Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
I don't care about Mitch, he's a dirt bag. The point is you are wrong about the constitution.Just quit spinning it and making it say something isn't true.
It says no where a vote has to be held and this has happened 12 times before.
And to note, Biden Rule holds true.
No, you love him because he's an Obama hater. Be real for a moment.
I paraphrased what the Constitution dictates concerning the matter. So, no, I wasn't wrong with what I said.
Now the strawman you're making out of what I actually said, that's wrong.
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
If it makes you feel any better I think this man should be confirmed. However I have deeper feelings that he won't be and this will be a ploy to try and get Obama in the Supreme Court after his presidency is over. And the republicans are part of this.
I really don't know much about the guy myself, aside from the accolades I heard, so I don't have a yes/no leaning thus far.
That sounds like a whacky bipartisan conspiracy theory.
How so? Hilary has already talked about making him a SC justice. So I refuse your statement of this bring some "conspiracy."
Oh look, no conspiracy.
http://nationalreport.net/hillary-consider-naming-obama-supreme-court-2016-win/
After watching Garland's speech, I feel like it would be difficult for anyone to impede him unless they admitted that they were just doing it out of spite for Obama.
He made a point to emphasize that justices shouldn't be political chess pieces, that they should work to serve the nation and its law, not partisan interests, and I think he was earnest about that.
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
How so? Hilary has already talked about making him a SC justice. So I refuse your statement of this bring some "conspiracy."Oh look, no conspiracy.
http://nationalreport.net/hillary-consider-naming-obama-supreme-court-2016-win/
Originally posted by Time-ImmemorialHillary nominating Obama if she should win the Presidency, sure. It's been joked about and it could be a possibility, though unlikely.
How so? Hilary has already talked about making him a SC justice. So I refuse your statement of this bring some "conspiracy."Oh look, no conspiracy.
http://nationalreport.net/hillary-consider-naming-obama-supreme-court-2016-win/
Garland being some distraction so the above comes to pass and the Republicans are in on it. That's the whacky conspiracy part.
Not sure where else to put this, but wow look at this resolution by a Texas congressmen.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-resolution/642/text?resultIndex=12
It's all about how magic should be considered "art". I'm not even kidding.
Originally posted by Robtard
Hillary nominating Obama if she should win the Presidency, sure. It's been joked about and it could be a possibility, though unlikely.Garland being some distraction so the above comes to pass and the Republicans are in on it. That's the whacky conspiracy part.
No the shoe fits
Look at the time line
Hilary says she would nominate him.
Scalia dies
Reps say no to anyone till new president.
Obama offers a good justice.
Republicans still say no
Hilary becomes president
Obama gets nominated.
This is simple to follow.
We have her on record saying she would do so.
You saying "wacky conspiracy" means little. And it's just being dismissive.
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
No the shoe fitsLook at the time line
Hilary says she would nominate him.
Scalia dies
Reps say no to anyone till new president.
Obama offers a good justice.
Republicans still say no
Hilary becomes president
Obama gets nominated.This is simple to follow.
We have her on record saying she would do so.
Clinton said that about 10months before Scalia died.
But if you want to believe this is all some bipartisan ploy, have at it.
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
How so? Hilary has already talked about making him a SC justice. So I refuse your statement of this bring some "conspiracy."Oh look, no conspiracy.
http://nationalreport.net/hillary-consider-naming-obama-supreme-court-2016-win/
You're missing the best part: read the first comment on the article. Just shows Hilary has no idea what the f*ck she is even talking about.
Originally posted by Robtard
He's a former constitutional law professor, senator and would have eight years as president under his belt as well. Why would he be a bad SCJ?
I look at the decisions he has made and just think..I don't really want this man making anymore decisions for anyone. After his term is over he should just stick to golfing.
Or if you want another answer: I simply don't like him. I don't mean as a person, but as a politician. I don't like him, I don't trust him. Thus I personally think he shouldn't be nominated. Sort of the same reasons I don't want Hilary in the White House for anything other then a guided tour.
Obama seems to me like the coolest politician of all time. He seems like a real swell guy. I like him a lot and I'm English.
Originally posted by Surtur
Not sure where else to put this, but wow look at this resolution by a Texas congressmen.https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-resolution/642/text?resultIndex=12
It's all about how magic should be considered "art". I'm not even kidding.
I'd agree with this. Magic is a performance just like dance or whatever is. I'm surprised it isn't already considered art tbh.
Originally posted by Nephthys
I'd agree with this. Magic is a performance just like dance or whatever is. I'm surprised it isn't already considered art tbh.
Sure but..why is a congressmen making resolutions for it? What would be the purpose? Surely not because he'd want some kind of funding for it or anything like that. So if magic is recognized as art..what then? Why is this something any politician is doing?