Guess the next scotus justice.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this "President" wants to nominate a replacement, he's going to have to play ball. He's going to have to nominate someone that McConnell or Ryan would nominate themselves.

Obama should look to the Judicial Conference of the United States, the policy making arm of the Federal Judiciary. Pick people the Chief Justice has blessed, by picking them for key leadership slots.

Bill Traxler, the current Chair of the Executive Committee, would be fabulous. A Bush 41 appointee to the District bench out of South Carolina, Strom Thurmond strong armed Clinton (during impeachment) into elevating Traxler to the 4th Circuit bench. So it would "close the circle" for this Senate to force Obama to his knees, elevating an anti-criminal budget hawk as the best he can do.

Julie Robinson of Kansas, a Bush 43 appointee, would be a terrific choice also. She is a black female federal judge so it would be hard for the liberals to complain. But she has been a great help in passing sensible anti-abortion policies (while hammering ACLU!!!), as well as nailing the Brady campaign on procedural grounds.

If Obama decides to nominate some "Guest of our country" like Goodwind Liu, he'll fail. But if he bargains with Mitch, he can still get a marginal improvement over Scalia, and over a President Cruz nominee.

Obama needs to take what he can get!

Why is "President" in quotes?

Because pp is a seditious racist who hates America and all that she stands for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this "President" wants to nominate a replacement, he's going to have to play ball. He's going to have to nominate someone that McConnell or Ryan would nominate themselves.

Obama should look to the Judicial Conference of the United States, the policy making arm of the Federal Judiciary. Pick people the Chief Justice has blessed, by picking them for key leadership slots.

Bill Traxler, the current Chair of the Executive Committee, would be fabulous. A Bush 41 appointee to the District bench out of South Carolina, Strom Thurmond strong armed Clinton (during impeachment) into elevating Traxler to the 4th Circuit bench. So it would "close the circle" for this Senate to force Obama to his knees, elevating an anti-criminal budget hawk as the best he can do.

Julie Robinson of Kansas, a Bush 43 appointee, would be a terrific choice also. She is a black female federal judge so it would be hard for the liberals to complain. But she has been a great help in passing sensible anti-abortion policies (while hammering ACLU!!!), as well as nailing the Brady campaign on procedural grounds.

If Obama decides to nominate some "Guest of our country" like Goodwind Liu, he'll fail. But if he bargains with Mitch, he can still get a marginal improvement over Scalia, and over a President Cruz nominee.

Obama needs to take what he can get!

It going to a lot of fun watching "citizens" like you tie themselves up in knots, foaming at the mouth over President Obama's nominee.

What will likely happen? Obama will nominate someone "historic" (which is how liberals will label the nominee - you see it starting on DCUM already). He will do this knowing full-well when the Senate says 'no way', liberals will not focus on any valid reason but will instead scream 'racist' and/or 'sexist' . This reaction is so predictable Obama knows he can use it to try and create a false message. The only blessing is that Cruz and Trump will have the balls to call him out on his BS.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised Sri Srinivasan has so many fans on DCUM considering what the general attitude towards Indians/Indian-Americans is on DCUM

There's really only one guy and as long as Srinivasan isn't on a H1-B visa, even he is probably cool with it.

Thanks for letting us know that, Jeff. Also, I think his animosity is towards the people in software or IT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised Sri Srinivasan has so many fans on DCUM considering what the general attitude towards Indians/Indian-Americans is on DCUM

There's really only one guy and as long as Srinivasan isn't on a H1-B visa, even he is probably cool with it.

Thanks for letting us know that, Jeff. Also, I think his animosity is towards the people in software or IT.

Already the race shit is starting? How about deciding on the man's merits, as opposed to whether or not he's brown enough for liberals?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this "President" wants to nominate a replacement, he's going to have to play ball. He's going to have to nominate someone that McConnell or Ryan would nominate themselves.

Obama should look to the Judicial Conference of the United States, the policy making arm of the Federal Judiciary. Pick people the Chief Justice has blessed, by picking them for key leadership slots.

Bill Traxler, the current Chair of the Executive Committee, would be fabulous. A Bush 41 appointee to the District bench out of South Carolina, Strom Thurmond strong armed Clinton (during impeachment) into elevating Traxler to the 4th Circuit bench. So it would "close the circle" for this Senate to force Obama to his knees, elevating an anti-criminal budget hawk as the best he can do.

Julie Robinson of Kansas, a Bush 43 appointee, would be a terrific choice also. She is a black female federal judge so it would be hard for the liberals to complain. But she has been a great help in passing sensible anti-abortion policies (while hammering ACLU!!!), as well as nailing the Brady campaign on procedural grounds.

If Obama decides to nominate some "Guest of our country" like Goodwind Liu, he'll fail. But if he bargains with Mitch, he can still get a marginal improvement over Scalia, and over a President Cruz nominee.

Obama needs to take what he can get!

It going to a lot of fun watching "citizens" like you tie themselves up in knots, foaming at the mouth over President Obama's nominee.

What will likely happen? Obama will nominate someone "historic" (which is how liberals will label the nominee - you see it starting on DCUM already). He will do this knowing full-well when the Senate says 'no way', liberals will not focus on any valid reason but will instead scream 'racist' and/or 'sexist' . This reaction is so predictable Obama knows he can use it to try and create a false message. The only blessing is that Cruz and Trump will have the balls to call him out on his BS.

It's not a false message. What is predictable are the reactions of many people in this country and those reactions have consistently been rooted in racism and/or sexism, masked by ideology. Using Cruz and Trump in the same sentence with blessing, is, well, BS.

[Anonymous]

Mitch McConnell is a piece of work, declaring that Obama should leave the selection of the new justice to the next president. Who does he think died and made him God? And at the rate the GOP race is going, he should be careful what he asks for.

[Anonymous]

I know it won't happen, but I think it would be really interesting to appoint Al Gore to the Supreme Court, given his history with it and the statement it would make in replacing Scalia with him.

[Anonymous]

Obama should start with Pam Karlan to really piss off R's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Mitch McConnell is a piece of work, declaring that Obama should leave the selection of the new justice to the next president. Who does he think died and made him God? And at the rate the GOP race is going, he should be careful what he asks for.

Also saw something in my news feed today that Mitch has approved SCOTUS nominees in election years before. Of course, it was for a Repub pres...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Mitch McConnell is a piece of work, declaring that Obama should leave the selection of the new justice to the next president. Who does he think died and made him God? And at the rate the GOP race is going, he should be careful what he asks for.

Also saw something in my news feed today that Mitch has approved SCOTUS nominees in election years before. Of course, it was for a Repub pres...

What McConnell's saying today is a complete, radical 180 degree departure from what he said in 2005

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/2/13/1484831/-Sen-Mitch-McConnell-in-2005-The-President-and-the-President-alone-nominates-judges

Back then he said it was the absolute right of the sitting President to have his nominations heard by the Senate.

Was he lying then or is he lying now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Obama should start with Pam Karlan to really piss off R's.

She's great

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know it won't happen, but I think it would be really interesting to appoint Al Gore to the Supreme Court, given his history with it and the statement it would make in replacing Scalia with him.

He's not even a lawyer.

[Anonymous]

Jane. It will be Jane. She is currently trying to get out of it (mining from Iowa to DC) but she will accept. I call it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know it won't happen, but I think it would be really interesting to appoint Al Gore to the Supreme Court, given his history with it and the statement it would make in replacing Scalia with him.

He's not even a lawyer.

Liberals will give him an honorary degree and say that's good enough.

[Anonymous]

You actually do not need to be a lawyer to be a Supreme Court justice.