@snood,
I hope it hurts those republicans up for reelection real bad, and get booted out. A message needs to be sent, or we'll continue to get the kind of gridlock in congress we've been experiencing. If not, we can expect more of the same.
Robert Reich
8 mins ·
I suppose I shouldn’t be surprised at the circus Republicans have created in the wake of the death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. Pay no attention. Here are the 4 realities:
1. Under the Constitution, when a Supreme Court vacancy arises, the President is authorized to nominate whomever he or she wishes to fill that vacancy. A majority of the Senate must then confirm in order for that nominee to become a Supreme Court Justice.
2. The Republicans now hold a majority of 54 in the Senate. Each of the 54 (as well as every other Senator) has a constitutional right to vote on the President's nomination. If just 4 Republicans vote in favor of it, and all 44 Democrats and the Senate’s 2 Independents also vote in favor, and the president of the Senate (Vice President Joe Biden), casts the deciding vote in favor, then the nominee is confirmed.
3. The Constitution does not give the majority leader of the Senate the right to hold up a vote on the President's nomination. He cannot usurp the rights of senators to cast such a vote.
4. Everything you have heard other than these three points -- all the blather and bluster coming from Mitch McConnell or any other Republican senator, from Republican presidential hopefuls, and from right-wing pundits -- is irrelevant.
@edgarblythe,
Great article. Thanks edgar.
@edgarblythe,
McConnell is a rable rouser who only disrupts the congress, and misinforms the public. Why any republican doesn't speak out against this jerk is telling.
@snood,
snood wrote:One consideration that may force Republicans to recalibrate their strategy is the prospect of political damage to some of the embattled Senate incumbents up for reelection this fall.
Little prospect of that. All they need to do IF anyone complains is point out how the Democrats obstructed Mr. Bush's nominees in 2008.
@edgarblythe,
Quote Robert Reich:
Quote:1. Under the Constitution, when a Supreme Court vacancy arises, the President is authorized to nominate whomever he or she wishes to fill that vacancy. A majority of the Senate must then confirm in order for that nominee to become a Supreme Court Justice.
2. The Republicans now hold a majority of 54 in the Senate. Each of the 54 (as well as every other Senator) has a constitutional right to vote on the President's nomination. If just 4 Republicans vote in favor of it, and all 44 Democrats and the Senate’s 2 Independents also vote in favor, and the president of the Senate (Vice President Joe Biden), casts the deciding vote in favor, then the nominee is confirmed.
3. The Constitution does not give the majority leader of the Senate the right to hold up a vote on the President's nomination. He cannot usurp the rights of senators to cast such a vote.
Anybody know of some prominent and learned Hispanic judges, preferably extremely dark skinned? Let's see the Republicans vote him/her down just before an election. As Romney proved, you can't win a Presidential election if only white people vote for you.
@Blickers,
Hey, I like how you are thinking there, sir.
For those interested in the historical precedent, here is a link to
Supreme Court Nominations Not Confirmed, 1789 to 2009.
Quote:Opposition to the nominating President played a role in at least 16 of the 36 nominations that were not confirmed. Many of the 16 were put forward by a President in the last year of his presidency—seven occurred after a successor President had been elected, but before the transfer of power to the new administration.
@engineer,
engineer wrote:
For those interested in the historical precedent, here is a link to
Supreme Court Nominations Not Confirmed, 1789 to 2009.
Quote:Opposition to the nominating President played a role in at least 16 of the 36 nominations that were not confirmed. Many of the 16 were put forward by a President in the last year of his presidency—seven occurred after a successor President had been elected, but before the transfer of power to the new administration.
Those precedents are interesting, but the only ones I think really pertinent to the present situation are those that had confirmation in the last year of a presidency, don't you think?
@snood,
Yes, that is why I excerpted that particular paragraph.
@engineer,
A good quote, but I wonder how many of the 16 rejections came in the last year of the Presidency, but before the election. By the figures presented, it would appear to be only 1 or 2, if that.
When stuff like this latest obstruction by the Republicans happens, I wish Obama could use his anger translator to address the nation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qv7k2_lc0M&list=PLEYwk_EevzlPPelsVVdpXviOuzlEeTBKg
The plot thickens...
Cracks Emerge In GOP Strategy On Supreme Court Nominees
More and more GOP senators say they'd be open to voting on an Obama nominee.
Initially, GOP senators and presidential candidates all lined up behind McConnell. But over the past couple days, senators have started to break away and indicate that they're open to voting on an Obama nominee.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dean-heller-supreme-court_us_56c4d442e4b08ffac127606b
@snood,
I'm just surprised it took them "this long" to come out against McConnell's "wait until the next election" rhetoric. They're all supposed to be Constitutional experts as representative of the people of this country. That McConnell can still speak for the republicans is way past due.
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:
I'm just surprised it took them "this long" to come out against McConnell's "wait until the next election" rhetoric. They're all supposed to be Constitutional experts as representative of the people of this country. That McConnell can still speak for the republicans is way past due.
Wow, CI - you must have much more faith in the decency and humanity of the rightwing, because what surprises
me is that anyone is doing something
other than blatant pigheaded obstruction.
@snood,
No, it's about both parties letting McConnell get away with bull shyt. They all look at the lit fuse without acting on it.
@cicerone imposter,
But, haven't you noticed they've been watching him (and Boehner, and the whole beady-eyed lot of them) do this "no to anything Obama proposes" dance for 7 years?
@snood,
Yea, I've seen it. It only proves that the republicans don't understand how politics in this country is supposed to work. It's called 'compromise.'
Their attempts to overthrow Obamacare over 50 times shows how stupid, ignorant, and worthless they are. Why they continue to enjoy living in Washington DC is one of the mysteries of our times.
The death of Justice Scalia has really brought out the entire range of crazy from the conservative side of this country. High-ranking Republican politicians making baseless (lawless? they do love that word) arguments that the President should, not? follow the Constitution.
I guess like voting it's a "privilege" not a "right", which is also a thing Republicans get wrong. And then there are the "he was murdered" conspiracy nuts/trolls. Yeah, liberals are clearly just as dangerous and crazy.
@jcboy,
They twist and turn the Constitution around where they only confuse the general public. The Constitution is clear on the nomination of a SC judge by the president. He doesn't have to wait until the following election as the republicans demand. That's silly and stupid.
The republicans presidential candidates are wrong. They don't even understand the Constitution, and they want to run for the highest position in our government.
http://www.thenation.com/article/yes-president-obama-can-still-nominate-a-supreme-court-justice/
