User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:22:29 AM EDT
[#1]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:24:10 AM EDT
[#2]
I wouldn't call that caving just yet. It won't surprise me when they do though. We will see.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:25:18 AM EDT
[#3]
That site is fucky on my iPad. What does it say?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:26:01 AM EDT
[#4]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:26:31 AM EDT
[#5]
Not yet...........we'll see.................................
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:27:20 AM EDT
[#6]
They will cave for sure. Spineless fucks.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:27:30 AM EDT
[#7]
CRUZ is the constitutionalist. Would make wiser pics. Trump is a liberal live wire.
Might as well let obongo do it if you're thinking the liberal democrat from NY will do any better 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:28:32 AM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/feb/16/gop-signs-back-down-vow-block-obama-scotus-nominee/ This is why Trump is 100% gonna be the Repubican Canidate. Fuck the GOPe Dupe. 
http://www.ar15.com/forums/t_1_5/1839229_And_so_the_first_act_of_the_nomination_drama_commences.html |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:28:47 AM EDT
[#9]
They will cave. They always have and there is no evidence this will be any different............ |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:29:24 AM EDT
[#10]
The mistake they (Mitch) made was coming out within hrs. and telling the world their strategy of blocking any nomination......it gained nothing....never ever tell anyone what your thinking strategically...wait on Obama to make the first move then block the nominee on personal merit. Now they have backed themselves into a corner and will be painted as obstructionist...that's fine for a Primary but there is a general election forthcoming......checkers not chess and coming out hrs within the mans death and laying out a public strategy was a huge mistep
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:29:31 AM EDT
[#11]
Was there ever any doubt they would?  |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:29:54 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That site is fucky on my iPad. What does it say? See the thread link to a thread started yesterday a couple of pos up, it has a portion of the article. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:29:59 AM EDT
[#13]
Where in the Constitution does it say "the President should wait to confirm who runs the highest court in the land until the other side gets what they want?"
Oh wait, it doesn't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:31:30 AM EDT
[#14]
What the Senators ought to be thinking: "What vote is best for the country?"
What the Senators are really thinking: "What vote could make me the most money?" |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:31:56 AM EDT
[#15]
The Republicans are seriously compromised. Too many players with skeletons in the closets that can be flipped. And the Democrats know these dirty little secrets. Why do you think they do opposition research?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:32:12 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
CRUZ is the constitutionalist. Would make wiser pics. Trump is a liberal live wire. Might as well let obongo do it if you're thinking the liberal democrat from NY will do any better He just gave a press release naming who he would nominate. Both staunch conservatives. But don't let that stop you from getting your digs in |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:32:37 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Where in the Constitution does it say "the President should wait to confirm who runs the highest court in the land until the other side gets what they want?" Oh wait, it doesn't.  so now the constitution has meaning to the dems
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:33:38 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
so now the constitution has meaning to the demsQuote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Where in the Constitution does it say "the President should wait to confirm who runs the highest court in the land until the other side gets what they want?" Oh wait, it doesn't. so now the constitution has meaning to the demsI'm not saying that it does, but "we're going to block who you pick until if/when our guy gets in office" is bullshit. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:34:41 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The mistake they (Mitch) made was coming out within hrs. and telling the world their strategy of blocking any nomination......it gained nothing....never ever tell anyone what your thinking strategically...wait on Obama to make the first move then block the nominee on personal merit. Now they have backed themselves into a corner and will be painted as obstructionist...that's fine for a Primary but there is a general election forthcoming......checkers not chess and coming out hrs within the mans death and laying out a public strategy was a huge mistep Gee, it's almost as if they want Obama to succeed, as if his agenda is similar to theirs. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:34:57 AM EDT
[#20]
In other news, water is wet and the sky is blue...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:36:38 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The Republicans are seriously compromised. Too many players with skeletons in the closets that can be flipped. And the Democrats know these dirty little secrets. Why do you think they do opposition research? I have no doubt whatsoever that Obama has dirt on everyone in congress. I really just don't give a fuck anymore...we're done. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:37:23 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm not saying that it does, but "we're going to block who you pick until if/when our guy gets in office" is bullshit. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Where in the Constitution does it say "the President should wait to confirm who runs the highest court in the land until the other side gets what they want?" Oh wait, it doesn't. so now the constitution has meaning to the demsI'm not saying that it does, but "we're going to block who you pick until if/when our guy gets in office" is bullshit. If they can, why not? I always try to fuck with people I don't like every opportunity I get. This is an opportunity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:37:34 AM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm not saying that it does, but "we're going to block who you pick until if/when our guy gets in office" is bullshit. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Where in the Constitution does it say "the President should wait to confirm who runs the highest court in the land until the other side gets what they want?" Oh wait, it doesn't. so now the constitution has meaning to the demsI'm not saying that it does, but "we're going to block who you pick until if/when our guy gets in office" is bullshit. Not like it hasn't been done before. The GOP needs to start acting like the dems and quit caving. They are the majority party and were elected by the people to do a job. Instead they give the limbs whatever they want. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:38:47 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Not like it hasn't been done before. The GOP needs to start acting like the dems and quit caving. They are the majority party and were elected by the people to do a job. Instead they give the limbs whatever they want. I'd like to know how letting the Constitution work as intended is "caving." Has it been done before? As I understand it, yes. It doesn't make it right though, by either side. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:39:46 AM EDT
[#25]
To say they would block any person FBHO selects is just reckless and confrontational.
What if FBHO selects a republican? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:39:51 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'd like to know how letting the Constitution work as intended is "caving." Has it been done before? As I understand it, yes. It doesn't make it right though, by either side. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Not like it hasn't been done before. The GOP needs to start acting like the dems and quit caving. They are the majority party and were elected by the people to do a job. Instead they give the limbs whatever they want. I'd like to know how letting the Constitution work as intended is "caving." Has it been done before? As I understand it, yes. It doesn't make it right though, by either side. The constitution does not mandate that the Senate consent to any appointment the President wishes to make. They can withhold or grant consent as they please, part of the system of checks and balances. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:40:04 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Gee, it's almost as if they want Obama to succeed, as if his agenda is similar to theirs. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The mistake they (Mitch) made was coming out within hrs. and telling the world their strategy of blocking any nomination......it gained nothing....never ever tell anyone what your thinking strategically...wait on Obama to make the first move then block the nominee on personal merit. Now they have backed themselves into a corner and will be painted as obstructionist...that's fine for a Primary but there is a general election forthcoming......checkers not chess and coming out hrs within the mans death and laying out a public strategy was a huge mistep Gee, it's almost as if they want Obama to succeed, as if his agenda is similar to theirs. Yep. Republicans could delay this if they wanted to. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:40:19 AM EDT
[#28]
[The President] 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.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:40:57 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The constitution does not mandate that the Senate consent to any appointment the President wishes to make. They can withhold or grant consent as they please, part of the system of checks and balances. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Not like it hasn't been done before. The GOP needs to start acting like the dems and quit caving. They are the majority party and were elected by the people to do a job. Instead they give the limbs whatever they want. I'd like to know how letting the Constitution work as intended is "caving." Has it been done before? As I understand it, yes. It doesn't make it right though, by either side. The constitution does not mandate that the Senate consent to any appointment the President wishes to make. They can withhold or grant consent as they please, part of the system of checks and balances. I see. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:44:17 AM EDT
[#30]
They have catered to Obama's every whim thus far why should this be any different.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:45:15 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'd like to know how letting the Constitution work as intended is "caving." Has it been done before? As I understand it, yes. It doesn't make it right though, by either side. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Not like it hasn't been done before. The GOP needs to start acting like the dems and quit caving. They are the majority party and were elected by the people to do a job. Instead they give the limbs whatever they want. I'd like to know how letting the Constitution work as intended is "caving." Has it been done before? As I understand it, yes. It doesn't make it right though, by either side. So the Constitution declares that the Senate MUST approve everything the President wants? Huh, who knew.... The Senate has the power to deny any or all sc nominees . Gridlock is good for you. As we as a nation currently sit, gridlock is good for the nation. You dont just blindly allow communists to fuck shit up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:46:06 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'd like to know how letting the Constitution work as intended is "caving." Has it been done before? As I understand it, yes. It doesn't make it right though, by either side. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Not like it hasn't been done before. The GOP needs to start acting like the dems and quit caving. They are the majority party and were elected by the people to do a job. Instead they give the limbs whatever they want. I'd like to know how letting the Constitution work as intended is "caving." Has it been done before? As I understand it, yes. It doesn't make it right though, by either side. If the Democrats wanted the nominee to sail through, they should have won more Senate seats. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:46:57 AM EDT
[#33]
This is why Trump is 100% gonna be the Repubican Canidate.
Fuck the GOPe |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:47:42 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'd like to know how letting the Constitution work as intended is "caving." Has it been done before? As I understand it, yes. It doesn't make it right though, by either side. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Not like it hasn't been done before. The GOP needs to start acting like the dems and quit caving. They are the majority party and were elected by the people to do a job. Instead they give the limbs whatever they want. I'd like to know how letting the Constitution work as intended is "caving." Has it been done before? As I understand it, yes. It doesn't make it right though, by either side. What goes around comes around. The dems would not have told the world their intent, they would have just done it and lied and justified it. The GOP should have not tipped their hand but at least they were honest about their intent |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:48:24 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is why Trump is 100% gonna be the Repubican Canidate. Fuck the GOPe If these fucking assholes cave on this I will cry like a fucking baby. And I haven't cried like that in YEARS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:49:36 AM EDT
[#36]
If the Halfrican picks a moderate in the mold of Roberts or Kennedy the GOP Senate is going to have to make a very hard choice to make that will not please anyone.
If they wait (and given the GOP's penchant for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory) they will face a parade of liberal appointees as sure as shit. The way I see it is The Halfrican is not so much worried about a center-right moderate nominee as he is having his legacy to include three SCOTUS picks to include one that replaced a staunch conservative....It's a win for him any way it shakes out. I'd not want to be The Turtle right now. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:50:47 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
............... I'd like to know how letting the Constitution work as intended is "caving." Has it been done before? As I understand it, yes. It doesn't make it right though, by either side. They shouldn't do ANYTHING to make it easier for these evil fucking communist democrats to get their way. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:51:00 AM EDT
[#38]
Scalia's death is only one piece in a chess game. Even if FBHO get someone through, IF we get a R president elected this year, and especially if he's a 2-termer, there is a very good chance that one or more liberals will retire from SCOTUS or die.
Ginsburg is 82 and Breyer is 77. Kennedy is a turncoat and is 79. ALL the remaining conservatives are considerably younger than that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:51:05 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
They will cave for sure. Spineless fucks. If they do they'll lose 24 seats come election time. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:51:25 AM EDT
[#40]
OP is
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:51:52 AM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Scalia's death is only one piece in a chess game. Even if FBHO get someone through, IF we get a R president elected this year, and especially if he's a 2-termer, there is a very good chance that one or more liberals will retire from SCOTUS or die. Ginsburg is 82 and Breyer is 77. Kennedy is a turncoat and is 79. ALL the remaining conservatives are considerably younger than that. We know that............SO WHAT? Fuck Obama. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:51:59 AM EDT
[#42]
The hands of both parties are tied. The Republicans would be crucified from now until the election for "not doing their job" if they blocked any and all nominees for no reason. If Obama picked a hard core liberal he would be creating a situation that would rally the Republicans.
The Republicans have to play the game unless they want to lose a lot of seats in November. The average nominee only takes 2 1/2 months to get approved. There is enough time to approve 4 nominees before Obama is out of office. When the Democrats rammed Obamacare through and ignored everyone who disagreed with them, they lost seats and eventually control of Congress. If the Republicans forced their agenda while ignoring everyone else they would see the same fate. From now until the election the media and Democrats would daily blast the Republicans for "not doing their job" or "not doing the work of the people". Think back to the failed government shutdown. It was bad press the entire time it was going on and then bad press for months after that.
At the same time Obama knows that he must pick someone who is moderate. If he picked a hard core liberal the Republicans can use that to show how terrible Obama and the Democrats are for the country. That would give them fuel to block the nominee and rally the base leading up to the election. We will see how big of a narcissistic bastard Obama really is. He could pick a hard core liberal and knowingly screw over the Democrats because he feels his legacy is more important. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:52:32 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The mistake they (Mitch) made was coming out within hrs. and telling the world their strategy of blocking any nomination......it gained nothing....never ever tell anyone what your thinking strategically...wait on Obama to make the first move then block the nominee on personal merit. Now they have backed themselves into a corner and will be painted as obstructionist...that's fine for a Primary but there is a general election forthcoming......checkers not chess and coming out hrs within the mans death and laying out a public strategy was a huge mistep IIRC Cruz was first out with that strategy. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:54:22 AM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'd like to know how letting the Constitution work as intended is "caving." Has it been done before? As I understand it, yes. It doesn't make it right though, by either side. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Not like it hasn't been done before. The GOP needs to start acting like the dems and quit caving. They are the majority party and were elected by the people to do a job. Instead they give the limbs whatever they want. I'd like to know how letting the Constitution work as intended is "caving." Has it been done before? As I understand it, yes. It doesn't make it right though, by either side. Are you saying to give his nominee a vote or confirm him? |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:55:00 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
[span]The hands of both parties are tied. The Republicans would be crucified from now until the election for "not doing their job" if they blocked any and all nominees for no reason. Crucified by whom? Liberal voters and political groups who wouldn't support them regardless? The reason Trump is polling so well is because people view him as having the sack that these "political compromisers" lack. 99% of Rs in Congress are scared of a stiff breeze. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:55:43 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If these fucking assholes cave on this I will cry like a fucking baby. And I haven't cried like that in YEARS. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
This is why Trump is 100% gonna be the Repubican Canidate. Fuck the GOPe If these fucking assholes cave on this I will cry like a fucking baby. And I haven't cried like that in YEARS. Attention shoppers, Kleenex on sale on isle 6, buy one, get one free. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:55:57 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'd like to know how letting the Constitution work as intended is "caving." Has it been done before? As I understand it, yes. It doesn't make it right though, by either side. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Not like it hasn't been done before. The GOP needs to start acting like the dems and quit caving. They are the majority party and were elected by the people to do a job. Instead they give the limbs whatever they want. I'd like to know how letting the Constitution work as intended is "caving." Has it been done before? As I understand it, yes. It doesn't make it right though, by either side. Actually, when speaking of the Supreme Court, precedent has a LOT of meaning. There is also the logical argument that the country is in the midst of picking a new leader and that this is a perfect opportunity to allow them to have a say in who gets to pick. Any time you can put more power in the hands of the people, you ARE following the Constitution. Certainly the spirit of it and definitely as the founders intended. |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:56:14 AM EDT
[#48]
I"m a lifelong Republican, if they cave on this after obama and co used the nuclear option to push through appointees when the demos had control of the Senate, I will never identify myself as a Republican again.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:56:19 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Crucified by whom? Liberal voters and political groups who wouldn't support them regardless? The reason Trump is polling so well is because people view him as having the sack that these "political compromisers" lack. 99% of Rs in Congress are scared of a stiff breeze. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
[span]The hands of both parties are tied. The Republicans would be crucified from now until the election for "not doing their job" if they blocked any and all nominees for no reason. Crucified by whom? Liberal voters and political groups who wouldn't support them regardless? The reason Trump is polling so well is because people view him as having the sack that these "political compromisers" lack. 99% of Rs in Congress are scared of a stiff breeze. Now you're 'talkin!!!!!!!!!!!!! 
ENOUGH!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
|
Posted: 2/17/2016 8:56:38 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I'm not saying that it does, but "we're going to block who you pick until if/when our guy gets in office" is bullshit. Oh no! Politics has intruded in a judicial nomination. Either you don't follow these matters or you have a very short memory. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
.jpg)
