Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia Dead

Pages

Clarence Thomas asks first question in 10 years

Literally waited for Scalia to die before talking again.

Chairman_Mao wrote:

Clarence Thomas asks first question in 10 years

Literally waited for Scalia to die before talking again.

Gotta make sure that the men who beat their girlfriends and wives can still have their bang bangs.

Chairman_Mao wrote:

Clarence Thomas asks first question in 10 years

Literally waited for Scalia to die before talking again.

It's just the organism looking for another host.

Paleocon wrote:
Chairman_Mao wrote:

Clarence Thomas asks first question in 10 years

Literally waited for Scalia to die before talking again.

It's just the organism looking for another host.

Post of the week.

OG_slinger wrote:
Chairman_Mao wrote:

Clarence Thomas asks first question in 10 years

Literally waited for Scalia to die before talking again.

Gotta make sure that the men who beat their girlfriends and wives can still have their bang bangs.

I was hoping you were kidding... and you were not. The case is literally two dudes who submitted guilty pleas for domestic violence and someone apparently thinks dudes with self-confessed anger issues and violent outbursts should get their guns back.

Having a family member who was the victim of that, just... BAAAAAAAH!

I recognize the value of exploring the question... after all, in abstract, it's a valuable piece of logic to understand before making a decision from the highest court in the land.

If only I could believe that's all it was.

Obama, Republicans Meet on Supreme Court Vacancy

On the senate floor Monday, [Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck] Grassley accused Obama of making “an unprecedented attempt to hold hostage an entire branch of government.”

Republicans literally say that the President has no right to appoint a nominee, and if he does so, they'll completely stonewall and not even hold hearings... and Obama is the trying to hold the court hostage.

wat

Apparently this was not a long meeting.

Before he traveled across Pennsylvania Avenue to the White House, McConnell told House Republicans at their weekly meeting he’s standing by his promise to not hold hearing or votes on an Obama nominee.

Didn't he already say, basically, f*** it, you want to send nominees, feel free. We'll just vote them all down immediately? This way we're meeting our constitutional obligation to consent or not? Like, has he already gone back to, nope that's too much work.

It makes perfect sense if you remember that Democratic policies are prima facie Constitutionally illegitimate. So if Hussein Obama pretends to nominate a Supreme Court justice, especially one that he should know is unAmerican, he's just wasting the Senate's valuable time.

qaraq wrote:

It makes perfect sense if you remember that Democratic policies are prima facie Constitutionally illegitimate. So if Hussein Obama pretends to nominate a Supreme Court justice, especially one that he should know is unAmerican, he's just wasting the Senate's valuable time.

Meanwhile, how many ACA repeals led by Republicans are we up to?

Demosthenes wrote:

Didn't he already say, basically, f*** it, you want to send nominees, feel free. We'll just vote them all down immediately? This way we're meeting our constitutional obligation to consent or not? Like, has he already gone back to, nope that's too much work.

An hour after Scalia was reported dead McConnell said that Obama wasn't going to be allowed to fill the vacancy.

And a few days after that he clarified that position to mean that he'd make sure the Senate would sit on any nominee Obama sent over and do nothing.

But Obama is holding a branch of government hostage? How? By not resigning and putting a republican in charge?

farley3k wrote:

But Obama is holding a branch of government hostage? How? By not resigning and putting a republican in charge?

Exactly, he's been holding the White House hostage for over seven years now. He's even got teams of gunmen patrolling the grounds so that he can't be removed.

It's just the usual. The night after Obama's election, Republican Congressional leaders get together and agree to be the Party of No. They do this for Obama's entire tenure.

And they constantly claim that Democrats and Obama himself are completely responsible for the lack of progress (and comity, and bipartisanship, and probably spicy cheese sauce and leather-lined elevators) in Congress.

White House Is Said to Be Vetting Iowa Judge for Supreme Court Seat

President Obama is vetting Jane L. Kelly, a federal appellate judge in Iowa, as a potential nominee for the Supreme Court, weighing a selection that could pose an awkward dilemma for her home-state senator Charles E. Grassley, who has pledged to block the president from filling the vacancy.
In a Senate floor speech in 2013, Mr. Grassley effusively praised Judge Kelly, a longtime public defender, just before she won unanimous confirmation to her current position on the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.

The senator read from a handwritten recommendation letter he had received from a retired judge, David R. Hansen, a Republican appointee he counted as an old friend. Mr. Hansen called Judge Kelly a “forthright woman of high integrity and honest character” and a person of “exceptionally keen intellect.”

*I don't see this as really helping much of anything - not that I expected much. It will show how Republicans are really only doing this to stop Obama, not to preserve America, not to uphold the people. But we already know that and Democrats find that bad and Republicans find that good so it will not change anyone's position.

Grassley is facing re-election in Iowa this time around. If he pops a cap in her nomination, or refuses to consider it, his opponent will beat him over the head with that for months...

Robear wrote:

Grassley is facing re-election in Iowa this time around. If he pops a cap in her nomination, or refuses to consider it, his opponent will beat him over the head with that for months...

Hell, his opponent already has ammo with Grassley's general obstructionism, but yeah... that would make for some really nasty attack ads.

Just like last time, I'll be voting against Grassley, but I honestly expect him to retain his seat.

Yeah, the nomination of this guy can easily be spun as "Real American becomes unfortunate victim of Obama's games".

Bloo Driver wrote:

Yeah, the nomination of this woman can easily be spun as "Real American becomes unfortunate victim of Obama's games".

FTFY

Obama To Nominate Merrick Garland To The Supreme Court

Settling for a centrist candidate with decades of judicial experience, President Barack Obama will nominate Merrick Garland, a federal appeals judge in Washington, D.C., to the Supreme Court seat left vacant by the death of Justice Antonin Scalia, according to The Associated Press and congressional sources.

Apologies to farley3k: Created a new topic out of respect to the justices involved!

https://www.gamerswithjobs.com/node/...

Thanks, Scalia, I guess.

Sometimes seeing the animus directly is different from just theorizing it.

Robear wrote:

Sometimes seeing the animus directly is different from just theorizing it.

I'm imagine Desmond felt the same way.

Demosthenes wrote:
Robear wrote:

Sometimes seeing the animus directly is different from just theorizing it.

I'm imagine Desmond felt the same way.

Can you imagine experiencing Scalia's animus via the animus? What a nightmare.

Besides, Templar for sure.

BadKen wrote:
Demosthenes wrote:
Robear wrote:

Sometimes seeing the animus directly is different from just theorizing it.

I'm imagine Desmond felt the same way.

Can you imagine experiencing Scalia's animus via the animus? What a nightmare.

Besides, Templar for sure.

Oh, totally a Templar.

I would just say, I really recommend playing AC: Rogue for a different take on the whole Templar ethos.

Robear wrote:

Sometimes seeing the animus directly is different from just theorizing it.

While true, framing his role like he deserves any form of credit is super-villain levels of delusional.

Oh, I absolutely agree, Stengah. But I think that recognizing that it can be someone's *nature*, that they can't help it, probably helped Kennedy and O'Connor viscerally understand what the situation actually meant.

"He was so cartoonishly hateful, it drove others to do the right thing" seems a perfectly fitting legacy.

Pages