By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
JWeinCom on 14 February 2016
Edit Thread
AAA300 said:
JWeinCom said:

They absolutely should evaluate the candidates, and judge them on whether or not they think they should be in the supreme court.  I have no issue with that.  But, Senators are saying that they will refuse to accept any nomination.  It's not a case of Senators doing their job in evaluating potential candidates, it is a matter of them not doing there job of evaluating candidates.

Of course there going to say that cause no one in there right mind thinks Obama will appoint a moderate judge.And as thranx says checks and balances the Senate has the power to not approve, and the people voted them in to stop Obama not to help him.

Except, that's not what they said.  They've said simply that Obama can't fill the vacancy at all.  This isn't a case of checks and balances, this is a case of the Senate outright refusing to fulfill their duty to help fill vacancies on the court.  Why shouldn't the Senate give any potential appointment an honest and fair evaluation, as is their responsibility? 

The fact that you want to ignore the 2012 election is ridiculous.  In 25 different terms in this century (out of 58), the president has had one or both parties representing the opposing party.  Not only is it possible for the population to vote one way with congress and another with the president, but it happens nearly half the time.  

And by the way, none of those 25 different congresses tried to obstruct the process in the way that is happening now.

I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but Obama didn't run in 2014.  There are many factors involved in congress races, so to label this simply as "they voted against Obama" is a childish oversimplification to be charitable.  

And, what criteria may I ask do you use to claim the president should not be able to appoint a successor to Scalia?  Reagan was able to appoint in his last year.  Bush was allowed to appoint with a Senate controlled by the opposite party.  So on what criteria are you going to say that Obama should not be able to nominate ANYBODY to the court?