the Republican party has followed so vociferously a pattern of practically pathological inaction and obstruction even when it damages our credibility world-wide, further threatens our economy, keeps jobs from rising and endangers the livelihoods of the population of the country.

What, in your opinion, is the cause of clear and blatant Contempt of the People that the Republicans have had on display for the entirety of President Obama's tenure in office?
 
leaningright said:
And I'm going to tell you that has nothing whatsoever to do with it. Nothing. I get so tired of this tired response to everything anti-Obama. How abou you ask the "cons" if they'd like for Ben Carson to appoint a judge? Maybe JJ Watts? Allen West? The "color of their skin" has so little to do with the real reason you would prefer Obama pick one and I would prefer any of those I mentioned to pick one. But you can't admit to that. Maybe you can't see it. But your sad refrain of "racism" as the reason we disagree is just getting old.
Click to expand...

I have to agree with you here. Its not the color of his skin.

It is the way the thinks and his priorities, which are generally indicative of the priorities of those who share his skin color. This is not racism, and to call it racism is, I believe harmful. Don't get me wrong, I believe there are plenty of racists who hate President Obama because of his skin color, but most hate him for his ideas. They treated President Clinton as badly as they treat President Obama. President shared many of the ideas and priorities of President Obama, and while Clinton is white, his politics are more closely shared by a larger percentage of African Americans.

Its the way of thinking they hate.


Opposing President Obama's nominee, before he names one, is the epitome of harmful politics, but its where we are as a nation today. Its clear this is not about the nominee, but the President himself.

It used to be that a nominee's qualifications to be a judge were what was important when comfirming on rejecting a proposed nominee, this Senate has done away with even the pretense of that. In my opinion it is the Constitutional obligation of the Senate to consider any nominee the president appoints. It is the obligation of the Senate to hold a vote, but it is not the obligation of the Senate to support the nominee or to vote for him/her.
 
they are the enemies of the people

the people chose THIS president TWICE


they refuse to let the peoples choice decide.


they are traitors to this nation
 
Celticguy said:
It doesn't say when. Besides it was dems that passed the resolution for no election year appointments.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about, when was a resolution passed about election year appointments?

I think you are making something up...
 
evince said:
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/senate-resolution/334


S.Res.334 - A resolution congratulating the Pennsylvania State University women's soccer team for winning the 2015 National Collegiate Athletic Association Soccer Championship.
114th Congress (2015-2016) | Get alerts
Click to expand...

NO, he is talking about a resolution from 1960 where the Senate asked Eisenhower not to make a recess appointment. It has nothing to do with election year appointments. They are grasping at straws.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top