Obama Filibustered Justice Alito, Voted Against Roberts

[UK2K]

Say what? I thought he was all about the constitution and doing his duties. Not only were Democrats openly campaigning to block Bush nominations, but Obama himself blocked SC nominees despite the fact they were qualified. His reason?

They were conservatives.


Let's start with Justice Roberts.

Obama admitted that Roberts was eminently qualified. He praised him highly.

"There is absolutely no doubt in my mind Judge Roberts is qualified to sit on the highest court in the land. Moreover, he seems to have the comportment and the temperament that makes for a good judge. He is humble, he is personally decent, and he appears to be respectful of different points of view. It is absolutely clear to me that Judge Roberts truly loves the law. He couldn't have achieved his excellent record as an advocate before the Supreme Court without that passion for the law..."

But, no he wasn't going to vote for him anyway.

"I ultimately have to give more weight to his deeds and the overarching political philosophy that he appears to have shared with those in power than to the assuring words that he provided me in our meeting. The bottom line is this: I will be voting against John Roberts' nomination."

In short, Obama chose to vote against Roberts because of his perceived conservative politics. Nothing else.

But that wasn't the only time..


However things really got ugly with the nomination of Justice Alito.

Obama joined a filibuster when he was a U.S. senator to delay the confirmation of Judge Samuel Alito, one of President Bush’s nominees to the Supreme Court.

"I will be supporting the filibuster because I think Judge Alito, in fact, is somebody who is contrary to core American values, not just liberal values," Obama said in January 2006.

Obama has no idea what American values are. His only values are leftist values. Here's what he said about Justice Alito.

“While I certainly believe that Judge Samuel Alito has the training and the qualifications necessary to serve as a Supreme Court Justice,after a careful review of his record, I simply cannot vote for his nomination."

Obama claimed that, "Judge Alito simply does not inspire confidence that he will serve as an independent voice on the U.S. Supreme Court."

Meanwhile once in the White House, Obama nominated Elena Kagan, his own lawyer for that "independent voice". So once again, Obama fought against a justice for no other reason than his politics.

Again, blocking a SC nominee Obama admitted himself that was more than qualified.

Let's hear it... let's hear about the constitution. Sucks to suck.

[DrakeTheSnake]

The Republicans are the ones that push to withhold the current constitution, which is why it is hypocritical for them to try to delay the selection. The Democrats are more open to amending the constitution and not following it verbatim.

[Patrick Chewing]

The Republicans are the ones that push to withhold the current constitution, which is why it is hypocritical for them to try to delay the selection. The Democrats are more open to amending the constitution and not following it verbatim.


You're right, the Democrats what to change shit around just to fit their agenda. Which would make their cause un-Constitutional.

There is only one candidate out there with a proven track record of defending the Constitution and swears to defend it once he's elected President.

That man is Ted Cruz.

http://rlv.zcache.com/vote_ted_cruz_2016_postcard-re590abc839f44c9eb4d86f00a38be614_vgbaq_8byvr_324. jpg

[UK2K]

You're right, the Democrats what to change shit around just to fit their agenda. Which would make their cause un-Constitutional.

There is only one candidate out there with a proven track record of defending the Constitution and swears to defend it once he's elected President.

That man is Ted Cruz.

http://rlv.zcache.com/vote_ted_cruz_2016_postcard-re590abc839f44c9eb4d86f00a38be614_vgbaq_8byvr_324. jpg

Only one of the many candidates to come out and say it directly.

He has my vote.

[UK2K]

The Republicans are the ones that push to withhold the current constitution, which is why it is hypocritical for them to try to delay the selection. The Democrats are more open to amending the constitution and not following it verbatim.

Allowing another left leaning Justice to assume a position on the SC would allow Democrats to amend and alter the Constitution as they see fit...

Thus, blocking the nomination IS defending the Constitution.

[Patrick Chewing]

Only one of the many candidates to come out and say it directly.

He has my vote.

You sir, are a smart man.

:cheers:

[Sarcastic]

Bernie will win and put Elizabeth Warren on the Court :lol

[NumberSix]

The Republicans are the ones that push to withhold the current constitution, which is why it is hypocritical for them to try to delay the selection. The Democrats are more open to amending the constitution and not following it verbatim.
Which is why the dems shouldn't be appointing judges. They openly don't respect the law of the land.

[DeuceWallaces]

He has a right to vote any way he sees fit. And they didn't entirely block Alito; they ran a little show about it in the press and then went ahead with the vote. They clearly didn't obstruct the process for a year in a temper tantrum. In fact he favored using it as a catalyst to win elections and put forth their own candidates; which in fact did. This will be a hilarious republican shit show as they sabotage any general election hopes they had.


"President Obama himself attempted to filibuster Justice Alito, who now sits on the Supreme Court," Kyl said. "So if the president isn't going to take it off the table, I'm not going to take it off the table. But I think it can easily be avoided by appointing, frankly, the kind of person that Senator Schumer just mentioned, someone who is mainstream enough that with intellect and the application of good law can persuade colleagues to support his position or her position."

We wanted to examine whether Kyl was correct about Obama's position on then-Judge Samuel Alito back in 2006, when Obama was a senator and Alito was President George W. Bush's nominee.

We found that Obama did join a broader Democratic effort to filibuster Alito. Democrats said Alito opposed abortion and was too deferential to executive power.

But in what's become Obama's trademark on-the-one-hand, on-the-other-hand style, he joined the filibuster while at the same time saying he thought it was a bad idea.

Here's what he told George Stephanopoulos on Jan. 29, 2006:

Stephanopoulos: "Two of your colleagues, Senator (Edward) Kennedy and Senator (John) Kerry, want to try to mount a filibuster tomorrow. Will you join them?"

Obama: "Well, I will be supporting the filibuster because I think Judge Alito, in fact, is somebody who is contrary to core American values, not just liberal values, you know. When you look at his decisions in particular during times of war, we need a court that is independent and is going to provide some check on the executive branch, and he has not shown himself willing to do that repeatedly. I will say this, though, I think that the Democrats have to do a much better job in making their case on these issues. These last-minute efforts using procedural maneuvers inside the Beltway, I think, has been the wrong way of going about it, and we need to recognize, because Judge Alito will be confirmed, that if we're going to oppose a nominee that we've got to persuade the American people that, in fact, their values are at stake and frankly I'm not sure that we've successfully done that."

Stephanopoulos: "Well, it sounds to me like you're not really happy about going forward and joining this filibuster. And I've actually seen some reports that inside the Democratic caucus you were arguing against this strategy. Is that true?"

Obama: "Well, you know, I don't talk about what I, you know, what takes place in caucus but what I will say is that there is an over-reliance on the part of Democrats for procedural maneuvers and mechanisms to block the president instead of proactively going out to the American people and talking about the values that we care about. And, you know, there's one way to guarantee that the judges who are appointed to the Supreme Court are judges that reflect our values and that's to win elections."

Later that day, a report from the Associated Press carried the headline, "Sen. Obama Criticizes Filibuster Tactic."

The next day, Democrats failed in their attempt to filibuster on a vote of 72 to 25, with Obama joining 24 other Democrats on the losing end.

Obama may have criticized the filibuster even as he joined it, but at the end of the day, he still joined it. Kyl said, "President Obama himself attempted to filibuster Justice Alito, who now sits on the Supreme Court." We rate Kyl's statement True.

[NumberSix]

He has a right to vote any way he sees fit. And they didn't entirely block Alito; they ran a little show about it in the press and then went ahead with the vote. They clearly didn't obstruct the process for a year in a temper tantrum. In fact he favored using it as a catalyst to win elections and put forth their own candidates; which in fact did. This will be a hilarious republican shit show as they sabotage any general election hopes they had.
Do you think they actually will refuse to even vote? I personally can't imagine that.

IMO, some kind of deal will be cut and Obama will end up getting a nomination through.

[DeuceWallaces]

Do you think they actually will refuse to even vote? I personally can't imagine that.

IMO, some kind of deal will be cut and Obama will end up getting a nomination through.

They've caved on everything else to Obama, but this is a much bigger deal. Either way they come out a loser. They either change the balance of SCOTUS, or they looks like shitheads in the general election and put forth someone like Cruz who is the epitome of government obstruction.

[NumberSix]

They've caved on everything else to Obama, but this is a much bigger deal. Either way they come out a loser. They either change the balance of SCOTUS, or they looks like shitheads in the general election and put forth someone like Cruz who is the epitome of government obstruction.
I think people are overestimating this. I'd bet that the majority of Americans have no idea that a Supreme Court justice died and a VAST majority don't even know what the Supreme Court does. It's like quoting PER or defensive rating to causal basketball fans. Only primary voters pay attention to these kind of things and only 4% of voters vote in primaries. And that not 4% of people eligible to vote, that's 4% of people who actually do vote, which is about 35-38% of eligible voters.

[UK2K]

I think people are overestimating this. I'd bet that the majority of Americans have no idea that a Supreme Court justice died and a VAST majority don't even know what the Supreme Court does. It's like quoting PER or defensive rating to causal basketball fans. Only primary voters pay attention to these kind of things and only 4% of voters vote in primaries. And that not 4% of people eligible to vote, that's 4% of people who actually do vote, which is about 35-38% of eligible voters.

The people will believe whatever the media tells them to believe.

[DrakeTheSnake]

I think people are overestimating this. I'd bet that the majority of Americans have no idea that a Supreme Court justice died and a VAST majority don't even know what the Supreme Court does. It's like quoting PER or defensive rating to causal basketball fans. Only primary voters pay attention to these kind of things and only 4% of voters vote in primaries. And that not 4% of people eligible to vote, that's 4% of people who actually do vote, which is about 35-38% of eligible voters.
This is very true. Most just vote in the general election and let others decide the rest.

[TheMan]

I think people are overestimating this. I'd bet that the majority of Americans have no idea that a Supreme Court justice died and a VAST majority don't even know what the Supreme Court does. It's like quoting PER or defensive rating to causal basketball fans. Only primary voters pay attention to these kind of things and only 4% of voters vote in primaries. And that not 4% of people eligible to vote, that's 4% of people who actually do vote, which is about 35-38% of eligible voters.
You're right about this but we got 8 months to educate American voters with political ads, campaign rallies, debates, talking points etc.

Americans may not be the brightest of the bunch but don't sell them short either. This can be used by the Dems effectively, if they know how to take advantage of it and Obama is a smart political strategist so I like our chances of it being an important factor come the GE than not.

[DeuceWallaces]

I think people are overestimating this. I'd bet that the majority of Americans have no idea that a Supreme Court justice died and a VAST majority don't even know what the Supreme Court does. It's like quoting PER or defensive rating to causal basketball fans. Only primary voters pay attention to these kind of things and only 4% of voters vote in primaries. And that not 4% of people eligible to vote, that's 4% of people who actually do vote, which is about 35-38% of eligible voters.

That's strange, because I've never seen PER on the front page of every newspaper across the country, lead every show on every cable news network for 4 days straight, be #1 on reddit, consume every blog for days, etc.

And we're not even out of the primaries. It will be the #1 talking point in the general election if they stall this for a year.

[NumberSix]

You're right about this but we got 8 months to educate American voters with political ads, campaign rallies, debates, talking points etc.

Americans may not be the brightest of the bunch but don't sell them short either. This can be used by the Dems effectively, if they know how to take advantage of it and Obama is a smart political strategist so I like our chances of it being an important factor come the GE than not.
This kind of thing is too into the weeds. I'm telling you, most GE voters will hear that there's an open seat on the Supreme Court and that "some people" say we're too close to an election and we should just wait for the next president and think to themselves "oh, well that seems reasonable" and never give it a second thought.

[TheMan]

The people will believe whatever the media tells them to believe.
Unfortunately, this is true and both political parties are guilty of this...

Remember when the media went along with the Bush WH in lying to the American public in the lead up to the Iraq War? A majority of Americans believed that Iraq had something to do with 9/11, which has been proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to have been false.

If Obama and the Dems (and the media) play this right, it could be a political sledgehammer to bash the GOP with.

[NumberSix]

That's strange, because I've never seen PER on the front page of every newspaper across the country, lead every show on every cable news network for 4 days straight, be #1 on reddit, consume every blog for days, etc.

And we're not even out of the primaries. It will be the #1 talking point in the general election if they stall this for a year.
News media isn't as big of a deal as we think it is. Fox News is by far the highest rated news network, but it's entire viewership is like 4 million people. Most people do not pay very much attention to the news or politics.

[DrakeTheSnake]

News media isn't as big of a deal as we think it is. Fox News is by far the highest rated news network, but it's entire viewership is like 4 million people. Most people do not pay very much attention to the news or politics.
That's because it is the main channel for conservatives, while there are many channels for liberals.

[DeuceWallaces]

News media isn't as big of a deal as we think it is. Fox News is by far the highest rated news network, but it's entire viewership is like 4 million people. Most people do not pay very much attention to the news or politics.

It's a big deal. Everyone knows he's dead. It will be more of a big deal as the primaries hit each state, and it will be a huge deal come fall if they've railroaded a vote or it even making the floor.

[TheMan]

This kind of thing is too into the weeds. I'm telling you, most GE voters will hear that there's an open seat on the Supreme Court and that "some people" say we're too close to an election and we should just wait for the next president and think to themselves "oh, well that seems reasonable" and never give it a second thought.
I disagree.

If the Dems frame it in layman's terms and paint the GOP as the worst of politics as usual in this strange election cycle where politics as usual is being overwhelmingly rejected, it could make a difference between controlling the Senate or not...that's my take.

[UK2K]

I disagree.

If the Dems frame it in layman's terms and paint the GOP as the worst of politics as usual in this strange election cycle where politics as usual is being overwhelmingly rejected, it could make a difference between controlling the Senate or not...that's my take.
If I were Republicans in congress, I take the gamble.

I don't think Bernie wins in a general election. Even Hillary, with the entire backing of the media and establishment Democrats, may be a long shot to win.

Take the risk. They'll be okay for a few months. Easily spun by Republican nominees if they word it correctly.

[NumberSix]

I disagree.

If the Dems frame it in layman's terms and paint the GOP as the worst of politics as usual in this strange election cycle where politics as usual is being overwhelmingly rejected, it could make a difference between controlling the Senate or not...that's my take.
I think you'd be in for a shock if you talked to a bunch of GE voters. The extent of the average GE voter's political knowledge is....

Dem. voter: "the republicans are mean. We're the nice people"
Rep. Voter: "America, FCUK YEAH!!!"

[UK2K]

I think you'd be in for a shock if you talked to a bunch of GE voters. The extent of the average GE voter's political knowledge is....

Dem. voter: "the republicans are mean. We're the nice people"
Rep. Voter: "America, FCUK YEAH!!!"
Nailed it.

That's politics in America, in one phrase.

[DrakeTheSnake]

I think you'd be in for a shock if you talked to a bunch of GE voters. The extent of the average GE voter's political knowledge is....

Dem. voter: "the republicans are mean. We're the nice people"
Rep. Voter: "America, FCUK YEAH!!!"
That is just the lower SES Rep voters. You also have the wealthy rep voters: "I worked hard for my money. Why should I give it to people who didn't earn it."

[DeuceWallaces]

I think you'd be in for a shock if you talked to a bunch of GE voters. The extent of the average GE voter's political knowledge is....

Dem. voter: "the republicans are mean. We're the nice people"
Rep. Voter: "America, FCUK YEAH!!!"

Have you followed the previous elections? Have you ever voted? Yes that makes up the majority, but those voters don't decide the election. The middle does, and this shit decides elections.

Republicans got murdered the past two elections because of hispanics and young people, and all they've done since being shook 4 years ago is paint themselves into an even further corner with both demographics. Then, to top it off, they plan on pissing off the moderate average white voters by bringing SCOTUS to a halt for over a year. They lost the popular vote in 2000, and won in 2004 by smearing a war veteran, and still barely beat that stiff by 2 points.

It's a bad, bad, look.

[nightlight]

The people will believe whatever the media tells them to believe.

You mean, people like yourself...


Allowing another left leaning Justice to assume a position on the SC would allow Democrats to amend and alter the Constitution as they see fit...

Thus, blocking the nomination IS defending the Constitution.

:biggums:

[UK2K]

You mean, people like yourself...



:biggums:

Do we need to bring up Obamacare again?


The Supreme Court upheld ObamaCare on June 28, 2012. The final ruling on ObamaCare was a made by Supreme Court Judge Vinson. The basic idea of the ruling was that ObamaCare was declared a tax and not a mandate, and was therefore declared constitutional.

“It focuses on the fact that the law was passed in violation of the Constitution’s ‘Origination Clause,’ which requires that any tax law start in the House of Representatives,” he said. “The Supreme Court has ruled that the Individual Mandate ‘penalty’ payment is a tax – yet it started not in the House, but in the Senate.”


So its a tax, not a mandate (according to the SC, even though it is mandated), but it originated in the HOR. Yet, it was deemed constitutional! Surprise!

Shh. Go outside and play.

[nightlight]

If you're going to write with such conviction concerning the United States government, you might want to actually read the Constitution first.

[TheMan]

If I were Republicans in congress, I take the gamble.

I don't think Bernie wins in a general election. Even Hillary, with the entire backing of the media and establishment Democrats, may be a long shot to win.

Take the risk. They'll be okay for a few months. Easily spun by Republican nominees if they word it correctly.
And as a Dem, that's exactly what I hope the GOP does because I think it'll hurt them with moderates and independants (it will be popular with their base though, but unfortunately for the GOP, their base is shrinking).

And if you really believe the media favors the Democrats, imagine how bad of a light the GOP will be seen because of their stalling, blocking, obstructing of the SCOTUS nomination process. I just don't see how the GOP turns this into a positive for them in the GE.

That's why I do believe they'll give in eventually and nominate someone Obama pushes but hopefully they'll do what you propose :cheers:

[UK2K]

And as a Dem, that's exactly what I hope the GOP does because I think it'll hurt them with moderates and independants (it will be popular with their base though, but unfortunately for the GOP, their base is shrinking).

And if you really believe the media favors the Democrats, imagine how bad of a light the GOP will be seen because of their stalling, blocking, obstructing of the SCOTUS nomination process. I just don't see how the GOP turns this into a positive for them in the GE.

That's why I do believe they'll give in eventually and nominate someone Obama pushes but hopefully they'll do what you propose :cheers:

Because someone like Trump will insist the GOP approve a nomination in front of the cameras, but in reality, he's telling them to do the exact opposite.

His popularity goes up from both the GOP and independents (for being a stand up guy, which he shouldn't because Democrats played this same game a few years ago but, again, the media chose not to blow it up), and the GOP Senate gets to dick around and wait until a Republican is nominated.

That's what I'd do anyway.

The question is, will the Repubs in the Senate go along with it. Some are up for re-election.

[FillJackson]

If I were Republicans in congress, I take the gamble.

I don't think Bernie wins in a general election. Even Hillary, with the entire backing of the media and establishment Democrats, may be a long shot to win.

Take the risk. They'll be okay for a few months. Easily spun by Republican nominees if they word it correctly.:roll:
:roll:
:roll: