Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 41 of 41

Thread: Obama to nominate Judge Merrick Garland to Supreme Court

  1. #31
    They should do their $#@!ing job. There's no reason the court should stand at 8 justices for the next 9-12 months. They could also just go lightning speed, have a hearing on this nominee tomorrow and vote him down. Make Obama keep putting up nominees till there's one repubs like. It's bull$#@! like this that makes people vote trump.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Slave Mentality View Post
    Do your jerb Juan says! Constitution!

    90% or better of the $#@! all three branches pull doesn't fit your request dooood.
    Edit: just noticed that dirty words are filtered now? That's $#@!ed up if so freedom lovers. Hopefully just a setting or some $#@!.



  4. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  5. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Slave Mentality View Post
    Edit: just noticed that dirty words are filtered now? That's $#@!ed up if so freedom lovers. Hopefully just a setting or some $#@!.
    http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...ofanity-filter
    Quote Originally Posted by Ron Paul View Post
    The intellectual battle for liberty can appear to be a lonely one at times. However, the numbers are not as important as the principles that we hold. Leonard Read always taught that "it's not a numbers game, but an ideological game." That's why it's important to continue to provide a principled philosophy as to what the role of government ought to be, despite the numbers that stare us in the face.
    Quote Originally Posted by Origanalist View Post
    This intellectually stimulating conversation is the reason I keep coming here.

  6. #34
    I think what Cato is trying to say is that if Hillary gets elected, she won't nominate people like Garland. She'll nominate some crazy affirmative action pick. Imagine the headlines reading something like this: "President Clinton Nominates First Black Transgender Lesbian to Highest Court in The Land!" That nominee would make Garland look like Thomas Jefferson.
    Last edited by PaleoPaul; 03-16-2016 at 11:32 PM.
    Rand Paul 2016
    Justin Amash 2024
    Thomas Massie 2032

    Check out Matthew Vines' Reformation Project!

  7. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by spudea View Post
    They should do their $#@!ing job. There's no reason the court should stand at 8 justices for the next 9-12 months. They could also just go lightning speed, have a hearing on this nominee tomorrow and vote him down. Make Obama keep putting up nominees till there's one repubs like. It's bull$#@! like this that makes people vote trump.
    The only logical argument in favor of not even giving Obama's commie nutter nominees a hearing is that they are worried that some of their "moderates" might jump ship and one of them will slip through. Obama is going to whine about obstructionism until he gets his way, whether these stooges he sends to the senate are voted on or ignored, so maybe they should do their jobs.

    Then again, I don't really see it as a tragedy if we have 8 judges for the next 9-12 months, I'd actually find it interesting to see a bunch of stalemates, maybe we could learn something about how partisan judges work and learn to see the SCOTUS as something other than an object of worship.

  8. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by PaleoPaul View Post
    I think what Cato is trying to say is that if Hillary gets elected, she won't nominate people like Garland. She'll nominate some crazy affirmative action pick. Imagine the headlines reading something like this: "President Clinton Nominates First Black Transgender Lesbian!" That nominee would make Garland look like Thomas Jefferson.
    Who cares? Having a pinko sitting on the bench doesn't get better if he's white and doesn't have his genitals mutilated.

  9. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by hells_unicorn View Post
    The only logical argument in favor of not even giving Obama's commie nutter nominees a hearing is that they are worried that some of their "moderates" might jump ship and one of them will slip through.
    Yes, that is the only argument. But it is overwhelmingly powerful argument. Trust in the GOP to uphold Constitutional principles is at all time low. NOBODY believes that if votes were allowed, the GOP would reject the nominee. It is childish for sure, and embarrassing for the party, but it is the reality. GOP just can't be trusted with the power to hold a vote. We have to treat them like babies.

  10. #38
    xxxxx
    Last edited by Voluntarist; 07-25-2018 at 09:15 AM.
    You have the right to remain silent. Anything you post to the internet can and will be used to humiliate you.

  11. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Slave Mentality View Post
    Edit: just noticed that dirty words are filtered now? That's $#@!ed up if so freedom lovers. Hopefully just a setting or some $#@!.
    wtf right? really $#@!s with my irate and tireless

    'We endorse the idea of voluntarism; self-responsibility: Family, friends, and churches to solve problems, rather than saying that some monolithic government is going to make you take care of yourself and be a better person. It's a preposterous notion: It never worked, it never will. The government can't make you a better person; it can't make you follow good habits.' - Ron Paul 1988

    Awareness is the Root of Liberation Revolution is Action upon Revelation

    'Resistance and Disobedience in Economic Activity is the Most Moral Human Action Possible' - SEK3

    Flectere si nequeo superos, Acheronta movebo.

    ...the familiar ritual of institutional self-absolution...
    ...for protecting them, by mock trial, from punishment...


  12. #40
    Trump said back in March he would get a list of ten people from the Heritage Foundation that he "would definitely pick from" for a supreme court nominee if he had the chance. Anybody seen that list? I haven't.

    http://time.com/4266700/donald-trump...t-nominations/

    Speaking at the construction site for his new hotel in Washington, D.C., Monday, Trump said he will make a list public in the next week of 10 conservative judges that he would consider nominating to the Supreme Court. If elected, Trump said, he would only pick from that list, which is being made in consultation with the conservative Heritage Foundation.

    “I’m going to submit a list of justices, potential justices of the United States Supreme Court, that I will appoint from the list,” Trump said. “I won’t go beyond that list. Some people say maybe I’ll appoint a liberal judge. I’m not appointing a liberal judge.”
    Do Republicans still think they will get a better nominee from Clinton or Trump for the court to replace Scalila?



  13. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  14. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Zippyjuan View Post



    Do Republicans still think they will get a better nominee from Clinton or Trump for the court to replace Scalila?
    Tell the RINOs in the Senate, to do their job & block anything stupid Trump would send them.

    Are these pussies unwilling to block 10 crappy nominees Trump suggests, until he gets it right?
    BOWLING GREEN, Kentucky – Washington liberals are trying to push through the so-called DREAM Act, which creates an official path to Democrat voter registration for 2 million college-age illegal immigrants.
    Rand Paul 2010

    Booker T. Washington:
    Cast it down among the eight millions of Negroes whose habits you know, whose
    fidelity and love you have tested in days when to have proved treacherous meant the ruin of your firesides.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •