I have always admired the American system of governance but most importantly the representatives commitment and desire to Honour the intention of their Constitution. However, that feeling of awe has just been undermined by the action of the Republican representatives to dishonor that intention. If you think that you are the leader of the free world, I guess you have to think again because all the world is watching how you treat a non-white presidency, not just elect one for show.
2
Lol, that picture of those four GOP stalwarts is worth a thousand words to describe the Republican Party . Here's a few....prissy, old ,White and out of touch .
This insanity is a call, a challenge, to progressive Democrats and even moderate Republicans, to work extra hard not only to elect a Democratic President, but to work to change both houses of Congress to Democrat. The Republicans now in power are bankrupt morally, intellectually, politically and every other way. They do NOT believe in the Constitution, clearly. They do NOT care for the democratic principles we are supposed to be based upon. The days of honest collaboration and negotiation are a distant memory; may they return. I'm not asking for uniform thinking and action; just fairness and a collaborative approach to running the country.
So, we must all work very hard to rid Congress of the current GOP very sick lot, so they cannot continue to block the work of this nation. They have done enough damage to this country by their obstinate opposition to everything Obama has tried to do, and this is the final straw! Please, sign up wherever you can to work to defeat those kinds of Republicans at every level of government, especially Congress!
So, we must all work very hard to rid Congress of the current GOP very sick lot, so they cannot continue to block the work of this nation. They have done enough damage to this country by their obstinate opposition to everything Obama has tried to do, and this is the final straw! Please, sign up wherever you can to work to defeat those kinds of Republicans at every level of government, especially Congress!
2
These Republicans make the voters who vote for them look like silly idiots Americans vote people into Congress to NOT do any work on the Tax Payer's dollar. It's like...if your got a fool that votes for you...Bump his head...Hard. There are 36 Republican seats coming up in 2016...its time to get rid of those destroyers of America and of the Constitution...fast.
1
This partisan nonsense began with Bork. While Mitch McConnell's actions are sickening, the democrats would probably do the same kind of political gamesmanship. It amazes me how much the political establishment is clueless about the voters' feelings about their government. That the republicans truly believed another Bush could have possibly won the White House, or that the democrats believe we voters are happy about more years of Clinton drama, or that McConnell believes that his brand of political obstructionism is acceptable to we citizens anymore is astonishing to me. Are they that out of touch? Or do they just believe that most of us don't care enough nowadays?
I never thought this would happen here, but it is situations like this that lead to military coups. Why? Eventually, people will lose patience with antics like this and ask the military to intercede, or the military themselves will intercede and restore the Constitutional rule of law. When the legislative branch sabotages the system, especially the Judicial system, defies the Constitution, essentially declaring themselves beyond the law and accountability, who else can do the job that will need to be done? And it will eventually need to be done, that much the Republican party has made clear. They are in open rebellion.
1
I really think this is the beginning of the end for the Republicans.
2
It is heartening to see nearly 5,000 citizens concerned enough to comment about this bridge-too-far of Republican obstructionism, the saga of which I am sure will live in infamy for the current crop of Republicans in Congress. The U.S. Capitol has become nothing more than a Republican think-tank. Republicans do not wish to serve the people of America, just their party. Surely their behavior is criminal.
I cannot read every comment, so I do not know if someone already has asked whether the President's civil rights are being violated. The Constitution gives the President the right to nominate a justice; implicitly, that right entails that the nomination will be acknowledged by Congress. I hope the NY Times can pass the question to an attorney. The President's rights are clearly Constitutionally derived, but those rights are being arbitrarily usurped by Republican Party decree. I believe we have a civil case with good standing.
I cannot read every comment, so I do not know if someone already has asked whether the President's civil rights are being violated. The Constitution gives the President the right to nominate a justice; implicitly, that right entails that the nomination will be acknowledged by Congress. I hope the NY Times can pass the question to an attorney. The President's rights are clearly Constitutionally derived, but those rights are being arbitrarily usurped by Republican Party decree. I believe we have a civil case with good standing.
1
The shame of it is, these folks will not be recalled and most of them are secure in the states that sent them to DC. McConnell was just re-elected. The problem is that by not doing their job they are holding the rest of the country hostage. Censure is too good for them. This truly seems to be a constitutional crisis, since any lawsuit would end up in the Supreme Court. They have finally broken our government. Time for a revolution I fear.
4
Oh, how the newbies over-react. You sound like me when it became clear that George McGovern was not gonna be in the white house.
While McConnell has abjectly failed time after time to represent the half of the country infuriated by Mr. Obama's lawless behavior, he merely repeats the statements of numerous Democrats. But I'm nor sure you even know who they are.
Harry Reid, Charles Schumer, and even Sen. Obama came out for NOT allowing an outgoing President the chance to fill an empty seat on the Supreme Court. They said such things 18 months before the President elected by the people was due to leave office.
LX you cheat yourself by not reading up on the recent past, or even further back. Anyone graduating from an American or other high school since 1975 was not given any real sense of American history at all. But fixing that problem is now up to you.
Even the sites Slate & HuffPost are too radicalized to be the place you start your news reading. This Times site is worth the price and these people only allow political convictions to infect SOME of the writijng here.
Stick with the newspapers and switch back and forth between CNN and Fox News sites to get a sense of how far apart opinions range. But MediaMatters, Liars & Cheats, AltNet, MoveOne, Kos, and a hundred others are actively trying to inflame your feelings more than inform you. You should wonder about that.
While McConnell has abjectly failed time after time to represent the half of the country infuriated by Mr. Obama's lawless behavior, he merely repeats the statements of numerous Democrats. But I'm nor sure you even know who they are.
Harry Reid, Charles Schumer, and even Sen. Obama came out for NOT allowing an outgoing President the chance to fill an empty seat on the Supreme Court. They said such things 18 months before the President elected by the people was due to leave office.
LX you cheat yourself by not reading up on the recent past, or even further back. Anyone graduating from an American or other high school since 1975 was not given any real sense of American history at all. But fixing that problem is now up to you.
Even the sites Slate & HuffPost are too radicalized to be the place you start your news reading. This Times site is worth the price and these people only allow political convictions to infect SOME of the writijng here.
Stick with the newspapers and switch back and forth between CNN and Fox News sites to get a sense of how far apart opinions range. But MediaMatters, Liars & Cheats, AltNet, MoveOne, Kos, and a hundred others are actively trying to inflame your feelings more than inform you. You should wonder about that.
1
I wish I could send a letter saying I won't do my job and still get paid.
4
The people who took the House and then the Senate away from the Dems feel that Mr. Obama quit trying to do his leadership job by the beginning of 2011. Actual leaders - and 40+ Presidents - were trying to strike compromises with the opposition ALL THE TIME that they were President.
NO-body counted on having their side running the Congress.
NO-body counted on having their side running the Congress.
1
I only just now obliged myself to read the actual letter by what turns out to be the Illiterate Eleven - Senators Grassley, Hatch, Sessions, Graham, Cornyn, Lee, Cruz, Flake, Vitter, Perdue, and Tillis.
And to them I say: If you wanted to even come close to trying for credibility, you wouldn't go reading a word like "shall" and come up with "may." In what Constitution in what parallel universe y'all seem to be livin' in did you find a sentence saying "The President may nominate judges of the Supreme Court"? Man, you guys [sic] are a piece of work.
My suggestion: Plead illiteracy. It's better, holier, than intention deception or self-serving misrepresentation.
And to them I say: If you wanted to even come close to trying for credibility, you wouldn't go reading a word like "shall" and come up with "may." In what Constitution in what parallel universe y'all seem to be livin' in did you find a sentence saying "The President may nominate judges of the Supreme Court"? Man, you guys [sic] are a piece of work.
My suggestion: Plead illiteracy. It's better, holier, than intention deception or self-serving misrepresentation.
7
We can solve this problem once and for all. Never ever vote for another Republican. Start your own party. Vote anything but Republican. I decided this after years of voting Republican when it became apparent that it had become the party of negative self interest and obstruction. Its been that way since 1948 when Republicans saw an opportunity to pursue racist southern Democrats. The parties switched sides as Republicans gave up Lincoln for Jefferson Davis to get votes, as Democrats took the risk of promoting civil rights. I will take civil rights over racists any day for a better nation.
7
Your headline would be more accurate if you said that the presidents nominees will not be considered, rather them that they will be rejected.
2
Oops...you forgot something....The Republicans are the MAJORITY in Congress....the process is, as THe Constitution framed the process.
1
Glad to hear you support the Constitution. Correct. The President *shall* nominate, and then the Senate does its thing in relation to advice and consent [or does not consent]. So far, the Senate has not *done* anything as a body. Rather, outside the framework of the Senate as a decision-making body, *some* Senators have made some nearly illiterate and self-righteous remarks about their plans. Once the President nominates, let's see the Senate actually do something official.
4
The decision over the nomination of the next Supreme Court Justice, if put on hold by obstructionists Republicans, will then be made by the voters this November. From the looks of it, this does not bode well for the GOP. They are in disarray with the possibility they will be harnessed with the albatross of Trump weighing them down in the Fall. This won't help. The potential for a terrible lose-lose faces Republicans come 2017.
As this gridlock plays out for the rest of the year the recalcitrant Republicans will devolve into utter chaos as the public sees in full light that they have blocked everything this president has proposed.. Until the GOP is shrunk to a the size of a baby in a tub, as Grover Norquist enjoys saying, and drowned, then and only then will this nation be able to right its keel and move ahead.
DD
Manhattan
As this gridlock plays out for the rest of the year the recalcitrant Republicans will devolve into utter chaos as the public sees in full light that they have blocked everything this president has proposed.. Until the GOP is shrunk to a the size of a baby in a tub, as Grover Norquist enjoys saying, and drowned, then and only then will this nation be able to right its keel and move ahead.
DD
Manhattan
3
Article II of the Constitution, Section II: (with regards to the President) "He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law."
The man that we elected is sworn to uphold this article. To those who would oppose, I see as un American and a shame on this country. I only hope that come November, the majority will see this rogue group as the scoundrels that they are and remove them, one and all.
The man that we elected is sworn to uphold this article. To those who would oppose, I see as un American and a shame on this country. I only hope that come November, the majority will see this rogue group as the scoundrels that they are and remove them, one and all.
5
For seven years we have been told repeatedly that Presidenrt Obama hates America. But today the curtain was drawn back, revealing that it is Senator McConnell and Senator Grassley who hate America. The remarkable thing is how gleefully they pulled that curtain aside to step out in front of it and reveal their true feelings toward America, its Constitution, and its people. Small venal men who have let Citizens United embold them to forsake the Constitution which they vowed to uphold.
6
If it was wise to wait previously for Obama, Schumer, Reid and Biden when Dems had majority in Congress and a Republican President, it is wise to wait now. Obama has done enough damage. Let's see who is running things after Jan 20, 2017. Maybe the candidate with the highest untrustworthiness ever for a candidate will win and Dems can stack the court in their favor. Hopefully, though we will have a trustworthy Presidendt and a new justice that believes in the US Constitution and that the people who wrote meant every word they put in it.
1
This, above all else: Bork unto others as ye would have them Bork unto you. And it must follow, as the air of scandal ineluctably follows Hillary, that to no Grand Jury can you then be false. Nay, do not saw the air too much with your mendacities, Democrats, nor strain to explain what "is" is.
1
Articles of impeachment should be prepared for McConnell and whatever cronies are of his are perpetrating this crime. This is treasonous.
5
Hey Mitch:
Instead of giving authoritarian candidates and their voting base more evidence that negotiating is a sign of weakness, how about showing them what the founding fathers envisioned? Hint: its not obstructionism. No one cares about ideology outside of the beltway. Show them why we have a congress.
Instead of giving authoritarian candidates and their voting base more evidence that negotiating is a sign of weakness, how about showing them what the founding fathers envisioned? Hint: its not obstructionism. No one cares about ideology outside of the beltway. Show them why we have a congress.
1
Recently in Oregon, the federal building at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge was illegally occupied for 41 days.
The 23 men and two women who occupied the reserve are now facing felony charges for conspiracy to impede an officer of the United States. That federal criminal statute has a maximum penalty of six years.
Prosecutors need only prove that two or more of the defendants agreed to prevent some federal employee from discharging his or her duty by force, intimidation or threat. Prosecutors don't have to prove they were successful.
It appears that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, several Republican candidates, and many Republican Senators are collaborating to prevent other federal officials (the President and Senators) from doing their job by saying there would not even be a hearing of a nominee to fill Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s vacant seat.
It used to be hard to prove what defendants agreed to do, but this is 2016. The airwaves and social media are chock-full of their own words: statements in press interviews, statements in videos posted to YouTube, statements in widely distributed emails. It's enough to make a defense attorney weep.
The Senate Judiciary Committee (which includes Democrats and Republicans) should either lead, follow, get out of the way, or be prosecuted for conspiracy to impede an officer of the United States.
The 23 men and two women who occupied the reserve are now facing felony charges for conspiracy to impede an officer of the United States. That federal criminal statute has a maximum penalty of six years.
Prosecutors need only prove that two or more of the defendants agreed to prevent some federal employee from discharging his or her duty by force, intimidation or threat. Prosecutors don't have to prove they were successful.
It appears that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, several Republican candidates, and many Republican Senators are collaborating to prevent other federal officials (the President and Senators) from doing their job by saying there would not even be a hearing of a nominee to fill Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s vacant seat.
It used to be hard to prove what defendants agreed to do, but this is 2016. The airwaves and social media are chock-full of their own words: statements in press interviews, statements in videos posted to YouTube, statements in widely distributed emails. It's enough to make a defense attorney weep.
The Senate Judiciary Committee (which includes Democrats and Republicans) should either lead, follow, get out of the way, or be prosecuted for conspiracy to impede an officer of the United States.
10
Either Mitch McConnell plans to short stock in the GOP, or he has secretly placed a big bet on Democrats to win in November, because this will SURELY make Democrats vote in droves. Political suicide for McConnell...
2
Democrats voting in droves would sure be a novelty, eh? Ask Bernie, after they chose not to vote in droves on his behalf in Nevada. Self-inflicted "voter suppression."
1
Excuse me? The Republican Senators, whose sworn duty is to uphold the Constitution and to give it advice and consent to nominees for the Supreme Court, has written and signed a pledge that they will hold no confirmation hearings and not vote to fill the seat left vacant by Scalia’s death?
Is this the way to honor the man they mourn, the man who so eloquently espoused adherence to the intent of the Founding Fathers? Is this the way to perform their sworn constitutional duties? How can they possibly know that they oppose a nominee before he or she is nominated?
Why do they wish to demonstrate yet again that they are the Party of No, that they do not understand what it means to govern?
When I taught a government course in high school, I required my students to memorize a definition of the word compromise: an agreement in which both sides give up something for the good of the whole. I taught them that compromising was an essential part of governing and that the Founding Fathers made compromises when they framed the Constitution, the most egregious being the Three-Fifths Compromise. Without it in 1788, the South would never have ratified the Constitution.
The senators’ refusal to meet with the President to explore the names of candidates to replace Antonin Scalia is a blatant abdication of their constitutional duties.
Is this the way to honor the man they mourn, the man who so eloquently espoused adherence to the intent of the Founding Fathers? Is this the way to perform their sworn constitutional duties? How can they possibly know that they oppose a nominee before he or she is nominated?
Why do they wish to demonstrate yet again that they are the Party of No, that they do not understand what it means to govern?
When I taught a government course in high school, I required my students to memorize a definition of the word compromise: an agreement in which both sides give up something for the good of the whole. I taught them that compromising was an essential part of governing and that the Founding Fathers made compromises when they framed the Constitution, the most egregious being the Three-Fifths Compromise. Without it in 1788, the South would never have ratified the Constitution.
The senators’ refusal to meet with the President to explore the names of candidates to replace Antonin Scalia is a blatant abdication of their constitutional duties.
2
This is what the constitution says: forget Mc Connell says:
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any Subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
2
MITCH MC CONNEL DECISION is really stupid, since the next president is going to be a democrat, so the next democratic president is going to elect the supreme justice successor to Scalia
2
Judge Sullivan and FBI Director Comey first have to work out the plea bargain with David Kendall on his client's behalf. Doubtful she'll win, and sub-basement expectations if she does, based on her general cluelessness, and age.
I would, ideally, like to see Obama appoint a qualified jurist that is a true progressive but I, a lifelong Democrat, could content myself with a great jurist of moderate views.
If the Republican Senate wanted to impress their constituents, they would work with Obama to appoint a candidate that would serve Democrats, Republicans and the whole country.
You know, do their jobs as the constitution mandates.
And this: why can Congress declare they will not enact any legislation of substance and abrogate their S.Court approval duties but still get a pay check. Most folks who declare they aren't going to do their jobs don't get paid.
If the Republican Senate wanted to impress their constituents, they would work with Obama to appoint a candidate that would serve Democrats, Republicans and the whole country.
You know, do their jobs as the constitution mandates.
And this: why can Congress declare they will not enact any legislation of substance and abrogate their S.Court approval duties but still get a pay check. Most folks who declare they aren't going to do their jobs don't get paid.
4
"G.O.P. Senators Say Obama Supreme Court Pick Will Be Rejected"
Who is that pick again? Has the President announced his pick and the NYT failed to print the name? Have those nasty Republicans rejected the President's pick?
Who is that pick again? Has the President announced his pick and the NYT failed to print the name? Have those nasty Republicans rejected the President's pick?
1
With an 8-person Supreme Court, I'm curious to know what would happen if in November 2016 we encounter a situation similar to that in Florida in 2000 (that led to Bush v. Gore), when the Supreme Court, by a 5-4 vote, effectively appointed George W. Bush president.
1
Not so fast, amigo. Gore's campaign demanded that SCOTUS review the decision of the Florida Supreme Court upholding the Bush win of 97,000 votes, courtesy of Ralph Nader. SCOTUS acceded to Gore's demand. On review they simply upheld the decision of the Florida Supreme Court. In the NYT video overview of Judge Scalia's 10 biggest opinions, he laughs about the irony of Gore's unwarranted insistence on SCOTUS review. It's just a few clicks away from here.
3
They say they won't meet with an Obama nominee. Nominate The Pope. They'll meet with him. And he probably already has the robes.
1
This is Jim Crow racism at its worst. These Republican Senators are a disgrace to America and all the principles this Country was founded upon and that many have died for.
7
“This nomination will be determined by whoever wins the presidency in the polls,” Mr. McConnell said.
Um, Senator McConnell, I couldn't agree more, and a President has already been elected. His name is Barack Obama. The Constitution states that he shall nominate the next Supreme Court justice, so do your duty and let him.
This is not a rejection of a judicial candidate but a rejecction of the the legitimacy of Obama's presidency, and a rejection of the entire idea of a constitutional democracy. After all, the American People elected President Obama twice. We expect the Senate to fulfill it's duty and let the President fulfill his.
This is one more reason I will never, ever, vote for a Republican for any office from neighborhood parking commissioner to President. There is no leadership or sense of governing left in the GOP. Only anger, obstructionism, and I'm-taking -my-ball-and-going-home-if-you-won't-play-my-way. Leave that in the playground, where it is still wrong, but at least developmentally appropriate.
Um, Senator McConnell, I couldn't agree more, and a President has already been elected. His name is Barack Obama. The Constitution states that he shall nominate the next Supreme Court justice, so do your duty and let him.
This is not a rejection of a judicial candidate but a rejecction of the the legitimacy of Obama's presidency, and a rejection of the entire idea of a constitutional democracy. After all, the American People elected President Obama twice. We expect the Senate to fulfill it's duty and let the President fulfill his.
This is one more reason I will never, ever, vote for a Republican for any office from neighborhood parking commissioner to President. There is no leadership or sense of governing left in the GOP. Only anger, obstructionism, and I'm-taking -my-ball-and-going-home-if-you-won't-play-my-way. Leave that in the playground, where it is still wrong, but at least developmentally appropriate.
8
Brooklyn sounds like me in '72. What I learned is that the guys I trusted lied to me worse than anyone else. Don't carve today's opinions in stone because Churchill already told us about how our worldview changes as we mature.
Check what Harry Reid & Charles Schumer - AND Barack! - have said about not letting Presidents get a vote on nominations in the past. BHO helped filibuster the Alito nomination.
Remember all these ''sources'' who have not told you any of this.
Check what Harry Reid & Charles Schumer - AND Barack! - have said about not letting Presidents get a vote on nominations in the past. BHO helped filibuster the Alito nomination.
Remember all these ''sources'' who have not told you any of this.
1
They say they won't meet with an Obama nominee. Nominate Netanyahu. They'll meet with him. And he hasn't been in the papers for months. He'll meet with them.
6
There is a big difference between Biden saying it would be good to wait until after the elections are over before nominating a justice to the supreme court, and the Republicans insisting that the president not nominate one at all, and instead allow the next president to nominate one. It appears that Biden was allowing the chaos of the elections to subside before adding a potentially divisive issue to the public debate. In contrast, the Republicans are simply insisting on getting a chance to nominate their own replacement.
4
Anarchy | Definition of Anarchy by Merriam-Webster
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anarchy
Merriam‑Webster
Full Definition of anarchy. 1 a : absence of government b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority
When I refuse to do my job - they fire me.
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anarchy
Merriam‑Webster
Full Definition of anarchy. 1 a : absence of government b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority
When I refuse to do my job - they fire me.
2
The swing vote in the Supreme Court can end this constitutional crisis by himself. Justice Kennedy can simply declare that our Constitution to which the Senate is subject is more important for the future of our country than partisan politics and holding the Supreme Court hostage and that until Justice Scalia's seat is filled by an Obama nominee he shall vote on every issue (which the GOP Senate Republicans expect to be tied) with the liberal wing, unless they adhere to their constitutional duty. Otherwise the voters will resolve the issue when a Democratic president sends a nominee to a Democratic Senate which has outlawed the filibuster. . .
1
Look at their work environment, marble everywhere, even the bathrooms, staff, cafeteria, medical healthcare, gym, don't have to pay the bills for any of it, and they just want to get uppity and refuse their obligations. These lackeys need to be taken out behind the wood shed for a lesson or two on how hard it is for an average American to make ends meet and keep a household together. These republicans are despicable and will destroy the party of Lincoln, Roosevelt, and Eisenhower. Vote Democrat in November and keep our great country progressively advancing for all her citizens.
3
Do they really want Donald T. to pick the next Supreme Court Judge? Honestly?
1
Has a majority of the Senate announced their collective agreement to abrogate their constitutional right to participate in the selection of the next justice? It appears that the President can now appoint the next justice without Senate confirmation. This announcement is an abandonment of their right and the logical conclusion is that the balance of the obligation remains: the President shall appoint.
1
There is nothing new or remarkable about this! Obstruction by the GOP has been going on for years!
3
Coming up on 5000 comments most illustrating pure ignorance. The government is working exactly how the designers wanted it to work three co-equal branches. Maybe some of y'all should educate yourselves on our form of government.
2
Liberalism is a religion. It's not supposed to make sense.
2
If a Democrat becomes our next president, what will prevent Republicans from refusing to hold hearings for that president's Supreme Court nominations?
3
This is treason against ....we the people....and it we who are lacking
representation because of obstruction of our rights to governance.
Refusal to abide by the oath of office as a Senator...should be impeachment
To NOT uphold the laws which are sworn to by oath...is ..breaking the law.
and
Therefore, Mitch McConnell and those who refuse to uphold the US
Constitution...should be kicked out of office......Mutiny has never been
rewarded...so...
KICK THEM OUT OF CONGRESS...plain and simple ASAP..
representation because of obstruction of our rights to governance.
Refusal to abide by the oath of office as a Senator...should be impeachment
To NOT uphold the laws which are sworn to by oath...is ..breaking the law.
and
Therefore, Mitch McConnell and those who refuse to uphold the US
Constitution...should be kicked out of office......Mutiny has never been
rewarded...so...
KICK THEM OUT OF CONGRESS...plain and simple ASAP..
2
imagine that....The President actually does something constitutional for a change..i guess he just wants a deciding vote on the court to let him get away with whatever he wants..
1
The republicans have done everything they can to do nothing important for nearly 8 years, why stop now and do something important.
3
When "the people" voted for Congressmen, Senators and the President they DID make a choice. And now the Senate, known more in the last few years for taking long breaks than going to work, should DO their work by holding hearings and voting on Supreme Court Justice.
7
Perhaps Amendment XIV Section 3 allows removal of the recalcitrant Senators, if their actions can be construed to be insurrection.
3
Obama has brought this on himself with his executive orders. He has treated Congress like they don't exist. Because of his arrogance and his lack of any meaningful work experience, he does not know how to make a deal with the opposition. Besides, when Bush was a lame duck, Joe Biden pushed very hard to role over a Supreme Court nomination to the next President. What is good for the goose is good for the gander!
1
Obama Exec Orders 2009-2016: 233. Bush Exec Orders 2001-2009: 292. Source: Federal Register https://www.federalregister.gov/executive-orders
Obama Signing Statements: 31. Bush Signing Statements : 130
Source: http://www.coherentbabble.com/latest.htm
Obama Signing Statements: 31. Bush Signing Statements : 130
Source: http://www.coherentbabble.com/latest.htm
2
Oh, you liberals and your facts!
2
I'd like to see Obama appoint Anita Hill for the Supreme Court. Maybe that would wake up Clarence Thomas.
4
As I staff restaurants, I would like to view this from a human resources perspective.
I'd like to view this from a staff management perspective.
You, a restaurant owner, hire a manager named George , whose job includes wine purchasing. George has just broken off a personal relation with wine salesperson Martha who he knows will soon be replaced by a new representative. Joe does not want the cut for wine sales to go to Martha , so he says, "I won't be dealing with wine until Martha is replaced next month. What do you, the restaurant manager, do about it? Even if a number of your customers happen to know Martha and dislike her, you are still running low on Prosecco.
I'd like to view this from a staff management perspective.
You, a restaurant owner, hire a manager named George , whose job includes wine purchasing. George has just broken off a personal relation with wine salesperson Martha who he knows will soon be replaced by a new representative. Joe does not want the cut for wine sales to go to Martha , so he says, "I won't be dealing with wine until Martha is replaced next month. What do you, the restaurant manager, do about it? Even if a number of your customers happen to know Martha and dislike her, you are still running low on Prosecco.
1
Obiter dicta: "That government is best that governs least." An alien notion at odds with the Democrats' Big Government mentality and their decades-long culture of dependency. Hence Ferguson, Baltimore, Oakland, and Chi-Raq, among 50 other kleptocracies. No wonder the GOP is ascendant, along with the NRA: BLM and Occupy were invaluable recruiters for us.
3
P.S. The potential wonderful irony of all of this is that with a backlash and the GOP losing the Congress, and the Dems winning the presidency (because can anyone really imagine Trump, Cruz, or Rubio becoming the resident of the White House?), then any delay in confirmation of appointment means a Dem Prez and a Dem Congress can put in whomever they please. That Justice could be MUCH more progressive than any candidate that might be approved in 2016, and the GOP will be able to nothing than wish they had not been so undemocratic.
3
sounds good, but probably can't happen with all the gerrymandering of districts not sure the democrats can get back the Congress.
But, they need to….we can't have another 4-8yrs of obstruction if Hillary gets elected….we have seen what they did to Obama, and they'll do the same to Hillary i fear.
But, they need to….we can't have another 4-8yrs of obstruction if Hillary gets elected….we have seen what they did to Obama, and they'll do the same to Hillary i fear.
1
Since the House is not involved in the consent function for officer appointments and there are many more Republican senators up for reelection than Democratic senators, a sufficiently deep revulsion among the electorate for the cumulative monkey business of the Republican Senate caucus could just possibly have the outcome Dr. GS raises. The adults (including millenials) need to get out the vote.
1
Were I president-in-waiting Trump I'd say, "I don't know what General McConnell drinks, but send him a case of it." He rarely loses a battle, it fortifies him so.
The answer is obvious, Charles: Kool-Aid.
2
Everyone in the Senate Judiciary Committee should be impeached for dereliction of duty and for failing to comply with the provisions of Article II Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution. These so-called "legislators" are an embarrassment to the free world and the offices they hold. If they believe they are above the law, then they should be punished accordingly.
8
Who would be left in the Albany state house if such a standard were applied? Let's ask Shelly and Vito.
2
Everyone? Including the Senators who are Democrats and presumably even more frustrated than we voters by the dereliction of their Republican "colleagues?"
1
This unconstitutional act of defiance to advise and consent by McConnell and the Senate Judiciary Committee is a clear violation of their oath of office. They should be removed from office.
7
Things could not get any worse for enfeebled Obama, what with the Federal judge lowering the boom on his 3rd term in court yesterday, Trump locking up the Hispanic (!) vote in Nevada, and China integrating a complete surface-to-air missile and fighter defense screen in the South China Sea. PETA should dispatch its lame-duck rescue squad to the Oval Office ASAP. Michelle and Joe can't handle it much longer.
3
I have no idea why people are surprised at McConnell. He has been getting away with this kind of obstructionist nonsense for many years and is just keeping to his mantra to oppose anything Obama does or wants to do.
He recently got re- elected as Senator from Kentucky- so his disgusting behavior has been rewarded by the people of Kentucky- a very red state.
He crossed the line years ago when he conspired to make Obama a one term president- and now, continues to defy the will of the American people who voted for Obama twice to do the people business on their behalf.
This latest move may very well backfire on McConnell- but don't forget- every since GOP candidate including Trump area ll saying the same thing.
So, we get back to the same old thing- get out and vote in every single election- not just presidential elections. Throw the bums out and let's get a Dem majority in Congress to release us from these criminals. Once we have Hillary or Bernie in the WH, I hope they will nominate Barack Obama to the SCOTUS. I cannot think of a more qualified person.
He recently got re- elected as Senator from Kentucky- so his disgusting behavior has been rewarded by the people of Kentucky- a very red state.
He crossed the line years ago when he conspired to make Obama a one term president- and now, continues to defy the will of the American people who voted for Obama twice to do the people business on their behalf.
This latest move may very well backfire on McConnell- but don't forget- every since GOP candidate including Trump area ll saying the same thing.
So, we get back to the same old thing- get out and vote in every single election- not just presidential elections. Throw the bums out and let's get a Dem majority in Congress to release us from these criminals. Once we have Hillary or Bernie in the WH, I hope they will nominate Barack Obama to the SCOTUS. I cannot think of a more qualified person.
9
McConnell says "let the people decide". The people have decided when they elected Obama as President for the current 4-year term! And the politicians wonder why the electorate is so angry?? Now they are defying the Constitution. Their only concern is their own power. They all need to be voted out of office. Vote, people, vote!
10
Oh , I guess I can comment. I read no one elses. If you read the controversy over Scalias death then you will see they are suggesting everything that you should abhor! But, you let this go on. I wonder why?
Who benefits? The more details emerge from WAPO the worse the GOP looks. They have every thing suggested from Brokeback mountain trysts to viagra. He cared more for this institution that 7 years ago, he suggested to David Axlerod that Obama chose Justice Kagin!
He had some failings and everyday we learn more about his shameless association with the Koch brothers, along with Justice Thomas, who received a warm welcome from total racists who founded the John Birch society.
I assume he was innocent, but loved the access to power. But, every day shows how afraid you are, GOP and you will be lead by Trump, probably. Will he be tough enough to make Hillary look like the bad person you have tried to paint?
Yes, this is your bet. You sold us out when it comes to banks too big to fail (mortgages and now car loans) You will stoop as low as you must, a once honorable party. Look at mCconnells face! When will you realize he has nothing in his bankrupt heart?
It is over, and the gerrymandering etc will stay in place. He benefited and will stonewall America, the weak, cowardly and you allowed our country to sell out to the highest bidder.
He is hoping you will be predictable.
Who benefits? The more details emerge from WAPO the worse the GOP looks. They have every thing suggested from Brokeback mountain trysts to viagra. He cared more for this institution that 7 years ago, he suggested to David Axlerod that Obama chose Justice Kagin!
He had some failings and everyday we learn more about his shameless association with the Koch brothers, along with Justice Thomas, who received a warm welcome from total racists who founded the John Birch society.
I assume he was innocent, but loved the access to power. But, every day shows how afraid you are, GOP and you will be lead by Trump, probably. Will he be tough enough to make Hillary look like the bad person you have tried to paint?
Yes, this is your bet. You sold us out when it comes to banks too big to fail (mortgages and now car loans) You will stoop as low as you must, a once honorable party. Look at mCconnells face! When will you realize he has nothing in his bankrupt heart?
It is over, and the gerrymandering etc will stay in place. He benefited and will stonewall America, the weak, cowardly and you allowed our country to sell out to the highest bidder.
He is hoping you will be predictable.
2
The Republican Party is dominated by the most reactionary forces in recent US history - the far right-wing ideology of the John Birch Society, the xenophobia and misogyny of Christian theocrats, and the deep pockets of 'free market' fundamentalist billionaires.
What could go wrong?
What could go wrong?
7
What what are the constitutional remamifications if the senate deliberatly and with out justification follows through on their threat?
Can these senators be impeached?
Can the president declare he will not step down until he completes his presidential duties to up hold the constitution?
Please NYtimes, give us some legal recourse for this action.
Can these senators be impeached?
Can the president declare he will not step down until he completes his presidential duties to up hold the constitution?
Please NYtimes, give us some legal recourse for this action.
2
No recourse.
They "advise" and "consent" or they "don't consent."
There is no timetable.
They can schedule a hearing or vote for 2017 or 2018 if they want.
Harry Reid's vile perversion of the Senate rules laid the groundwork for this.
Live by the sword, fall by the sword.
They "advise" and "consent" or they "don't consent."
There is no timetable.
They can schedule a hearing or vote for 2017 or 2018 if they want.
Harry Reid's vile perversion of the Senate rules laid the groundwork for this.
Live by the sword, fall by the sword.
3
I think Joe Biden should organize a group of people to sit in front of each one of these Senators' office doors and commit to remaining there until these Senators commit to holding hearings. Another group could sit in the Senate chambers. Time for some powerful non-violent protest that cannot be avoided by these Senators.
3
umm, Biden may not be the right guy for that. And not Reid or Schumer either. All for obvious reasons.
Really hard for them to "reject" when they refuse even to meet.
Republicans - further proof that they are nothing more than domestic terrorists.
Republicans - further proof that they are nothing more than domestic terrorists.
5
I shun these crooked politicians. They have created a financial depression in this country, lied repeatedly to the public, taken bribes from corporations, obstructed the work of a sitting President, created a revival of racial bigotry, continued to invade the privacy of our citizens,….the list goes on and on. It is grotesque and deeply disturbing to anyone with a smidgen of morals. Let the people deicide?? The people have decided they want their democracy back. Unfortunately, the people can't seem to see the difference between a reality star and a public servant so I fear democracy is a thing of the past.
1
One way to get back at these cowards is to boycott Kentucky and Iowa, the myopic states that keep electing fossils McConnell and Grassley), and all things made there. I never thought I'd say bye-bye to bourbon, a desperate measure indeed.
4
I wonder what kind of man Mitch McConnell is? I only know him through his actions and words. Based upon them, he appears to motivated by an irrational desire to "Stop Obama!" Whether making his bold prediction that President Obama would be a one term president, or making a blood oath that his nominee will never see the light of day, the guy seems to be professionally fueled by an irrational animus towards our President. Never a productive trait in the workplace. For Obama, nothing seems to be taken personally, for McConnell, every word and/or action directed at Obama is basted in rancor and venom. Senator McConnell, try as you might lo these past seven and half years, you have not been able to bring down the President and you certainly have failed miserably, to engage him at your lowest common denominator level. There will be a nominee and he or she will see the light of day, no matter what proclamation you put forth in front of the cameras; President Obama will find a way and the American people will demand it.
2
In reading the letter attached to this article, the first thing that sticks out like a sore thumb is the attachment of the traditional honorific "Honorable" in addressing Mitch McConnell. But then one must consider the authors of this despicable document.
4
Agreed, the GPO badly needs a new style sheet.
I could slam the Republicans from now until Kingdom Come; but there is no longer any point. It is so obvious that the world should now refer to your (two?) nation(s) as the Dis-United States. I truly believe the ghost of the Civil War has never gone away. I even recall a country song about how the ;South was going to do it Again! Look at the insane debates about the Confederate Flag flying on southern State Legislatures. No there are now 2 distinct tribes at war with each other; and the bitterness is getting worse by the day. Abraham Lincoln as usual got it right; when he prophesied that if the U.S. were to fail it would be from internal divisions; not outside forces. I can only look on in sadness at what was once a truly great country coming apart at the seams. The madness of the Tea Party/ Wall Street Crowd is getting more insane by the day. There will be 2 new countries emerging in the not too distant future. This divorce seems now inevitable. A house divided against itself cannot stand; Shame on those who failed to learn this simple truth.
2
It's hard to imagine ever forgiving the Republicans for disenfranchising me.
6
Did you lose your rent-controlled apartment, or something? Or did Trump triple your rent?
3
I believe the Senators need to be reminded of their 4th grade government studies: members of the Supreme Court are appointed, not elected.
2
maybe you should do some reviewing as well: Who appoints?
This is a classic case of a no-win situation for the Republican leadership. If they take a middle of the road approach, ( allow hearings and a vote even if they have no intention of approving the nominee) they will further antagonize the far-right and ensure a Trump or Cruz nomination, which they do not want. On the other hand, being obstructionist and proud of it will alienate Independents and moderate Republicans while energizing the Democratic base and basically ensure a November defeat. There is absolutely no upside for the GOP in this. None whatsoever!
1
McConnell, the Obstructionist says we don't nominate judges in an election year. I researched the NY Times Headlines. McConnell and his minions serving on the judiciary are dead wrong on this issue.
In 1975 an unelected President nominated John Paul Stevens and the Senate confirmed (98-0) him in less than a month. Here is prof we were in an election year based on the NY Times Headlines:
October 27, 1975
The New York Times runs a front-page story stating, "Carter Holds Strong Lead Going Into Iowa Caucuses," leading to a big increase in media coverage of his campaign.
January 19, 1976
Carter wins the Iowa Democratic caucuses with 29.1% of the vote.
History and precedent mean something or use to mean something in our country. Impeachment proceedings need to begin now.
In 1975 an unelected President nominated John Paul Stevens and the Senate confirmed (98-0) him in less than a month. Here is prof we were in an election year based on the NY Times Headlines:
October 27, 1975
The New York Times runs a front-page story stating, "Carter Holds Strong Lead Going Into Iowa Caucuses," leading to a big increase in media coverage of his campaign.
January 19, 1976
Carter wins the Iowa Democratic caucuses with 29.1% of the vote.
History and precedent mean something or use to mean something in our country. Impeachment proceedings need to begin now.
3
These people are like spiteful children. It is way past time for both sides to come together so we can move forward. Why do we have a Constitution if we don't follow it?
5
The majority of the Senators who signed the letter represent Southern states.
Two are Mormon. The Church of the LDS didn't ordain Black Priests until 1978.
Racism veiled by Senatorial politics.
Two are Mormon. The Church of the LDS didn't ordain Black Priests until 1978.
Racism veiled by Senatorial politics.
3
Be more specific.
What you really meant are Southern Debtor States.
What you really meant are Southern Debtor States.
"Racism," the dog that stopped hunting in 2010.
I can't put to words the emotions I feel when I read what the Republicans are doing to our country in the interest of their party's power. The most recent action being their announcement not to hold hearings on President Obama's Supreme Court nominee.
As I think about this action, the best I can come up with is that the Republicans are honoring Scalia's memory by taking an originalist view of the constitution. When the constitution was first approved a black man was counted as 3/5 of a person. The Republicans are applying that same ratio to what Obama is allowed to do in his term and therefore according to the Republicans his time has run out.
As I think about this action, the best I can come up with is that the Republicans are honoring Scalia's memory by taking an originalist view of the constitution. When the constitution was first approved a black man was counted as 3/5 of a person. The Republicans are applying that same ratio to what Obama is allowed to do in his term and therefore according to the Republicans his time has run out.
5
I'm not sure why McConnell and company didn't go the next mile and say what they really mean: that they won't consider a nominee for Supreme Court until he or she is named by a Republican president. If the Senate remains in their hands after the election, why would anyone believe any nominee by a Democratic president would receive consideration, let alone approval?
I keep waiting for the bind to get so intolerable that the voters whose interests are so counter to their votes wake up and take a look at the country they've created. But I guess football, reality TV, comfortable religion, and guns are such great companions that it's very hard to notice or care what's actually going on around you or deeply affecting your life.
I keep waiting for the bind to get so intolerable that the voters whose interests are so counter to their votes wake up and take a look at the country they've created. But I guess football, reality TV, comfortable religion, and guns are such great companions that it's very hard to notice or care what's actually going on around you or deeply affecting your life.
1
The Republicans...there they go again...They are strict readers of the Constitution unless it is not favorable to them.
It doesn't say let the people decide our next Justice, the President with the advise and consent of the Senate should decide.
Bunch of hypocrites.....
It doesn't say let the people decide our next Justice, the President with the advise and consent of the Senate should decide.
Bunch of hypocrites.....
6
it'd be interesting to see what would happen if obama nominated an extreme right winger. then, of course, withdrew the nomination after whatever the reaction happened to be.....
3
I'm lovin' it!
I'm betting this is the final nail in the coffin of the contemporary Republican Party. And good riddance.
I'm betting this is the final nail in the coffin of the contemporary Republican Party. And good riddance.
4
You haven't heard of Donald Trump and Marco Rubio, it seems. Check the Nov. 2015 election results, to boot.
3
All government obstructionists should be charged with treason. This contemporary version of American government is a sham.
2
After reading Jane Mayer's DARK MONEY, I can't listen to anything the Republicans say without visualizing a Koch think tank preparing their words for them.
5
Try "Clinton Cash," it's a real eye-opener. Greedy as they come, ever since Little Rock, where Hillary Rodham deducted $1 for each pair of Bill's underwear donated to Goodwill, as their tax returns show. Impressive.
2
Watergate, contras, shutting the government down twice, torture, forged evidence of WMDs and the illegal wars that followed, Bush v. Gore, Flint---nothing, absolutely NOTHING in the last 50 years has been a more outrageous threat to our entire way of governing than this move. This is absolute treason, unprecedented in our history. If this is allowed to stand we are ripe for either the collapse of our democracy or its takeover by a totalitarian--like Trump or Cruz. This is NOT partisan politics as usual, it is a hijacking of the United States of America and we need to wake up.
5
I fear that this latest step in a slow motion coup by the Republicans of not just Obama but the Republic will not be taken for what it is by the American voter, a subversion of the Constitution....yes, the lack of understanding or interest in both civics and policy by the current electorate is extremely frustrating and scary...is it any wonder why we see a crypto-capitalist like Trump on the rise....people beat their breasts about the Constitution this or that...but are not angry about what these jokers in Washington are doing?....yes, it is racism, semi-fascism, and subverting the Republic all rolled into one....DC is about to get a whole lot worse.
3
Biden is not the only current political figure who got it wrong in the past. McConnell made remarks that are equally damaging to his own current point of view. Shouldn't we be striving to do what is right, regardless of which "Side" we're on?
2
This clique of extreme right wing Senate Republicans have just about quaranteed that the Senate (and perhaps the House) will flip in the aftermath of November's elections.
We Americans have had it with extreme right wing obstructionism from the controlling party in the Senate & House.
In our opinion, this 75-year old Kentucky senator has lost his feeble mind. But, more serious, "Mitch" is openly standing in violation of our Constitution.
Mitch and his clique remind this amateur history buff of those Southern federal lawmakers who led the succession movement and started our Civil War.
We're ready to throw-down with this "old guard".
See you in November, Mitch.
We Americans have had it with extreme right wing obstructionism from the controlling party in the Senate & House.
In our opinion, this 75-year old Kentucky senator has lost his feeble mind. But, more serious, "Mitch" is openly standing in violation of our Constitution.
Mitch and his clique remind this amateur history buff of those Southern federal lawmakers who led the succession movement and started our Civil War.
We're ready to throw-down with this "old guard".
See you in November, Mitch.
3
Republicans have made another grave error. They may indeed succeed in blocking any nominee--for now. Next year will be a different story, and Republicans will like President Clinton's nominee even less.
Congressional Republicans set out to destroy this American President almost eight years ago. Either they have defeated themselves or they have suffered an ignominious defeat at the hands of a skinny black man. However will they spin this story?
Congressional Republicans set out to destroy this American President almost eight years ago. Either they have defeated themselves or they have suffered an ignominious defeat at the hands of a skinny black man. However will they spin this story?
3
I think an appropriate response would be that we the people should hold up all the pay & benefits Mitch McConnell & his cohorts are expecting us to pay them....if they refuse to do their jobs then that is a breach of contract and they loose. This is treason in my opinion and the GOP has become not only the party of ignorance but the anti-American party. Put a hold on all their $ & benefits now, change the locks & security codes and lock them out. I think kids from a local Kentucky Jr High School could do a better job then Mitch has.
1
Imagine what it would be like if you went to work in the am, told your boss that you disagreed with the job requirements and then refused to do any work until your boss agreed to accept your grievances. How long would your employment last? Would you make it to the first coffee break? Lunch perhaps?
Republican tactics of shutting down government, attempting to undermine a president negotiating a peace with Iran, and blockading a Consitutional process to ensure the continuity of the Judicial branch of government all amount to blatant political obstructionism. They too should be removed from the job of governing America.
Republican tactics of shutting down government, attempting to undermine a president negotiating a peace with Iran, and blockading a Consitutional process to ensure the continuity of the Judicial branch of government all amount to blatant political obstructionism. They too should be removed from the job of governing America.
3
So, why doesn't the White House sue the Senate; we can have the Supreme Court decide whether the Senate should perform the required constitutional duty.
2
Mitch, you're a good boy. Check your account when you get a chance. Love, The Brothers Koch
5
Headline: Politics Trumps Constitution.
Article: Politics have discarded the obligation of the Senate to advise and consent the President's Supreme Court nominee as required under the Constitution.
Question: Will anyone bring this unlawful act to Justice?
Article: Politics have discarded the obligation of the Senate to advise and consent the President's Supreme Court nominee as required under the Constitution.
Question: Will anyone bring this unlawful act to Justice?
If only we could split America into two countries and move to the America of our choice. One country could be pure, unfettered market exuberance and capitalism at its peak of tooth and claw. No health care coverage. No regulations. No protections. No processes. The other could be a mix of free market and government collaboration and cooperation, with a functioning social safety net, logical regulations, and a spirit of collaboration. If only.
1
The Republicans have a three pronged strategy. 1) Voter suppression. 2) Dark money and 3) Gerrymandering. In order for these to succeed they need to maintain a Republican (note not a conservative) majority on the Supreme Court. Therefore there has never been any chance that Republicans would allow a vote on an Obama nominee even if it costs them control of the Senate. And should a Democrat succeed Obama the Republicans will move heaven and earth to block virtually any nominee unless it is a reliably Republican vote.
3
Hmmm. Had this lame duck issue been taken to the Supreme Court last month, what would the originalist Scalia have said?
1
I can't think of a better way to keep Trump from being elected
1
So the great protectors of our constitution show their real face, which of course has been recognized by the readers of this paper for sometime. The President should put forth a balanced highly qualified nominee immediately, someone even Reagan or Eisenhower would approve, then use every legal tactic possible to push for approval, including legal action against McConnell and his cronies. We the people must replace congressmen and senators who are intent on destroying our democracy in the next election.
3
Their oaths to the Koch Brothers and others trumped their oaths to support the Constitution. A shameful day. An infamous day. There's desolation in it.
4
So what else is new? They would have said the same thing at any point from 2009 on. But right wingers will point to the 1992 Biden speech, so getting sanctimonious about the Constitution is a dead end. Instead Democrats should use it as rallying point to keep voters mindful of what is at stake here, democracy vs. theocracy and plutocracy, and to energize them to take back the Senate as well as the presidency in November.
3
We cannot allow President Obama to replace him with a judicial activist. Activist judges have mangled the Constitution almost beyond recognition, and we cannot allow Justice Scalia to be replaced by a justice who will continue to shred the Constitution rather than protect it and uphold it.
This is not even a partisan issue. One only needs to recall that Senator Charles Schumer and then Senator Joe Biden took the same position this letter takes, although they made the pronouncement when a Republican held the oval office. And Senator Schumer said, the Senate should not confirm and Supreme Court Justice when an election is within 18 months of election. We currently are only 10 months to a new president. The parties are in basic agreement. Except, it appears they both changed their positions with a Democrat in the oval office. The wind continue to blow in opposite directions depending on which party is in power.
This is not even a partisan issue. One only needs to recall that Senator Charles Schumer and then Senator Joe Biden took the same position this letter takes, although they made the pronouncement when a Republican held the oval office. And Senator Schumer said, the Senate should not confirm and Supreme Court Justice when an election is within 18 months of election. We currently are only 10 months to a new president. The parties are in basic agreement. Except, it appears they both changed their positions with a Democrat in the oval office. The wind continue to blow in opposite directions depending on which party is in power.
1
The "judicial activism" argument goes both ways. Rulings that corporations are "people" and money is equivalent to speech mangle the Constitution beyond recognition. Justice Scalia was no saint when it came to interpreting the Constitution.
As to Biden and Schumer, they voiced opinions but never blocked courtesy visits, committee meetings and Senate votes on Supreme court nominees. your "they did it too" argument doesn't hold water.
As to Biden and Schumer, they voiced opinions but never blocked courtesy visits, committee meetings and Senate votes on Supreme court nominees. your "they did it too" argument doesn't hold water.
1
Pssst . . . Gorby! $calia was a political activist judge. Why should you complain even if the President were to replace him with another?
1
How much does our democratic process have to be disrupted by one party before we admit that our Constitutional republic is under coup? How can we trust that vote counts in any Republican dominated area will be honestly recorded when Republican leaders show a united willingness to flaunt procedure in order to control an outcome? How will we know who wins the election? Our democracy is in shambles.
3
Cruz is not a U.S. citizen, not a Senator. His mother was not married when he was born. He falls under the one year residence rule for birth mothers and does not qualify. He should be in prison for falsifying his background.
3
This is ridiculous. They are not hired to do nothing or to break the constitution laws. If they do that, people shall ask them to pay back all their salary. Enough is enough of getting paid and doing nothing and trying to get SSN benefit from people too. If this is not the 21st century white collar robbery, what is it?
2
Mitch McConnell, once again has the unmitigated gall to undermine a separate branch of our government. When is this man going to be removed from office for failure to do his job? His partisanship continues to sink this country to unbelievable depths. He shows us once again why no Republican should be voted into office during the next election cycle. We need to purge Congress of members who fail to do their job or who see their jobs as obstructionist. Our country cannot take another cycle of immature, egotistical, bought and paid for fools who don't understand the concept of their job or what the words negotiate and compromise mean.
1
The Senate is required to "advise and consent," implying they may withhold their consent. The Constitution gives no timetable. But this something altogether different: a refusal by Senate leaders to fulfill their Constitutional obligation.
In this situation Obama should do two things:
1. Nominate somebody (I'm hoping for Loretta Lynch, but anybody who has been confirmed recently and is therefore well vetted);
2. Bring a suit against McConnell, et al. for failure to follow Constitutional mandates. And he should ask this to be fast-tracked to the Supreme Court.
His candidate may receive a down vote, but the spectacle of Republicans proceeding in this way will look very bad during the election.
In this situation Obama should do two things:
1. Nominate somebody (I'm hoping for Loretta Lynch, but anybody who has been confirmed recently and is therefore well vetted);
2. Bring a suit against McConnell, et al. for failure to follow Constitutional mandates. And he should ask this to be fast-tracked to the Supreme Court.
His candidate may receive a down vote, but the spectacle of Republicans proceeding in this way will look very bad during the election.
1
“The duties of the Senate are set forth in the U.S. Constitution. Nowhere in that document does it say the Senate has a duty to give Presidential appointees a vote. It says appointments shall be made with the advice and consent of the Senate. That is very different than saying every nominee receives a vote.”
Harry Reid (2005) discussing George W Bush's judicial nominees.
Harry Reid (2005) discussing George W Bush's judicial nominees.
Harry was wrong, and so is McConnell.
2
Of course, Messrs. Roberts and Alito were considered, passed out of committee, and confirmed as Justices of SCOTUS during the reign of Cheney/Bush2. Clearly, this band of derelict Republican Senators are willing to break the government in order to impose de facto changes by a non-constitutional process. Just as clearly, neither Harry Reid or other Democratic Senators were willing to do so despite Mr. Reid's rhetorical hyperbole of that moment.
1
It seems that the same Republicans who have specialized in peddling fear to the public for decades are now infected by their own contagion. I wish some Democrat, some independent, some reporter would ask Mitch McConnell and Co. exactly why they are now afraid to follow the Constitution. Perhaps there might be a small chance of getting an honest answer.
I hope a smarter, better informed reader can answer this question--what steps can be taken if the Senate leadership refuses to fulfill their Constitutional duty? I'm serious--can they be impeached? Can they be arrested? Are they violating law? As a citizen of Pennsylvania, I am outraged that a Senator from another state is preventing me from my right to a new Justice. Brass tacks, people--what can be done about this?
2
There is some commentary buried below about how this could arguably be viewed as a waiver or concession of the Senate’s power to confirm. (Generally, when a right is not exercised it is waived. Alternatively, when an entity refuses to follow a prescribed legal procedure, it is held against that entity.) However, that would require the Administration to use “brass tacks” tactics and attempt to push through a nominee via a legal case. Something the Republicans would probably attempt if the shoe were on the other foot, but which the Obama Administration has shown it has little stomach for.
3
The men in the picture for this article have scary faces as well as displaying stupid reasoning that is not reflective of the best in American thought and practice. Their reasoning and looks reflect a Hitlerian view. God deliver us from them.
4
We can, again, thank George W. Bush and his appointment of John Roberts to the court for this mess. Without Citizens United this would not be happening.
3
This is nothing more than a Denial-of-Service attack by the GOP government hackers.
5
Let's call this what it is: a coup.
And it's backed by big money. The Supreme Court should refuse to hear cases until Congress agrees to hold nomination hearings.
And it's backed by big money. The Supreme Court should refuse to hear cases until Congress agrees to hold nomination hearings.
1
I wonder, if Obama decided to pick a Republican as a nominee, if he could find one who would be willing to suffer through the abuse that would be dumped on him or her. It's one thing to take a bullet for the country; it's something else to take a cluster bomb.
2
I believe Biden's June 1992 remarks are taken out of context. He is referring to a vacancy on the Supreme Court occurring "at the end of summer or in August in a presidential election year. If I recall correctly, a Senate hearing on a nominee has taken about three months, so that the process would extend into the final days of an outgoing president.
This is not the case now, where there is sufficient time to consider President Obama's nominee to the court following Antonin Scalia's death February 13.
This is not the case now, where there is sufficient time to consider President Obama's nominee to the court following Antonin Scalia's death February 13.
3
Just for laughs have POTUS nominate the most RIGHT WING lawyer he can find and see what the reaction is. He can always withdraw it.
Hey Mitch, if the next president is a Democrat do we wait until the following election?
4
Contrary to what the NYT and its readers think, the Senate has the constitutional authority and obligation to not only approve, or disapprove of any supreme court nominee, but it also can set the number of justices.
There is nothing in the constitution that says there needs to be nine justices. It can remain at eight, be reduced to seven or increased to whatever.
One hopes that someday the NYT can provide a service to its readers by educating them instead of being a propaganda tool of the radical progressive left.
There is nothing in the constitution that says there needs to be nine justices. It can remain at eight, be reduced to seven or increased to whatever.
One hopes that someday the NYT can provide a service to its readers by educating them instead of being a propaganda tool of the radical progressive left.
It does not surprise me. In a way I think it may be race related as they do not want a black president to succeed at anything. I remember Mitchie declaring, when Obama got elected, that he would see to it that his presidency was a failure.
2
Clear evidence of Republicans' ability to govern. They are money wasters, time wasters, and self servers. We should stop paying them, since they refuse to do their jobs.
2
Senate Oath of Office
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.
federal law, 18 U.S.C. 1918 provides penalties for violation of oath office described in 5 U.S.C. 7311 which include: (1) removal from office and; (2) confinement or a fine.
The Senators who refused to perform their duty of Advise and Consent on Supreme Court nominees, just violated their oath of office.
We should remove them from office
I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.
federal law, 18 U.S.C. 1918 provides penalties for violation of oath office described in 5 U.S.C. 7311 which include: (1) removal from office and; (2) confinement or a fine.
The Senators who refused to perform their duty of Advise and Consent on Supreme Court nominees, just violated their oath of office.
We should remove them from office
3
If Republicans are only at least willing to consider a "centrist" or "moderate" candidate, please define for us what that means in these times. What does it mean to be "moderate" these days, or do we really have to fall back on Ronald Reagan as our reference?
The nation, conservatives included, needs to think about the various resource- and time-consuming standstills that the Republicans have been responsible for - ehem, the government shutdown, and now this shutdown on getting together the Court in order.
The nation, conservatives included, needs to think about the various resource- and time-consuming standstills that the Republicans have been responsible for - ehem, the government shutdown, and now this shutdown on getting together the Court in order.
I have my own pledge to sign:
I will never vote for a Republican again.
I will never vote for a Republican again.
6
All this hissy fit throwing by the GOP could have been avoided if Obama had only been born white.
3
Charge them with treason. Did they not take an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States? McConnell should be behind bars.
1
McConnell is in contempt of the nation's highest law.
The Constitution is very clear. It requires 'advice and consent' which doesn't mean that they have to confirm the candidate but must fulfil their responsibility.
Let him contemplate it jail just like I would have to if I were in contempt of the law.
The Constitution is very clear. It requires 'advice and consent' which doesn't mean that they have to confirm the candidate but must fulfil their responsibility.
Let him contemplate it jail just like I would have to if I were in contempt of the law.
1
This illustrates the fact that the Republican Party is less of a party and more of an army, in which nobody dares disobey. Everybody who steps out of line, and even hints at cooperation, quickly sees the error of their ways. What I worry about is who is the one giving the orders.
3
Just for fun, the president should nominate the most hide-bound conservative he can find. Then watch Mr. McConnell, et al twist themselves into knots.
II lived in Southern Illinois -which borders McConnell’s Kentucky- during the the Bill Clinton era and I still remember McConnell’s ads when he was running for the US House. Basically they amounted to “I will single-handedly stop Bill Clinton from ruining America!” Cliton was easily re-elected and got much of his agenda through. Obama comes along and McConnell takes the same approach and Obama is nonetheless re-elected. I doubt that anyone could say what Mitch McConnell is actually for. No one could say what he has accomplished. His mission to stop these ‘horrible, America-ruining’ presidents has been a (deservedly) abject failure, only serving to establish McConnell as one of the most feckless leaders in the history of the Senate. I long to see the look on his face should Hillary be elected and have years to get her own nominee through. I am sure McConnell would be unfazed, though, busily preparing for a post- Senate, big government cash-in as a lobbyist.
3
"Leader" McConnell and other Republican Senators may very well rue the day they stated, "let the people have a voice." It is my fervent hope that the people of this country will let them hear their voice in November!
3
Two words come to mind re. the "publicans" on this matter. OBSTRUCTIONISTS and TRAITORS. Not too strong, I think, for what these people are doing to our country.
2
I recommend that angry "progressives" here look up the definition of hypocrisy.
1
Mitch McConnell has, once again, insulted the Office of the Presidency and is attempting to belittle President Obama personally. In doing so, he and his boys are also insulting the American people. The vast majority of voters reelected President Obama in 2012. His term isn't over yet.
The adorable part of this whole thing is Republican leadership thinking Trump or Cruz or Rubio could actually win the presidency.
2
Who can beat them? Hillary, pending her indictment? Check the rulings by federal Judge Sullivan in D.C. yesterday. Drip, drip, all the livelong day! She's toast.
This can't really surprise anyone. The Republican Congress is barely capable of tying its shoes. We should all be grateful that they haven't been able to pass any legislation at all (other than the first half of "repeal and replace" Obamacare). They haven't passed a balanced budget. They haven't declared war on ISIS. They haven't imposed restrictions on abortion. They haven't passed any legislation addressing immigration. They haven't cut taxes. One would think they would pass an entire program, have Obama veto it, and then run on it. But they haven't. No wonder rank-and-file Republicans want to throw all the bums out.
Democracy ends when cooperation ends - this is beyond objection - it is destruction.
Someone needs to start a letter addressed to all the signers of Mitch's letter stating that we, the American electorate, demand that the Senate do it's job and give advice and consent in a timely manner on any and all Supreme Court nominees that any president nominates.
Send it electronically over the internet so everyone who wants to can sign it and continue to sign it until it blows up the internet and goes viral.
Our entire government is being held hostage for political reasons and someone needs to wake these Senators up. Millions of signature and press coverage might help.
How do we accomplish that? I'm open for ideas.
Send it electronically over the internet so everyone who wants to can sign it and continue to sign it until it blows up the internet and goes viral.
Our entire government is being held hostage for political reasons and someone needs to wake these Senators up. Millions of signature and press coverage might help.
How do we accomplish that? I'm open for ideas.
The G.O.P. leadership in the photograph are all white, like me, but they don't look like the country I live in. I lived in their country until my niece married a black guy and now we have Carter, he is about 2 years old. So my brother, who is a white guy like me, and his wife of 40 years take care of Carter during the day while my niece and her husband work. My brother has never been more alive. He went in to the pre-kindergarten orientation class Carter was in and and Carter was left alone, and when he saw Jimmy, he said, "Ok, pop pop, let's go now." Yes, we must learn that removing a child from class is not legal. But you do not leave our baby alone, teacher, do you understand? eh, she didn't understand. But we're white guys. Like McConnell and all those other dinosaurs.
1
Exactly: I'm so glad this is a picture of four lily white men.... This is the scariest, (possibly scarier than Donald Trump as President) thing ever. It's clearly racist and disgusting. How did we get here?????? These white men have the finest health care plan in the country but want to dismantle Obamacare. I can hardly sleep at night thinking about what's going on in this country. Hillary -- soldier on, we need you more than ever now.
1
Since you live in NYC, you're surrounded by a paucity of white men, who flee for Grand Central and Penn Station and PATH at the earliest opportunity each weekday. Cheer up!
I can just see that room full of WASPS - stomping their feet and throwing a big old temper tantrum. Really? Grow the eff up. If you truly believed in your party, and what you supposedly stand for, you should be able to work through the process accordingly. Unfortunately, when you are incompetent, it is easier to bring down the opposition then to overcome your own challenges to become better. Trump may win, the new SCOTUS member might get deferred, but ultimately, the GOP political leaders have been made to look foolish, incapable, grasping at straws to create some type of legacy before they crumble. The GOP voters are screaming for change with their support of Trump. McConnell and his cronies are trying to make a last stand before their obsolescence gets any more obvious.
1
They really don't get it, do they? Trump is destroying the GOP precisely because of this sort of anti-American behavior. Do they really think that HRC, Bernie or the socially liberal Trump is going to pick a better justice than Obama?
2
Speaker McConnell should be impeached and removed from office. Why is no one taking action against this obstructionist when his actions clearly put him at odds with all historical precedent? We live in an era of "mean girls" running engine of government and clearly it's a slumber party that the majority of Americans ( you know, the majority that elected the current President) aren't invited to. The founding fathers would be appalled. We should be, too.
The republicans are doing everything in their power to show the world that DEMOCRACY DOES NOT WORK. Very patriotic.
What's it going to take to have a viable third or even a fourth political party so as to break up this dysfunctional two party Yin/Yang?
Let's face it, Bill Clinton was a democratic sell out to Big Corporate Interests and Wall Street. He took the democratic party so far to the right and diluted the essence of what that party stood for.
Now all you can point to is the hypocrisy of both parties. One two sided coin.
This country needs political party options. If we claim that we live in a democracy then shouldn't we have more to choose from than this toxic two party dysfunction that's evolved?
Let's face it, Bill Clinton was a democratic sell out to Big Corporate Interests and Wall Street. He took the democratic party so far to the right and diluted the essence of what that party stood for.
Now all you can point to is the hypocrisy of both parties. One two sided coin.
This country needs political party options. If we claim that we live in a democracy then shouldn't we have more to choose from than this toxic two party dysfunction that's evolved?
Above all, the GOP delegation demonstrates that they are a bunch of cowards.
1
hold-my-breath-until-i-turn-blue tactic. I remember doing that as a kid. Didn't work then. won't work now. you're still going to get a spanking.
2
And if Mitt had won the last election?
The GOP: Doing what's worst for America.
2
What an abomination. When senators, who take an oath to uphold the Constitution, refuse to decide on a Supreme Court nominee based on her or his merits, they deserve to be removed from office for violating that oath.
This is an act of sedition designed to destroy the constitution by delegitimizing and undermining the power of presidency. The names of the individual Senators perpetrating this crime should be in public view every single day until they either end their rebellion against We,the People or are removed from office. By trying to make Supreme Court an elected body, the Republicans have once again proven that they cannot be trusted to govern.
They've caught the Trump disease--ignorance and arrogance bordering on insanity.
2
Can anyone name anything positive the Senate Republicans have done? It seems their objective is to oppose everything that a Democratic President proposes.
The American people have spoken. President Obama was elected twice. The Constitution says that the President shall nominate justices.
What will the Republicans say if Kennedy, Thomas or Alito decide to retire or leave the bench?
The American people have spoken. President Obama was elected twice. The Constitution says that the President shall nominate justices.
What will the Republicans say if Kennedy, Thomas or Alito decide to retire or leave the bench?
2
This is no surprise. Since Obama was elected the Republicans have tried to thwart him at everything that he has proposed. Once they got control of Congress it was simply "shaft the country. Make Obama look as bad as possible."
Will the voters respond and elect a Democrat or go with the "Trump Express" which appears to be rolling over all the other Republicans? If Trump does win the real party begins because he doesn't have a clue how to be a leader of a country.
Will the voters respond and elect a Democrat or go with the "Trump Express" which appears to be rolling over all the other Republicans? If Trump does win the real party begins because he doesn't have a clue how to be a leader of a country.
1
The GOP is coming across as obstructionist.
Obama hasn't even nominated anyone, and the Senate is already putting up roadblocks. They should have waited until Obama did something, and then just simply sat on it, without saying anything. A much more subtle way of handling things.
Obama hasn't even nominated anyone, and the Senate is already putting up roadblocks. They should have waited until Obama did something, and then just simply sat on it, without saying anything. A much more subtle way of handling things.
1
If it is true that every dynasty falls (as history shows) I weep for my country.
This is the kind of partisan, one sided, prejudiced thinking that has driven every atrocity in history.
Martin Luther King Jr. once said "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." Whether you agree or disagree, politics used to be the art of diplomacy and getting the people’s business done for the good of the many. Not acting like a screaming kid in the grocery store when you can’t have what you want. When will these people start being politicians again and not zealots? For the record I am an independent but more importantly, I am an American.
This is the kind of partisan, one sided, prejudiced thinking that has driven every atrocity in history.
Martin Luther King Jr. once said "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." Whether you agree or disagree, politics used to be the art of diplomacy and getting the people’s business done for the good of the many. Not acting like a screaming kid in the grocery store when you can’t have what you want. When will these people start being politicians again and not zealots? For the record I am an independent but more importantly, I am an American.
1
"I don’t see the point of going through the motions if we know what the outcome is going to be" says the man that voted over 60 times to repeal ACA. The GOP should fear karma: Should the president nominate a moderate and not even get a hearing and Hilary or Bernie become president, I suspect they will nominate the absolute most liberal judges they can find.
2
This morning I listened to Joe Scarborough and his establishment republican crew cry and lie about the reasons for Donald's victory in Nevada and his apparent crowning to represent them in the general election. The gist of their angst is the rise of the Tea Party and its spill over into the mainstream republican sentiment in reaction to their party over promising in their rhetoric with little to show in return. Essentially, working class republicans are tired of being lied to and today's GOP and this particular action is symptomatic of everything that's wrong the establishment. This benefits the country how? It doesn't. It invalidates the constitution. It continues the policies of obstruction that hasn't worked for seven years. The establishment is being outflanked by their arrogance, their greed and their misrepresentation of conservatism. More importantly, the mob has finally wizened up to that staple blue collar jobs have been outsourced and no one in their party prepared the middle class to change with the technical revolution that we're experiencing. Essentially the party of Lincoln lacks credible leadership.
3
They are refusing to do their jobs. My taxes pay their salaries. I say -no pay!
McConnell is absolute failure of a human being. The GOP is going down, big time.
"Just the facts, ma'am": The election results 4 months ago, and the newly expanded investigation into Hillary & Co. ordered yesterday by federal Judge Sullivan, show otherwise. The Democrats are dying on the vine, all their eggs in one basket called Hillary.
It's only common sense that no SCOTUS nominee should be considered in the last year of a presidential term if you don't like the President. I'm pretty sure this is what the Founders intended when they wrote the Constitution - you just have to read between the lines.
Mr. McConnell, The Obstructionist, has polluted our system of government through schemes that has disgraced and stained the United States Senate, an institution that has served our country with great honor and distinction.
Mr. McConnell, you are a disgrace.
On November 17th, 1975, Jimmy Carter was campaigning in Iowa for his party's Presidential nomination. On that day, the liberal icon of the Supreme Court -- William O. Douglas, who was nominated by FDR, resigned his seat on the Court. The longest serving justice in the history of the court stepped down. An unelected GOP President, Gerald Ford, nominated a much more conservative John Paul Stevens 11 days later. The chairman of the Judiciary was Democrat James Eastland, from Mississippi. Democrats held a commanding filibuster proof Senate, 60 Democrats and 38 Republicans and 2 independents. The Senate was dominated by the Dems. Yet they confirmed the conservative jurist, John Paul Stevens by an overwhelming 98-0 vote.
This confirmation was during an election year, that was confirmed less than 11 months prior to the election of Jimmy Carter.
McConnell you're nothing but a political hack. Impeachment proceedings need to begin immediately.
Mr. McConnell, you are a disgrace.
On November 17th, 1975, Jimmy Carter was campaigning in Iowa for his party's Presidential nomination. On that day, the liberal icon of the Supreme Court -- William O. Douglas, who was nominated by FDR, resigned his seat on the Court. The longest serving justice in the history of the court stepped down. An unelected GOP President, Gerald Ford, nominated a much more conservative John Paul Stevens 11 days later. The chairman of the Judiciary was Democrat James Eastland, from Mississippi. Democrats held a commanding filibuster proof Senate, 60 Democrats and 38 Republicans and 2 independents. The Senate was dominated by the Dems. Yet they confirmed the conservative jurist, John Paul Stevens by an overwhelming 98-0 vote.
This confirmation was during an election year, that was confirmed less than 11 months prior to the election of Jimmy Carter.
McConnell you're nothing but a political hack. Impeachment proceedings need to begin immediately.
1
Under the circumstances, what nominee would like to go through any nomination grind and ruin their careers and chances of a future position? The only way Obama could succeed is to wait for Republicans to be out of session and just appoint someone. Mitch wants to set precedents, why not Obama? Go for it! What a spectacle! Is this a nation of laws and order?
While the embarrassment of the few GOP Congressmen who won't consider President Obama's nomination to the Supreme Court. . my question. . .where are our black robed learned Supreme Court Justices in this quagmire (muck) of Congressional obstructionists? The GOP has become so self-serving and self-absorbed that they forgot what it is to be an American and the love of country.
"Told that Democrats were asserting that such past statements were irrelevant, Mr. McConnell and other Republican leaders laughed."
The photo caption says "Mitch McConnell with other members of the Senate G.O.P. Leadership".
What leadership? Leading us in destruction of the Constitution? Leading us in doing nothing?
The photo caption says "Mitch McConnell with other members of the Senate G.O.P. Leadership".
What leadership? Leading us in destruction of the Constitution? Leading us in doing nothing?
5
It's time to impeach a few Senators.
2
This shows yet again how the GOP really cares nothing about the Constitution unless somehow the foundation of our country helps their particular cause at any moment. What standards they now have can be see additionally by the type of candidates left running for President, half of whom would make religious law the replacement for the Constitution and the separation of Church and State (which overly zealous Americans have been closing, or trying to close, ever since the Constitution and then the Bill of Rights -- which has absolutely no mention of God -- were officially created and accepted. I won't be surprised to see a 3rd part in the US coming about as a result of the dismal GOP character. Maybe Bloomberg will be the one to lead it...
1
Yes, I do know what the Founders considered to be treason.
But since so many of their definitions have already been so radically altered (think of citizens united as “Free Speech?” or assault weapons for all as “Well Regulated Militia?”) that I believe it is time to change the words defining “treason” to more accurately respect the concept.
If those now crippling our government are not traitors, at least let us recognize them as terrorists.
But since so many of their definitions have already been so radically altered (think of citizens united as “Free Speech?” or assault weapons for all as “Well Regulated Militia?”) that I believe it is time to change the words defining “treason” to more accurately respect the concept.
If those now crippling our government are not traitors, at least let us recognize them as terrorists.
2
Do-nothing Republicans declare that they will do nothing.
1
How wonderful that they've announced their intention to not even look at the qualifications of the nominee, but to simply deny it. This seems rather consistent for the party I *used* to vote for.
I hope they push it out, Clinton or Sanders gets elected and the senate moves back to a democrat majority and they nominate and confirm Obama as the new justice.
I hope they push it out, Clinton or Sanders gets elected and the senate moves back to a democrat majority and they nominate and confirm Obama as the new justice.
Reformist Senate Republican leaders announce that they will block the President's Supreme Court nomination, whoever it may be. They instruct Americans to vote for the next president and the next justice in November. Thus they deny the President a prerogative mandated by the US Constitution and voters in the last election. Clearly these radicals abrogate their oath of office to "support and defend" the Constitution, to "bear true faith and allegiance" to it, and to "faithfully discharge the duties" it requires. If this arrogance persists, Supreme Court vacancies will be filled only when the same political party controls the Senate and the White House. This tilts the constitutional balance of powers forever.
"Wins the polls"? McConnell and the rest of them have rejected and tried to undermine President Obama from day 1. I resent them trying to invalidate my vote and the votes of the majority of voters who put President Obama in office for 8 not 7 years. I hope some legal recourse is available to force the Senate to consider his nominee. I hope those of us who support President Obama come out in droves later this year to defeat McConnell and the rest of them for trying to hijack our country.
What should we make of this? As soon as President Obama was elected by the American people, Mitch McConnell vowed to make him a one term president. Now, as soon as Justice Scalia died Mitch McConnell vowed that he would never allow a vote to get to the floor.
Charles Grassley, my US Senator, is head of the judiciary committee. He has a history of stating every nominee deserves an up or down vote. Today when he can deliver on that he will not.
Initially, Chairman Grassley thought he would take this process one step at a time. Yet, now he apparently has been taken to the woodshed by his party leaders. He authors a letter (or did he?) pledging not to hold hearings.
The photos in the news show the Senate GOP leadership. No Senator Grassley.
I will equally reject VP Biden's call to not hold hearing from back in 1995.
Frankly, I dispair.
Charles Grassley, my US Senator, is head of the judiciary committee. He has a history of stating every nominee deserves an up or down vote. Today when he can deliver on that he will not.
Initially, Chairman Grassley thought he would take this process one step at a time. Yet, now he apparently has been taken to the woodshed by his party leaders. He authors a letter (or did he?) pledging not to hold hearings.
The photos in the news show the Senate GOP leadership. No Senator Grassley.
I will equally reject VP Biden's call to not hold hearing from back in 1995.
Frankly, I dispair.
We should also note that there are currently 39 vacancies in the Federal judiciary to which President Obama has nominated a replacement. Some of these nominations go back to January of 2015. Yes, 13 months ago. The Senate has not acted on any of these nominations as well. The Republicans are, in effect, trying to make the entire Federal Judiciary a branch of the Republican Party.
2
I love how the repubs are saying that the "will of the people" will choose the next supreme court justice. Since when has the will of the people or the welfare of the people really mattered to McConnell or any of the republicans? This is just another obstruction like all of the others since Obama became president. No worry though, their party is in shambles and they won't be able to get rid of the Donald as the repub candidate. Let's see how well they do when the bully takes the Oval Office.
This Republican tactic to thwart the Constitution, if it is carried out, may be the one thing to convince Hillary-hating Democratic progressives to vote for her in the general election. Because some of us would have considered voting Republican if she won the nomination.
1
Can we at least not pay them if they won't do their job? It wouldn't make a ton of difference in their lives, chances are, but it would be a good reminder that they are not- and should not be- so far above the voting public that they are supposed to SERVE that they can't be touched.
Also, a handy reminder here for when the mid-term elections come. Clear them out if they won't do their jobs. That's a piece of how a free market economy works.
Also, a handy reminder here for when the mid-term elections come. Clear them out if they won't do their jobs. That's a piece of how a free market economy works.
1
In every respect, pathology, long-term effect of the disease, the Republican party is and has been a wasting cancer in the body politic of this country. It's long since time to understand, identify and fight against it under that definition.
3
If by some bizarre and unsettling circumstances a Republican is actually elected President in November, I would have no problems with Democrats filibustering and blocking any nominee to the Supreme Court.
The Republicans just cannot mentally accept the facts that 1) they are losing their voting base due to demographic changes, and 2) the Supreme Court will most certainly swing to the left, or maybe to a more fact-based-reality judge.
If Hillary Clinton is elected President, I hope she will push exactly the candidate she wants for the Supreme Court, no matter how "liberal." Does anyone think for one minute a Republican president would nominate some "neutral" or non-right wing candidate??
The Republicans just cannot mentally accept the facts that 1) they are losing their voting base due to demographic changes, and 2) the Supreme Court will most certainly swing to the left, or maybe to a more fact-based-reality judge.
If Hillary Clinton is elected President, I hope she will push exactly the candidate she wants for the Supreme Court, no matter how "liberal." Does anyone think for one minute a Republican president would nominate some "neutral" or non-right wing candidate??
How will we ever rise above 21st century racism when a branch of our government refuses basic civility toward the President of the United States?
Could Obama seek some kind of remedy-in-law (Constitutional provisions), about the Senate's block here, with a filing directly to the Supreme Court on this matter?
Would the Administration have "standing" to do so? Maybe?
Under what provision(s) of the Constitution would they file a claim? The specific one addressing the Senate's role to "advise and consent" (Article II, Section 2, Clause 2)?
This clause makes mandatory ("shall") the President's duty to nominate and appoint SCt justices.
Would the Senate's refusal to co-operate on this be a violation of the Constitution -- one that would subject those blocking the President's mandatory obligation, to a SCt order on compliance? Maybe?
OK, so the SCt is now a 4-4 split, on Repubs v. Dems.
Yet, Repubs Kennedy -- and esp Chief Justice Roberts -- have expressed significant concerns (and voted, likewise) in the past about the legacy of that court becoming viewed as "partisan" in regards to politics.
Might those (2) justices make it a 6-4 decision to issue such an order to the Senate?
What say ye, Constitutional scholars?
Would the Administration have "standing" to do so? Maybe?
Under what provision(s) of the Constitution would they file a claim? The specific one addressing the Senate's role to "advise and consent" (Article II, Section 2, Clause 2)?
This clause makes mandatory ("shall") the President's duty to nominate and appoint SCt justices.
Would the Senate's refusal to co-operate on this be a violation of the Constitution -- one that would subject those blocking the President's mandatory obligation, to a SCt order on compliance? Maybe?
OK, so the SCt is now a 4-4 split, on Repubs v. Dems.
Yet, Repubs Kennedy -- and esp Chief Justice Roberts -- have expressed significant concerns (and voted, likewise) in the past about the legacy of that court becoming viewed as "partisan" in regards to politics.
Might those (2) justices make it a 6-4 decision to issue such an order to the Senate?
What say ye, Constitutional scholars?
This is a hostile attempt by the GOP members of the Senate to negate any action by this President to fulfill his Constitutional obligation to nominate a successor to Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court. According to another news site , Senator Grassley has not responded to an invitation to meet with the President and Senator Leahy to discuss the proposed nomination. In my estimation, Senator Grassley's failure to respond to the President's act is a blatant act of disrespect.
It is also ironic , that Senator Toomey has taken a position that the nomination be made by the next President, when the Senator is also ,in essence, a lame duck Senator. Given that logic, he should not have a vote or any say until after the election as well.
It is also ironic , that Senator Toomey has taken a position that the nomination be made by the next President, when the Senator is also ,in essence, a lame duck Senator. Given that logic, he should not have a vote or any say until after the election as well.
1
Republicans should invoke the words of Nancy Reagan and just say NO!
Obama's abuse of our system has got to Stop!
Obama's abuse of our system has got to Stop!
1
Have you noticed that the "Golden Rule" does not apply to the neo-Christian Republicans. They have their own Republican Bible which places them above all. It's printed with "oil" and spews out pollution.
They have been drinking their own cool aid for so long that they don't understand how they gave birth to Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, and the electorate that is so angry, mean spirited and disloyal to support Donald and Ted over them. These characters will put us below sea level, bake us in the summer heat, destroy our democracy, bankrupt our economy, and when the last Republican is about to blow away in a hundred years, blame it all on President Obama.
They have been drinking their own cool aid for so long that they don't understand how they gave birth to Donald Trump and Ted Cruz, and the electorate that is so angry, mean spirited and disloyal to support Donald and Ted over them. These characters will put us below sea level, bake us in the summer heat, destroy our democracy, bankrupt our economy, and when the last Republican is about to blow away in a hundred years, blame it all on President Obama.
It's cool to drink Kool-Aid when watching Rachel Maddow and her perpetual pantsuit try to explain the Democrat mindset. All things in moderation.
Can't Democrats file contempt of Congress charges or request censures of the House and Senate Republican leadership for these unconstitutional actions? Are they not breaking any laws by intentionally preventing the President from performing his required constitutional duties?
It seems appropriate if McConnel's actions are able to proceed with impunity, the President can now select which constitutional duties he wants to perform: if any duties can be ignored, they all can be ignored. Is that where this country wants to go?
It seems appropriate if McConnel's actions are able to proceed with impunity, the President can now select which constitutional duties he wants to perform: if any duties can be ignored, they all can be ignored. Is that where this country wants to go?
Majority Leader McConnell lectures "Even if doing so [nominating someone to fill a Supreme Court vacancy] will inevitably plunge our nation into another bitter and avoidable struggle...." Who is he trying to kid? It's not only presidential prerogative to nominate, it's a constitutional duty.
By his declaration, McConnell is again dusting-off the tiresome GOP trope about President Obama's "divisiveness." If you bray a lie often and loudly enough, it becomes perceived as truth. This is like punching a classmate, unprovoked, in the school yard and then complaining to the principal about the classmate's fighting.
George Orwell would be proud.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
By his declaration, McConnell is again dusting-off the tiresome GOP trope about President Obama's "divisiveness." If you bray a lie often and loudly enough, it becomes perceived as truth. This is like punching a classmate, unprovoked, in the school yard and then complaining to the principal about the classmate's fighting.
George Orwell would be proud.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
3
Senator Mitchell is once again showing his limited intelligence and clumsy governing ability. Grassley is not much better (and I had expected better from him). The voters I know are aghast at this latest Republican stunt. I am thinking that there will be a democratic sweep in the next election.
Obama has been a successful president in spite of all the obstruction of the Republicans in Congress. Our economy, in particular, has recovered and continues to work well.
Wake up, Republicans, and go back to the days when you had some support of sane people. My parents would be extremely disgusted and are probably hanging their heads in heaven over the current state of affairs.
Obama has been a successful president in spite of all the obstruction of the Republicans in Congress. Our economy, in particular, has recovered and continues to work well.
Wake up, Republicans, and go back to the days when you had some support of sane people. My parents would be extremely disgusted and are probably hanging their heads in heaven over the current state of affairs.
Seems to me that the GOP has embraced a radical Anti-Federalism for at least the past two decades and intends not only to defund federal government, but to ensure its inability to function as well. Think Articles of Confederation redux with no federal courts, presidency, or powers of taxation. As far as the military goes, think militias sniping at each other across state lines.
1
Do the Republicans not see that they are reaping what they have sown? Republican voters are angry with do-nothing leaders. By being obstructionists, the Republicans have left a void of leadership and Mr. "I will be the greatest president God ever made" oligarch Trump has jumped in to fill it. Terrifying. Really terrifying.
2
And these guys are collecting their pay for doing what?
1
Re impeachment of Senator McConnell: "Gerald Ford stated: "An impeachable offense is whatever a majority of the House of Representatives considers it to be at a given moment in history." The House of Representatives did impeach a senator once: Senator William Blount, in 1798, I believe its time to do it again after 215 years. Jefferson's Manual, which is integral to the Rules of the House of Representatives states that impeachment is set in motion by charges made on the floor...It further states that a proposition to impeach is a question of high privilege in the House and at once supersedes business otherwise in order under the rules governing the order of business."
Mitch McConnell could do the country a favor by letting us know what else he has on his mind. Perhaps he should just call President Obama and tell him what he's allowed to do in his last year. If this miscreant of a Senate Majority leader has any ideas other than being anti-Obama, he's kept it a well guarded secret.
1
Appalling.The lengths the GOP will go to obstruct this duly elected President is
beyond anything I've ever witnessed.It can only be explained as bigotry pure and simple.Where is the public outrage?For a party that clings to a literal reading of the constitution,they, yet again,ignore the facts when it does not suit them.The GOP has held this country hostage for long enough...it borders on treason.The entire GOP should be taken down for racial crimes.
beyond anything I've ever witnessed.It can only be explained as bigotry pure and simple.Where is the public outrage?For a party that clings to a literal reading of the constitution,they, yet again,ignore the facts when it does not suit them.The GOP has held this country hostage for long enough...it borders on treason.The entire GOP should be taken down for racial crimes.
1
Do the Republicans really want that Donald T. or Hillary C. nominate the next Supreme Court Judge?
These senators MUST GO! Please vote them out and let the country get back to a working democracy.
1
Majority members of the Senate are clearly violating their constitutional responsibilities. Why can't someone – the President, Justice Department, an individual citizen – take them to court and force them to do their job?
Obama should nominate Mitch McConnell.
“This nomination will be determined by whoever wins the presidency in the polls,” Mr. McConnell said.
Um, Senator McConnell, I couldn't agree more, and a President has already been elected. His name is Barack Obama. The Constitution states that he shall nominate the next Supreme Court justice, so do your duty and let him.
This is not a rejection of a judicial candidate but a reaction of the the legitimacy of Obama's presidency, and a rejection of the entire idea of a constitutional democracy. After all, the American People elected President Obama twice. We expect the Senate to fulfill it's duty and let the President fulfill his.
This is one more reason I will never, ever, vote for a Republican for any office from neighborhood parking commissioner to President. There is no leadership or sense of governing left in the GOP. Only anger, obstructionism, and I'm-taking -my-ball-and-going-home-if-you-won't-play-my-way. Leave that in the playground, where it is still wrong, but at least developmentally appropriate.
Um, Senator McConnell, I couldn't agree more, and a President has already been elected. His name is Barack Obama. The Constitution states that he shall nominate the next Supreme Court justice, so do your duty and let him.
This is not a rejection of a judicial candidate but a reaction of the the legitimacy of Obama's presidency, and a rejection of the entire idea of a constitutional democracy. After all, the American People elected President Obama twice. We expect the Senate to fulfill it's duty and let the President fulfill his.
This is one more reason I will never, ever, vote for a Republican for any office from neighborhood parking commissioner to President. There is no leadership or sense of governing left in the GOP. Only anger, obstructionism, and I'm-taking -my-ball-and-going-home-if-you-won't-play-my-way. Leave that in the playground, where it is still wrong, but at least developmentally appropriate.
2
The GOP is unraveling; desperate men take desperate measures.
2
I believe an arrest of the GOP Senate Judiciary Committee Membership is in order. They are guilty of treason and should be punished accordingly.
This is apathetic and offensive abdication of a constitutional duty by the Senate.
Meet the nominee, hold hearings, and vote against confirmation. But do your jobs.
Every Senator swore an oath to the constitution when you were elected.
Meet the nominee, hold hearings, and vote against confirmation. But do your jobs.
Every Senator swore an oath to the constitution when you were elected.
1
What a model for all those countries we strive to conquer in the name of spreading democracy. Between the disgraceful behavior of some candidates and this petulant pout-fest, I can imagine people around the world saying, "You can keep it!" I have to agree.
2
This situation is a sad commentary on the GOP and the U.S. Senate. These people swore to uphold the Constitution, yet are flatly refusing to do so with this action. The argument is that it is an election year is fallacious. The Constitution isn't put into suspension because we have an election coming up in November. We elect officials to serve and uphold the Constitution for the entirety of their elected terms, not just the portion before the next campaign cycle begins.
McConnell and his Republican colleagues are engaging in treasonous behavior with this act. They should be tried accordingly.
McConnell and his Republican colleagues are engaging in treasonous behavior with this act. They should be tried accordingly.
I love the selected amnesia liberals have on this. Take a look at Biden 1992. Did SAME exact thing. Sen. Joe Biden in 1992 says President Bush should "not name a nominee until after the November election..." Were the democrats so outraged here the least bit upset when Biden said it?? Hypocrites all.
“This nomination will be determined by whoever wins the presidency in the polls,” Mr. McConnell said.
Mitch must be incredibly stupid. President Obama did indeed win the presidency. Twice.
Republicans are a disaster.
Mitch must be incredibly stupid. President Obama did indeed win the presidency. Twice.
Republicans are a disaster.
2
So...Mitch McConnel and his pals are willing to take the risk that Donald Trump might be afforded the opportunity to advance the next nominee to the Supreme Court. And, turn it into a reality TV show!!
2
Just when I thought the GOP couldn't be more obstructionist, they surprise me. The GOP has got to go. I don't care about anything that they have to say about anything at this point. They are a group of unreasonable people that reflect and cater to the worst elements of American society. It used to be my party once, but I do not recognize what it has become. I don't say this lightly, but Sanders was on point when he mentioned that the animus towards Obama does have a lot to do with his background.
2
No one should be at all surprised that the Republican party wants to do whatever they can to bend the Supreme Court towards their conservative cause. One might even allow for their current tactic if they were busy putting forth anything positive in the way of legislation to benefit our country. But they are busy only with obstructionism in all areas. They are the fifth-grade bully who has the ball and refuses to put it into play, having the only goal of keeping anyone at all from engaging in the game. One cannot shame them because they simply do not care. A sad state of affairs indeed.
Republicans are cowards, to afraid to do the job they were elected to do.
Washington's broken? Yes....by the GOP
Washington's broken? Yes....by the GOP
2
That's not what the American electorate said in the Nov. 2010, Nov. 2014, and Nov. 2015 elections, is it? Making Obama the lamest duck ever.
Charles: President Obama a lame duck, you say? Wrong, ol' boy.
1. President Obama, and the world, this year passed the most comprehensive environmental protection in history.
2. President Obama continued his surge against Polluter Republicans by prohibiting development of a key pipeline.
3. President Obama's key national insurance plan continues to repel the GOP's assault to repeal it.
4. President Obama stands up for the rights of women, gays, and other minorities -- minorities disparaged and ignored by the GOP.
Glad I could help, Chuck.
1. President Obama, and the world, this year passed the most comprehensive environmental protection in history.
2. President Obama continued his surge against Polluter Republicans by prohibiting development of a key pipeline.
3. President Obama's key national insurance plan continues to repel the GOP's assault to repeal it.
4. President Obama stands up for the rights of women, gays, and other minorities -- minorities disparaged and ignored by the GOP.
Glad I could help, Chuck.
3
Give the Republicans a break, but only for a moment.
The Democrats play the same game when the tables are turned; read Biden's 1992 speech, briefly mentioned in the article; his words are fully relevant to the current discussion. And recall that when Justice Alito was being considered, then Senator Barak Obama voted to filibuster.
I think the Republicans should give Obama's forthcoming nominee a hearing, but the bottom line is: it doesn't matter. The Republican controlled Senate will not vote to confirm prior to the election.
The good news, such at it is, for those of a liberal persuasion is that Mr. Trump is the leading candidate for the Republican nomination for President. When makes it quite likely that the next Justice will be nominated by President Hillary Clinton. As a moderate Republican, and the Editorial Board's writings notwithstanding, the phrase is not an oxymoron, I don't believe Mr. Trump is electable.
The Democrats play the same game when the tables are turned; read Biden's 1992 speech, briefly mentioned in the article; his words are fully relevant to the current discussion. And recall that when Justice Alito was being considered, then Senator Barak Obama voted to filibuster.
I think the Republicans should give Obama's forthcoming nominee a hearing, but the bottom line is: it doesn't matter. The Republican controlled Senate will not vote to confirm prior to the election.
The good news, such at it is, for those of a liberal persuasion is that Mr. Trump is the leading candidate for the Republican nomination for President. When makes it quite likely that the next Justice will be nominated by President Hillary Clinton. As a moderate Republican, and the Editorial Board's writings notwithstanding, the phrase is not an oxymoron, I don't believe Mr. Trump is electable.
Shame on them! They took a solemn vow to uphold the Constitution - the same Constitution which gives the President a FULL four year term, makes it his duty to nominate a Justice when necessary and the duty of the Senate to consider that nomination.
Shame on them! They should be impeached for dereliction of duty,
Shame on them! They should be impeached for dereliction of duty,
The latest GOP claim is that Joe Biden proposed the same approach in 1992. That is false. In that Senate speech, Biden urged President Bush not to nominate anyone until after the November election, but promised to give due consideration to a Bush nominee made then and committed to supporting such a nominee if he were moderate - or even if Bush consulted with the Senate before making the nomination. It might also be noted that Biden was speaking in later June, just a few weeks before the Democratic Convention. All Biden was asking was to avoid tying up either process by mixing them in time.
2
The Constitution is quite clear about the roles of the president and the senate in this situation. What word other than "treasonous" does justice to McConnell's actions?
Biden said his words were taken out of context. Well, I heard the whole speech and the context was quite clear. He meant what he said.
Bottom line: If the GOP doesn't have the Supreme Court it has nothing. Since getting the conservative majority in the Supreme Court, the Republicans have had both houses of Congress. This is no accident, and the Republicans know it. With a liberal court, they get fair elections, with fair elections they lose!
Voter suppression, gerrymandering, campaign finance, all the Republican advantages go out the window when the court finally goes liberal. This is no surprise that they are fighting the nominee, they have no choice. It's either stop the appointment of another liberal justice, or half of them will lose their jobs.
It's that simple. In this economy, we all know, it's job security. They couldn't care less about Obama, or what race he is, or the budget. In fact, it helps get them elected as talking points for Conservative media. All that matters is keeping those quasi legal advantages that the court has allowed them. Without them they are toast.
Voter suppression, gerrymandering, campaign finance, all the Republican advantages go out the window when the court finally goes liberal. This is no surprise that they are fighting the nominee, they have no choice. It's either stop the appointment of another liberal justice, or half of them will lose their jobs.
It's that simple. In this economy, we all know, it's job security. They couldn't care less about Obama, or what race he is, or the budget. In fact, it helps get them elected as talking points for Conservative media. All that matters is keeping those quasi legal advantages that the court has allowed them. Without them they are toast.
Time for a recess appointment, Mr. President, to deal with the current calendar of important cases -- a blazing progressive, to ensure that this Republican "victory" is short-lived. Then President Sanders and the Democratic Congress can make it permanent. The Republican senators shall reep what they have sown.
A perfect example of why the appointment of Supreme Court judges should be taken out of the political process.
One would think the Chief Justice would speak up and alert the majority that what they are doing is purely political and as such, for all intents and purposes, illuminates the third branch or our Constitutional Government, supposedly impartial, as the same political hacks that run Congress. Oh well, our democratic experiment so cherished by the Framers has been hijacked by a bunch of petulant, privileged, children with no moral backbone.
Biden's speech "has come back to bite him and his Party big time"? Hardly.
Biden's speech was in June, suggesting that nominations after June be deferred for the next president, after January. McConnell and posse's shut-down of the process was announced in February, much earlier, and would leave the Court without a full complement of Justices for much longer.
And think of what the Democrats will do, and the press, at the announcement of all those 4-4 non-decisions ( 8 or 10?) across the time remaining before January.
Biden's speech was in June, suggesting that nominations after June be deferred for the next president, after January. McConnell and posse's shut-down of the process was announced in February, much earlier, and would leave the Court without a full complement of Justices for much longer.
And think of what the Democrats will do, and the press, at the announcement of all those 4-4 non-decisions ( 8 or 10?) across the time remaining before January.
I agree with all below. This takes out government to a new low. Can we get beyond the bipartisan politics and actually get something done? Someone commented about them acting like 2nd graders? I would say 2nd graders act better!
A message to our government leaders:
We should have respect for our President and allow the process to continue as it has for over 200 years. Please remember why you are there. Its not about your domineering power. Its not about the new appointee being Republican or Democrat, its about nominating the best person for the job so the Supreme Court can continue do the work they need to do. It is about balance. Please try to look beyond your biases and remember who put you in office to begin with.
A message to our government leaders:
We should have respect for our President and allow the process to continue as it has for over 200 years. Please remember why you are there. Its not about your domineering power. Its not about the new appointee being Republican or Democrat, its about nominating the best person for the job so the Supreme Court can continue do the work they need to do. It is about balance. Please try to look beyond your biases and remember who put you in office to begin with.
The Republicans are witnessing a massive revolt in their primary against a government that does not solve problems. It seems very strange to me that they still refusing to act on any of the serious issues that need to be addressed, further showing that they cannot do anything but have a temper tantrum during which they scream No, No, No. Why?
I guess the Republicans want President Bernie Sanders to submit an appointment to the new Democratic Majority Senate come January. I am sure Majority Leader Chuck Schumer will expedite the process.
Straight Outta Brooklyn.
Straight Outta Brooklyn.
2
If Scalia had died a year ago, what excuse would McConnell have used? Two years ago? He would have found some reason for shirking his responsibilities and thumbing his nose at the Constitution.
1
Justice Scalia was an "originalist," a staunch defender of the Constitution in its original form and intent. Now, after his passing, the GOP says it will block the sitting President from fulfilling his constitutional duty to name a successor, citing that it is "unfair". Sounds like a small child changing the rules in a board game. Grow up, shut up, and vet the nominee. The stated intent to "block any nominee" is obstructionist, dishonest, and sad. It's a ludicrous indefensible position, beneath the integrity of the process and defies the rule of law.
Why is it so difficult for congressmen to perform their job according to the job description? In the private sector these slackers would have been fired long ago.
Republicans motto:
Obstruct! Obstruct! Obstruct!
Since day one Mitch McConnel said “Our No. 1 priority is to make this president a one-term president,” They didn't get their candy, but since, Obama has been constrained by an unprecedented obduracy in his Republican opposition.
The media is still asking why Trump can't be stopped! Well, this is why!
They are the worse group set of senators of all times.
Sick and tired of these toddlers in suits just to pretending to look after our country.
What part of the Constitution, these Republicans DON'T understand?
Watch out! You are next we will get rid of!
Obstruct! Obstruct! Obstruct!
Since day one Mitch McConnel said “Our No. 1 priority is to make this president a one-term president,” They didn't get their candy, but since, Obama has been constrained by an unprecedented obduracy in his Republican opposition.
The media is still asking why Trump can't be stopped! Well, this is why!
They are the worse group set of senators of all times.
Sick and tired of these toddlers in suits just to pretending to look after our country.
What part of the Constitution, these Republicans DON'T understand?
Watch out! You are next we will get rid of!
1
Why not just leave the number of Justices at 8? There's no requirement of a specific number, so 8 is just as good as 9. Maybe better...
Dear Mitch McConnell and GOP Senators: Bless your heart, you seem to have forgotten the roles of government. We the people elect the president, the president selects Supreme Court justices, and the Senate decides whether or not to confirm said nominee. Nowhere in our Constitution does it say that the Senate decides whether or not the President gets to nominate a candidate. Nor does it say the president is only allowed to nominate someone in the first three years of their term. Refusing to vote, confirm, or even meet with the President's Supreme Court nominee is completely unprecedented and a direct violation of the Constitution. Do you want to know why Trump is trouncing your guys state after state? Because you show time and time again that you are nothing but a bunch of tantrum throwing children unable to govern. Are you so above reproach that you think you can refuse to do your job and smugly think you deserve to keep your seat? You all should be fired!
If you don't want to do your job? You will be FIRE!
I am embarrassed by this. I can only imagine that the rest of the world is looking at what going on politically in this country and scratching their heads in collective disillusionment. Our so-called model of government has been hijacked by a group of ultra-conservatives who have put the democratic process in a straight-jacket. They hold up the Constitution only when it fits their agenda - reprimanding our courts when it is perceived that they've reached that decision by reading between the lines of the Constitution, and conveniently read between the lines themselves when it suits them. Republican candidates still bring up issues on the campaign trail that have already been decided by the Supreme Court, such as a patients right to abortion and gay marriage - decisions made while Scalia was on the bench. If Trump (or any other Republican candidate) prevails in November? God help us.
If I were the Republicans, I would have modified the letter to say
after the Election but not necessarily before the new President is sworn in,
for if Hillary wins, she might nominate far more liberal Judges than President
Obama, and if the Republicans lose control of the Senate in November,
this option might prove worthwhile.
after the Election but not necessarily before the new President is sworn in,
for if Hillary wins, she might nominate far more liberal Judges than President
Obama, and if the Republicans lose control of the Senate in November,
this option might prove worthwhile.
2
Thank you, Mitch. As I was generally not excited about either Clinton or Sanders, I was not planning to contribute to the Presidential campaign.
You and your sorry lot of seditious Senators have changed my mind. I'm now thinking of doubling what I gave to Obama in 2008 and 2012.
You and your sorry lot of seditious Senators have changed my mind. I'm now thinking of doubling what I gave to Obama in 2008 and 2012.
Last I checked it was this "president" who was a little iffy on the COnstitution regarding governance and enacting law. Booo, hooo, hooo. You reap what you sow.... Now I'll sit back and enjoy the show why you all cry like babies now that the shoes on the other foot.
McConnel Grassley and their lot, are abjuring their positions
They are demogogues and idealogues who are guilty of sedition
They are shunning the electorate and their constitutional duties
By acting like bullies in second grade accusing Obama of cooties.
The angry public will not with withstand its trust being so breached
Without delay let us start today to IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH!
They are demogogues and idealogues who are guilty of sedition
They are shunning the electorate and their constitutional duties
By acting like bullies in second grade accusing Obama of cooties.
The angry public will not with withstand its trust being so breached
Without delay let us start today to IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH!
1
Want a solution? Get rid of the parties. Every particular issue should be debated on its own merits by Senators, and by the citizens as well. As George Washington said "...the common and continual mischiefs of the spirit of party are sufficient to make it the interest and duty of a wise people to discourage and restrain it."
Our first president well understood the "...the alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension." He warned against "the baneful effects" of party, especially in government of the people (where) "it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy."
The quotes are from Washington's farewell address.
Our first president well understood the "...the alternate domination of one faction over another, sharpened by the spirit of revenge, natural to party dissension." He warned against "the baneful effects" of party, especially in government of the people (where) "it is seen in its greatest rankness, and is truly their worst enemy."
The quotes are from Washington's farewell address.
Mitch needs to be FIRED! I know that's not the way it works but do nothing obstructionist congressmen need to go. Vote them out ! We need term limits!
The foto accompanying the article is worth a thousand words. Say what you will about Republicans, they have power politics in their DNA. They understand the stakes and are calculating and pulling out all the stops to preserve the right/conservative Court for the next generation or two.
Meanwhile, what are the Democrats doing? President Obama has recently turned his focus on … Guantanamo? Why? To remind the country of a long unfulfilled campaign promise and give the Republican candidates another club to bash him with?
At the very least Democrats should be treating this with the same level of urgency as Republicans – with one appointment the direction of the Court swings to the left for the foreseeable future.
That will be most or all of the adult lives of millennial voters. The appointment should be used as a clarion call for registering new Democratic voters and motivating the youth who will be disappointed when the Sanders nomination/revolution fizzles.
Meanwhile, what are the Democrats doing? President Obama has recently turned his focus on … Guantanamo? Why? To remind the country of a long unfulfilled campaign promise and give the Republican candidates another club to bash him with?
At the very least Democrats should be treating this with the same level of urgency as Republicans – with one appointment the direction of the Court swings to the left for the foreseeable future.
That will be most or all of the adult lives of millennial voters. The appointment should be used as a clarion call for registering new Democratic voters and motivating the youth who will be disappointed when the Sanders nomination/revolution fizzles.
Senator John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 Republican and a member of the Judiciary Committee, concurred. “I don’t see the point of going through the motions if we know what the outcome is going to be,” he said.
Did Sen. Cornyn vote to defund Obamacare? Did any Republican? Wouldn't they expect that Obama would veto a piece of legislation that has the president's very name colloquially attached to it? Republicans today are worse than mere hypocrites, they are treasonous un-American louts. Where's the tar and feathers when you need 'em?
Did Sen. Cornyn vote to defund Obamacare? Did any Republican? Wouldn't they expect that Obama would veto a piece of legislation that has the president's very name colloquially attached to it? Republicans today are worse than mere hypocrites, they are treasonous un-American louts. Where's the tar and feathers when you need 'em?
Republicans, let the hate keep showing.
All they have shown these past years is that hate is this political parties current brand.
This latest action does not surprise me.
Trump is the result of this sickness that grips this party
All they have shown these past years is that hate is this political parties current brand.
This latest action does not surprise me.
Trump is the result of this sickness that grips this party
Let's fire them as soon as we can!
Mitch McConnell is a hero. Why waste time? Mitch's actions will bring out millions of voters on both sides. Most people are sick of the corruption in Washington. Games that do not benefit the country have been substituted for a functioning government and holds no benefit for the American people. When Hillary Clinton offered a seat on the Supreme Court to President Obama on a whim as a political gift, President Obama said that he was not interested. The Supreme Court is important and the American people should make their will heard at the ballot box. I would suggest that all candidates for POTUS should starts a process of finding a candidate for the Supreme Court that the voters can render their opinion on by electing the candidate who has given them the choice.
Make no mistake about it, this GOP obstructionism aims to prevent the overturning of Citizen's United. The GOP Senators have received their orders from their benefactors and their pledge to block any SCOTUS nominee is how they will execute the orders.
Every time McConnell opens his mouth, Trump wins another state.
Take a good look at the list of Senators refusing to do their job. It is our job as US citizens, a constitutional right, to vote. I know I would get fired if I refused to do my job. why is a Senator any different. DO NOT VOTE THEM BACK IN OFFICE
1
Senator McConnell and other Republicans say that they want to "let the voters decide."
The voters did decide. They elected Barack Obama for a second term as President of the United States in 2012, in the belief and expectation that he would perform his duty and exercise his authority as President under the Constitution throughout his term until replaced by his successor in January 2017.
Republicans do not genuinely want this issue "decided by the voters." They have no respect whatever for the legitimate expectations of any of the voters who cast their votes for President Obama during the 2012 election. They are arrogantly, blatantly and utterly disrespecting the right to vote of every single American voter who cast his or her ballot for President Obama during the 2012 election.
Consider carefully the broader implications of what Senator McConnell is saying. If ISIS were to launch a terrorist attack against the U.S. homeland, is Senator McConnell suggesting, based on the same theory, that President Obama should refrain from making any response as Commander In Chief of the U.S. armed forces, take no action whatever, and "let the voters decide" how to respond after the next election?
Senator McConnell, my vote is my own. You are trying to steal it from me, but I won't let you. There is one thing you can be absolutely certain of. When I cast my ballot next November, I will have clearly and firmly in mind how you have disrespected me and other American voters.
The voters did decide. They elected Barack Obama for a second term as President of the United States in 2012, in the belief and expectation that he would perform his duty and exercise his authority as President under the Constitution throughout his term until replaced by his successor in January 2017.
Republicans do not genuinely want this issue "decided by the voters." They have no respect whatever for the legitimate expectations of any of the voters who cast their votes for President Obama during the 2012 election. They are arrogantly, blatantly and utterly disrespecting the right to vote of every single American voter who cast his or her ballot for President Obama during the 2012 election.
Consider carefully the broader implications of what Senator McConnell is saying. If ISIS were to launch a terrorist attack against the U.S. homeland, is Senator McConnell suggesting, based on the same theory, that President Obama should refrain from making any response as Commander In Chief of the U.S. armed forces, take no action whatever, and "let the voters decide" how to respond after the next election?
Senator McConnell, my vote is my own. You are trying to steal it from me, but I won't let you. There is one thing you can be absolutely certain of. When I cast my ballot next November, I will have clearly and firmly in mind how you have disrespected me and other American voters.
1
Well, I know that these persons are figuring that by refusing to at least make an effort to meet Obama half way, they are thinking that history will look at his record as ineffective.
But unlike with most of history, past, when someone wrote their opinions about events that happened, these folks have to realize they are on tape. Every stupid utterance they've made, everything they have done to block anything that Obama has proposed, is on tape for all of history and future students of history to observe.
By their own actions, they are writing Obama's legacy, which will make Obama's presidency look masterful.
But unlike with most of history, past, when someone wrote their opinions about events that happened, these folks have to realize they are on tape. Every stupid utterance they've made, everything they have done to block anything that Obama has proposed, is on tape for all of history and future students of history to observe.
By their own actions, they are writing Obama's legacy, which will make Obama's presidency look masterful.
President Obama is nothing if not smart.
He knows that if he keeps putting up qualified nominees and the feckless confederates in the Senate keep ignoring him the Koch owned GOP will take a hit when Hillary runs against the Donald Trump in the general.
If the kentucky milquetoast McConnell thinks he makes President Obama nervous or gives him a microsecond of pause, he is crazier than we thought.
He knows that if he keeps putting up qualified nominees and the feckless confederates in the Senate keep ignoring him the Koch owned GOP will take a hit when Hillary runs against the Donald Trump in the general.
If the kentucky milquetoast McConnell thinks he makes President Obama nervous or gives him a microsecond of pause, he is crazier than we thought.
Stop club Republican A constitution law the President has every constitutional right to nominatea candidate for the Supreme Court
The funny thing about this mess is that Mitch McConnell was supposedly going to use his Republican majority during this session of Congress leading into the 2016 Presidential election to "demonstrate that Republicans could govern" - in contrast to the self-destructive obstructionism that led to a government shut-down. How's that project going for you, Mitch??
The President should perform his Constitutional duty to nominate Scalia's successor. That nominee should have impeccable credentials. And if McConnell and Grassley remain obdurate, the Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee should conduct their own public hearings. That will not have much if any chance of resulting in the confirmation of the candidate. But it will provide a highly visible dramatic representation of the competent and proper conduct of Democratic officeholders - in sharp contrast to the mindless and arguably unconstitutional conduct of the total governmentally dysfunctional Republican legislators.
The President should perform his Constitutional duty to nominate Scalia's successor. That nominee should have impeccable credentials. And if McConnell and Grassley remain obdurate, the Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee should conduct their own public hearings. That will not have much if any chance of resulting in the confirmation of the candidate. But it will provide a highly visible dramatic representation of the competent and proper conduct of Democratic officeholders - in sharp contrast to the mindless and arguably unconstitutional conduct of the total governmentally dysfunctional Republican legislators.
1
No Senators seeking re-election should have a vote in the Senate during their lame-duck 2016 session of Congress.
1
"[The President] may, on extraordinary occasions, convene both Houses, or either of them...." (Article II, Section 3)
http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/opinions/1989/07/31/op-ol...
“This nomination will be determined by whoever wins the Presidency in the polls,” Mr. McConnell said. “I agree with the Judiciary Committee’s recommendation that we not have hearings. In short, there will not be action taken.”
Well, as the Constitution makes clear, and as supported by the Office of Legal Counsel, action can be taken. Thus, a nominee--found to be very well qualified by the ABA, professors of law and history, and by the press--needs to be sent up. And, if necessary, the President should call the Senate into special session. Then the American people will see that the upper House has gone from advise and consent to ignore and dissent, for which the Republicans should pay a price at the polls.
http://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/olc/opinions/1989/07/31/op-ol...
“This nomination will be determined by whoever wins the Presidency in the polls,” Mr. McConnell said. “I agree with the Judiciary Committee’s recommendation that we not have hearings. In short, there will not be action taken.”
Well, as the Constitution makes clear, and as supported by the Office of Legal Counsel, action can be taken. Thus, a nominee--found to be very well qualified by the ABA, professors of law and history, and by the press--needs to be sent up. And, if necessary, the President should call the Senate into special session. Then the American people will see that the upper House has gone from advise and consent to ignore and dissent, for which the Republicans should pay a price at the polls.
Perhaps the President should announce that he will veto every bill that comes to his desk on the grounds that no law should be passed until a new Senate has been elected.
1
Been there, done that. Of 423 pieces of legislation sent to Obama for review by McConnell and Boehner, only 10 or so survived Harry Reid's impoundment of them. Obviously Obama was not ready for prime time, as Bill Clinton often said in 2007. Hence, the biggest Democrat loss since 1932 (!) was their reward for Apathy come the 2014 Midterms.
“This nomination will be determined by whoever wins the presidency in the polls,”
If such should turn out to be the case it is most essential that a Democrat - any Democrat - win the presidential election. I think it is time for the Republican Party to go the way of the Whigs - they serve no useful purpose and bring out the worst in American no-nothing attitudes.
If such should turn out to be the case it is most essential that a Democrat - any Democrat - win the presidential election. I think it is time for the Republican Party to go the way of the Whigs - they serve no useful purpose and bring out the worst in American no-nothing attitudes.
Obstruct, delay, ignore. As if anything else was ever really expected...after all, the Senate Majority Leader is still hard at work trying to ensure Obama is a one-term president who must be denied at every turn. Besides which, this bit of political gamesmanship is as old as presidents sending SC nominations to the Senate...
Oh, how delicious the irony would be...if the electoral college chose to elect the Democratic candidate and the American electorate chose to return the Senate majority to the Democrats...delicious indeed.
Oh, how delicious the irony would be...if the electoral college chose to elect the Democratic candidate and the American electorate chose to return the Senate majority to the Democrats...delicious indeed.
It is exactly this idiotic posture that has delivered Donald Trump to our doors. It is time to get rid of these "do nothing" Republicans.
Frankly I'm shocked (though I shouldn't be) at how obtuse Mitch McConnell and his fellow Republicans on the Judiciary Committee are being. Donald Trump (God help us) is leading the Republican primary by double digits for a reason. A majority of Republicans in this country are so angry and disallusioned with the political process that they are willing to vote for a bigoted, racist, blowhard rather than an established Republican candidate. It’s this scorched earth, no compromise, non productive tactic that has brought the Republican party to this juncture. One of the bigger irony’s in the situation is that Justice Scalia was the most literal constitutionalist on the bench.
The Appointment Clause of the Constitution (Article II, Section 2, Clause 2) states that the president "shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint ... Judges of the Supreme Court."
Apparently, Mitch keeps closing his eyes and with all of his might keeps wishing Obama away. "I think I can, I think I can....."
The Appointment Clause of the Constitution (Article II, Section 2, Clause 2) states that the president "shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint ... Judges of the Supreme Court."
Apparently, Mitch keeps closing his eyes and with all of his might keeps wishing Obama away. "I think I can, I think I can....."
It appears to me that these Senators are in willful violation of this line of their oath of office, and therefore should be impeached. "I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter"
from their oath:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."
from their oath:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God."
There are so many things I could say, but one word sums it up: disgraceful.
I wonder, what would the Founding Fathers think about McConnell and his Republican Party? I think the Founding Fathers would turn over in their graves knowing that their sacrifices, their gift of the Constitution and their hope for America's future were all trashed by petty-thinking, legislative pretenders.
What would the Founding Fathers think of two men getting married, and paying someone to have a baby for them? Geez, Tom Jefferson having a slave catamite is one thing, but at least it was natural.
The Conservative branch of the Supreme Court has already become politicized in recent history. Instead of being "orignalists" they shape their decisions based on their political desires. You may recall how Bush won the Florida vote to get elected. Under Roberts, business interests have rarely lost a decision. Nowhere in the Scalia obituaries or news stories since he died was there any mention of his close ties with the Koch brothers and their political organizations and about his attendance at their secretive conferences. They never mentioned his refusal to recuse himself from the case involving his buddy Dick Cheney. Why would anybody want to give a free hunting trip to a Justice? Why would an ethical Justice accept such favors. Clarence Thomas also has unseemly politcal ties through his wife's activities. I don't recall there being previous Supreme Courts so involved in partisan politics. You'd think they wouldn't want to appear to be tainted by partisan politics once they've reached that level. I don't recall any previous Court being so politically active. It just doesn't seem right.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/2/20/1488186/-The-Media-Have-Forgotte...
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/2/20/1488186/-The-Media-Have-Forgotte...
There has been a coup d'etat in this country; the Republicans are holding this country as hostage and it is more than just one action. For one thing it is pure racism against Obama; for another it's a desire for complete control of this country. I have never been so scared and I lived for the Cuban Missile Country which was plenty scary. Equally, I am afraid of the electorate which puts these monsters in power. Unless the Democrats can take control of Congress, I fear for us all.
What is the bigger tragedy is that these fools are focused on something that most Americans do not care about and will have little impact on their lives. Their focus and behavior is near treason.
We all see it. We know they do not care. Start your next war, politician and ...Whoa! What? No one is going over to fight? "Treason! Cowardly!" you say?
Remember this day the next time, politico, that you try and send people over to die to protect corporate interests. You know, the ones that send jobs overseas while you bicker.
We all see it. We know they do not care. Start your next war, politician and ...Whoa! What? No one is going over to fight? "Treason! Cowardly!" you say?
Remember this day the next time, politico, that you try and send people over to die to protect corporate interests. You know, the ones that send jobs overseas while you bicker.
As an independent, I see both parties responsible for keeping the senate dysfunctional. Most of the rules of the senate can be changed by a simple vote. But neither party wants to remove filibuster. Senator Reed was the majority leader if the senate for years, but he chose to keep the rule in place. No point in blaming Republicans. Likewise Republicans are going to keep this rule in place but will blame Democrats for filibustering important legislation. The senate is the swill of American politics.
I couldn't help but laugh when I read the Quote of the Day from Mitch McConnell: "This nomination will be determined by whoever wins the presidency in the polls." Apparently that excludes the person who already won the presidency in the polls. It does not surprise me that Republicans are so angry at Washington and so dismissive of establishment Republican candidates. Their party has made it their sole purpose to prevent anything getting done there that could accrue credit to President Obama.
Disgusting.
Get back to work Senators!
Get back to work Senators!
1
This has probably already been commented on below, but the reality is that, even if a new Justice is confirmed by this time next year, it will in effect be two terms lost because "next year's" session of the Court begins this year on October 1st. These country clubber military service avoiding GOP Senators who have dissed Obama from Day One shouldn't be surprised when the 2016 African American voter turn-out exceeds that of 2008 and 2012.
Once again the Party of No has raised its ugly head to show just how frightened and mean spirited they are, especially McConnell, who should be given an enema and buried in a thimble. They are living in the fanatsy world that the Republicans will win the presidential election and name another right-wing judge to the SCOTUS. McConnell's reason for living is not to act as a leader or to find ways to solve the problems of the US through cooperative and compromising legislation , but to throw roadblocks in front nof everything the President and the Democrats in Congress try to do to solve the problems of our country. He and the Republican members of the Judiciary committee ought to be named and the Democrats pour money effort into getting Democrats elected . By making the unpatriotic deeds of these do-nothing obstructionist known to the American public and the harm they are inflicting on our country, perhaps we can get them broomed out in 2016 and get back to the business of running the country. It is interesting how the Repubs go to the Constitution for 2nd Amendment support, but ignore it for other issues that don't fit into their narrow vision of democracy.
1
To be perfectly honest none of us on the conservative side care what the "progressives" think about this it is frankly irrelevant. We simply don't want Obama to cause any more damage to this country than he already has.
With all due respect, could you list 4 or 7 things President Obama has done that has damaged the country? I just don't see it.
McConnell's coward's countenance in the Times photo perfectly depicts his narcissistic contempt of ethics. This Pest -- this Scab on prudence, virtue, and liberty -- should remove himself from the public landscape -- immediately.
And when this happens, a psychiatrist should then examine this Loser's brain to determine what infected it.
And when this happens, a psychiatrist should then examine this Loser's brain to determine what infected it.
1
I don't care if he has oral cancer, or elephant ears like Obama, he gets results. Hear the Democrats squeal in angst!
Charles --
Sure. McConnell gets "results." The negative kind.
P.S.: We'd all be blessed if a dog ate his awful homework, and he had to go home.
Sure. McConnell gets "results." The negative kind.
P.S.: We'd all be blessed if a dog ate his awful homework, and he had to go home.
1
Can the People sue the Senate Judiciary Committee for obstructing their constitutional duty to provide us with judicial branch representation? If so, could it go all the way up to the Supreme Court, all 8 of them?
I read the letter and the 11 GOP members of the judicial committee are taking several things for granted, first of all that one of their candidates will be President next year and 2nd of all that they know what the American People want. I can't imagine a darn thing they want that I want- they're nothing but obstructionists and have divided this country for the last 8 years and blamed the President for their actions. Unfortunately for much of the American public, if you say something loud enough and often enough people believe it. I wouldn't vote for one of the current GOP Presidential hopefuls- least of all the 3 top runners.
Biden's speech in 1992 came in late June. It's not remotely the same thing that the GOP is staging this year when a justice died in February!
Let's face it, the white identity party, now called The Republicans, do not feel that the nation's first black president should have been allowed to use any of the powers of his office at any time.
Let's face it, the white identity party, now called The Republicans, do not feel that the nation's first black president should have been allowed to use any of the powers of his office at any time.
Play the race card, when all else fails. An accident of birth is Barry's last defense, the same reason her got elected, ironically.
On the contrary, it's the GOP that has been playing the race card for decades. That's the polite term for it anyway.
McConnell will go down in history as a modern day Grand Wizard whose only mission was to delegitimize the first Black President. Oh yes, he will of course deny it. But history will judge him harshly. Years ago, there was a debate about whether the Senate should break the filibuster rule when it comes to Supreme Court nominees. Senators from the left and right wringed their hands on this difficult issue. But even before the nomination was made, when it came to consider a Black President's Supreme Court nominee, the Grand Wizard in an instant declared there would not even be any hearings. And we all thought Kentucky only had two Ks.
The republicans are under no obligation constitutionally or otherwise to cooperate with this president. Obama has never once attempted to work with the republicans from Obamacare foward and one reaps what one sows.
"You accuse me of doing nothing. That is not true, as a matter of fact. I am far, far above doing nothing, I am boldly refusing to act."
And I thought the republican presidential nominees were a bunch of clowns, in a clown car. these guys have been riding in the clown bus. What an embarrassment to our democracy that elected officials think it is great to ignore the Office of the President and the Constitution of the US for their own party benefits.
And I thought the republican presidential nominees were a bunch of clowns, in a clown car. these guys have been riding in the clown bus. What an embarrassment to our democracy that elected officials think it is great to ignore the Office of the President and the Constitution of the US for their own party benefits.
The clown car is not being tailed by an unmarked sedan driven by the FBI corruption squad, per the orders yesterday of a Federal judge against Hillary & Co., LLC. It's the 11th hour for HRC and her scammers. Meantime the clown car, less crowded now, toodles merrily along, untainted by scandal.
A number of people have argued that Democrats would do the same thing.
However, post WWII, a brief review (hopefully accurate), the following Presidents and the justices have been confirmed by a Democratic Senate
Eisenhower - Stewart and White
Nixon - Burger, Black, Powell and Rehnquist
Ford - Stevens
Reagan - Kennedy
Bush - Souter and Thomas
I do not think that Clinton had any openings during the Senate Republican term, and this is the first for Obama.
So, in other words, no Republican Senate in the modern era has confirmed a Democratically nominated Justice, and in fact at the first opportunity, they refuse to even consider. So, please do compare the treatment.
However, post WWII, a brief review (hopefully accurate), the following Presidents and the justices have been confirmed by a Democratic Senate
Eisenhower - Stewart and White
Nixon - Burger, Black, Powell and Rehnquist
Ford - Stevens
Reagan - Kennedy
Bush - Souter and Thomas
I do not think that Clinton had any openings during the Senate Republican term, and this is the first for Obama.
So, in other words, no Republican Senate in the modern era has confirmed a Democratically nominated Justice, and in fact at the first opportunity, they refuse to even consider. So, please do compare the treatment.
3
If the good Senators in question refuse to do their jobs, perhaps we citizens should stop paying their salaries.
2
Throw the laggards out !!! How do you spell impeachment ???
1
While this controversey illustrates several things, one of them surely is that it is hight time we replaced Chuck Grassley the spineless man Iowa has chosen to shepard some of our most important affairs. If he lacks to courage to even hold a hearing to find out what a nominee is made of, he ought not be in charge of anything of importance. The same could be said of Kelly Ayotte, Rob Portman, John Cornyn and others. While the GOP is on the cusp of nominating an unqualified, crude and biggotted roughneck, the GOP Senate is setting up proceedures soley designed to engineer a Republican Justice on the Supremene Court. It too is a crude, extra legal maneuver that would embarrass ordinary men and women. Unfrotunately, the modern Repbubican party is beyond being embarrassed. It is now a place where extremes are never enough!
1
Trump the next President should get that honor. Obama has done enough damage to repair. Ask 60% of the country and they will say the same.
With all due respect, could you list a few of the things President Obama has done to damage the country? I just don't see it.
As a life long individual who has most of the time voted for Republican candidates, I can assure you my vote will no longer be for a Republican candidates for the 2016 election. You have done a great job of convincing a conservative that the present Republican Party does not deserve my support and I believe I am not alone with this view point.
Basically the Republican party and its leadership, if you can call them leaders at all, is destroying the American system of government. President Obama has every right to nominate a justice for the supreme court and you the senate should have enough respect for the office of the presidency and the American system of government to hold hearing on his nomination. Your failure to give any candidate a hearing will cost you dearly in November and the president senate leadership may find themselves as a minority group as the Democratic candidates win the Presidency and the US Senate. I can assure you that their choice for the Supreme Court will not be to your liking.
Keep up your president agenda and you will be voted out of office.
Basically the Republican party and its leadership, if you can call them leaders at all, is destroying the American system of government. President Obama has every right to nominate a justice for the supreme court and you the senate should have enough respect for the office of the presidency and the American system of government to hold hearing on his nomination. Your failure to give any candidate a hearing will cost you dearly in November and the president senate leadership may find themselves as a minority group as the Democratic candidates win the Presidency and the US Senate. I can assure you that their choice for the Supreme Court will not be to your liking.
Keep up your president agenda and you will be voted out of office.
3
Obama, FIGHT!
Do nominate + expose the dismantlers of democracy. We are with you!
Do nominate + expose the dismantlers of democracy. We are with you!
1
Obama + fight = oxymoron. Ask ISIS.
Mitch McConnell and his Senate colleagues are taking a big risk with this strategy. Whoever President Obama nominates now would have to be a moderate to have any chance of the nominee being confirmed--someone like Justice Kennedy or Sandra Day O'Connor. If they wait until after the election it is not unlikely that they would be up against a Democratic president and Senate.
2
To Republicans: You can hear a moderate pick from President Obama or wait until you get a more liberal pick from President Clinton next year. Not a good gamble in my opinion.
4
Just to spite the Republicans, Obama should nominate a conservative judge.
2
the Senate, was once called the "Great Deliberative Body".......doesn't take much deliberation to say "no" to just about everything......are there no grownups much less statesmen in Washington .........these people belong in junior high school not in the Senate
2
Once again, these Republicans have decided to put Party before Country. Their actions prove that actual governing and statesmanship are not, nor have ever been, their priorities. The GOP, which was originally my family's party of choice, has become the party of division and hate. We have all moved to the Democratic side.
1
The most stunning and strategically brilliant pick would be Judge MaryAnne Trump Barry, Donald Trump's sister: district judge nominated by Reagan, appellate judge nominated by Clinton, twice confirmed by Senate, moderate/conservative Republican. Let McConnell try to ignore or reject the #1 choice of his party's soon-to-be Presidential nominee -- he wouldn't dare!
When these gerrymandered dinosaurs finally lose - when the demographic shifts in this country finally spell their collective demise - they are gone forever.
1
This is why Trump, socially liberal, areligious, and an extremist is winning Republican primaries state after state. This is no surprise since Republicans with Limbaughs, Hannity's and other right wingers have turned the business of American government into a show which is anything but entertaining. The Republican senate's refusal to even hold a hearing on the Obama supreme court nominee is an opportunity for the democrats to hurt them electorally. Either republican senate fullfills its constitutional responsibility or have to pay a heavy price in the ballots.
1
assuming obama carries through with his announced plan to close guantanamo and move prisoners to the u.s.--as he should--and the repubs carry through with their stated intention to sue the president for this "violation of law" (which has a major separation of powers issue attached), then:
pres. obama should file a counterclaim seeking a writ of mandamus ordering the senate to comply with its constitutional duty to consider obama's supreme court nominee.
now, to be clear, i'm hopeful the senate does not consider obama's nominee, because obama has always been a great compromiser. his nominee will certainly be a moderate.
i'm hopeful that hillary will nominate a true progressive to help balance the politics of the justices. we'll see.
pres. obama should file a counterclaim seeking a writ of mandamus ordering the senate to comply with its constitutional duty to consider obama's supreme court nominee.
now, to be clear, i'm hopeful the senate does not consider obama's nominee, because obama has always been a great compromiser. his nominee will certainly be a moderate.
i'm hopeful that hillary will nominate a true progressive to help balance the politics of the justices. we'll see.
This is nothing but a naked power grab by the Republicans. The Constitution requires them to provide "advice and consent." Since they are refusing to abide by the Constitution, Obama should perform his required Constitutional duty and "appoint" and swear into office new SC Justice. If the Senate is upset they can go to the SC for a ruling. I suspect the Senate will lose in the SC with a 5-4 party line vote.
Let me guess whom Barry will select - black female, Latino, Asian, Muslim; then when he does the Legislature will make short shrift of it and they will be sexist, racist, etc.
If Mitt had won in 2012 the Republicans would have already found and consented to an Attila like reactionary justice.
1
I stand in total agreement with the Republic stance on waiting for the next President to select a supreme court justice. Which only means that when Hillary Clinton wins the Presidency, she will no doubt select a thoroughly liberal justice to replace Scalia. Can't wait!!
Why does everyone in media continue to use the Biden quote, but never the Mitch McConnell response to it?
Old white dinosaurs ignorant of their irrelevance. Or petulant children. Take your pick. Get rid of them all.
Treasonous All who have obstructed justice...
and
all of these traitors should be impeached...at once...!!!!.
this is NOT Democracy..
This IS MUTINY...plain and simple...and these traitors should be indicted.
and
all of these traitors should be impeached...at once...!!!!.
this is NOT Democracy..
This IS MUTINY...plain and simple...and these traitors should be indicted.
How dare they behave like a bunch of gangsters?
Why are Republicans so dead set against democracy? Don't they realize that we elected this president?
1
This obstructionism is what results from BIG democracy-destroying money in politics. Why isn't Senator Sanders out in front of the fight, helping to stop it? Instead he's wasting good will within the Democrat/Independent community dissing the MOST QUALIFIED CANDIDATE - Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton. Senator Sanders needs to call on his "revolutionaries", including MoveOn.org to take this matter on because democracy in America is at stake. Time for some Sanders action.
1
If nothing else, this might bring some people to realize that the real contest is not for the White House but for the Senate.
4
Here's a prediction: There will be no new justice confirmed for many years. The Republicans obviously feel they will not pay a political price for blocking any nomination. As long as a Democrat is in the White House, they will not allow a nominee to be confirmed. And if a Republican wins in November, almost all Democrats will feel free to resort even to a filibuster to block a conservative nominee. I can't think of one Senate Democrat who would vote with the Republicans with the stakes this high.
4
WE cannot let that happen. It's OUR country and OUR lives and government at stake. WE must stop being bystanders and take action.
1
Worse. It is clear that, even with a Democratic President, the Republicans will also block ANY consideration of any Secretary of State or Defense, Attorney General, department head . . . or any legislation whatever they care to. Make no mistake, this is a blatant attempt to usurp the government of the United States.
The GOP invested all in insuring that Obama
would be a failure & a one Term President. Regardless of the damage done to the Republic. Twice the GOP has failed. As a consequence of their actions, Obama will be on the Ballot a third time.
So ironic . Yes we can!!!
would be a failure & a one Term President. Regardless of the damage done to the Republic. Twice the GOP has failed. As a consequence of their actions, Obama will be on the Ballot a third time.
So ironic . Yes we can!!!
4
It is becoming clear that the party of NO does not have the will to govern. Yesterday Donald Trump won Republican caucus In Nevada followed by Marco Rubio and Ted Cruz. The chance of a Republican winning the President is going down fast. Now the knee jerk decision of Republicans in the Senate about Supreme Court candidate is likely loss of a the majority in the Senate.
Dereliction of duty. Obama should refuse to pay them if they refuse to hold the hearings, or at least withhold the extra dollars they get for serving on the judiciary committee. Then, if they continue to refuse to do their jobs, the Democrats should develop and broadcast a "You're Fired" spoof based on the same.
1
Dereliction of Duty, defined: When a president spends more time in his first term traveling to fund-raisers than the two previous presidents did, COMBINED. Obama is that man, as 100s of news articles reported. Ka-Ching!! $$$$
Just think, if we eliminated the word "no" from our vocabulary, the GOP wouldn't have a platform.
5
The headline should read GOP refuses their Constitutional Duty, shows hatred for the sitting President and all the American people.
4
Congress is refusing to perform constitutional duties and the Supreme Court is a political body. Perhaps it's time for the citizens of this country to find a new and better way.
1
In 10 months there will be a democrat in the White House and the senate will be back in democrat majority and Mrs. Clinton will have offered her candidate for consideration. And all that will be evident in the intervening time is that the Republican Party and its leadership in congress will have unmasked themselves as the full obstructionists they have been sine the spring of 2009
3
Liberals and leftists. Kindly curb your enthusiasm for a President Hillary appointment of Barack Obama to be an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.
Chief Justice, maybe. That's been done before. William Howard Taft served as President, and Chief Justice.
So why should the only black US President settle for Associate Justice?
Put another way, why would any ex-President serve in a full time paid role, with defined duties, that was less than Presidential?
So he wouldn't have time for the lucrative speaking engagements, book deals, and fundraising efforts on behalf of an ex-Presidents Foundation that have put so many millions of dollars at Bill Clinton's fingertips?
Closeted racism among white democrats? Any port in a storm? Don't know no better?
Let it go.
Chief Justice, maybe. That's been done before. William Howard Taft served as President, and Chief Justice.
So why should the only black US President settle for Associate Justice?
Put another way, why would any ex-President serve in a full time paid role, with defined duties, that was less than Presidential?
So he wouldn't have time for the lucrative speaking engagements, book deals, and fundraising efforts on behalf of an ex-Presidents Foundation that have put so many millions of dollars at Bill Clinton's fingertips?
Closeted racism among white democrats? Any port in a storm? Don't know no better?
Let it go.
2
One can only hope the GOP obstructionists do not waver from their ridiculous stance. The longer they stand firm and refuse to bend the better it will be for Hillary in the Fall, not that she'll need much more help in defeating Trump should he continue his onslaught against the Republican party establishment. If Trump can capture the nomination, Democrats will have a multi-pronged attack strategy in the Fall. Happy Days Are Here Again indeed.
DD
Manhattan
DD
Manhattan
4
The GOP has a death wish. That's the only possible reason I can think of for their rude, ignorant, egotistic, unpatriotic behavior over the last decade. And why behave like this, why encourage democracy in the rest of the world when this is, apparently, the way it ends.
7
Obama says what he is looking for in appointee in piece in NYT today, clearly reflecting exactly what the Founders were thinking in crafting the Constitution so that Presidents - not the unruly mob, as Republicans would have it - appoint Judges.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/25/us/politics/obama-supreme-court-nomine...®ion=Header&action=click&contentCollection=Home%20Page&pgtype=article
"There will be cases in which a judge’s analysis necessarily will be shaped by his or her own perspective, ethics, and judgment,” Mr. Obama wrote, adding that he was seeking someone with “a keen understanding that justice is not about abstract legal theory, nor some footnote in a dusty casebook.”
“It’s the kind of life experience earned outside the classroom and the courtroom; experience that suggests he or she views the law not only as an intellectual exercise, but also grasps the way it affects the daily reality of people’s lives in a big, complicated democracy, and in rapidly changing times,” the president wrote."
Amen
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/25/us/politics/obama-supreme-court-nomine...®ion=Header&action=click&contentCollection=Home%20Page&pgtype=article
"There will be cases in which a judge’s analysis necessarily will be shaped by his or her own perspective, ethics, and judgment,” Mr. Obama wrote, adding that he was seeking someone with “a keen understanding that justice is not about abstract legal theory, nor some footnote in a dusty casebook.”
“It’s the kind of life experience earned outside the classroom and the courtroom; experience that suggests he or she views the law not only as an intellectual exercise, but also grasps the way it affects the daily reality of people’s lives in a big, complicated democracy, and in rapidly changing times,” the president wrote."
Amen
1
McConnell might as well be Vladimir Putin...
4
Oh, my goodness. The comments on this article. I can't remember when I've laughed so hard.
More than three thousand four hundred of them before this one. Any number of which demand the Senate GOP be arrested. Sent to Guantanamo. Be impeached. Traitors. Treason. Insurrection. Sedition. Enemies of the Constitution. Racists.
All because the Republican leadership are quoting Vice President Biden when he was a Senator, and the Head of the Judiciary Committee. And some also state openly they would treat any Obama Administration nominee to the Supreme Court the way the Democrats treated Robert Bork when Reagan was President. Go away Judge Bork. So why bother with so little time left in the current President's term of office?
Where did any number of those off the deep end comments come from? The North Korean, or Iranian delegations to the UN pretending to be American citizens? The CPUSA? Rent control tenants in Manhattan? Canada? All of the above?
The President will make an appointment. The Senate Judiciary Committee will ignore it. Unless the appointee is a sitting judge with a conservative record. But everyone agrees that would be less likely than, say, an Iranian nuclear weapon. The President makes a recess appointment in August. The new Judge serves between October and January. Unless the next President and the Senate are controlled by Democrats. That's all there is to it.
More than three thousand four hundred of them before this one. Any number of which demand the Senate GOP be arrested. Sent to Guantanamo. Be impeached. Traitors. Treason. Insurrection. Sedition. Enemies of the Constitution. Racists.
All because the Republican leadership are quoting Vice President Biden when he was a Senator, and the Head of the Judiciary Committee. And some also state openly they would treat any Obama Administration nominee to the Supreme Court the way the Democrats treated Robert Bork when Reagan was President. Go away Judge Bork. So why bother with so little time left in the current President's term of office?
Where did any number of those off the deep end comments come from? The North Korean, or Iranian delegations to the UN pretending to be American citizens? The CPUSA? Rent control tenants in Manhattan? Canada? All of the above?
The President will make an appointment. The Senate Judiciary Committee will ignore it. Unless the appointee is a sitting judge with a conservative record. But everyone agrees that would be less likely than, say, an Iranian nuclear weapon. The President makes a recess appointment in August. The new Judge serves between October and January. Unless the next President and the Senate are controlled by Democrats. That's all there is to it.
1
Republicans are avoiding the annoying fact that in 1988 a Democratically controlled Senate confirmed a Republican nominee. What Biden said is irrelevant. People have a right to be mad, even if some of the vitriol is a little hyperbolic.
Quit whining about Bork. The Senate held hearings and went through the full confirmation process before rejecting Bork.
The current GOP Senate won't even consider the process.
Do you know how dumb it sounds to equate the two?
The current GOP Senate won't even consider the process.
Do you know how dumb it sounds to equate the two?
it is so hard to believe that people who run our country and have our best interest at heart(supposely), would stoop so low to not even consider a nominee put forth by the President. It would be a totally different story if the nominee was at least given the benefit of the doubt, but the nominee is being condemned before they even get a chance. I was considering voting for a Republican but with this reaction i am Democrat all the way. Way to sway the votes.....
2
My fear is my fellow Americans are so racist and so KKKhristian that only the "Holy Bible" and the GOP matter, the Constitution be damned.
2
KKK'ers Bobby Byrd and Strom Thurmond were the two of the longest-serving Democrats in US history. Bobby fiddled while black men twisted at the end of an Appalachian rope, strange fruit up in the holler.
1
A clear and official statement of G.O.P. racism! A pathetic obfuscation. They should all be voted out of office! It is scary to consider the potential for rationalization these "punks" have cultivated.
1
I think I will stop paying taxes until our government starts functioning again.
3
To quote a truly great American, "Have you no sense of decency sir, at long last? Have you left no sense of decency?" (Joseph N. Welch to Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, June 9, 1954, the 30th day of the Army–McCarthy hearings).
In the case of McConnell, Grassley and the rest of the GOP dross, the answer is a resounding and unequivocal "No."
In the case of McConnell, Grassley and the rest of the GOP dross, the answer is a resounding and unequivocal "No."
2
How does this action "support and defend the Constitution." ? If a US Senator does not execute his oath of office, is this impeachable?
2
Why doesn't Obama use executive rights and just turn off the lights on the GOP side of the House and Senate? After all, they haven't shown up for work in 6 years anyway. This is an easy decision given the 12 months between Scalia's death and the sitting of a new President. Obama needs to submit a candidate and those who wish can sit on a highly public confirmation. Just because the Judicial Committee can't sit due to the GOP doesn't mean an informal hearing can't occur. Put this in the do nothing Republican's court and see what the public thinks. I am also sure Obama can use some scorched earth tactics to make the GOP very uncomfortable.
you have a good point. The Senate Republicans through official channels will not deal with him/her. Hearings are also kind of pointless. Obama should do the nomination, send up a briefing book, and offer to send nominee around. Then Democrats should move for that nominees approval regularly. Nothing to prevent such motions, maybe even at the fake pro-forma sessions that they will be doing all year long.
Pure casuistry from McConnell. It's he and his cohorts in congress who have embraced a strategy designed to "plunge our nation into a bitter and (un)avoidable struggle." But the Republican-held Congress may soon fall victim to the law of unintended consequences. Registered republicans, disgusted by "Washington" (i.e., McConnell's obstruction politics) are supporting an opportunistic outsider who vacuously promises to "make America great again." It's difficult to imagine that this is a situation the Republican establishment had hoped for. Talk about painting yourself into a corner!
8
the senate fought hard to save slavery
and southerners all called it bravery
since the president's black
they'll take the same tack
only yankees would dare call it knavery.
and southerners all called it bravery
since the president's black
they'll take the same tack
only yankees would dare call it knavery.
2
What Republicans do is a crime
But the same thing by Dems is just fine
Let's be honest and say
That there's nothing new today
All that's changed is the passage of time
But the same thing by Dems is just fine
Let's be honest and say
That there's nothing new today
All that's changed is the passage of time
1
I would think that defiance of the US Constitution was an act of treason.
and I wonder if breaking one's oath to adhere to the Constitution ; might
make an elected government official liable to indictment as well as
force such elected person to lose their job.
and I wonder if breaking one's oath to adhere to the Constitution ; might
make an elected government official liable to indictment as well as
force such elected person to lose their job.
1
I appreciate all the comments here and agree with the majority. I just have one question - do the readers and commenters also write their respective representatives? And also the ones wreaking all this havoc? For example - being female, my head almost exploded when I read about the de-funding of Planned Parenthood by Kasich and don't forget his remark about "women coming out of the kitchen" to support him. So I am drafting a letter to him to start with. Then I will turn my attention to the Republicans not supporting a Supreme Court replacement attempt. I know it doesn't do much good; but it makes me feel better and if everyone wrote or called, someone may notice. I always get responses from my locals, for what it's worth... I would also like to engage the NRA in a discussion but one step at a time. Last thought - we need to get the kids out there to vote. My 2 boys are voting; how about yours?
2
Partisan - phooey. Republicans refuse some 11 months before the next inauguration to even have a hearing with respect to the next S. Ct. justice. Democrats pretend that it is outrageous, despite the videotape evidence that the V.P. and next Dem. minority leader took the exact same positions. And websites, including the media sites, are as ever biased in their articles and their comment section. Here, the Republicans are seen as obstructionist, irresponsible, liars while the exact opposite can be found on conservative friendly fights.
This argument actually goes back to the dawn of our Republic. When Adams was on his way out, he appointed many judges at virtually the last minute, so late in the day that some did not have their commissions delivered in time. This led to the famous case of Marbury v. Madison, which has given the S. Ct. most of its power.
Personally, I think regular order should be kept. That doesn't mean, of course, that the Senate has to approve any nominee. There is a way out - Obama could appoint a conservative or pro-life judge. He's not going to. And no one is going to believe anyone anymore who says they have no opinion.
There should, in my view, be a constitutional amendment wherein all nominees are deemed appointed if they are not rejected in an up and down vote within 90 or 120 days. But, that's a fantasy.
In the end, who is at fault? As almost always - partisans, left or right.
This argument actually goes back to the dawn of our Republic. When Adams was on his way out, he appointed many judges at virtually the last minute, so late in the day that some did not have their commissions delivered in time. This led to the famous case of Marbury v. Madison, which has given the S. Ct. most of its power.
Personally, I think regular order should be kept. That doesn't mean, of course, that the Senate has to approve any nominee. There is a way out - Obama could appoint a conservative or pro-life judge. He's not going to. And no one is going to believe anyone anymore who says they have no opinion.
There should, in my view, be a constitutional amendment wherein all nominees are deemed appointed if they are not rejected in an up and down vote within 90 or 120 days. But, that's a fantasy.
In the end, who is at fault? As almost always - partisans, left or right.
No Democrat Senate has ever refused to deliberate a Supreme Court Justice.
Don't equate the history of Democrat engagement with the obstructionism of the current GOP.
Don't equate the history of Democrat engagement with the obstructionism of the current GOP.
I suppose they would feel it is in their rights to stage a coup next.
Considering how elastic the Liberals have made the notion of "rights," meaning "special rights" for all manner of eccentricities, you could be right.
Article II of the Constitution says "shall appoint." It is not just President Obama's right; it is his obligation. The dictionary defines "shall" as must, "used in laws, regulations, or directives to express what is mandatory."
President Obama would be shirking his sworn duty to uphold the Constitution of the United States if he were to ignore his obligation to appoint a new justice.
The 100 senators can let Senator McConnell have his way and ignore their Constitutional duty to "advise and consent" at their own peril - a female Democratic president with a filibuster proof Senate and a more liberal appointment than President Obama might make, maybe a Constitutional scholar named Barack Obama.
It happened when they blocked Elizabeth Warren's appointment and now she's a much more powerful force in their midst in the Senate. There is a just God and she's likes a good joke.
President Obama would be shirking his sworn duty to uphold the Constitution of the United States if he were to ignore his obligation to appoint a new justice.
The 100 senators can let Senator McConnell have his way and ignore their Constitutional duty to "advise and consent" at their own peril - a female Democratic president with a filibuster proof Senate and a more liberal appointment than President Obama might make, maybe a Constitutional scholar named Barack Obama.
It happened when they blocked Elizabeth Warren's appointment and now she's a much more powerful force in their midst in the Senate. There is a just God and she's likes a good joke.
Please read Biden speech 1992. to become more informed on this matter.
2
it's different to say that as an elected representative you won't approve, as opposed to refusing to hold hearings.
Please look at the history of Democrat engagement in the confirmation process, and contrast it to GOP obstructionism, to become more informed on this matter.
This is a constitutional crises 40 years in the making. Republicans have been determined to take over this country, to see that all three branches are in their control by hook or by crook. Illegal, immoral and unethical means are what they've applied all along the way because it's all they have. It's all they've had for nearly my entire lifetime.
3
Treason – 1 : the betrayal of a trust : treachery. 2 : the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance. >> Send the treasonous senators to Gitmo. Let Trump build a wall around it and throw away the key. Enough is enough.
1
Impeach them all.
2
Republicans, led by McConnell, have changed the US Congress from a dignified, responsible, equal branch of government into an arena devoted to political blood-sport, opposition to good governance and trashing the US Constitution.
The only positive I see coming out of the Republican obstruction and their scorched-earth tactics over the past 7 years, is that it has led to a revolt, a Republican base ignoring Republican Party power to support Trump. My very conservative Republican mother-in-law (who generously contributes to the Republican Party) is appalled at the prospect of Trump for president. She has vowed she will sit out the national election rather than vote for him. That is a positive sign--Republicans so disgusted with their party that they stay away from the polls, guaranteeing a Democrat takes the White House in 2016, ensuring a Democrat nominates jurists to the Supreme Court for at least the next 8 years. Time to replace Republicans in Congress!
The only positive I see coming out of the Republican obstruction and their scorched-earth tactics over the past 7 years, is that it has led to a revolt, a Republican base ignoring Republican Party power to support Trump. My very conservative Republican mother-in-law (who generously contributes to the Republican Party) is appalled at the prospect of Trump for president. She has vowed she will sit out the national election rather than vote for him. That is a positive sign--Republicans so disgusted with their party that they stay away from the polls, guaranteeing a Democrat takes the White House in 2016, ensuring a Democrat nominates jurists to the Supreme Court for at least the next 8 years. Time to replace Republicans in Congress!
6
what is all the fuss? The majority of contributors here are just hypocrites. This entire mess started with Kennedy sliming Bork and creating a political test for nominees. Obama , when a senator, tried to filibuster a supreme court nominee preventing a vote. Further, “It is my view that if a Supreme Court justice resigns tomorrow or within the next several weeks, or resigns at the end of the summer, President Bush should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not, and not name a nominee until after the November election is completed,” Biden said then as chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee. It is clear that if Democrats prevent a nominee, it is fine with the hypocrites, if Republicans do it, it is a travesty.
1
Once nominated, Democrats began the process of nomination.
Here, the GOP refuses even to consider the process.
It's a travesty that so many are too obtuse to understand the difference.
Here, the GOP refuses even to consider the process.
It's a travesty that so many are too obtuse to understand the difference.
it baffles the mind. Truly. I've written to my senate representatives to share my outrage. Doubt much will happen. I sincerely hope the GOP has sealed its fate by losing seats and the presidency this election.
For people who claim to love the constitution they have a strange way of showing it.
For people who claim to love the constitution they have a strange way of showing it.
1
I'm sure we can find no record of opposition to the timing of the nominations of Bork - one year before the presidential election - and Thomas - one year before the 1992 presidential election - from the Democrats. Besides, no one took anything that Joe Biden said back then seriously. Why start now? A bit cynical.
1
The "people" have already chosen by electing Obama twice. I will be making another contribution to Hillary today.
2
Atop her $3 Billion family fortune -- "We left the White House flat broke!" -- as reported by the NYT, make sure it's a sizeable donation lest it go unnoticed.
The "people" also chose in 2014 when they elected a Republican-controlled Senate.
To call this a congress is a sham thanks to the Republican Party whose only objective over the last 8 years have never been the important issues our country faces. For the GOP the only matter of importance has been to block any possibility that there be a working United States three branches of government. These are paid for, self-serving, narrow minded, parodies of what a statesman can and should be. They deserve Donald Trump as their leader if the American People Don't. For Shame!!!
Isn't it sad how the GOP continues to stand against the President of the United States when clear 'evidence' points to their nominee, Donald Trump, whom they don't want? Perhaps they should hire a grammar school teacher as their campaign coordinator!
1
Intentional rebuke (now formally in writing and signed by a bunch of fall guys) of enumerated constitutional duties by elected officials...sounds like treason. Impeachment has been prosecuted for less.
Each Republican, as with all elected officials, took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. Biden is certainly not the scholar to now follow in their decision to violate their oath of office. Whatever that piece of paper with signatures is supposed to mean to them, the reality is that it is now evidence and they must all be tried under the law for, at the very least, stupidity, conspiracy, treason and breach of their legal duty to do their jobs as defined in the Constitution.
Each Republican, as with all elected officials, took an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution. Biden is certainly not the scholar to now follow in their decision to violate their oath of office. Whatever that piece of paper with signatures is supposed to mean to them, the reality is that it is now evidence and they must all be tried under the law for, at the very least, stupidity, conspiracy, treason and breach of their legal duty to do their jobs as defined in the Constitution.
The Republican senators have now served notice that for the year 2016 they will do nothing except cash their paychecks.
1
Just when I didn't think the Republicans could come up with a new means of encouraging hatred. I've grown to hate the Republican Party. There's no entity in the world that does more harm to my country.
3
Good advice Mr. Vice President, we'll take it. So we don't have to fillabuster as you did Mr. President
Jeez, the Sophmores are if full bloom!
Jeez, the Sophmores are if full bloom!
1
ClearEye is absolutely correct about the Founders' intent as to any "people's choice" on United States Supreme Court nominees. For this reason, I urge the NYT to write an explanatory article on the Founders' view and the underlying rationale for it. Alternatively, would you please make some mention of it, Mr. President?
The Republicans, on Day 1 of President Obama's first term, declared that they would make him a 1-term president (how'd that work out for you boys?), and in the meantime, obstruct anything he tried to do. And then they set course to do exactly that. In the barbarity of their words ("You Lie!") and their false accusations that he wasn't born here, they made it clear that they considered him an illegitimate President. And then he won a second term.
Our Constitution sets out the DUTIES of the 2 branches of government in this situation - you know, the Constitution the Republicans claim repeatedly is the basis for our government - that it is the DUTY of the President to put forth candidates for certain vacancies in government, including SCOTUS, and that it is the DUTY of Congress to "advise and consent" to such nominations. Nowhere does it state that there is an exemption from those DUTIES during the last year of the President's term. Nowhere does it state that Congress can boldly refuse to do its DUTY because there is only a year left in the President's term. Republicans have made it very public and DEFIANTLY CLEAR that it is choosing to shirk its Constitutional DUTIES going forward for at least one year, and perhaps longer should the next President not be of their party's choosing. I hope that President Obama chooses to do his Constitutional Duty and put forth the most highly qualified candidate he can find, daring the Republicans to REFUSE to do its Constitutional DUTY.
Our Constitution sets out the DUTIES of the 2 branches of government in this situation - you know, the Constitution the Republicans claim repeatedly is the basis for our government - that it is the DUTY of the President to put forth candidates for certain vacancies in government, including SCOTUS, and that it is the DUTY of Congress to "advise and consent" to such nominations. Nowhere does it state that there is an exemption from those DUTIES during the last year of the President's term. Nowhere does it state that Congress can boldly refuse to do its DUTY because there is only a year left in the President's term. Republicans have made it very public and DEFIANTLY CLEAR that it is choosing to shirk its Constitutional DUTIES going forward for at least one year, and perhaps longer should the next President not be of their party's choosing. I hope that President Obama chooses to do his Constitutional Duty and put forth the most highly qualified candidate he can find, daring the Republicans to REFUSE to do its Constitutional DUTY.
Obama is under pressure and will probably nominate a middle of the road
candidate for the senate to review. If the Republicans refuse to consider the nomination and Hillary or God forbid Bernie is elected she or he will make them pay for their stubbornness with a nominee from the left or far left of center. Now maybe the Republicans feel Trump will win the general, all I can say to that is good luck.
candidate for the senate to review. If the Republicans refuse to consider the nomination and Hillary or God forbid Bernie is elected she or he will make them pay for their stubbornness with a nominee from the left or far left of center. Now maybe the Republicans feel Trump will win the general, all I can say to that is good luck.
3
? I learned that it was the right (duty) of the POTUS to nominate a Supreme Court Justice in fourth grade! And that it was the duty of the Senate to consider such nominee. If certain members of the Senate are so extreme as to block basic constitutional duties, what can be done to protect democracy?
1
Strict obstructionists, not strict constructionists.
1
This decision goes far beyond mere obstructionism, and all the way to secession. It's tantamount to rejecting the authority of the Constitution. Each of the signatories to this letter should be subject to immediate impeachment for violating their oath of office to protect and defend the Constitution. There is no way this sedition can go unanswered. These so called leaders have crossed a red line that demands a response if we are to preserve our republic.
4
Is it any wonder that middle America is beginning to abandon the Republican and Democratic parties both of whom stymy solutions to critical problems? We need to supply them with bigger shovels so that they can dig their own graves more quickly.
We see now clearly that some Southern Senators have decided that they are not representing anyone but themselves and their cronies.
Perhaps they will never consent to follow the laws of our United States.
Perhaps they will never consent to follow the laws of our United States.
4
Worse, perhaps they'll choose to follow only certain laws, as Clinton and Obama did, and choose to stand down when called on to defend existing laws which run counter to their Liberal catechism. Dereliction of duty that's called, despite the oaths the Administration officials took, esp. AG Holder, water boy, who corrupted the DOJ, as two recent books have illustrated.
1
would like to read or listen to a formal response by the member of the Senate Judiciary Committee who did not sign the letter of sedition.
This morning, in the SCOTUS blog, President Obama outlined his criteria for candidates thusly:
"A sterling record. A deep respect for the judiciary’s role. An understanding of the way the world really works. That’s what I’m considering as I fulfill my constitutional duty to appoint a judge to our highest court. And as Senators prepare to fulfill their constitutional responsibility to consider the person I appoint, I hope they’ll move quickly to debate and then confirm this nominee so that the Court can continue to serve the American people at full strength."
Recommended Citation: SCOTUSblog Obama, A Responsibility I Take Seriously, SCOTUSblog (Feb. 24, 2016, 8:00 AM), http://www.scotusblog.com/2016/02/a-responsibility-i-take-seriously/
It behooves all American citizens to demand that those guilty of sedition be restrained, and that the business of American governance be not hindered.
This morning, in the SCOTUS blog, President Obama outlined his criteria for candidates thusly:
"A sterling record. A deep respect for the judiciary’s role. An understanding of the way the world really works. That’s what I’m considering as I fulfill my constitutional duty to appoint a judge to our highest court. And as Senators prepare to fulfill their constitutional responsibility to consider the person I appoint, I hope they’ll move quickly to debate and then confirm this nominee so that the Court can continue to serve the American people at full strength."
Recommended Citation: SCOTUSblog Obama, A Responsibility I Take Seriously, SCOTUSblog (Feb. 24, 2016, 8:00 AM), http://www.scotusblog.com/2016/02/a-responsibility-i-take-seriously/
It behooves all American citizens to demand that those guilty of sedition be restrained, and that the business of American governance be not hindered.
9
So, the same people who have deleted the "well-regulated militia" clause from the Second Amendment have now rewritten Art. 2 to provide that our twice-elected and first African-American President "shall nominate only during the first 3/4 of his term in office, and by and with Advice and Consent of the Senate... shall appoint Judges of the Supreme Court...."
The argument by the Judiciary Committee that the Constitution does not require them to even hear and debate the President's nominee is specious. That argument could essentially allow Congress to refuse to perform any of its constitutional duties at all, thus shutting down the federal government and, more critically, endangering the very Constitutional underpinnings of our Republic. Mitch McConnell and his older, white male cohorts in the article's photo have hit a new low which puts their hatred of President Obama and their zeal for power before the well-being of our Constitution, our government, and the American people whom they are supposed to serve.
The argument by the Judiciary Committee that the Constitution does not require them to even hear and debate the President's nominee is specious. That argument could essentially allow Congress to refuse to perform any of its constitutional duties at all, thus shutting down the federal government and, more critically, endangering the very Constitutional underpinnings of our Republic. Mitch McConnell and his older, white male cohorts in the article's photo have hit a new low which puts their hatred of President Obama and their zeal for power before the well-being of our Constitution, our government, and the American people whom they are supposed to serve.
9
What is wrong with you, NYT? You just roll over and let the GOP slice, dice and splice a "quote" into whatever serves their self-interest, no facts required?
Here's what Biden said, on June 25, 1992: "...It is my view that, if a Supreme Court justice resigns tomorrow or within the next several weeks or resigns at the end of the summer, Pres. Bush should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not - and not - name a nominee until after the November election is completed. The Senate ... should consider not scheduling confirmation hearings until after the campaign season is over."
Note:
1) It was June 25, not February 13.
2) It was a hypothetical not a real situation
3) It was only about a resignation of a justice, not a death
4) It was a request that Bush consider, not a defiant refusal
5) He only called on Bush to wait until after Nov. election was over, not to forfeit (and disobey) his entire elected Constitutional duty ("he shall nominate").
More false equivalency, NYT - You not only do it, you rubberstamp the GOP following your footsteps. Seriously, how do you instigate and publish this ill-begotten failure to report - the whole story - and to call out misappropriations.
Here's what Biden said, on June 25, 1992: "...It is my view that, if a Supreme Court justice resigns tomorrow or within the next several weeks or resigns at the end of the summer, Pres. Bush should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not - and not - name a nominee until after the November election is completed. The Senate ... should consider not scheduling confirmation hearings until after the campaign season is over."
Note:
1) It was June 25, not February 13.
2) It was a hypothetical not a real situation
3) It was only about a resignation of a justice, not a death
4) It was a request that Bush consider, not a defiant refusal
5) He only called on Bush to wait until after Nov. election was over, not to forfeit (and disobey) his entire elected Constitutional duty ("he shall nominate").
More false equivalency, NYT - You not only do it, you rubberstamp the GOP following your footsteps. Seriously, how do you instigate and publish this ill-begotten failure to report - the whole story - and to call out misappropriations.
5
Pathetic hairsplitting. Distinctions without a difference.
Just be honest: if you think it is wrong now, you have to admit it was wrong then.
Just be honest: if you think it is wrong now, you have to admit it was wrong then.
Pathetic rationalizing, those who hope no one (including the NYT) will see distinctions *with* a difference, and not just a difference but five consequential differences. That's what false equivalency is all about: pretending (to oneself) that kindergarten-style "He did it first!"s give you license to equate a hypothetical delay in carrying out a duty into an actual roadblock to duty itself.
And regarding distinction #3 between Biden '92 and McConnell et al. '16: The reason Biden only mentioned resignations, not sudden deaths, was because he wasn't just speaking to the President, his target audience included justices themselves who might be weighing optional resignations, as Justices do when they attempt to calibrate the timing of their departures to maximize power in determining their successor. There was plenty of precedent for Biden to be thinking of: Eisenhower had "suddenly" had fall into his lap (coincidence?) the Sept 7, 1956 retirement of Justice Minton, which just "happened" to give Ike an opportunity on the eve of his re-election campaign, not unlike the re-election campaign timing Biden anticipated might just "happen" for Pres. Bush in 1992. And Ike took that opportunity to make a recess appointment (holy moley, I thought the GOP hated recess appointments, and of a Supreme Court Justice no less!). And let the record reflect that Ike chose his nominee to attract votes for his own re-election from Democrats and Catholics by seeming to magnanimously reach across the aisle to a Northeastern Catholic Democrat, William Brennan.
However, trying to game the system like that is known to backfire more often than not: Brennan turned out not to be the conservative Catholic Democrat that Ike hoped he'd be, instead evolving into one of the three most liberal Justices of the 20th c.
during election fervor as much as addressing Bush, not applying it to death at all
However, trying to game the system like that is known to backfire more often than not: Brennan turned out not to be the conservative Catholic Democrat that Ike hoped he'd be, instead evolving into one of the three most liberal Justices of the 20th c.
during election fervor as much as addressing Bush, not applying it to death at all
3
The idea that our elected officials are "Public Servants" has become a total sham. We. the People. pay their too high salaries and they, the "Public Servants" turn around and abuse the very people who are paying for their existence.
Clearly the system, as it exists today, has too many loopholes to serve the people it was intended to serve. For a Congress to be allowed to peevishly and arrogantly set aside Constitutional law and procedure is completely unacceptable and the guilty parties should be impeached.
As the Red Queen said, "Off with their heads!!!"
Clearly the system, as it exists today, has too many loopholes to serve the people it was intended to serve. For a Congress to be allowed to peevishly and arrogantly set aside Constitutional law and procedure is completely unacceptable and the guilty parties should be impeached.
As the Red Queen said, "Off with their heads!!!"
2
What the Republicans are saying is that they will not allow Obama to upset the imbalance of the Supreme Court as it existed prior to the death of Scalia. The Republican Party is an obstructionist to almost every point involving governing. Politically, they are banking on stimulating their base to turn out, but it is as if they are living in a vacuum. It will have an even bigger effect on their opposition. After all it is a Presidential year and Democrats usually turn out to vote with even more of incentive on their plate than usual. All of this is obvious. Things should not be functioning this way, but gerrymandering protects the Republicans, currently, to some degree, and they are banking on it in all probability. However, it could go against them, especially since they have been wrong on so many points. I am not making a casual or a statement of convenience, when I say that it was more than likely that I was going to sit out this election, since no one really thrills me that has a chance, but unless an appointment is made, I would be moved to register and to vote Democratic. People sing the praises of Mr. Scalia, but I did not share his views on most everything, since he seemed to be as biased as he was intelligent, and not in a good way. When you read some his recent opinions, you really have to ponder how much damage this man has actually caused our country, and his behavior is the foundation of the current Republican position regarding a new appointment.
1
This yet another predictable act by the GOP and Republicans just being themselves: selfish, self-serving, arrogant. tyrannical, convenient bible-thumping backstabbing anti-American domestic terrorists as they have been for the last 16 years. First as GW Bush destroyed our country then refusing to help President Obama fix it. Not to mention their ongoing war against women, the poor, and affinity as mercenary lackeys in the employ of America's special interest corporate owners. They have decided who we shall vote for this November.
1
This infamous refusal that continues the racist contempt of top Republicans for President Obama, coupled with the nomination of a vacuous megalomaniac as their presidential candidate, will hopefully doom the GOP's prospects in November - if the American people see clearly how the Republican party has turned American politics into a scorched earth zone where battling for power is the only priority.
1
I guess the GOP (and their owners, the Koch Brothers) simply prefer that the next justice be nominated by President Bernie or President Hillary and confirmed by a Schumer led Senate that has eliminated the filibuster.
1
More death throes of the racist dinosaur party. After 7 years of open racism, hatred, unconfirmed appointments, devaluation of the nation's credit, senseless government shut downs, unprecedented obstructionism, climate denialism, total politicization of the supreme court, citizen's united, unattended crumbling of the nation's infrastructure, and unprecedented disrespect for their beloved constitution and the presidency, what are we paying Mr. McConnell for? If anyone, not on the public dole, unlike Mr. McConnell and his ilk, performed their jobs with such disdain and incompetency they wouldn't last a week. The new "welfare queens" are the current, soon to be extinct, republican party. It appears that President Hilary Clinton may have to appoint the next Justice after a lengthy, republican temper tantrum, holding their breath, stomping their feet, hoping to wake up from their worst nightmare, aka the black president. What an embarrassment.
5
Outrageous. Where in the world is true Democracy?
It certainly isn't in the USA.
Uganda recently had an election and may election watchers said it was rigged and corrupt.
The USA recently had primaries and soon an election. Hope election watchers declare it corrupt.
First there is gerrymandering,
Then there is the super delegates.
Then there is the electoral college.
And finally there is the supreme court.
How is this reflective of the populous vote.
And now the GOP is going against the constitution. Remember this, GOP the next time sensible gun control is presented.
How phony.
Disgusting.
It certainly isn't in the USA.
Uganda recently had an election and may election watchers said it was rigged and corrupt.
The USA recently had primaries and soon an election. Hope election watchers declare it corrupt.
First there is gerrymandering,
Then there is the super delegates.
Then there is the electoral college.
And finally there is the supreme court.
How is this reflective of the populous vote.
And now the GOP is going against the constitution. Remember this, GOP the next time sensible gun control is presented.
How phony.
Disgusting.
5
Mr. McConnell's action here cannot be viewed as anything other than CATEGORICAL racism! - this is JIM CROW LAW and JIM CROW leadership.
3
Sure. And when Harry Reid and Joe Biden proposed doing the exact same thing, with a white President, was that racism too?
1
Another example of the GOP being unable to govern.
Obama's last election was, according to the GOP, a people's choice on health care. Just like in the Supreme Court, where they lost twice, they lost.
The midterm elections showed the GOP getting less votes overall but winning seats due to gerrymandering.
After the elections they alter voting laws to prevent their opponents supporters from voting.
Now, faced with a constitutional duty, they again shirk their responsibility, putting party over nation, their selfish interests over those the electorate chose.
The country made its decision that Obama had the right to select this justice in the last election. The GOP, being liked spoiled children, are hoping through some miracle to do in this election what they couldn't in 2012, or in the Supreme Court twice, win.
Their only chance is to ignore the Constitution, so they do.
They care about the party, not the people.
I want my vote in the last election respected. I want Obama's nominee.
Obama's last election was, according to the GOP, a people's choice on health care. Just like in the Supreme Court, where they lost twice, they lost.
The midterm elections showed the GOP getting less votes overall but winning seats due to gerrymandering.
After the elections they alter voting laws to prevent their opponents supporters from voting.
Now, faced with a constitutional duty, they again shirk their responsibility, putting party over nation, their selfish interests over those the electorate chose.
The country made its decision that Obama had the right to select this justice in the last election. The GOP, being liked spoiled children, are hoping through some miracle to do in this election what they couldn't in 2012, or in the Supreme Court twice, win.
Their only chance is to ignore the Constitution, so they do.
They care about the party, not the people.
I want my vote in the last election respected. I want Obama's nominee.
4
Reap what you sow, and waste more of the people's time doing nothing but shunning, nay-saying, and impeding the actual work they're being paid to do. When Hilary is president, the justice that could be there now will be sitting on the Supreme Court, and in two years after that, the Democrats will take back the house and senate and actually get something accomplished. Can't wait to see what a functioning government can do again. Wish it could bipartisan, but apparently all the Republican "king's men" can't think past the oath of fealty they've sworn to McConnell. Leadership? More like chest puffing from sheep.
3
One wonders if the Senate had force at its command whether it would support a coup d'etat because the same mentality is driving their decision, the idea that one party within the Senate has some right to Devine the will of the people.
1
NYT, you've been complicit with the GOP for so long it's become rot:
• You say "they had the ammunition they needed in a June 1992 floor speech by Joseph R. Biden" You rubberstamp them when you buy their word as your own, thus letting them define what constitutes "ammunition" - my prior comment detailed 5 ways it failed the "ammunition" test.
• Earlier in this case, you acquiesced repeatedly to Rubio and then the GOP flock misappropriating "lame duck" - it's not lame duck time until Nov. 2. But you don't call them on it, you wash your hands (Pilate) of them making stuff up.
• Back in Florida 2000, you let the GOP redefine "recount" to include counting ballots that had been set aside uncounted - did they intimidate you or were you just out to lunch, acquiescing to the revisionist definition they daily spit out as they spewed against "recounting"
• In 2004, you acquiesced to Bush to not release your story about his secret wiretaps that could very plausibly have affected the election outcome. Shameful.
• the list is endless, your comment box size limit is your shield.
You're the Fourth Estate, for heavens sake. Act like it. Stop cowering and appeasing. Your
• You say "they had the ammunition they needed in a June 1992 floor speech by Joseph R. Biden" You rubberstamp them when you buy their word as your own, thus letting them define what constitutes "ammunition" - my prior comment detailed 5 ways it failed the "ammunition" test.
• Earlier in this case, you acquiesced repeatedly to Rubio and then the GOP flock misappropriating "lame duck" - it's not lame duck time until Nov. 2. But you don't call them on it, you wash your hands (Pilate) of them making stuff up.
• Back in Florida 2000, you let the GOP redefine "recount" to include counting ballots that had been set aside uncounted - did they intimidate you or were you just out to lunch, acquiescing to the revisionist definition they daily spit out as they spewed against "recounting"
• In 2004, you acquiesced to Bush to not release your story about his secret wiretaps that could very plausibly have affected the election outcome. Shameful.
• the list is endless, your comment box size limit is your shield.
You're the Fourth Estate, for heavens sake. Act like it. Stop cowering and appeasing. Your
8
The NYT, like most corporations, secretly backs the GOP. That's common knowledge.
Maybe I am misinformed but last I observed Barack Obama resoundingly was reelected President by a majority of Americans in 2012. He was and until his term expires the " people's choice" and President . As President he is authorized and empowered to nominate individuals for appointment to the Supreme Court. The Senate has the obligation to conduct hearings and confirm or deny that nomination. By adamantly and defiantly refusing to fulfill their obligations once again the Republicans are disrespecting both the man as well as the office of the President, Suppose Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders are elected President in November? Do you suppose this angry crowd of obstructionist naysayers will hold hearings or confirm that particular President's nominee? When will the electorate tire of these angry , bitter hostile men who refuse to do their jobs , refuse to honor the will of the people while continuing to make a mockery of everything America purportedly stands for!
7
How low do Republicans have to go before this systematic destruction of my beloved homeland comes to a halt? When I learn of the latest tactics to destroy our democracy, I am left speechless. But only because I can't manage to sob and speak at the same time.
3
This is now the Jim Crow Senate that refuses to work with the first black president in any way. Look at the photograph here, and look at the Republican members of the Judiciary Committee: all white men (with the latter including Ted Cruz). They now refuse to follow the Constitution.
When Pres. Obama received 65,915,795 votes for his second presidency in 2012, basically what Sen. McConnell is saying when he continually tries to nullify the election is that the record votes of African Americans, Hispanics, Asians, and other minorities should not be counted, only the white votes. There is no other way in which he can pretend the popular and the electoral college votes did not go to Barack Obama.
There is now a "Whites Only" sign over the Republican Senate in terms of barring President Obama entrance or access to his normal Constitutional powers of office for his normal Constitutional term of office. The obstructionism by Sen. McConnell from the first inauguration of President Barack Obama basically is separate but unequal access to the Senate processes and respect.
When Pres. Obama received 65,915,795 votes for his second presidency in 2012, basically what Sen. McConnell is saying when he continually tries to nullify the election is that the record votes of African Americans, Hispanics, Asians, and other minorities should not be counted, only the white votes. There is no other way in which he can pretend the popular and the electoral college votes did not go to Barack Obama.
There is now a "Whites Only" sign over the Republican Senate in terms of barring President Obama entrance or access to his normal Constitutional powers of office for his normal Constitutional term of office. The obstructionism by Sen. McConnell from the first inauguration of President Barack Obama basically is separate but unequal access to the Senate processes and respect.
6
The decision of the Senate Republicans not to hold Judiciary Committee confirmation hearings on anyone that President Obama might propose for appointment to the Supreme Court – to close their minds eyes, and ears, without allowing any facts and evidence to be presented to them for rational consideration, says a lot – and none of it good.
This is an example of Senators who have a closed mind and do not want to make rational decisions based upon facts presented to them. The Senators based their decision, according to this article “… born of the necessity to protect the will of the American people…”
So the Senate Republicans have made their decision to close their minds, ears and eyes, because they believe that the American people also have the desire to close their minds, ears and eyes and give no consideration to any facts that might be presented to them!
If these Republicans and Democrats are correct, that the American public needs to be “protected” by closing their minds, ears, and minds to facts, evidence, and circumstances, then what does this say about us Americans and those who represent us?
And at the same time these Republicans and Democrats are continually pointing their fingers at leaders of other countries and criticizing those leaders for allegedly not respecting, and keeping in the dark, the citizens of their countries? Do I sense a bit of hypocrisy? I think so. How should we Americans feel about all of this. Not good I believe.
This is an example of Senators who have a closed mind and do not want to make rational decisions based upon facts presented to them. The Senators based their decision, according to this article “… born of the necessity to protect the will of the American people…”
So the Senate Republicans have made their decision to close their minds, ears and eyes, because they believe that the American people also have the desire to close their minds, ears and eyes and give no consideration to any facts that might be presented to them!
If these Republicans and Democrats are correct, that the American public needs to be “protected” by closing their minds, ears, and minds to facts, evidence, and circumstances, then what does this say about us Americans and those who represent us?
And at the same time these Republicans and Democrats are continually pointing their fingers at leaders of other countries and criticizing those leaders for allegedly not respecting, and keeping in the dark, the citizens of their countries? Do I sense a bit of hypocrisy? I think so. How should we Americans feel about all of this. Not good I believe.
1
It's OUR lives they are playing with, ladies and gentlemen. Earlier I called for grassroots action against obstructionist senators through communications and in-person demonstrations at their jobs as soon as President Obama names a candidate. WE also must take our outrage to their towns and homes so people there understand that the people they elected are trying to further destroy democracy in America. It is time to make THEM feel insecure behind that veil of money.
6
And the voters should shun the GOP nominee for president.
10
Wow, what a novel idea. No one else filing in here sent from the bloggers has even thought of that!
1
David Vitter’s signature appears on page 3 of the letter from the GOP membership of the Senate Judiciary Committee. Yes, that David VItter. The one who confessed to involvement with a DC escort service in 2007 and who, when accused of soliciting a prostitute in 2002, only avoided prosecution by the statute of limitations. One might well wonder why an individual with such a sordid history has a seat on such an important committee, but the relevant point here is that Vitter has announced he will not run for reelection to the Senate this year. By what twisted logic is lame-duck Vitter’s obstructive voice and vote legitimate while Obama’s fulfillment of his constitutional responsibility is not?
20
This (in)action by the Republicans feeds the fire that will destroy them- the nomination of Donald Trump as the Republican presidential candidate. The Republicans deny the legitimacy of the Obama presidency, they blame complex economic problems on Mexican immigration, and they claim that the Affordable Care act is destroying jobs and wrecking medical care. None of these are true. But their supporters in the conservative media disseminate the lies as truths, leading to a groundswell of support for a man who is more fascist than conservative. The United States can not become "great again" when led by a man and a party that believes the untrue to be true and refuses to acknowledge a founding principal of American governance, compromise.
13
To scare the pants off this GOP judiciary committee, all that their billionaire funders have to do is threaten to fund whoever's running against them in the next election. It works every time!
3
I love the photo that accompanies this article. Three ancient white Republicans whose body language screams obstruction. Then there's John Thune in the background, bearing a frightening resemblance to the execrable Douglas Neidermeyer from "Animal House."
This isn't your father's Republican Party. It's much, much worse.
This isn't your father's Republican Party. It's much, much worse.
14
It will be very interesting to see the Republican reaction when President Clinton nominates Barack Obama and the 75 Democratic Senators approve him.
13
Your words to G-D's ear.
This has gone beyond stupid How much hate can be left?
11
McConnell and his ilkish "brothers" are ugly, racist, and despicable -- and I use the term advisedly -- human beings. What a lack of civility or regard for our commonweal. Utterly disgraceful ... and they revel in being so: pigs in the mud.
The American government is a joke.
3
I look forward to casting my vote against those who would undermine the value of it.
One man/woman, one vote. Always.
That's called Democracy.
One man/woman, one vote. Always.
That's called Democracy.
7
Is there any reason to believe that if a Democrat is elected President and the Republicans retain control of the Senate that there just won't be another excuse to refuse to consider a supreme court nomination after the election? After all, if 8 justices are good enough for one year, why not until the next time a Republican is elected President?
5
I wonder, if a non-Republican wins the November election, does that mean the obstructionists [assuming they still control the Senate] will automatically approve the new President's nominee because '...the people have spoken''? Inquiring minds really want to know.
6
In 2012, I voted for Barack Obama for a second FOUR-YEAR term. Over the years, Senator McConnell and his Republican cohorts blocked many of Mr. Obama's proposals, and these the very reasons for my voting for Mr. Obama. I can understand that we have a two-party system, and not all of the president's agenda can be approved by Congress. But now, even though Mr. Obama has the constitutional authority to appoint a nominee to the Supreme Court and the Senate has the obligation to review that nominee's credentials, Senator McConnell and his cohorts won't let it happen! And their refusal not only stops the president from exercising his constitutional authority, their obstructionism is voiding my vote along with those of a majority of the voters in 2012. My hope is that either Mr. Trump or Mr. Cruz is nominated by the Republican president. Their refusal to acknowledge the rights of so many citizens in this country (indeed, in the world) truly represents the essence of the current Republican party.
9
You are mistaken, sir. Mr. Obama does not have constitutional authority to appoint anyone to the Supreme Court. His authority is sufficient only to nominate a candidate for elevation to the Supreme Court. The Senate has authority to decide how (and whether) to treat the President's nominee, i.e., whether to confirm, reject or ignore the nominee. Apparently, the Senate has chosen the latter course of action. That is their constitutional right. It's what we call "politics"; and it most assuredly is a game that both of the major political parties in this country play on a regular basis.
2
So does this mean that the president's term is only three years? If so, Mr. Obama has overstayed his welcome, and the election seems to be running late. In any event, better hurry up and amend the Constitution.
6
As I commented earlier, it is so pathetic. The next thing will be that decisions by the Supreme Court that the right wing doesn't like will be dismissed as illegitimate or "to be reversed as soon as possible." In fact, that is essentially what Ted Cruz and others have already been saying recently about the Court's rulings affecting the ACA and same-sex marriage. Respect for the Constitution? The Supreme Court is, precisely, supposed to rule on difficult constitutional questions, and its decisions are supposed to be accepted. They are, for now. I do wonder how the Republicans would have swallowed a different decision on the Gore vs. Bush vote in 2000. The country was, in fact, "saved" by agreeing to the Supreme Court's decision favoring, in this case, the Republican candidate for president. We all "moved on." Given today's troop of Republican senators, if the decision had favored Al Gore would they have accepted him as the country's legitimate president? These people are drunk with power and obsessed with notions that the country will somehow fall apart if the Supreme Court is unlikely to rule in ways they wish. Please grow up.
8
Do others also see the stunning irony, not to mention mendacity, in those who claim to love America, but despise so many Americans?
Democracy is not a spectator sport, and the upcoming election will be the most consequential in at least a generation (the 2000 "selection" obviously cannot count). As other commenters have said, eligible voters must -- MUST -- exercise their franchise, even if their choices are underwhelming. As has often been said, the perfect must not be the enemy of the good (or even the merely acceptable). For myself, the sine qua non is whether a candidate's beliefs -- and actions -- are predicated on evidence-based reality. Period and full stop.
This election may also bring another "perfect storm," one that could make the crisis of 2000 pale by comparison, thanks to the many impediments to voting put in place by the Republicans controlling so many states -- aided and abetted by the Supreme Court's savage gutting of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/26/us/supreme-court-ruling.html.
Failing to vote -- and choosing carefully and purposefully -- simply because one is not excited by, or is even disenchanted with, the eventual nominee will have consequences beyond even one's imagining.
Democracy is not a spectator sport, and the upcoming election will be the most consequential in at least a generation (the 2000 "selection" obviously cannot count). As other commenters have said, eligible voters must -- MUST -- exercise their franchise, even if their choices are underwhelming. As has often been said, the perfect must not be the enemy of the good (or even the merely acceptable). For myself, the sine qua non is whether a candidate's beliefs -- and actions -- are predicated on evidence-based reality. Period and full stop.
This election may also bring another "perfect storm," one that could make the crisis of 2000 pale by comparison, thanks to the many impediments to voting put in place by the Republicans controlling so many states -- aided and abetted by the Supreme Court's savage gutting of the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/26/us/supreme-court-ruling.html.
Failing to vote -- and choosing carefully and purposefully -- simply because one is not excited by, or is even disenchanted with, the eventual nominee will have consequences beyond even one's imagining.
7
There it is folks.....the ultimate slap in the face to the voters of the United States, the ultimate insult to a great president, the ultimate shredding of the Constitution, and the ultimate derleliction of duty by the Republican party.
They will either cave and end up holding hearings, or the court will allow the lower more liberal courts to decide until President Clinton has a Democratic senate as a result of these shennanigans. She can then really fill the courts with liberal progressive judges who use the Constitution instead of talking points from rush limbaugh and the NRA as guides to deciding cases.
They will either cave and end up holding hearings, or the court will allow the lower more liberal courts to decide until President Clinton has a Democratic senate as a result of these shennanigans. She can then really fill the courts with liberal progressive judges who use the Constitution instead of talking points from rush limbaugh and the NRA as guides to deciding cases.
7
When does the senate have the right to ignore the constitution? It complains the President does so through executive over-reach and then does yhe same thing? This is partisanship taken to the city limit and then off the reservation and out of the state. What if they get a new Democratic president? Will they refuse then? How long can this debilitating cycle of internecine feuding go on before America can get something done?
5
Perhaps the Executive Branch should withhold the paychecks of the Senate since they haven't done anything useful since Republicons won the majority. No work, no pay.
6
Ironically, what you are proposing (the president's withholding congressional paychecks) actually would be unconstitutional.
1
The photo is of 4 old white men. This signatures are also all white mean from southern and mid-western sates, mostly with relatively small populations. The will of the people...
4
This decision will come back to hurt the Repubs badly come November.
3
Trump will make a much better selection for the Supreme Court.
Not for the lame duck....
Not for the lame duck....
1
...And the Constitution says that where?
I'm advocating that the President nominate Sandra Day O'Connor. Need I say more?
Joe Biden. Usually his lack of verbal discipline is harmless and just adds to his image as the slightly nutty family uncle of the Democratic Party. But his 1992 Senate speech, 90 minutes long, when he was head of the Judiciary Committee has come back to bite him and his Party big time. Good! About time the Democrats' hypocrisy on governing issues- one set of rules when they are in power and another when not- had some consequences instead of being shrugged off as 'just politics' and ignored by the media. It is so nice to watch Democrats squeal when forced to live under the standards they wished to impose on Republicans.
3
Next, the GOP will declare Scalia was a god and therefore he is
irreplaceable!
irreplaceable!
2
I would like to channel the GOP leading contender for the Presidential nomination and his fast and loose utilization of various regularities and send one McConnell's way but the Times would certainly reject my "comment".
I forced, therefore, to clean it up and try and act like a grownup, something the GOP in general has forgotten to do since about 2009.
Senator McConnell, you're a hypocritical and un-American disgrace.
I forced, therefore, to clean it up and try and act like a grownup, something the GOP in general has forgotten to do since about 2009.
Senator McConnell, you're a hypocritical and un-American disgrace.
5
In Curb Your Enthusiasm, Leon put on glasses and suddenly doors opened for him. So President Obama needs to put on glasses and nominate a potential justice--maybe that will change the minds of senators that view him as an illegitimate president.
1
The ultra-right Republican party is under siege. Scalia is gone, Donald Trump is on the rise. What else can they do but hole-up and hope the calvary arrives soon in the form of Marco Rubio. Don't they know that this very action will seal their fate? Most Americans don't like people who don't play by the rules. Ignore the constitution to your peril, boys.
5
I encourage you all to write to justices Breyer, Ginsburg, Kagan, and Sotomayor and request that they refuse to sit for any cases until the vacancy is filled. Six justices are required for quorum in any case before SCOTUS. Lacking quorum, the court will cease to function. No decision will have any legal standing.
If the legislative branch refused to act in good faith, the judicial branch can and should demonstrate that there are consequences. No nominee, no Supreme Court.
If the legislative branch refused to act in good faith, the judicial branch can and should demonstrate that there are consequences. No nominee, no Supreme Court.
3
The mission of the GOPTP has been and will continue to be a coup done in slow motion.
4
Midterms 2010.... Midterms 2014... and Nov. 2015 election results in VA, OH, Houston, and KY. A Democrat debacle. Read the tea leaves.
"....not even a courtesy meeting with President Obama’s nominee to replace Justice Antonin Scalia."
Courtesy?! Obama would not know about courtesy or even legality as demonstrated over his sad tenure.
This action appropriately reflects the same courtesy that Obama provides to the constitution with his endless illegal, executive orders.
Obama can put forth anyone he wants and that would be within his right under the constitution. Similarly, the Senate can ignore him and also be within the constitution.
Even VP Biden espoused not sending up any nominee (when the president happened to be a Republican) when he was a senator. Oh my, what excellent irony! The worm has turned in a most wonderful way.
It is a political bed that the radical and divisive Obama created for the last 7 years; and he is now appropriately and delightfully made to sleep in it.
Courtesy?! Obama would not know about courtesy or even legality as demonstrated over his sad tenure.
This action appropriately reflects the same courtesy that Obama provides to the constitution with his endless illegal, executive orders.
Obama can put forth anyone he wants and that would be within his right under the constitution. Similarly, the Senate can ignore him and also be within the constitution.
Even VP Biden espoused not sending up any nominee (when the president happened to be a Republican) when he was a senator. Oh my, what excellent irony! The worm has turned in a most wonderful way.
It is a political bed that the radical and divisive Obama created for the last 7 years; and he is now appropriately and delightfully made to sleep in it.
1
Obama's attending Scalia's funeral would have been a courtesy.
2
Two things:
Executive orders are legal - every president has issued them.
Obama has issued less executive orders than any president in recent history - less than both Bushes, Reagan, Nixon, Eisenhower, et al
Get your facts straight before you post.
Executive orders are legal - every president has issued them.
Obama has issued less executive orders than any president in recent history - less than both Bushes, Reagan, Nixon, Eisenhower, et al
Get your facts straight before you post.
2
But the Republicans are actually doing it, not just saying it. Also, "ignore" is not in the Constitution. "Advise and consent" is.
2
It will be a delicious irony next January when President Sanders nominates Barack Hussein Obama to the Supreme Court.
2
Unless democrats hold a majority in Congress, republicans would never, ever approve.
Senate Republicans are in violation of their oath to the uphold the constitution. They should be held in contempt and removed from office. Democrats must flock to the polls in record numbers to ensure that those 35 seats that are up for election this year are filled by Democrats.
There is simply no excuse for this. They are acting like irresponsible children.
There is simply no excuse for this. They are acting like irresponsible children.
2
Even so, the President needs to submit a nominee!
1
It appears that "advice and consent" now means "deny categorically with extreme prejudice" to our GOP Constitutional scholars. To act this way without knowledge of the nominee is beyond the pale. I don't know how these Senators can feel good about cashing their paychecks, hopefully they won't be much longer.
1
Maybe advise and consent should also be disregarded and the President should simply appoint someone. Advise and consent is a privilege - use it or lose it.
1
I am so sick of seeing both news stories and the comments on this article saying "the Senate has decided...," following McConnell's idiot letter about the "unanimity" of the Judiciary committee. It's the unanimity of the REPUBLICANS on that committee. The "Senate" and the "House" are run by majority REPUBLICANS. It is not either of these institutions which is acting--or not acting--it is one of our two political parties which has been captured by its wingnuts. Let's keep the record straight, and not let these destructive extremists win their PR message. It's not a failure of our institutions; it's THEIR failure.
5
Is this grounds for impeachment?
On top of seven years of obstruction, innumerable vacations and absences from Washington, more time spent fund raising for the next election than spent governing, this refusal to do what they have been elected to do is the cropper.
On top of seven years of obstruction, innumerable vacations and absences from Washington, more time spent fund raising for the next election than spent governing, this refusal to do what they have been elected to do is the cropper.
4
To an outsider, it seems that the Americans have forgotten that they are Americans first and only secondly to whatever party they profess their ideology to. Whenever, something like this happens and people forget their loyalties to their country first and everything else second, such nations are deemed to be very close to the precipice of disaster and disintegration of their countries. If this civil war between the two parties continues, the US will break apart. So sad to see a once great nation tearing itself apart.
6
The GOP Senators' oath of office to support and defend the Constitution has been trumped by the oath they took to support and defend the interests of the Koch Brothers and their ilk.
We need to march on Washington. Clog its streets, Disrupt its routine until the Senate does its job. Mr. President, name your nominee. A Justice delayed, is justice denied.
We need to march on Washington. Clog its streets, Disrupt its routine until the Senate does its job. Mr. President, name your nominee. A Justice delayed, is justice denied.
2
What I think President Obama should do now that it has become clear that the Senate will not approve anyone this year is to nominate a smart, cynical, and funny judge to verbally rip the Senate apart. After all he'd have nothing to loose and a lot to gain. Kind of an Al Franken type for law.
1
Look at the faces of the naysayers of the Constitution. Hate and distain are dripping from their eyes.
4
I detect a little "Who worry what me?" as well
The Republicans, by the very nature of their actions are tearing our country apart. What they are doing is not conservative and certainly not the right thing for our country.
4
So, by the Senate's whim, the next justice could likely be nominated by Clinton, Sanders, or Trump. Is that really their desire?
1
Just noticed the actual text of the letter of Feb 23 from Judiciary committee to McConnell was included in the piece here.
It seems clear enough and I don't see why Obama cannot nominate and appoint somebody who can proceed directly to the court and be sworn in, given that the letter is clearly unconstitutional.
It seems clear enough and I don't see why Obama cannot nominate and appoint somebody who can proceed directly to the court and be sworn in, given that the letter is clearly unconstitutional.
1
The next Senate recess begins on March 21st. Because the Senate has announced it will refuse to carry out its Constitutional responsibilities, the President has no choice but to act unilaterally and make a recess appointment. If such an appointment leads to a legal challenge, which gets expedited to the Supreme Court, those like Chief Justice Roberts who have long followed Justice Scalia's lead in upholding a strict interpretation of original intent will have a choice: either approve the President's action or demonstrate for all time that their so-called originalism is a smokescreen for partisan political expediency.
1
I have not heard ONE single forward looking plan from the GOP or its presidential candidates. It is all about opposing and opposing that and it doesn't matter whether it has to do with foreign politics or domestic matters.
Do the GOP seriously think that opposing any supreme court candidate put forward by President Obama will lead the Democrats to approve just any candidate they put forward!?
GOP: Gridlock & Oppose Party
Do the GOP seriously think that opposing any supreme court candidate put forward by President Obama will lead the Democrats to approve just any candidate they put forward!?
GOP: Gridlock & Oppose Party
1
Remember how America likes to export democracy to the rest of the world? They claim to be the freest country on Earth? This is why the rest of the world laughs at the USA.
5
Curious what happens if a democrat wins in November? Do the clueless Republican senate intend to block a vote for an additional four years?
1
“This nomination will be determined by whoever wins the presidency in the polls,” Mr. McConnell said.
Well, no. It might be determined by the Supreme Court. After all, that's what happened in 2000.
And if there's a 4-4 deadlock ... yikes.
Well, no. It might be determined by the Supreme Court. After all, that's what happened in 2000.
And if there's a 4-4 deadlock ... yikes.
We have a president who was chosen by the polls. The GOP party, however, has spent over seven years now working its hardest to disenfranchise the US voters--at least those voters who have the temerity to disagree with the GOP.
1
News flash, the republicans were also elected - to do exactly what they are doing now.
Unlike many writers here, I hope that Mitch McConnell continues to be a refusenik (a word from the Soviet Union that also means "a person who refuses to follow orders or obey the law, especially as a protest.")
According to one entrance poll of Nevada Republican voters, who, by the way, turned out in record numbers, a large majority felt filling the vacancy on the Supreme Court is a very important issue.
The good news for Democrats is that demographics should prevent Donald Trump from becoming the 45th president. 85% of the 1,573 Nevada GOP voters CNN polled before they caucused were white, compared with 59% of Democratic Nevada voters. We don't have the Democratic South Carolina results yet, but 96% of GOP voters in that state were white. It's highly unlikely that the Democratic primary being held Saturday, Feb 27 will show such a lack of diversity. Iowa and New Hampshire are 92 and 94% white so they aren't really reflective of much of the rest of the country.
The bad news is that Republicans have been voting in record numbers during their primary, while Democrats have not. Hopefully the Supreme Court issue, including Mitch McConnell's unconstitutional stand, will wake Democratic voters up to what's at stake, and they will get out and vote in the general election when it counts. If they do, either Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton will be the next president and Donald Trump can go back to TV, if anyone will have him.
According to one entrance poll of Nevada Republican voters, who, by the way, turned out in record numbers, a large majority felt filling the vacancy on the Supreme Court is a very important issue.
The good news for Democrats is that demographics should prevent Donald Trump from becoming the 45th president. 85% of the 1,573 Nevada GOP voters CNN polled before they caucused were white, compared with 59% of Democratic Nevada voters. We don't have the Democratic South Carolina results yet, but 96% of GOP voters in that state were white. It's highly unlikely that the Democratic primary being held Saturday, Feb 27 will show such a lack of diversity. Iowa and New Hampshire are 92 and 94% white so they aren't really reflective of much of the rest of the country.
The bad news is that Republicans have been voting in record numbers during their primary, while Democrats have not. Hopefully the Supreme Court issue, including Mitch McConnell's unconstitutional stand, will wake Democratic voters up to what's at stake, and they will get out and vote in the general election when it counts. If they do, either Bernie Sanders or Hillary Clinton will be the next president and Donald Trump can go back to TV, if anyone will have him.
Is not the refusal of Senators McConnell, Grassley and their subordinates to take up their constitutional responsibilities to advise and consent impeachable?
Does not their willingness to conspire among themselves to suborn the Constitution compound the offense?
Would that some Cicero should rise to take them down and rid our Republic of their vile macchinations.
Does not their willingness to conspire among themselves to suborn the Constitution compound the offense?
Would that some Cicero should rise to take them down and rid our Republic of their vile macchinations.
1
Once again McConnell claims that the people should decide who the next nominee should be. They did, Mitch. Twice. That's one of the main reasons the American people elected Obama president: to exercise his authority and responsibility to nominate someone to fill a vacant seat on the Supreme Court.
McConnell and his henchmen are thwarting the will of the American people.
McConnell and his henchmen are thwarting the will of the American people.
2
These Republican's are wasting good air, they cant get any sorrier!
Sorry we're sending Donald Trump your way, you mean? Imagine what he'll make of Hillary.
The GOP is behaving like a two-year old having a temper tantrum. The disrespect they are showing is nothing short of astonishing. They are actually preventing the President from carrying out his sworn duties. What do they hope to accomplish? This should show any reasonable person that theyare not fit to govern. Of course, we have known that from the time that McConnell set out to obstruct the President on eveverything. Unfortunately, it indicates what we can expect if a Democrat is elected in November.
1
The president should sue the Senate leaders, and with the Supreme Court tied, let a lower court affirm Senate's obligation to act.
1
In refusing to consider a Supreme Court nominee, the Republicans are making a big gamble. If Clinton or Sanders wins the presidency they could well nominate a candidate that leans further to the left than anyone President Obama would support. And it is remotely possible that the Democrats might regain control of the Senate. Let the games begin.
Outrageous!
Hello,
The Trump factor seems to be encouraging the other politicians to find their courage.
Perhaps, just perhaps, the USA will get back on the right track.
I hope so,
Bill Moore
The Trump factor seems to be encouraging the other politicians to find their courage.
Perhaps, just perhaps, the USA will get back on the right track.
I hope so,
Bill Moore
The GOP action in refusing to schedule a vote on any potential appointment by the president to the court is unconstitutional. If this were constitutional, the senate could simply do away with the supreme court by not approving any nominee to the court ever and thereby eliminating the judicial branch of government. This quite simply cannot be the state of the law. Of course, I am sure the brilliant, Harvard educated genius like the jurists that dominate the court will disagree with me. Once we break this unconstitutional strangle=hold by the GOP, it is time to break the Ivy League strangle-hold on the court. How about a real lawyer on the court for a change? Somebody from the Midwest, South or West who went to a state school, actually practiced law, ended up on the bench, and is in touch with the real people of this country.
1
well, there they go again, the all white men retro group, headed by the old
bunny rabbit McConnell. Please, let's get them out of office. This has gone on
for too long. Where is jon Stewart when we need him. I'd love to see this group
skewered and removed from office in the end. What a disgrace they are to this
country and to the people they represent.
bunny rabbit McConnell. Please, let's get them out of office. This has gone on
for too long. Where is jon Stewart when we need him. I'd love to see this group
skewered and removed from office in the end. What a disgrace they are to this
country and to the people they represent.
1
I wish I could have the optimism of some of the other commenters that the Republicans will pay a price for this, but I fear they will not. Despite repeatedly shutting down the government over bogus budget issues, the American people have still given them control of both houses of Congress.
And I think Republican leaders have learned from this. Apparently the American people like it when their government doesn't work. Well, okay then. You will get what you want.
The American slow motion train wreck will just go a little faster.
And I think Republican leaders have learned from this. Apparently the American people like it when their government doesn't work. Well, okay then. You will get what you want.
The American slow motion train wreck will just go a little faster.
6
New York Times readers fail to the grasp the fact that the reason the country has given control of both houses of Congress to the Republicans is precisely so that Obama's agenda would be obstructed.
1
Would Scalia even recognize the GOP Senate as fellow conservatives or would he see them as a dangerous radical fringe?
1
Like Bernie says, we need a revolution!
2
Bring it on dude!
What's left of the GOP is now stuck with Donald Trump, and in their impotent rage have reverted back to the schoolyard, just as they did after Barack Obama's two landslide victories. I feel confident that the President and the American people will prevail.
2
I'm less confident - rationality has is gone.
Obama's victories were not landslides... both times he won by just over 50% of the vote. This country is fairly evenly divided ideologically.
Hate is a strong word, but I hate these cowards. Consider the nominee, you bunch of grumpy old white men. Or are you afraid, before the cameras, to say WHY you are going to say "no"?
I long for the demographic shifts that will make the GOP perish. May the day come and come soon.
I long for the demographic shifts that will make the GOP perish. May the day come and come soon.
5
One more sign of the Republican Party imploding. None of their representatives are capable of making a decision until they know which way the wind will blow within the party. Should they take an extreme right-wing stand or be more centrist? They don't know yet. They stand to lose a lot if they make the wrong choice, so they won't make one at all.
5
When 45% of Nevada's Hispanics vote for Trump, the GOP is hardly imploding. BTW, a federal judge yesterday ordered Hillary & Co. to keep imploding over FOIA obstructionism, payola for friends, and perjury about emails and servers. Our condolences, Democrats.
1
I expect to see this as a campaign issue. The GOP, for all its talk about expanding its big tent, is now publicly closing the flap on the first black president, elected not one but twice, who has 10 months left in his second term. Voting down President Obama's nomination is one thing, refusing to allow him to perform his Constituional duty is quite another. Republicans-when they're not shutting down government, they are obstructing it. Vote D.
6
The Republicans never cease to amaze me, but not in a good way. What Mr. McConnell is doing is basically flipping the President a double-bird. If I were Mr. Obama, I'd be rubbing my hands in satisfaction. He now has the opportunity to totally embarrass and ridicule the G.O.P., portraying them as Constitutionally ignorant buffoons, and arrogant lawbreakers. Grand Old Party indeed.
1
GREAT!!!
I was hoping that the Supreme Court would be invalidated. They are now partisan hacks.
If you need a majority in both houses to get someone on the supreme court the supreme court will dwindle in size and become a neutered relic.
Bring it on.
I was hoping that the Supreme Court would be invalidated. They are now partisan hacks.
If you need a majority in both houses to get someone on the supreme court the supreme court will dwindle in size and become a neutered relic.
Bring it on.
2
This is actually amusing. Joe Biden was one that felt the lame duck president in his final year should not nominate a justice. Watched him on tape just yesterday say that. Oh, could that have been during the time of a Republican president. I forgot it's different for a democrat president. Another one that never changes what he thinks.
7
Yes, Reince Priebus. You have your hands full.
But where are you?
Come out of hiding and let us hear how proud you are of your party.
But where are you?
Come out of hiding and let us hear how proud you are of your party.
7
It's time for Republican Senators running for re-election to be shunned in the voting booth. #doyourjob
8
That means Democrats first have to show up at the voting booth. Heck, even in vote-by-mail states they still don't vote. We GOP say, "Keep it up!"
1
Mr. McConnell added: “But he has also has the right to make a different choice. He can let the people decide ..."
Really Senator? You mean the people who want to put Trump in the White House - something even the Repbulican establishment is desperately trying to stop?
Really Senator? You mean the people who want to put Trump in the White House - something even the Repbulican establishment is desperately trying to stop?
6
No, he means the BIG democracy-destroying money people who own he and his brethren in OUR U.S. Senate, House and Supreme Court.
3
Senator Sanders is calling for a revolution. He and MoveOn.org should turn their attention to organizing people to stop this obstructionism by Mitch McConnell and the other republican senators who think it's THEIR country. They are the reason for the wealth inequality and destruction of democracy he talks about. Stop tearing down Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton and do something for America, Senator Sanders.
6
Who do these senators think they are: citizens above the Constitution? And who are these "American people" they claim to represent? Let's just call McConnell and Cruz and their lot what they really are: de facto racists who never got over the election of Barack Obama by THE American people. So let's do our part for our country and rid the Senate of those who could care less about us.
11
Fine, then we need to elect a Democratic president and senate in Nov., so we can be done with these anarchists.
9
It is pathetic and absurd for the Republicans to rely on what Biden or Schumer may have said in the past for political reasons in the past re nominees for the Supreme Court in an election year.
It what the Democrats did under Sen. George Mitchell that matters. They gave Republican nominees to the Court a hearing, and voted. That is the constitution!
It what the Democrats did under Sen. George Mitchell that matters. They gave Republican nominees to the Court a hearing, and voted. That is the constitution!
6
The Washington Post reporting on Joe Biden senate floor comments from 1992:
"Were there a vacancy, Biden argued, Bush should “not name a nominee until after the November election is completed,” and if he did, “the Senate Judiciary Committee should seriously consider not scheduling confirmation hearings on the nomination until after the political campaign season is over.”
“Senate consideration of a nominee under these circumstances is not fair to the president, to the nominee, or to the Senate itself,” he continued. “Where the nation should be treated to a consideration of constitutional philosophy, all it will get in such circumstances is partisan bickering and political posturing from both parties and from both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.”"
"Were there a vacancy, Biden argued, Bush should “not name a nominee until after the November election is completed,” and if he did, “the Senate Judiciary Committee should seriously consider not scheduling confirmation hearings on the nomination until after the political campaign season is over.”
“Senate consideration of a nominee under these circumstances is not fair to the president, to the nominee, or to the Senate itself,” he continued. “Where the nation should be treated to a consideration of constitutional philosophy, all it will get in such circumstances is partisan bickering and political posturing from both parties and from both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.”"
4
Re: "...partisan bickering and political posturing from both parties and from both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.”
Indeed. But all that bickering and posturing is Constitutional.
Indeed. But all that bickering and posturing is Constitutional.
Lots of screaming and yelling here but not much call for action. Thanks to the people who have called and written their Senators and told them to confirm President Obama's nominee. WE must not allow Mr. McConnell and the other wholly-owned Koch brothers/Sheldon Adelson/fox-so-called news operatives behave this way. THEY WORK FOR US! As soon as President Obama announces a candidate WE must take action by blasting the obstructionists with letters, e-mails, tweets and every other social media until we crash their communications. People who live in the area and agree must storm the senate and DEMAND a hearing and confirmation. WE cannot allow the vacancy to remain because the "conservative" machine will use the vacancy to get THEIR voters out with letters from the nra, radical religious right, BIG money machines and advertising. Mr. McConnell knows exactly what he's doing - and so do we. And we say NO!
10
Please remind me again, who's paying their salaries?
13
So, does the 2nd Amendment have any meaning either?
6
It takes education of mind and heart to lead by wisdom and reason and decide ideas on merit. All of the above is absent from the naked and despicable power players known at the Republican Party Bunch.
3
Isn't the intentional abjurgation of a constitutional duty grounds for impeachment? Treason ?
6
Really? Regardless of all the umbrage to the lack of constitutional protocol, by delaying what do republicans have to lose? At worst they delay the process because for sure by now they certainly don't care about image. At best, a Trump actually wins and the court stays to the right.
Politicians need to FOLLOW the Constitution, not try to get around it.
The Article says: "The President SHALL nominate...with the Consent...SHALL appoint..." This a Constitutional statement DIRECTING the behavior of all of the participants.
None of whom have any options whatsoever, other than to select and accept or reject the nominees.
No participant has the choice to NOT fully participate as DIRECTED, nor to prevent another participant from fully complying with this DIRECTING clause.
Any of the specified participants who fail to perform as Constitutionally DIRECTED are in immediate and obvious breach of the Constitution and their oath of office. Therefore steps should be taken immediately to remove them from office as they are unwilling to comply with the Constitution.
The Article says: "The President SHALL nominate...with the Consent...SHALL appoint..." This a Constitutional statement DIRECTING the behavior of all of the participants.
None of whom have any options whatsoever, other than to select and accept or reject the nominees.
No participant has the choice to NOT fully participate as DIRECTED, nor to prevent another participant from fully complying with this DIRECTING clause.
Any of the specified participants who fail to perform as Constitutionally DIRECTED are in immediate and obvious breach of the Constitution and their oath of office. Therefore steps should be taken immediately to remove them from office as they are unwilling to comply with the Constitution.
8
Proceed, Mr. President, proceed. Submit a nominee in due course, and set the approval process in motion. Provide these scoundrels with the opportunity to impale themselves time and again in the coming months. Send your nominee to meet with them as is customary and let the nation watch the Republicans turn that person away from their door.
That scenario will make a lasting impression on even the most indifferent voters.
These fools are so hasty. The have not only gift wrapped an opportunity for Mr. Obama to create an enduring capstone for his Presidency regardless of whether or not a nominee is confirmed, they are also allowing him to decide how painful the outcome will be for them based on how readily approvable his nominee is considered to be.
That scenario will make a lasting impression on even the most indifferent voters.
These fools are so hasty. The have not only gift wrapped an opportunity for Mr. Obama to create an enduring capstone for his Presidency regardless of whether or not a nominee is confirmed, they are also allowing him to decide how painful the outcome will be for them based on how readily approvable his nominee is considered to be.
7
I am a Republican but I am disgusted with both parties. I am not a Liberal socialist or a conservative Libertarian. I think I can best be described as a moderate conservative but always thought I was just a Republican who would work within the framework of the constitution. Evidently I am proven wrong, now I want term limits, outlawing packs and limit donations to one thousand dollars. Senators and congressman should make no more than officers in the area services and their benefits should be equal. Once your out so our your benefits. Maybe we need a multi men mens and ladies march on DC. I want to see the day that extremist don't rule my nation. put some democracy into my government. Maybe representative government is not so good.
8
"“There’s nothing in the Constitution that specifies the size of the Supreme Court,” Justice Alito said."
This quote and the speech recently shown where Vice-Pres Biden advocated a delay in appointing a justice for political purposes are examples of how politicians in both parties have contemplated abiding to the Constitution only when it is politically preferable. This is not an attitude that is acceptable to those of us who truly believe in democratic principles.
To all parties involved in this debacle, we the people show demand they either fulfill their obligation by permitting President Obama to appoint a judicial replacement for Justice Scalia and all 50 Senators vote for the nominee or not. However, if the Republican Senators refuse to comply, then every Democrat and those Republicans who do not agree with this racist act should vote to displace all participants in this egregious act that undermines our democracy.
This quote and the speech recently shown where Vice-Pres Biden advocated a delay in appointing a justice for political purposes are examples of how politicians in both parties have contemplated abiding to the Constitution only when it is politically preferable. This is not an attitude that is acceptable to those of us who truly believe in democratic principles.
To all parties involved in this debacle, we the people show demand they either fulfill their obligation by permitting President Obama to appoint a judicial replacement for Justice Scalia and all 50 Senators vote for the nominee or not. However, if the Republican Senators refuse to comply, then every Democrat and those Republicans who do not agree with this racist act should vote to displace all participants in this egregious act that undermines our democracy.
2
On November 17th, 1975, Jimmy Carter was campaigning in Iowas for his party's Presidential nomination. On that day, the liberal icon of the Supreme Court, nominated by FDR, resigned his seat on the Court. The longest serving justice in the history of the court stepped down.
An unelected GOP President, 11 days later, nominated a much more conservative John Paul Stevens.
The chairman of the Judiciary was Democrat James Eastland, a conservative from Mississippi. Democrats held a commanding filibuster proof Senate. 60 Democrats and 38 Republicans and 2 independents.
The court was dominated by the Dems. Yet they confirmed after the mass!
Why
An unelected GOP President, 11 days later, nominated a much more conservative John Paul Stevens.
The chairman of the Judiciary was Democrat James Eastland, a conservative from Mississippi. Democrats held a commanding filibuster proof Senate. 60 Democrats and 38 Republicans and 2 independents.
The court was dominated by the Dems. Yet they confirmed after the mass!
Why
1
McConnell, for being such a institutionalist has really been instrumental in many ways to empowering polarization in govt. The main reason? To win and hold power. When the drive to win totally submerses the duty of office this is the situation we get. And though Democrats aren't totally guiltless, this sense of entitlement to power is uniquely Republican. It was McConnell who helped unleash the far right whirl wind thinking to de-stablize a Democratic majority, and now they themselves are getting devoured. The upshot is, the Congress can not even do its job. The deconstruction of institutions that will occur if they win the presidency is hard to fathom, because they don't even know themselves. Like Slim Pickens in Dr. Strangelove, they will whoop it up while they ride the bomb down to destruction and be shocked at what happened, and of course, then they will turn around and blame it on Obama!
1
Good decision though tad blunter than one would have preferred. Nevertheless, Senator McConnell and others to be admired for recognizing the futility of the exercise and bringing down the curtains in no uncertain terms at first opportunity. Everybody wins, even Democrat senators, who now probably relieved that they may not have to support a DOA nominee. The people are the biggest winners, spared from a useless confrontational proceeding whose result known in advance. And for that, they will hand Senator McConnell and others, their well-deserved attaboys inside the voting booth.
Obama wins big too: he can swallow humble pie now quietly, presidentially and the story will be quickly forgotten well before 1sr March. Or drag it out, hoping against hope that his "moral" stance is all historians will remember, not the barrage of public humiliation that would come from pursuing it. Despite that, this president may well choose the latter, in which case we already know it won't be Joe Biden (smiley). Perhaps Obama can nominate Bob Dole (or other 90 plusser in a wheel chair); nobody in the Senate dare refuse meeting him. It could deliver the moral victory Obama seeks and deserves.
Name-calling aside, fact is the SCJ nominee train has already left the station. First stop Trump, next stop Clinton (if she wants onboard), and then we the people. Hurrah!
Obama wins big too: he can swallow humble pie now quietly, presidentially and the story will be quickly forgotten well before 1sr March. Or drag it out, hoping against hope that his "moral" stance is all historians will remember, not the barrage of public humiliation that would come from pursuing it. Despite that, this president may well choose the latter, in which case we already know it won't be Joe Biden (smiley). Perhaps Obama can nominate Bob Dole (or other 90 plusser in a wheel chair); nobody in the Senate dare refuse meeting him. It could deliver the moral victory Obama seeks and deserves.
Name-calling aside, fact is the SCJ nominee train has already left the station. First stop Trump, next stop Clinton (if she wants onboard), and then we the people. Hurrah!
1
"He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for..." (USC II, 2).
The key phrase that applies to the present situation appears to be:
"provided two thirds of the Senators present concur."
Republican statements to this point indicate the Republican leadership has no intention to be "present" or, if present, to participate in a meaningful manner.
Force the Republicans to show up so the American populace can see how little they do, ineffective they are, and relate the damage to individual families and voters.
The key phrase that applies to the present situation appears to be:
"provided two thirds of the Senators present concur."
Republican statements to this point indicate the Republican leadership has no intention to be "present" or, if present, to participate in a meaningful manner.
Force the Republicans to show up so the American populace can see how little they do, ineffective they are, and relate the damage to individual families and voters.
3
The Senate cannot be forced. They cannot even be told when a recess is in effect, the Senate gets to decide that too, so a recess appointment idea is DOA.
1
So, why is anyone surprised about this? Republicans have absolutely no capacity for doing anything remotely positive for our government. They want it to fail - especially if a Black Man is in the White House.
What bothers me more is that Democrats will sit blithely aside and let this happen.
This is truly chickens coming home to roost for Joe Biden. He was a driving force in establishing Civil Asset Forfeiture, and a driving force in establishing minimum sentencing guidelines. He was basically a conservative poster child. Now they're going to roast him. Actions have consequences.
What bothers me more is that Democrats will sit blithely aside and let this happen.
This is truly chickens coming home to roost for Joe Biden. He was a driving force in establishing Civil Asset Forfeiture, and a driving force in establishing minimum sentencing guidelines. He was basically a conservative poster child. Now they're going to roast him. Actions have consequences.
3
While it's easy to lay blame on G.O.P. Senators, let's not forget that they are just puppets of their corporate overlords. We (that means YOU, journalists) must demand to know which donors are blocking this Supreme Court nomination process. Here are just a few of the usual suspects: Sheldon Adelson (Las Vegas Sands), AT&T, Verizon, ExxonMobil, Citigroup, American Financial Group, Bank of America, UPS, GE, Lockheed Martin, Union Pacific, Altria.
5
If someone starts a petition at change.org to to respresent the American people and sue all these G.O.P senators or change the Constitution so we can impeach them, I'll sign it.
Our democratic process, as envisioned by the founding fathers, no longer works. Time to get rid of bunch of serious dead weight in Congress. I agree with Chris@ West Chester. Congressional members get two terms. No more long-term tenures. And Congressional members can be impeached. They've all been ruled by ego and Greed. They have been serving themselves and not the American people (ex: causing a shutdown that hurt working folks while they all flew home in private jets to their mega-mansions). They've all turned into dishonorable, spineless losers, sitting on their fat arses! How can they get up in the morning and look at themselves in the mirror? What kind of commendable legacy are they leaving to prosterity? What happens to serving our Country, to Honor, and to Duty? Fire them all! Let's start with anew! Time for another American revolution!
Our democratic process, as envisioned by the founding fathers, no longer works. Time to get rid of bunch of serious dead weight in Congress. I agree with Chris@ West Chester. Congressional members get two terms. No more long-term tenures. And Congressional members can be impeached. They've all been ruled by ego and Greed. They have been serving themselves and not the American people (ex: causing a shutdown that hurt working folks while they all flew home in private jets to their mega-mansions). They've all turned into dishonorable, spineless losers, sitting on their fat arses! How can they get up in the morning and look at themselves in the mirror? What kind of commendable legacy are they leaving to prosterity? What happens to serving our Country, to Honor, and to Duty? Fire them all! Let's start with anew! Time for another American revolution!
3
It would impugn 5-year-olds to call this classic GOP kindergarten. Tantrums, pouts, "can't share toys," "convinced of ability to bamboozle others"...
...and hoping you won't notice, MSM, their every co-optation:
Joe Biden spoke words in June (not January) about a hypothetical (not a real) vacancy on the Court and said at the time that his reason was that he was worried for the Senate deliberations (not worried about an election, not claiming "the people hadn't spoken") that a vacancy that might arise in summer and entail confirmation in the fall in the throes of electioneering, which would mean the Senate would give less than due attention to their sacred duty of careful consideration of potential Justice.
Nothing is analogous in this latest smoke and mirrors, nor in their previous stab at appropriating Chuck Schumer's similarly gratuitous hypothetical. Grabbing at straws? More like grabbing at megalomania.
But surprise surprise, most astonishing at all, you aren't noticing - just doing deaf and blind transcribing. You're just mouthing their blather every time you utter shamelessly irresponsible non-sense like "they had the ammunition they needed in a June 1992 floor speech by Joseph R. Biden Jr."
Have you no shame, NYT? They learned the "science" of false equivalency from you.
ct
...and hoping you won't notice, MSM, their every co-optation:
Joe Biden spoke words in June (not January) about a hypothetical (not a real) vacancy on the Court and said at the time that his reason was that he was worried for the Senate deliberations (not worried about an election, not claiming "the people hadn't spoken") that a vacancy that might arise in summer and entail confirmation in the fall in the throes of electioneering, which would mean the Senate would give less than due attention to their sacred duty of careful consideration of potential Justice.
Nothing is analogous in this latest smoke and mirrors, nor in their previous stab at appropriating Chuck Schumer's similarly gratuitous hypothetical. Grabbing at straws? More like grabbing at megalomania.
But surprise surprise, most astonishing at all, you aren't noticing - just doing deaf and blind transcribing. You're just mouthing their blather every time you utter shamelessly irresponsible non-sense like "they had the ammunition they needed in a June 1992 floor speech by Joseph R. Biden Jr."
Have you no shame, NYT? They learned the "science" of false equivalency from you.
ct
2
Can this be called a crime and the perpetrators arrested?
6
Have you called the US Attorney's office to file your charges? Why not?
2
The republicans have shut down our government and now they are impeding our nation's Supreme Court ... vote these treasonous cowards out of office ! I'm tired of their rascist, underhanded ploys. Our nation deserves better and Bernie is right ... Enough ! Come' on Hillary stand up to these republican obstructionists, you are currently campaigning on continuing President Obama's policies ... then put pressure on them and push for his nominee !
7
As I understand it, it is the president´s right to nominate new high court judges during his tenure, which is 4 years. What should be the reason for the president to abdicate this right for a quarter of his term, i.e. the last year? If a judge dies 3,1 (or 2,9?) years into a Republican president´s term, would it then be ok for Democrats to demand "hey, wait until after the next elections?" Why should it? Republican senators basically say "We think that only Republican Presidents have the right to nominate judges - otherwise the U.S. will have to wait until one is elected".
7
Here is the Constitutional deal. The President "shall" nominate, and President Obama indeed should nominate the very best candidate he can find. The Senate is Constitutionally a deliberative body that takes actions in its organized sessions. A letter from a group of Senators is *not* an action of the Senate or any of its committees, and it should not be treated as such. That is, the Senators' letter is *outside* the orb of Constitutional government and it lacks the legitimacy of a Constitutional Senate action, i.e., one taken up and voted on within the *Senate as a body*. To treat the letter as a basis for the President not to nominate and Senators not to act collectively would be a grave mistake for our country. It is the Senators refusing to do their duty who are precipitating a Constitutional crisis. To do anything but ignore this letter and proceed with the Constitutionally mandated process would amount to abdicating to a power putsch.
Once President Obama has made a nomination, every effort should be made to bring the Senate -- both in the Judiciary Committee and the body as a whole -- to fulfill its Constitutional responsibilities. There are many Senators, I pray and trust, that would work to this end. Then we see what happens.
Once President Obama has made a nomination, every effort should be made to bring the Senate -- both in the Judiciary Committee and the body as a whole -- to fulfill its Constitutional responsibilities. There are many Senators, I pray and trust, that would work to this end. Then we see what happens.
7
The letter from the Senate JC republicans is a rather strange civics lesson to say the least, and a possibly accurate but twisted history lesson as well. Of course Article 2, apparently not "quoted" in the letter, does not "give the Senate the power to withhold" rather the president the POWER to appoint with AND BY the advice and consent of the Senate, i.e. as we all know consent of the Senate is required. Of course the POWERs of the Congress are enumerated in Article 1, section 8. The power to withhold is not on that list. Moreover the JC letter states that the constitutional POWER granted to the Senate in Article 2 includes ensuring a public debate over the TYPE of jurist to fill a SCOTUS vacancy.
Regarding history, the particular very specific twists that take us back to 1932 or 1888 are clever, but given the rather small number of vacancies, nominations and consents over all US history, there isn't much meaning to the history at all - it's all modern history.
Ensuring the public debate is fine, the politics is fine if unseemly, but invoking the constitution to justify a purely political act is just plain cynical.
Regarding history, the particular very specific twists that take us back to 1932 or 1888 are clever, but given the rather small number of vacancies, nominations and consents over all US history, there isn't much meaning to the history at all - it's all modern history.
Ensuring the public debate is fine, the politics is fine if unseemly, but invoking the constitution to justify a purely political act is just plain cynical.
6
The Senatorial power to consent, which is equally as powerful as the Presidential power to nominate, implies withholding consent. The application of any power or right is always strongest in the negative sense, e.g., the freedom of speech is the freedom to not speak, etc.
1
If you want a democracy you must make your voices heard between elections. We need feet on the ground. We need creative actions that get media attention and spread the word.
You don't hire an employee, then check back in on them in four years.
Government only serves the People when politicians are more afraid of the People then the .01%. Every major reform undertaken in this country was forced by people on the street. Look behind the after the fact claims by politicians like FDR and you'll see their hand was forced by millions of Americans.
If you hope that we Hillary will win and nominate someone, you have already lost. Hope is for "losers."
You must fight before the election and scare the Republicans with large mobs of angry People. You shouldn't hurt anyone or break stuff. That is not necessary. Their imaginations will run wild if you give them a reason.
Why did corporate media work so hard to discredit Occupy Wall Street? Why was the entire NYC police department, Homeland Security, the FBI, and the White House involved in attacking Occupy across the Country? Why did the big banks donate millions to the NYC police Department in October of 20011? Because Occupy scared the billionaires.
The People must govern all of the time. We know that politicians are not to be trusted. They use that to discourage people fro getting involved, but that is the exact wrong response.
We need feet on the ground!
You don't hire an employee, then check back in on them in four years.
Government only serves the People when politicians are more afraid of the People then the .01%. Every major reform undertaken in this country was forced by people on the street. Look behind the after the fact claims by politicians like FDR and you'll see their hand was forced by millions of Americans.
If you hope that we Hillary will win and nominate someone, you have already lost. Hope is for "losers."
You must fight before the election and scare the Republicans with large mobs of angry People. You shouldn't hurt anyone or break stuff. That is not necessary. Their imaginations will run wild if you give them a reason.
Why did corporate media work so hard to discredit Occupy Wall Street? Why was the entire NYC police department, Homeland Security, the FBI, and the White House involved in attacking Occupy across the Country? Why did the big banks donate millions to the NYC police Department in October of 20011? Because Occupy scared the billionaires.
The People must govern all of the time. We know that politicians are not to be trusted. They use that to discourage people fro getting involved, but that is the exact wrong response.
We need feet on the ground!
6
Do I think this is responsible governing? No, absolutely not. And I think the Republicans will be kicking themselves in 2017 when they are confronted with a likely democratic majority in the Senate, so confirmation of a liberal judge is much more likely than it is now.
But the democrats need to stop whining about this power abuse by the GOP. After all, if they had bothered to show up for the midterm elections there would not be a GOP majority in the Senate and the majority in the House would be much smaller than it is today.
The GOP has a real challenge in winning elections on ideas. It's mostly based on district gerrymandering, making it difficult to vote, etc. When was the last time anyone has heard an actual idea from the GOP on how to address some of the issue this country is facing?
If those entitled democrats want to get their free stuff they will need to at least get their butts off the couch and VOTE. And if there is a requirement to properly identify yourself (fair or not), you make the effort to obtain that documentation. You are a citizen of a democracy and it comes with Rights AND duties, such as voting.
(Note: I am only a permanent resident so not eligible to vote. All I can do is watch this moving train wreck from the sidelines.)
But the democrats need to stop whining about this power abuse by the GOP. After all, if they had bothered to show up for the midterm elections there would not be a GOP majority in the Senate and the majority in the House would be much smaller than it is today.
The GOP has a real challenge in winning elections on ideas. It's mostly based on district gerrymandering, making it difficult to vote, etc. When was the last time anyone has heard an actual idea from the GOP on how to address some of the issue this country is facing?
If those entitled democrats want to get their free stuff they will need to at least get their butts off the couch and VOTE. And if there is a requirement to properly identify yourself (fair or not), you make the effort to obtain that documentation. You are a citizen of a democracy and it comes with Rights AND duties, such as voting.
(Note: I am only a permanent resident so not eligible to vote. All I can do is watch this moving train wreck from the sidelines.)
2
Obama must not let the Senate Republicans bully him. Their refusal to even consider any nominee must be met with equal determination by the president to make and push a nomination. He has nothing to lose then by nominating a strong progressive liberal to fire up the democratic base. He should nominate Loretta Lynch, an African American woman. A Republican snub against her could then seen as a snub against African Americans and women in general and used to generate support and get them to vote.
2
Obama should reject ANY bill passed by Congress. Plain and simple. and seize and embargo their salaries until they do their jobs.
1
I would love to know what Trump supporters think of this move by the Republicans. They seem to be willing to go against the establishment Republicans' agenda, and may not like this do nothing stance. Of course not a lot of Trump supporters reading the NYT.
The Constitution mandates with the word "shall":
STEP ONE: The President selects a nominee.
Nomination: The President announces a nomination to the Senate.
Nominee’s Paperwork: The nominee completes paperwork concerning finances and personal background.
FBI Investigation: The FBI probes the nominee’s criminal history, if any.
STEP TWO: The Senate confirms or rejects the nominee.
Senate Confirmation Hearings: The nominee is sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Eighteen senators interview the nominee.
Topics include the nominee’s qualifications and previous casework.
The committee also questions witnesses who support or oppose the nomination.
Committee Vote: The committee votes on the President’s nominee.
No matter the vote’s outcome, the nominee is generally sent to the Senate floor after the committee hearings.
Senate Vote: The full Senate deliberates and then votes on the nominee.
A simple majority (51 votes) confirms or rejects the nominee’s appointment.
If the nominee is confirmed, the Supreme Court justice is appointed for life.
If the nominee is rejected, the President chooses another and the process is repeated.
Current Senate:
54 Republicans.
44 Democrats.
2 Independents (both caucus with the Democrats).
GOP behavior - meaningless obstructionism and DICTATORIAL behavior - throwing their weight around and giving us the universal sign of derision.
"If you think you are being played, you probably are" - for fools.
Or they are not sure of having 51 votes.
STEP ONE: The President selects a nominee.
Nomination: The President announces a nomination to the Senate.
Nominee’s Paperwork: The nominee completes paperwork concerning finances and personal background.
FBI Investigation: The FBI probes the nominee’s criminal history, if any.
STEP TWO: The Senate confirms or rejects the nominee.
Senate Confirmation Hearings: The nominee is sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Eighteen senators interview the nominee.
Topics include the nominee’s qualifications and previous casework.
The committee also questions witnesses who support or oppose the nomination.
Committee Vote: The committee votes on the President’s nominee.
No matter the vote’s outcome, the nominee is generally sent to the Senate floor after the committee hearings.
Senate Vote: The full Senate deliberates and then votes on the nominee.
A simple majority (51 votes) confirms or rejects the nominee’s appointment.
If the nominee is confirmed, the Supreme Court justice is appointed for life.
If the nominee is rejected, the President chooses another and the process is repeated.
Current Senate:
54 Republicans.
44 Democrats.
2 Independents (both caucus with the Democrats).
GOP behavior - meaningless obstructionism and DICTATORIAL behavior - throwing their weight around and giving us the universal sign of derision.
"If you think you are being played, you probably are" - for fools.
Or they are not sure of having 51 votes.
6
Seriously stupid, obstructionist and bottom line; pure disrespect based soley on racism
3
I'm on the left, however, I do not fault the Republicans. They are playing by the rules and as they have nothing to gain by allowing a confirmation hearing, why should they? Charity?
Should the Democrats win the Presidential election, then things will get very interesting, as a Republican Senate in theory, could keep delaying, as after all, there would still be nothing for them to gain by a confirmation hearing. Moreover, there is nothing sacrosanct about having an odd number of Justices. Originally there were 6.
I do not think the average, independent voter will really care, as the number of Justices is a technical detail, and partisans, are biased toward their side, and this will play well with both Republican and Democratic partisans, making them more so.
Should the Democrats win the Presidential election, then things will get very interesting, as a Republican Senate in theory, could keep delaying, as after all, there would still be nothing for them to gain by a confirmation hearing. Moreover, there is nothing sacrosanct about having an odd number of Justices. Originally there were 6.
I do not think the average, independent voter will really care, as the number of Justices is a technical detail, and partisans, are biased toward their side, and this will play well with both Republican and Democratic partisans, making them more so.
1
Throw them all in jail. The charges? High treason and contempt of the highest court in the land.
2
The Republican Party: An Anti-government Extremist Group.
6
These congressional Republicans have wasted the country's time for years now, opposing everything and accomplishing nothing. They should have been kicked out for non-performance on the job. Instead they've been mollycoddled and are now so spoiled that we have this unheard of stand-off.
6
It use to be that the President got his pick for the Supreme Court as long as the nominee was qualified.Ideology was not to be a consideration. Then the democrats trashed two nominees Judge Bork who was rejected and Judge Thomas who was confirmed after a sideshow by leftists and their supporters. Now the democrats are reaping what they've sown. An end to civility and common courtesy.The lack of common decency in Washington was illustrated by President Obama's refusal to attend Justice Scalia's funeral. Disgraceful and inexcusable behavior by a President toward a long serving Justice and his family. Obama should not be surprised that others are equally discourteous. Let the people decide on the direction of the Court by electing either a Republican or Democrat to the WH in November.
2
Mr. McConnell and his GOP gang are pathetic.
4
Mitch should retire to San Clemente, and write a book.
1
The most important decision in US Supreme Court history was Madison v. Marbury.
The Supreme Ct. is the final arbitrary voice in all things Constitutional.
And is the Law of the Land. But they are forbidden to offer political opinions.
I'm quite surprised the Senators who attended the press conference didn't wear Red Coats and Powdered wigs.
The Supreme Ct. is the final arbitrary voice in all things Constitutional.
And is the Law of the Land. But they are forbidden to offer political opinions.
I'm quite surprised the Senators who attended the press conference didn't wear Red Coats and Powdered wigs.
3
Once again we have a situation in which one would expect the true "conservatives" in the GOP to heave up onto their hind legs and proclaim:
"As much as we disapprove of Obama and everything he says and does, we cannot stand idly by while the leaders of our party unambiguously contradict not only the spirit but THE LETTER of the constitution. As the only true patriots in America, we object and condemn their actions as unamerican and probably illegal."
But no, they are like the never-to-be-found "moderate" voices in the middle-east. We expect them to stand up and show the strength of their principles, but then we realise, with great sadness, that they don't exist.
"As much as we disapprove of Obama and everything he says and does, we cannot stand idly by while the leaders of our party unambiguously contradict not only the spirit but THE LETTER of the constitution. As the only true patriots in America, we object and condemn their actions as unamerican and probably illegal."
But no, they are like the never-to-be-found "moderate" voices in the middle-east. We expect them to stand up and show the strength of their principles, but then we realise, with great sadness, that they don't exist.
5
Sour grapes by the bigots. Please Hillary, win in November. If Trump wins we could have that bigot Cruz on the court.
3
All the feigned outrage and imagined superiority from liberals here is quite amusing given they know they would do the exactly the same thing if they were in power, as urged by Joe Biden in 1992.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1SUn0zTGUQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1SUn0zTGUQ
1
Uh, 1992, was the last time I voted for a Republican. I've changed my mind about a lot of things in this country, including who is fit to run it. A 25 year old statement, from Joe Biden, carries NO weight regarding today's events.
All of these GOP congressional government obstructors should be IMPEACHED!
We are more than fed up with their bile, viciousness, arrogance and sabotage of the function of our government. These guys think that VOTERS ARE A JOKE! Because they count on voters being too lazy to vote. Show 'em they're wrong!
We are more than fed up with their bile, viciousness, arrogance and sabotage of the function of our government. These guys think that VOTERS ARE A JOKE! Because they count on voters being too lazy to vote. Show 'em they're wrong!
3
Recall is what should happen, not impeachment. Unfortunately, the states of these obstructive Republicans think it's always somebody ELSE'S Representative who is doing wrong, never their own.
1
I can't see how this doesn't do anything but backfire on the Republicans. You'd think they would at least appear to be more co-operative, but apparently not....
3
When he has a mere year in office left, President Obama clearly has some nerve saying he plans to nominate a successor to Scalia.
(Great photo, New York times - that says it all)
(Great photo, New York times - that says it all)
2
When I was a kid, during the time of Ike, we had a phrase/habit while playing our child hood sandlot sports that when something happened that would hurt our chance of scoring a winning play, one would exclaim "Rule Change!" and if no one objected we would go on and play. Sometimes, if enough of the players needed to make the game work disagreed the game would suddenly end and we would all quit the game and go home in disgust. THE GAME WAS OVER. It did not take a majority, it just took enough to ruin the game.
To the leaders of our political parties, governing has become a child like game where the official rule book only applies when you want it to.
The GOP does not like what the death of Scalia portends so they have suddenly yelled "Rule Change" as if this was a childhood game with no consequence.
The trouble is, this is not a child's sandlot game. It is the bigtime, more so than the NFL and with real rules, the Constitution, and real issues with real consequences, unlike my childhood games.
The GOP is playing with fire. They are not just yelling Rule Change in mid play, they are changing the rules about the referees that keep us all honest and the Constitution relevant. They are risking ending the ongoing game of America for a single score.
Maybe it is time to walk off the field and find another group of citizens to create a team that follows the rules for the good of the game and all who play it.
To the leaders of our political parties, governing has become a child like game where the official rule book only applies when you want it to.
The GOP does not like what the death of Scalia portends so they have suddenly yelled "Rule Change" as if this was a childhood game with no consequence.
The trouble is, this is not a child's sandlot game. It is the bigtime, more so than the NFL and with real rules, the Constitution, and real issues with real consequences, unlike my childhood games.
The GOP is playing with fire. They are not just yelling Rule Change in mid play, they are changing the rules about the referees that keep us all honest and the Constitution relevant. They are risking ending the ongoing game of America for a single score.
Maybe it is time to walk off the field and find another group of citizens to create a team that follows the rules for the good of the game and all who play it.
So when did a President's term in office get reduced to three years?
Let's take all Republican senators in their last year in office and forbid them to do anything.
Oh but, right, how could we tell the difference.
Let's take all Republican senators in their last year in office and forbid them to do anything.
Oh but, right, how could we tell the difference.
Disgraceful.
5
I am somewhat confused. My understanding of US Democracy, was that the President is the "Commander in Chief", always, and that the House of Representative and the Senate had the task of assisting the President in respecting and protecting that Democracy. If a Senate Committee, with the objective of pursuing one party's interests, prevents the President from exercising his constitutional duty/right, in my humble opinion, makes a mockery of that Democracy.
8
interestingly, you have just as poor an understanding of American civics as the modal commenter here. It is amazing how many commenters believe the President of the United States is actually an Emperor. US public schools are doing the job we pay them to do, I guess.
1
If a Democrat President is elected and there is still a Republican majority in the Senate, will the Republ ican senators keep on refusing to even consider a candidate, and that until they get a Republican President, or until the cows come home?
If the GOP feels a lame duck President in his last year should not submit a nominee for consideration, then none of the 34 lame duck Senators up for election this year should be voting on nominations to the judiciary.
10
Great way to insure Hillary's coronation, Republicans! There's a time for holding one's ground and a time for giving a little. This is not the time to hold one's ground.
Maybe, in their deepest hearts the Republicans really do want a Hillary coronation... After all, she is a war-hawk like so many of them.
There is only one answer - BERNIE in 2016!
Maybe, in their deepest hearts the Republicans really do want a Hillary coronation... After all, she is a war-hawk like so many of them.
There is only one answer - BERNIE in 2016!
2
Pres. Obama should nominate Michael Mukasey. That will get the GOP's knickers in a twist
1
We already knew two outcomes which were not going to happen in 2016. There would be no nominee who would be at or near Scalia's position on the ideological spectrum. There would be no confirmation of a left-of-center nominee.
What would the Senate Republicans do if the president's nominee is a distinguished moderate Republican who could easily and quickly be confirmed so that the Court would have a full bench? In other words, would both the president and Senate demonstrate stewardship of the Court? A retired justice fits this description closely: Justice O'Connor.
What would the Senate Republicans do if the president's nominee is a distinguished moderate Republican who could easily and quickly be confirmed so that the Court would have a full bench? In other words, would both the president and Senate demonstrate stewardship of the Court? A retired justice fits this description closely: Justice O'Connor.
"distinguished moderate Republican".....More and more this seems like a double oxymoron.
3
Notice I had to list someone who will be 86 in a few weeks.
Online, there's a compilation going around of Reagan quotes from back when he was trying to get Kennedy appointed. It includes quotes like this:
"It would be unfair to the parties with cases before the Supreme Court and unfair to the remaining members of the court to be left without nine full-time justices. Each of us owes a sacred debt to our ancestors and to the citizens of the future."
Why Obama and the Democrats don't hit the Republicans with this material every chance they get is beyond me.
"It would be unfair to the parties with cases before the Supreme Court and unfair to the remaining members of the court to be left without nine full-time justices. Each of us owes a sacred debt to our ancestors and to the citizens of the future."
Why Obama and the Democrats don't hit the Republicans with this material every chance they get is beyond me.
6
At what point do we say the Republicans have violated their oath to defend and uphold the Constitution, which includes the Senate Advise and Consent clause regarding Supreme Court nominees? If they have signed a pledge to effectively violate their oath, that is grounds for impeachment of the lot of them, maybe even treason. The president should direct the marshals to arrest every Republican who signed that pledge and throw them in jail until they rescind their unconstitutional stance.
8