(February 16, 2016 at 4:05 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:

(February 16, 2016 at 12:50 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: But you can bet your ass that an American Christian who lived 47 years in India since he was two years old would never, ever, get on the India Supreme Court under any circumstances.   http://supremecourtofindia.nic.in/judges/judges.htm

Are you arguing that we should take India as our example?

Just saying that we should insist on reciprocity in all of our dealings.

(February 16, 2016 at 1:53 pm)Cecelia Wrote:

(February 16, 2016 at 12:52 am)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: If Obama was going to play hardball he would have already announced his choice.  It looks like he's going to wimp out.

The Senate is in recess this week.  He won't name a choice until they return.

That's just a case of weak leadership.  He should have nine choices already made and vetted.

Why?  What's the rush?

Just today Senator Grassley said:

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/02/key-repu...at-a-time/

Quote:The Republican head of the Senate panel that weighs U.S. Supreme Court nominations said on Tuesday he will wait until President Barack Obama names his pick to fill the vacancy left by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death before deciding whether to hold confirmation hearings.

(February 16, 2016 at 2:48 pm)TheRealJoeFish Wrote:

(February 16, 2016 at 12:14 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: The Republicans are taking a risk if they pass up Sri Srinivasan. After this election the Senate could go blue and Sanders could be president. If that happens, they'll wish they had affirmed the moderate they were offered when they had the chance.

I hope he nominates Sri or Watford, inasmuch as I believe there is not even a plausible argument for anything but bipartisan approval.  Tom Goldstein from SCOTUSBlog (one of the nation's top legal commentators), however, anticipates that Loretta Lynch will be nominated.  I think this would at least let the Republican block fall back on "well, she served under Obama, politically", which is not a *reasonable* argument but is one that the base will accept. 

The best choice may be Kamala Harris but she could very well be our President in 2025 or 2029 and all indications are that she has no desire to join the SCOTUS.

Similarly, if Cory Booker isn't President some day, he could very well be on the Supreme Court.  But now's too early.

Obama doesn't have the balls to nominate a black person.

(February 16, 2016 at 8:46 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote:

(February 16, 2016 at 4:05 am)Thumpalumpacus Wrote: Are you arguing that we should take India as our example?

Just saying that we should insist on reciprocity in all of our dealings.

I don't think we should pass up a perfectly good candidate simply because his nation of birth would do so with someone born here.

(February 16, 2016 at 10:11 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote:

(February 16, 2016 at 2:48 pm)TheRealJoeFish Wrote: I hope he nominates Sri or Watford, inasmuch as I believe there is not even a plausible argument for anything but bipartisan approval.  Tom Goldstein from SCOTUSBlog (one of the nation's top legal commentators), however, anticipates that Loretta Lynch will be nominated.  I think this would at least let the Republican block fall back on "well, she served under Obama, politically", which is not a *reasonable* argument but is one that the base will accept. 

The best choice may be Kamala Harris but she could very well be our President in 2025 or 2029 and all indications are that she has no desire to join the SCOTUS.

Similarly, if Cory Booker isn't President some day, he could very well be on the Supreme Court.  But now's too early.

Obama doesn't have the balls to nominate a black person.

Lol wut

"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,"

(February 16, 2016 at 8:51 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Why?  What's the rush?

Just today Senator Grassley said:

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/02/key-repu...at-a-time/

Quote:The Republican head of the Senate panel that weighs U.S. Supreme Court nominations said on Tuesday he will wait until President Barack Obama names his pick to fill the vacancy left by Justice Antonin Scalia’s death before deciding whether to hold confirmation hearings.

Chuck is 82.  He might not make it through the next day.

(February 16, 2016 at 11:20 pm)TheRealJoeFish Wrote:

(February 16, 2016 at 10:11 pm)Wyrd of Gawd Wrote: Obama doesn't have the balls to nominate a black person.

Lol wut

You'll have to excuse WOG, he's a sincere racist and anti-Semite.

The narcissism of our species is our worst enemy. Here was a man who still died regardless of his religion. Still died regardless of his title. Every Christian, every Muslim, every Jew, every Buddhist, every Hindu every atheist, all die in the end. So all that belief and bluster clinging to an old book of myth didn't prevent him from dying.