The politics of the SCOTUS seat

[CitizenBBN]

Nice article here highlighting the obvious fact that this is all just politics, on both sides, and no statement by any politician means anything:

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/...not-precedent/


It does a good job of reminding us not only of McConnell's statements, but also how Joe Biden, then Chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he wouldn't consider a nomination by Bush I in 1992 in an election year, and then in 2016 argued fervently that Garland should get a vote.

This is politics. All of it. The ability to influence the law of the land for decades is a big prize, all the more b/c one of the two most liberal voices on the bench can be replaced by a conservative one, though due to the Senate margins it will be a moderately conservative one.

I take no offense at the machinations, it's the system working as it should. I do tire of the language on both sides trying to justify simple politics with some kind of moral high ground, which is humorous and silly.

The easy test is would the other side do exactly the same thing if their positions were reversed? If so, that's just politics, no need to get offended. If this was Schumer and Hillary in power and staring at a likely defeat of one and possibly of both, you think they'd wait and hand that choice to minority leader McConnell and a possible Trump presidency? Uh.... no way in Hades.

I am deeply intrigued by the political possibilities though. Just as the article above does a good job laying out the way it played out in 2016, there's a possibility Trump and McConnell may want to wait past Nov. 3rd for a vote, though it's a risky strategy to put in a pick during a lame duck session. McConnell loses a lot of his power over the weak tea Republicans in the Senate like Romney if he waits.

But hearings take time. Will be an interesting few weeks.

[CitizenBBN]

And seriously, what else can happen in this insane year? Everything that can go haywire seems to be doing so all at once.

[KeithKSR]

After the way the Reid and the left ran roughshod in Obama’s first two years they shouldn’t complain when McConnell turns the tables on them.

[Catonahottinroof]

Well.....it’s gonna be political. She herself made it political staying on the bench through all of this.

[kingcat]

I believe every option available and any political ploy no matter the ethics or breeching of established protocols involved should be applied to delaying or preventing any vote.
And that even the immediate concerns facing our country should be politicized if it can help in any way to accomplish that. And if using baseless facts and outright lies can help, by all means give it a go. They are beautiful, beautiful things.
That's as American as apple pie! If it dont land ya' in jail it's fair.

I now side with was stated in this forum four years ago. Surely an all out attempt at obstruction in every conceivable way is the duty of every public servant.

"The intent of all checks and balances is to obstruct. There was an explicit intent by the Founding Fathers to make governing a process that stifled unilateral rule"

Honestly, I was just getting out of practice grating' on political nerves here.

Everything will work out fine. God is still in control.

[catmanjack]

Vote Democrat and it will not be fine, placing too much power in the socialist direction is not a good thing for your family and the America we believe in.

[kingcat]

Vote Democrat and it will not be fine, placing too much power in the socialist direction is not a good thing for your family and the America we believe in.

I've heard that "socialist" call to arms thing all my life, and for many years I participated in the same battle cry. It's a farce by those who know the term can still be used to convince the uninformed it's linked to communism. It's been the corporate battle cry of their party since the advent of Social Security and every other program created to benefit the common citizen. No thanks, I'll vote to maintain freedom. One which is dependent on everyone else's freedom to believe different than me and command my respect for doing so.

Believe me, just like others I have studied this thing for years, and the dangers of buying in wholeheartedly to either party and/or condemning every aspect of the other is the true and most imminent danger.

I believe that despite claims to the contrary, a huge group of conservatives desire one party rule at all costs, and are willing to accept the very real threat of autocracy in the White House to accomplish that desire.
So my response to you would be that imho..the America you believe in, never existed. It is the new one you are trying to help create. No offense, as I take no personal offense at your post. Any of us are capable of being completely wrong. But I 100% guarantee, no one or no group here including myself is above that. So we should all be cautious.

Let's not discard the German lesson, a well educated and informed society, who were totally convinced and blinded by their fear and mistrust when Hitler rose to power. And cleverly manipulated by his propaganda machine which went about to destroy its opposition by nurturing hate and anger.; Ive been told to look inward when I mention that, and I have. And I still see those who would suggest it, refused to do so themselves. We arent quite there yet, and so there's still time to learn from it.
Because winning is what's most important.

But more to the point, the leaders of the party you believe in will say, do, and forsake all Americans consider as values, anything..to stay in power. There certainly is no moral high road to be found on either side. As proof, and as to the discussion of selecting SCOTUS justices.

Let's remember that it would be a relatively short delay compared to going over a year with an empty seat just to prevent Garland from sitting on the Court.

Here's what McConnell said in 2016:

February 13, statement on the day of Scalia's death: "The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president."

February 16, Washington Post op-ed with Republican Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa: "Given that we are in the midst of the presidential election process, we believe that the American people should seize the opportunity to weigh in on whom they trust to nominate the next person for a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court. It is today the American people, rather than a lame-duck president whose priorities and policies they just rejected in the most-recent national election, who should be afforded the opportunity to replace Justice Scalia."

February 22, press statement: "[While finding the right person to take the seat [Scalia] occupied will clearly be a monumental task, it's one we think the American people are more than equipped to tackle. Some disagree and would rather the Senate simply push through yet another lifetime appointment from a president who's on his way out the door...I believe that it is today the American people who are best-positioned to help make this important decision."

February 23, Senate floor speech: "The Senate will appropriately revisit the matter after the American people finish making in November the decision they've already started making today....[Mr. Obama] could let the people decide and make this an actual legacy-building moment, rather than just another campaign roadshow."

February 23, press conference: "The American people are perfectly capable of having their say on this issue, so let's give them a voice. Let's let the American people decide. The Senate will appropriately revisit the matter when it considers the qualifications of the nominee the next president nominates, whoever that might be."

March 16, Senate floor speech after Mr. Obama nominated Garland: "The American people may well elect a president who decides to nominate Judge Garland for Senate consideration. The next president may also nominate someone very different. Either way, our view is this: Give the people a voice."

March 20, "Fox News Sunday" interview: "We think the important principle in the middle of this presidential election, which is raging, is that American people need to weigh in and decide who's going to make this decision."

March 20, "Meet the Press" interview: "The American people are about to weigh in on who is going to be the president. And that's the person, whoever that may be, who ought to be making this appointment."

August 6, speech to supporters in Kentucky: "One of my proudest moments was when I looked Barack Obama in the eye and I said, 'Mr. President, you will not fill the Supreme Court vacancy.'"
--------------------------------------------------

And this, as per his request, from Lindsey Graham..
"I want you to use my words against me. If there's a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say, 'Lindsey Graham said let's let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination."

So you see, some see evil intent evident when lying to the people of this great country to suit a political purpose. Both sides may do it, but both sides have not discussed cancelling elections, not accepting the results, or negotiating presidential reign beyond what the constitution allows.

In the America of my youth, that would have been squelched by both parties and dealt with by way more than harsh rebuke. And so I'd re-examine the America you envision to be certain it ever existed. I've done so and continue to..but I don't think you have.

But I think you're a good man. Just wrong.

[Doc]

After the way the Reid and the left ran roughshod in Obama’s first two years they shouldn’t complain when McConnell turns the tables on them.

Its the reason he can turn the tables

[dan_bgblue]

Hildabeast jumps into the fray with comments shared with the worst news commentator on TV, Rachael Madcow.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/hillar...nell-hypocrisy

[KeithKSR]

I believe every option available and any political ploy no matter the ethics or breeching of established protocols involved should be applied to delaying or preventing any vote.
And that even the immediate concerns facing our country should be politicized if it can help in any way to accomplish that. And if using baseless facts and outright lies can help, by all means give it a go. They are beautiful, beautiful things.
That's as American as apple pie! If it dont land ya' in jail it's fair.

I now side with was stated in this forum four years ago. Surely an all out attempt at obstruction in every conceivable way is the duty of every public servant.

"The intent of all checks and balances is to obstruct. There was an explicit intent by the Founding Fathers to make governing a process that stifled unilateral rule"

Honestly, I was just getting out of practice grating' on political nerves here.

Everything will work out fine. God is still in control.

Right now the Dems lack the Senatorial checks, and I’m loving it.

[kingcat]

Right now the Dems lack the Senatorial checks, and I’m loving it.

It would appear that way if not for republicans who will side with the Dems. Maybe there will be enough this time being the election months and all.

And I fear the tit for tat by the Democratic party when they control the White House and the senate will show love and abuse of that competitive advantage and wielding of absolute power as a huge and uncorrectable mistake imo.

[Catonahottinroof]

To me, if the roles were reversed it would happen the same way....
No matter how you slice the story, the winners write the history.

[kingcat]

To me, if the roles were reversed it would happen the same way....
No matter how you slice the story, the winners write the history.

And often times change it.

To change the subject a bit. I hope everyone is experiencing as beautiful a Fall day as we are having here. Awesome!

[CitizenBBN]

To me, if the roles were reversed it would happen the same way....
No matter how you slice the story, the winners write the history.

Of course they would.

Actually, RGB herself defended the lame duck appointment process, right up until the wrong political party was going to be doing the lame duck picking.

That's why we know this is all just politics, and nothing more.

[CitizenBBN]

It would appear that way if not for republicans who will side with the Dems. Maybe there will be enough this time being the election months and all.

And I fear the tit for tat by the Democratic party when they control the White House and the senate will show love and abuse of that competitive advantage and wielding of absolute power as a huge and uncorrectable mistake imo.

I'll make you this bet. Even if the appointment is not made, if the Democrats control the Senate and the White House they will end the filibuster rule completely, and it won't matter a bit what the GOP did.

The pressure from their base will be very strong, IMO too much to stand against.

[KeithKSR]

I'll make you this bet. Even if the appointment is not made, if the Democrats control the Senate and the White House they will end the filibuster rule completely, and it won't matter a bit what the GOP did.

The pressure from their base will be very strong, IMO too much to stand against.

Ending the filibuster would be a bad thing for the country. There are wacky bills that come out of the House, no matter what party is in charge, and that 60 vote threshold serves to keep things in check.