Original Intent on the March

In memory of the late Antonin Scalia, the great champion of original intent, right?

I turn for the next remark to another authority:

"(The President) shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for..."

What the Constitution does not say is that the President shall nominate Judges of the supreme Court, unless he is a Democrat, and Republicans don't want him to appoint one.  It is the President's duty to do that.  It would be a real example of the Republicans' fantasy-world claims that Obama is trashing the Constitution, if he failed to carry out that task.

Obama: the only guy who can wreck the Constitution by following it.  Get ready for a Republican tantrum to top all tantrums.  They are all going to be competing with Ted Cruz to see who can make the government fall apart over this.

Comments

Anonymous said…
And it's the Congresses job to confirm, no time limit set for their conformation, but you don't seem to know that fact.
February 14, 2016 at 3:42 AM
Anonymous said…
Was just going to say the same thing.
You can bet if it were a President Romney
Picking a conservative judge to replace RB Ginsberg, the dems would never confirm them.
February 14, 2016 at 12:14 PM
Green Eagle said…
What shred of evidence do you have to support that? We all know that the Democrats were browbeaten into appointing Alito, the racist Rehnquist, Thomas, Roberts and Scalia himself, even though it was perfectly clear to all that they were never going to be fair jurists. If anything, the Democrats fell all over themselves to let Republican Presidents have their choices; the only exception in recent times being the uniquely unqualified Bork. Republicans, on the other hand fight to deny Democratic Presidents the right to appoint judges at all levels of the Federal judiciary, as part of an extremely successful covert war to turn the country into the property of their rich backers, by perverting the legal process.

Once again, you both-siders pop up at every chance. Well, both sides are not the same. The Republican party is a corrupt organization from top to bottom, and until it is forced to straighten itself out and govern fairly, or until its "base" of ignorant, hate filled older white males dies out, and the party disappears into history.
February 14, 2016 at 6:35 PM
ez said…
pssssst, anonymous, congress doesn't approve confirmation, the Senate does. One of those pesky Constitutional details.
February 14, 2016 at 11:46 PM
Grung_e_Gene said…
You forgot the Original Intent the Republicans bitterly ling to; Obama is only 3/5ths a person ergo his Presidency, which they don't acknowledge anyway, is already over.

Republicans only adhere to the Constitution when it suits them. Under an Imperial Presidency of W(worst POTUS Ever) it didn't matter, under the dotage of Senile Ronnie Raygun it didn't matter. and now that Unforgivable Blackness is President the Constitution doesn't matter to Republicans.
February 16, 2016 at 10:02 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

It's Okay, Never Mind

Image
The woman in this picture, equipped with the weapons and ammunition shown, was found outside a National guard base. She is apparently a big Glenn Beck fan, and believed that the base was a FEMA concentration camp. Think she's the only one out there? You just know this sort of thing is not going to end well.
Read more

If a Tree Falls In the Woods

Image
 And nobody hears it, is it really running for President at all? First of all, a note about my absence lately:  My wife got me to sign up for an account at Threads, which is sort of like X without the assholes.  I've spent a little time establishing myself there, and I have to say, I do like the relatively immediate exchange of views, but I don't mean to give up my blog- there are still so many things that can't be dealt with in a couple hundred words, so, perhaps to your dismay, I am back. So, what motivated the above question is the fact that the Sunday New York Times today had seven articles about Trump, and absolutely zero about Kamala Harris.   The Republicans have a problem with Harris, in that virtually everyone who sees her likes her and immediately understands how qualified she is to be President.  They have tried mightily the last month to find some way to smear her, but have been spectacularly unsuccessful- the tactics of character assassination ...
Read more

Wingnuts Slightly Annoyed about that $83 Million

Image
How can you look like a decrepit old geezer and an out of control two year old at the same time? I thought it might be nice to look in on wingnut world to see how they are taking yesterday's $83 million dollar Trump legal loss.  You kind of know that they will decide it shouldn't affect their opinion of him in any way, but it might be helpful to see just how the Republican party has trained them to reject any fact they don't like.  Not that surprisingly, a lot of the usual wingnut suspects didn't touch this loss at all, preferring to just ignore anything that interferes with their hateful daydreams, but here are a few excerpts from an article at Gateway Pundit, along with a sample of the hundreds of comments it received.  Enjoy.  Or not. "Trump attorney Alina Habba WENT OFF after the crooked New York City court slapped President Trump with an $83 million judgment for speaking out against the disgusting lies of a crazed woman who said he lured her into a Bergdorf Go...
Read more