Regarding the empty seat left by Antonin Scalia, I think Democrats should never lose sight of the crucial fact that most GOP priorities for a Supreme Court justice are deeply unpopular. Marco Rubio does an excellent impression of someone who wants to ban abortion for everything short the mother’s life but has to dance around the point to avoid looking too draconian on the issue. However, Rubio gets to do that only because previous Courts have left the interpretation of the current law somewhat ambiguous. By appointing the next Supreme Court justice(s) Rubio will get to decide what the law is.
I can guarantee that Republicans who keep voting to repeal Obamacare would feel a lot more squeamish about a vote that was not purely symbolic. Simply put, people hate “Obamacare” but they love the actual stuff that the Affordable Care Act puts in place. Local GOP officials know all about this. Even a goat-blowing moron like Matt Bevin discovered that something as simple as rolling back Medicaid was a lot harder than it looked. The dog really does not want to catch this car. Of course it would absolutely delight the GOP if the Supreme Court did the dirty work for them. Justices don’t worry about election and Republicans could semi-credibly paint Democrats as having screwed up by not writing a watertight law.
However, that trick requires a bit of separation between the GOP and the groundshaking SCOTUS decision that their election win produces. If you make the election explicitly and overwhelmingly about whether the candidate will appoint a Court to take away your health care, I predict people will choose their health care. I suppose the GOP nominee could try the usual rhetoric about litimus tests, but I doubt that will fly with today’s base. They feel betrayed by Souter and Roberts let them down. I think years of Foxification, Tea Partying and Trump have left the frothing hordes expecting something more tangible from their nominee. Of course if he does make firm commitments then Republicans will get slaughtered both in the general election and down ballot.
Trump is a bit of a wild card here. I think the base would give him a lot more leeway than a squish like Kasich or Bush. However I expect he would make all kinds of ridiculous commitments anyway, just because it is in the news and that is exactly the sort of stupid thing Trump would say and then double and triple down on just because Doom The Donald never corrects himself. Further, I think a vacant Supreme Court seat will make many people see this race as something more tangible than just a fun chance to vent their id. Of course Tocqueville pointed out long ago that you should judge a President first and foremost by how they would seat Justices. But most people don’t read Tocqueville. Losing access to contraceptive and abortion services completely, if you’re poor and live in the wrong state, has a more sobering effect than some dead French guy.
Maybe I am wrong about all this. But I don’t think so. I suspect that the open seat will clarify the race in a way that makes Mitch McConnell sorely regret not just working with Obama to get some compromise candidate approved before this election season gets completely out of hand.
Baud
They will claim that they are seeking to preserve the status quo because Scalia was a conservative, and that it’s the Dems that want to upset the apple cart.
JMG
Mitch can’t afford to. Republicans in Congress in either house fear only one thing, getting primaried. They figure they can win general elections on bullshit and low turnout because they can.
The real fun will start if a Democrat is elected President and makes his/her nomination to replace Scalia. The base will demand no vote or at least no one confirmed. We could have an eight, seven or six justice court as long as the Republicans are out of the White House.
jayackroyd
There are at least 8 battleground states for the Senate currently held by the GOP. Are those sitting Senators really gonna die on this hill? Fearing a primary in 2022? I think Mitchipoo got out in front of this because he will have a hard time keeping those 8 Senators in line. Moreover, I think this puts more of the 24 seats they’re defending into play.
What I’d really like to see is Clinton and Sanders weighing in on these Senate races. It fits better into #NotMeUs better than the Progressive Who Gets Things Done. But it’s really important if they actually care about the country.
jayackroyd
@JMG: repeating what I posted downthread, the races that matter aren’t subject to being primaried until 2022. FL and WI have June filing deadlines. IL 3/15. PA NC NH and OH have already passed. Presidential years are high turnout. Scalia’s death and Mitchipoo’s declaration is really bad news for Ayotte, Johnson, et alia.
errg
Yes, assuming that the supreme court vacancy is still open in November (and I’m 99% sure it will be), the Democrats should spin this as you’re not just voting for a president, you’re voting for a president plus a supreme court justice. And as you say, the Democratic side on the Supreme Court is definitely more popular than the Republican side.
Tim F.
@jayackroyd:
Ron Johnson will. That man would drink the Kool-Aid even if Jim Jones straight up told him it was cyanide.
I think a lot of GOP Senators would like to get this over with, but as JMG said the GOP has been completely captured by the fear of tea party primaries. I strongly doubt that Harry Reid could find fourteen willing partners even if McConnell were willing to backtrack on his pledge.
Hunter Gathers
McConnell would rather have the open seat stay that way for a year and a half than have to deal with his mouth-breather caucus if he were to allow a vote on a replacement. This way, he gets to be Majority Leader at least until January no matter the outcome of the election. He doesn’t want to get fragged by his own troops, Boehner-style, by allowing a vote.
jayackroyd
@JMG: Also see Marcy for a different wrinkle. https://www.emptywheel.net/2016/02/15/the-play-on-the-scalia-replacement-remember-the-lame-duck/
Robin G.
I can’t figure out what McConnell gained by coming out so instantly and aggressively against the very concept of a nominee. There’s a lot of ways to game out this process, and arguably several of them will benefit the GOP, but they all require the Senate Majority Leader to at least *look* like he’s willing to play ball.
Everyone’s taking it as a given that no matter what, Obama won’t get to fill this vacancy. Not sure I agree. I have no idea how, mind you, but this is eleventh-dimensional chess at its finest, along with the potential to have the biggest lasting effect on this country of his entire presidency, and Obama Is Out Of Fucks To Give about playing nice. I wouldn’t bet against him on this one.
Luthe
I think Mitch screwed the pooch by announcing his opposition right out of the gate. The seat would have been an issue in the race anyway, but if it remained empty for “natural” reasons, i.e. a long nomination fight and possibly needing to nominate more than one candidate before even getting to a vote then it wouldn’t be a partisan issue, just the normal way of doing business. Making it a partisan issue nine months before the election guarantees it’s a big issue and one that will get lots of news coverage as a partisan issue, which is no bueno for all those Senators up for reelection in marginal states.
Punchy
You really think blocking a SCOTUS nommy is going to hurt these senators?
Baud
GOP voters will be motivated too. They are on the verge of losing all of their various privileges.
WJS
The ultimate move would be to nominate Tino Cuellar for the Supreme Court. Or Beyonce. Either one would drive the Republicans even more batshit crazy than they already are.
Face
Yeah, a fat 79 y.o. bloviator with pure spite running through his veins ending up dead is “suspicious”.
I used to think you may be the Real Troll, but this shit is over the top stupid, you’ve outed yourself as a DougJ-esque click-bait generator. Fun while it lasted, I guess.
Smedley Darlington Prunebanks (formerly Mumphrey, et al.)
I really think McConnell is going to give in sooner than most of us think he will. His life’s dream is being majority leader, and this shit puts 6 or 8 seats that were already iffy in even more danger. And this kind of shit could put other seats, seats that few would look to as competitive, into play. Do the Republicans, already fighting to hold seats in states like Pennsylvania and Illinois and New Hampshire, really want to give Democrats an opening in Arizona or Missouri or Indiana? If I were to bet on it, I’d bet we’ll have a justice before summer.
Ridnik Chrome
If Obama gets to appoint Scalia’s replacement it’s pretty much “Game Over” for the conservative movement. Their program would be dead for the foreseeable future. So of course they’re going to fight to the very last man on this. Doesn’t necessarily mean they’ll succeed in blocking Obama’s nominee, but they will most definitely die on that hill…
Baud
@Smedley Darlington Prunebanks (formerly Mumphrey, et al.): Yeah, a lot of what the GOP gets away with depend on ordinary people not paying attention. That’s hard to pull off here.
Frankensteinbeck
A) Odds of the vacancy being filled are high. The trend, even and especially after 2014, is for McConnell to declare absolutely no compromise on major public votes, then give in.
B) The Tea Party base will happily destroy Obamacare, knowing they’ll lose the health care they love. It worked just fine for Bevin. When asked about it, they tell you they’ll be fine, because when the lazy welfare mooches are forced to work, good folks like themselves will get good jobs and be able to afford medical care. It’s the right’s equivalent of Bully Pulpit magical pony thinking.
Capri
@Luthe: I think you’re absolutely right. To state that before Obama has even had time to tease a short list shines light on the naked political calculation behind what they are doing. To do so before Scalia was even cold is the worst kind of optics.
Sister Rail Gun of Warm Humanitarianism
Tripped over this from Jan 27:
Baud
@Frankensteinbeck: Bevin hasn’t taken anything away yet.
Baud
@Sister Rail Gun of Warm Humanitarianism: I don’t think Obama should be on the court, or that he wants to be, but I like the optics of making that argument.
EconWatcher
OT, but my wife and I watched “99 Homes” yesterday. Wow. We’re still recovering from it.
I believe it’s the most powerful indictment of U.S.-style capitalism I have ever seen. There are scenes that will stick with you for a very long time. One is a speech by the evil character that so perfectly encapsulates our dog-eat-dog system, it simply could not be topped. (Gordon Gekko’s “greed is good” looks childish in comparison.)
The only movie in recent memory that I could compare it to is the Russian film “Leviathan,” which does for Putin’s Russia approximately what “99 Homes” does for the American system. Both leave you struggling to recover your will to live.
If I were Bernie Sanders, I would just adopt “99 Homes” as my campaign film.
Frankensteinbeck
@Baud:
It got him votes, though. Lots of them. Personally, I don’t think he realized how much of the business community would rebel. Medicaid expansion is great for business, especially hospitals.
Robin G.
@Baud: It’s kind of beautiful. It makes the election a referendum on Obama, and those are odds I like. Plus, it’ll goad even more hideous comments out of the GOP, which will make for excellent commercials.
Schlemazel (parmesan rancor)
@Frankensteinbeck:
B) Sparrow + curtain rod is OK as long as THEY have no curtain rod.
I think the goopers are checking poll numbers to see. If they figure out they might lose the Senate they will hammer Obama to appoint a “center-right” compromise. It scares me that he might but that will allow the GOP to remove the topic from discussion for the election and improve their chances of holding the Senate. I’d like to see each of the GOP klowndidates be forced to name who they would lke to appoint. They either disappoint the base or anger reasonable people.
Betty Cracker
@Luthe: McConnell’s move puzzles me too. How hard would it have been to stall? Crikey, it’s the Senate — they could stall a runaway freight train plunging over a cliff! The longer the process takes, the closer it gets to the election and the more reasonable their “let the people decide” argument gets in the eyes of low-info voters. The senatortoise screwed the pooch on this one.
Bill_D
@Baud: “I don’t think Obama should be on the court”
Why not? There’s no requirement that appointees be a judge already, and some past ones have not been. He was a constitutional law professor so he has some excellent training in the legal issues associated with Supreme Court cases.
That said, Obama has stated he wants some time to relax after his term ends, but later on, who knows?
Linda Featheringill
Scotusblog says that the remaining Court will probably “reargue” cases rather than affirm lower court decisions. They will still have to come up with something that is not a deadlock.
I suspect the process will be like making sausage: You don’t want to know.
Gator90
@Baud: GOP voters are always motivated. It’s why we can’t have nice things.
Sister Rail Gun of Warm Humanitarianism
@Baud: I loved her reaction and answer.
MattF
I suspect the only regret that McConnell feels is that he’s given Cruz an opportunity to ‘air his grievances’ on the Senate floor by filibustering whoever Obama nominates. Other than that… McConnell is no fool, but he’s a dyed-in-the-blood partisan.
Fair Economist
@jayackroyd: I think Marcy hit it on the head in that link. McConnell HAS to stop Obama from nominating Scalia’s replacement, because a 5-4 noncrazy majority is the death of the conservative takeover plans. Demographics are getting painful, and they need the court to back up ever more extreme voter suppression. He knows it’s going to be Sri and there’s no way to oppose him on the merits, so he’s got to cook up some political excuse. Weak as his position may be, he’s got to make the fight and even a nakedly partisan excuse is better than a “not qualified” excuse on a stellar non-partisan compromise candidate.
Dork
Serious question — What if Obama just keeps nominating a justice, say, once a month, as the GOP Senate immediately filibusters (or votes down) the previous one? I realize it’s an exercise in futility, but wouldn’t this best expose this bullshit? In effect, if forces the put-up-or-shut-up aspect of the threat.
I’d love to see how the media would report the 9th consecutive SCOTUS nominee reflexively filibustered out of pure spite. At some point, you’d think it may hurt the GOP’s image.
sparrow
@Robin G.: The link just above your comment suggests that they knew Obama would appoint someone reasonable (i.e., Sri, who was confirmed 97-0 very recently), so they needed to get out on record that *no* nominee would get through in order to look (slightly?) less ridiculous in their opposition. Makes about as much sense as anything.
April
“Clarify the race” is just another way of saying “once they see the facts, they will see things my way”. Liberals’ unfortunate blind spot. Seems I have spent my life believing that once we educated the voters about what was truly at stake, they would come to their senses and turn from Republicans. I think I don’t believe this fairy tale anymore, but I am stuck with not knowing how else to change minds. Maybe it is not the minds that have to be changed. People vote based upon something other than intellectual appeals, even when they have benefits directly at stake (see Kentucky gov 2015).
Tim F.
@Betty Cracker: Marcy Wheeler made the excellent point that McConnell would look like a complete ass if he kept an ostensibly open mind and then rejected Sri Srinivasan. The Senate approved him 97-0 in 2013. In this case he had to reject the whole idea of confirming a Justice right off the bat, because Obama has some candidates whom Republicans cannot plausibly reject any other way.
Ridnik Chrome
Also I wouldn’t count on the Democrats not to screw this up. When Bush II made that campaign promise to appoint more Justices like Scalia and Thomas, the Gore campaign should have been all over it, running commercials highlighting every wacko dissent those two ever wrote, They could have absolutely hammered Bush with it, but they didn’t. People need to call their Democratic senators and tell them this is a BFD, don’t ignore it…
Linda Featheringill
I’m usually wrong when I make political predictions, but I think we won’t have a new justice until next January.
sparrow
@EconWatcher: Thank you for the suggestion, I will check that out asap. I am so happy someone else saw Leviathan (I saw it in DC a few months ago… a very empty theater). It is still a movie I find myself thinking about. Emotionally, it was like getting hit by waves, and then the final tsunami at the end… very powerful.
debbie
McConnell has a history of shooting his mouth off too quickly (like promising Obama would be a one-term president). The focus has always been on the antics of the House, so he generally gets away with the ridiculous things he says. I don’t know how many clips I’ve seen of McConnell’s remarks on the floor where his statements were as inflammatory as anything Cruz has said.
Still hoping for Cordray to be nominated…
schrodinger's cat
OT because we need some respite from Republicans and their machinations.
What’s better than Ranveer Singh dancing? Ranveer Singh dancing shirtless!
From Bhansali’s* take on Romeo Juliet, Ram Leela, where he plays Ram.
*Bhansali makes Hindi movies that are operatic and gorgeous and usually doomed love stories. He is famous for Devdas and now Bajirao Mastani.
Randy P
@Fair Economist:
I know the name Sri Srinivasan from discussions here in the last few days, but my mind still parsed that on first glance as “Siri” and I imagined an iPhone standing up there in the 9th seat.
“Siri, what is your opinion on this case?”
Iowa Old Lady
I’m looking at Grassley and fantasizing about getting rid of him. Fat chance I suppose. But his previous elections have been easier.
2010, R sweep, off year election
2004, Bush reelected
1998, off year
1992, Clinton elected and Iowa voted for him, so I’ll give him that one.
1986, Off year
1982, Reagan elected and Iowa voted for him.
Iowa voted twice for Clinton, once for Gore, and twice for Obama
peach flavored shampoo
As if that matters to Republicans. That would require all of the following:
1) The Senate to vote him down as “unqualified”
2) The media to notice the previous 97-0 vote
3) The media to connect the disconnect between the votes and/or qualified/not qualified aspect
4) The media to broadcast this discrepancy
If you think the last 3 would happen with today’s MSM, you’re crazy.
schrodinger's cat
@Randy P: Sri is an appellation like Mr. in Sanskrit and many other Indian languages. Also short for Srikant, Srinavas, Sriram etc., which are all names of Vishnu.
Frankensteinbeck
@Schlemazel (parmesan rancor):
Conventional wisdom on our side has been that when McConnell says ‘No budget without total defunding of Planned Patenthood, end of discussion’ he means it because he’ll pay no price for going through with it. Results have been that he backs down quietly and without a fight.
EconWatcher
@sparrow:
Leviathan is an incredibly brave film. I hope the director is watching out for Polonium 210 in his tea.
Aleta
@Robin G.: Yes, exactly
Face
@Linda Featheringill: If a GOP is elected, then a SCOTUS firebreather by end of Jan17. If a Dem elected, I’m guessing more like July or August….at best.
Robin G.
@sparrow: But McConnell could pretty easily run out the clock and keep the nomination bogged in procedurals, enduring it never comes to a vote. “These things take time, and here’s Obama trying to rush it” could be enough of the narrative in spite of the fact that it’s bullshit. Now he’s outed himself.
Kirbster
Without Scalia there to browbeat and belittle him, I wonder if Justice Kennedy will behave differently. Perhaps there won’t be as many deadlocked 4-4 (non)decisions as the conventional wisdom is assuming.
WaterGirl
OT, but I managed to score tickets this morning to see Sonia Sotomayor speak here in Champaign. I started clicking the “buy on-line” button at 9:58, and finally at 10:02 they were on sale. Also started dialing on 2 phones for phone sales at 9:59. I was still on hold on both phones when I went back in to try to score 2 more tickets on-line, at which point the message came up that they were sold out. I am very excited!
A Conversation with U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor
Event Date: Monday, March 7, 2016 at 7:00 pm
I’m sure she was booked well in advance, but it should be an even more interesting conversation than it would have been last week!
Matt McIrvin
@JMG:
And in control of the Senate. Which is another election issue.
sparrow
@Robin G.: I’d be more than happy to hear that it’s an unforced error on their part. We need this nominee so badly…
the Conster, la Citoyenne
There are never any consequences for Republicans because the media absolutely refuses to connect any dots, and their voters are all morons who won’t consider anything longer term than whether it sticks it to “those people”. I’m not even sure that this issue will motivate them any more than they already are since Obama’s two elections have put them in perpetual existential crisis. The difference will be the turnout on our side, and it’s not clear to me what will be more motivating to get out the vote – having the seat filled or vacant. Both have their pros and cons.
WaterGirl
@jayackroyd: “There are at least 8 battleground states for the Senate currently held by the GOP. Are those sitting Senators really gonna die on this hill?”
I think it’s every man for himself FIRST, GOP second. Should be interesting.
Fair Economist
@Randy P:
Siri would be unmatched at the kind of bland nonanswers judicial candidate give these days.
Felanius Kootea
@EconWatcher: I want to see that too. The Big Short would also be a good campaign film but might be too subtle for some.
Matt McIrvin
@Dork:
I believe the plan is to not even vote, so nobody even gets rejected. After all, McConnell has explicitly said this has nothing to do with the specific candidate, they just refuse to consider anyone nominated by Obama.
jayackroyd
@Punchy: In the general? I think it could cost some of, even several of, them the seat. You think this is good for Ayotte or Johnson?
Fair Economist
@Iowa Old Lady:
That would basically be the one reason to nominate somebody other than Srinivasan. Jane Kelly is from Iowa, was supported strongly by Grassley before, and was also confirmed to a circuit court unanimously. Opposing her would give him a major electoral headache in what could be his toughest campaign ever, based on demographics.
Linda Featheringill
@schrodinger’s cat:
What a lovely way to warm a cold morning.
[No wonder the population in India is so high!]
Frankensteinbeck
@Kirbster:
An interesting question. How much are Roberts and Kennedy relieved that they don’t have to put up with Scalia’s spittle-soaked rants about them as betrayers right now?
WaterGirl
@Betty Cracker: I called my low-information-voter sister just now.
I asked if she had heard a supreme court justice had died. YES. She volunteered that she wondered how he would be replaced because those guys get a lifetime appointment. I asked if she had heard that the republicans are saying they won’t replace the supreme court justice until Obama isn’t president anymore. She had not heard that. I asked if that would make a difference to who she would vote for; she got really squishy and said she can’t impact any of that stuff anyway, so she just doesn’t think about it.
:: sigh ::
Tenar Darell
@Sister Rail Gun of Warm Humanitarianism:
First, always meant to tell you, just love your nym.
Second, oh wow, that HRC quote is brilliant!
jayackroyd
@Tim F.: LOL. You’re right about Johnson. And my other example, Ayotte has also endorsed Mitchipoo’s positions.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/02/15/1485484/-On-Scalia-s-seat-vulnerable-Republican-senators-embrace-obstructionism-and-court-danger.
\_(ツ)_/¯
nutella
They didn’t in Kentucky, so why do you think the voters in the other 49 states will be any more sensible about their own best interests?
schrodinger's cat
@Linda Featheringill: Thanks! Ranveer rocks, he can act too. I think I am in love.
Applejinx
What the heck is a squish?
The thing about Srinivasan is, he’s a Hindu so it’s a step away from a crusading Christianist state going to war on Islam. Not to say the guy’s a big Islam fan, but I have to see it in those terms.
Might be more important than any number of other issues.
geg6
@Fair Economist:
Tino Cuellar is another good, tough choice for the seat. Brilliant, excellent education and career, his wife is a federal judge who was confirmed (I think) unanimously. And he’s Mexican American, as are the majority of Hispanics in the country. Not to mention, it will send the Donald into the stratosphere, since he’s a naturalized American. Romney got how much of the Hispanic vote? Something like 28%? And that was considered a disaster. This could send those numbers down to 18%, easily.
geg6
@jayackroyd:
I have yet to hear a peep out of my senator, Toomey. I so, so, so hope that Fetterman wins the primary and Toomey has to go up against him. He looks like your biker uncle (tattos, earrings, bald, wears black and never a suit), but has a Master’s in Public Policy from Harvard. He’s amazing. I love him and would just love to see him rip into Toomey.
oldgold
Article II, Section 1: “The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America. He shall hold his Office during the TERM OF FOUR YEARS …” (caps supplied)
Article II, Section 2: “… he SHALL NOMINATE, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint … Judges of the supreme Court..” (caps supplied)
Article II, Section1: ” ..he SHALL take the following Oath …will to the best of my ability preserve, protect and defend the Constitution..” (caps supplied)
Article IV: “The Senators. …SHALL BE BOUND by an oath of Affirmation, to Support the Constitution..” (caps Supplied)
The above makes exceedingly clear that President Obama has a constitutional duty to nominate a successor to Justice Scalia and the Senate has a constitutional duty to advise and consent on his nominee. McConnell’s position not to consider ANY individual nominated by Obama as a Justice of the Supreme Court is grossly unconstitutional and an objective violation of each Senator’s Constitutionally required oath of office.
It is, in effect, an overt attempted coup of our constitutional republic. The issue should be framed as such.
Schlemazel (parmesan rancor)
@WaterGirl:
this is exactly the problem. The GOP has done a marvelous job of convincing people who don’t really pay attention that government really does not do anything they need to worry about as long as they don’t raise taxes. sigh indeed
Rafer Janders
@Punchy:
In a close general (not primary) election in a swing state during a presidential election year when they’re also on the ballot, yes. It will incentivize Democrats to come out and vote.
schrodinger's cat
@Applejinx: WTF is that supposed to mean? All Hindus are anti-Islam? How do you know what Srinivasan’s views on Islam are?
retiredeng
@Sister Rail Gun of Warm Humanitarianism: The mere suggestion that Obama could actually become a Supreme Court Justice would make a lot of the right in DC drop dead of heart attacks.
Sister Rail Gun of Warm Humanitarianism
@schrodinger’s cat: I think that was an expression of relief that Srinivasan is unlikely to be hiding Christianist sympathies and Christianist views on Islam.
And an assumption that Hindu anti-Islam sentiment is less likely among immigrants and their children. I’ve gotten the impression it’s a more of a nativist movement in India and therefore probably doesn’t produce a lot of emigrants.
Amir Khalid
@Applejinx:
I agree with schrodinger’s cat: what you are suggesting doesn’t make any sense. You’re presuming that Sri Srinavasan must have something against Muslims just because he’s Hindu. I wouldn’t buy it without supporting evidence if you said it about an Indian Hindu, let alone when you say it about an American Hindu
schrodinger's cat
@Sister Rail Gun of Warm Humanitarianism: Islam has a 1000 year history in India, its a tangled web, the relationship among the subcontinents two major religions. Your take is too simplistic.
@Amir Khalid: Thanks!
Miss Bianca
@schrodinger’s cat:
OK, after that, I’ve come to the conclusion that there is nothing more insanely hot (with the accent on “insane”) than a Bollywood song and dance number…
schrodinger's cat
@Miss Bianca: It works! SLB is a master of the genre and I like it that he gives the female gaze something to ogle too, because in general its usually the other way round.
Patrick
@WaterGirl:
How did you find out about this event?
sparrow
@Sister Rail Gun of Warm Humanitarianism: I think Applejinx is saying that Sri Srinivasan won’t necessarily be an easy nomination (in addition to general factors i.e. ODS) because they guy is not a christian. And we know that for RWNJ, telling different kinds of non-christians apart is a bit of a challenge. Ergo, they may conclude that he is a radical islamist plant (even though, as AJ points out, it’s far from a foregone conclusion that a hindu would be pro-islam anyway). That was my read, anyway.
schrodinger's cat
@sparrow: So you are heh indeeding Applejinx’s crass generalization. How would you like it if I make similar generalizations based on race?
Elie
@Frankensteinbeck:
Yeah, these folks forget that Medicaid is about provider reimbursement, not direct payments to recipients… Hospitals and clinics are also big local employers, so there’s that. There are multiplier impacts on those employees purchasing groceries and other necessities in the community that they would be unable to do if they are unemployed, and those businesses suffer. Services include everything from pharmaceuticals to home care and medical equipment. Healthcare services are big and effing with those service providers is unwise from a number of angles.
sparrow
@schrodinger’s cat: I was just trying to clarify for you what I thought AJ’s intent was. I didn’t “heh indeed” anything.
Amir Khalid
@sparrow:
Let’s ask Applejinx what he really meant by his remark about Sri Srinavasan. Over to you, man.
Whoever Obama nominates is going to face a difficult confirmation process, if they get one at all, simply because it was Obama who nominated them. That’s a given at this point — even more so than earlier in his administration, now that the Republican party unconstitutionally opposes his nominating anyone at all. I figure his being Hindu is really neither here nor there.
Citizen Alan
@srv:
You don’t. Alas.
schrodinger's cat
@sparrow: Now you are his official spokesperson? Is it the Solidarity of Bernie supporters.
wmd
The strike through of Doom reminded me of this video of Marvel characters saying Trump quotes.
WaterGirl
@Patrick: I don’t read the local newspaper, so I don’t know if it was advertised there. I found out from the weekly faculty-staff that the university sends out – someone in department x is looking for people to participate in a study, the mobile driver’s license unit will be on campus on this date, etc.
I only get the email because I do IT support for a doctor who is affiliated with the university, and I get all her university email (which is mostly crap) and I forward the occasional message that she would care about. Often, I don’t even read the weekly email, but for some reason I looked at it on saturday or sunday and this event was the first thing on their list, and it said free and open to the public.
I put the announcement in a BJ thread yesterday in case anybody in C-U didn’t know about it. Do you live in Champaign-Urbana?
Waspuppet
@Baud: Precisely. “Five conservatives and four mostly-liberals – it’s right there in the Constitution!” Some very slightly reworded version of that is coming; mark my words.
Sister Rail Gun of Warm Humanitarianism
@schrodinger’s cat: Necessarily so, since I am not Indian. Which is why I limited my comment to my impressions of the people who have emigrated from India to the US.
It still reads to me as an attempt to say “At least he probably isn’t in the “only good Mooslum is a dead Mooslum” camp. Since that camp has a huge overlap with the fundie Christian camp, it’s not unreasonable to hope that if someone is not part of the latter, they won’t be the former.
PS: Other than attempting a soft word to turn away anger, I don’t have a dog in this hunt. I’m not a Berniebro, and I don’t appreciate your insinuation above that I am just because I let my old forum moderator’s instincts take over for a few moments.
schrodinger's cat
@Sister Rail Gun of Warm Humanitarianism: The Bernie supporter was directed at sparrow. Applejinx’s (well know Bernie supporter in these parts) initial comment rubbed me the wrong way. Amir Khalid’s comment shows that I was not the only one who interpreted it the way I did.
I have no idea what Srinivasan’s views on Islam are. Your division of immigrant Hindus as paragons of secular virtues and Indians as anti-Muslim is too simplistic.
A small counter example, Bihar, one of India’s poorest states delivered a stinging rebuke to the ruling BJP by handing them a stunning defeat. While many Indians and Indian Americans who reside in the US have delivered tons of cash to Mr. Modi’s party and its parent organization. Think of Irish immigrants and the IRA.
Fred
@errg: No doubt the GOP candidate will make the same point. Both parties will be running to win that majority making seat.
I wonder how it would fly for the Dems in senate to philibuster any nominee should the Republican candidate win. The GOPers would certainly do it …and may.
schrodinger's cat
@Sister Rail Gun of Warm Humanitarianism: The Bernie supporter commenter was directed at sparrow. Applejinx’s (well know Bernie supporter in these parts) initial comment rubbed me the wrong way. Amir Khalid’s comment shows that I was not the only one who interpreted it the way I did. I never called any Berniebro.
I have no idea what Srinivasan’s views on Islam are. Your division of immigrant Hindus as paragons of secular virtues and Indians as anti-Muslim is too simplistic.
A small counter example, Bihar, one of India’s poorest states delivered a stinging rebuke to the ruling BJP by handing them a stunning defeat. While many Indians and Indian Americans who reside in the US have delivered tons of cash to Mr. Modi’s party and its parent organization. Think of Irish immigrants and the IRA.
catclub
@errg:
But are the voters as motivated? I would guess offhand that rightwing voters are at least as motivated to oppose Clinton because of SC nominations as Demeocrat are to support them.
J R in WV
@schrodinger’s cat:
Now you are just being catty. Anyone who isn’t a born again Christian is completely unacceptable to the Right Wing Nuts in charge of our legislative branch of government.
That is the point both AJ and Sparrow are making, and for you to accuse them of being bigots when all they are doing is pointing at the real bigots in the Republican party is not helpful at all.
Read those comments again, and then think of how horrible it has been for McConnell to announce that he was going to torpedo the whole nation in order to hurt that black guy in the white house! Make him a one term president! That didn’t work for them, did it?
This is one more example of McConnell’s – and the whole Republican party’s – hatred of President Obama. AND their willingness to hurt the whole nation in order to attempt to make President Obama look bad.
And that is what both of the folks you have attacked are saying.
Grung_e_Gene
@srv: @srv:
Obviously, you don’t know anything about the human body or causes of death. But, please elaborate about the pillow over his head; Did Obama’s FBI Thugs use the pillow to murder Fat Tony and then leave it over his face just cause???
and here’s this:
Even one such instance “[W]ith eight justices, raising the possibility that, by reason of a tie vote, it will find itself unable to resolve the significant legal issue presented by this case.” The situation, “impairs the functioning of the court.” Antonin Scalia 2004.
schrodinger's cat
@J R in WV:
I agree, if that’s what Applejinx had said I would have agreed wholeheartedly.
He seemed to divine the opinions of Srinivasan with regards to Muslims and Islam. What is this opinion based on except Srinavasan’s name. Because he is a Hindu he has some kind of an automatic antipathy towards Islam? That seems like a generalization.
You can be a Hindu and not be anti-Islam, and it doesn’t matter where you live either. There are plenty of Modi bhakts and Hindutva sympathizers among Indian Americans and there plenty of Indians in India who are speaking up against the Hindu right in India.
As there are people who have fought against Modi and his agenda over here ( he did not get a visitor’s visa to come to the US due to the efforts of these people) and there are people who are pro Hindu right in India.
People are complicated, it was the whole scale generalization that I found offensive. I don’t expect anything better from rightwingers but my standards for BJers are higher.
*BTW FWIW Amir Khalid read it the same way I did.