Merrick Garland SCOTUS judge?

[finnbow]

Once again, Obama is playing chess and the Republican fools on the hill are playing checkers. They can block Obama's eminently qualified moderate nominee, which will cause them to lose votes in November for obstruction and hypocrisy (they voted strongly in favor of seating Garland to the DC circuit). This will increase the (already high) likelihood of Hillary winning and the Senate flipping. If this occurs, Garland is likely to step aside in deference to Hillary's upcoming Presidency and Hillary will appoint a far more liberal justice. The GOP, however, has been very loud about blocking Obama's nominee and are now stuck between a rock and a hard place (giving Garland a hearing or giving Hillary a more liberal nominee). Couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch of clowns.

A bunch of GOP Senators are already breaking ranks with McConnell.
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-actio...arty-on-scotus

Jeff Flake (R-AZ) also has said he could support hearing after election results are in and if Republicans lose. The White House already said no deal.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Once again, Obama is playing chess and the Republican fools on the hill are playing checkers. They can block Obama's imminently qualified moderate nominee, which will cause them to lose votes in November for obstruction and hypocrisy (they voted strongly in favor of seating Garland to the DC circuit). This will increase the (already high) likelihood of Hillary winning and the Senate flipping. If this occurs, Garland is likely to step aside in deference to Hillary's upcoming Presidency and Hillary will appoint a far more liberal justice. The GOP, however, has been very loud about blocking Obama's nominee and are now stuck between a rock and a hard place (giving Garland a hearing or giving Hillary a more liberal nominee). Couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch of clowns.

A bunch of GOP Senators are already breaking ranks with McConnell.
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-actio...arty-on-scotus

When will Garland be qualified? Very soon, I hope.

[finnbow]

Originally Posted by Boreas

When will Garland be qualified? Very soon, I hope.

Fixed.

[Ike Bana]

Originally Posted by whell

So, Joe Biden was wrong?

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/23/us...1992.html?_r=0

PS - look how well the Kennedy pick worked out for the right.

Joe Biden is often wrong. Just like every other vote whoreing politician.

Kennedy? What fucking difference does it make how any of them turn out. Besides... Kennedy has voted with the two headed scalito monster more often than with Scalia's pal Ginsburg.

The POTUS puts in a name...it's his Constitutional responsibility. The Senate does their interviewing and either confirms or rejects...it's the Senator's Constitutional responsibility. There are 24 GOP Senate members seeking re-election in November. You don't think this is an issue they would rather not have to deal with? If I were Mark Kirk, I'd be considerably pissed off that my Republican colleagues were hanging me out to dry like this.

[Ike Bana]

Originally Posted by finnbow

Once again, Obama is playing chess and the Republican fools on the hill are playing checkers. They can block Obama's eminently qualified moderate nominee, which will cause them to lose votes in November for obstruction and hypocrisy (they voted strongly in favor of seating Garland to the DC circuit). This will increase the (already high) likelihood of Hillary winning and the Senate flipping. If this occurs, Garland is likely to step aside in deference to Hillary's upcoming Presidency and Hillary will appoint a far more liberal justice. The GOP, however, has been very loud about blocking Obama's nominee and are now stuck between a rock and a hard place (giving Garland a hearing or giving Hillary a more liberal nominee). Couldn't happen to a more deserving bunch of clowns.

A bunch of GOP Senators are already breaking ranks with McConnell.
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-actio...arty-on-scotus

Jeff Flake (R-AZ) also has said he could support hearing after election results are in and if Republicans lose. The White House already said no deal.

I read the article. Very interesting. Kirk is going to be in a real battle to beat Tammy Duckworth. She's very popular here in Illinois. Ayotte? I'm not surprised in the least to hear that Ayotte is behaving like this. She is, IMHO, the most despicable of all of them...Cruz included.

[MrPots]

Originally Posted by whell

Bologna...

Why? We're paying these people a considerable amount of money to do a job. They are refusing to do the job. Insubordination. Fire their worthless asses.

[68custom]

This is obstructionism at it's best (worst?) Mitch and his boys are bound by law to give Garland a thumbs up or down, not to spew out this nonsense about letting the people speak. what a bunch of BS. They all need to lose their seats, it's a disgrace!
as far as I am concerned, these guys are a bunch of stupid racist pricks!

[Dondilion]

Originally Posted by MrPots

refusing to consider this nomination will only hurt the GOP....in the midterms.

I do not think so. Midterms are their thing.

[bobabode]

'Why Merrick Garland Was a Brilliant Tactical Move'
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics...supreme-court/

[noonereal]

If I refused to do my job.....