No question in my mind that Sen. McConnell will cave, and President Obama will fill this vacancy this year. pic.twitter.com/p2KBysDJTj
— Senator Harry Reid (@SenatorReid) March 16, 2016
Odd to base SCOTUS obstruction on "giving American people a say" when they oppose obstruction by a 2-to-1 margin. https://t.co/rAk1M2Vwl3
— Kevin M. Kruse (@KevinMKruse) March 16, 2016
Yet Dana Milbank is fretting…
… In his introduction of Garland, Obama quoted past praise for the nominee by Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), the longest-serving Republican on the Judiciary Committee. Hatch supported Garland’s nomination to the circuit court two decades ago. He has since said that Garland would be a “consensus nominee” to the high court and that there’s “no question” he would be confirmed. Just last week, Hatch predicted Obama wouldn’t nominate Garland, because he’s too moderate.
But minutes after Obama nominated Garland, Hatch told reporters that he would continue opposing consideration of any nominee until after the election. And McConnell said Obama “made this nomination not with the intent of seeing the nominee confirmed but in order to politicize for purposes of the election.”
Obama had done just the opposite: He picked an old white guy whose centrist views do not excite the Democratic base — an olive branch to conservatives in (vain) hopes that they would relax their lock-step objections. In the process, he antagonized allies on the left, raising the possibility that Democrats won’t get a political benefit from the standoff — and that Obama still won’t get his nominee confirmed…
I have not always been serene in my faith regarding the Eleventh-Dimensional Chess Master, but let’s give President “Rhymes with Bucket” Obama some credit here, okay? There are already ads on my tv (Boston being what passes for a NH media market) attacking Kelly “Handmaiden of Gilead, also of McCain/Graham” Ayotte for ‘refusing to perform her Constitutional duty’ when it comes to scheduling a hearing for Judge Garland. I’m sure Grassley and the other GOP senators running this year are watching similar ads and popping antacids. Either they stand on their principles, such as they are, and give both-sides! voters another reason to sit on their hands come Election Day… or they break down, let President Kenyan Muslim have his lousy “hearings”, and risk getting primaried by an even further-right purist next time. Not to mention the rich pickings any such hearing is liable to provide for future attack ads, per the last eleven hours of Benghazi-gate.
***********
Apart from rolling our eyes, what’s on the agenda for the day?
.
So for this to work Obama should pledge to withdraw his nominee and replace them with a more liberal choice every month until confirmed
— Benjy Sarlin (@BenjySarlin) March 16, 2016
Elizabelle
Good morning. I am excited about Judge Garland. Keep us posted on what you’re hearing around the country.
Great shame that McConnell himself is not on the ballot this year. Although, Kyntucky.
Betty Cracker
Harry Reid is such a bad-ass. When did that happen?
MattF
Well– if there are hearings, the Rs in the Senate will have to come up with questions for Garland and then vote. Too much work! And likely to be embarrassing, since he’s so well qualified.
NotMax
’nuff said.
debbie
Has anyone called bullshit on the GOP’s promise to hold hearings during the lame duck session? After all, the same people will be holding and listening to the hearings.
Baud
By breathing.
pat
From what I’ve read, I think garland is an excellent nominee and will be a great justice. I just can’t see the repubs holding out for the next 8-9 months.
And Hilary can nominate the replacement when RBG finally decides to retire. W00t.
Mustang Bobby
I listened to Sen. Hatch on NPR this morning justifying his hypocrisy, blaming it on the “toxic election.” Yeah, who made it toxic, you big dumb pink thing?
I don’t understand why they don’t just come out and say “We won’t let that uppity darkie appoint anyone. Who does he think he is?” At least Trump would say that.
RedDirtGirl
Happy almost-Friday! Have you all noticed how many of our threads are in the 250-300 count these days? Do I remember correctly that passing a certain threshold is named after somebody?
BillinGlendaleCA
@Betty Cracker: He always has been a bad-ass(catch some video of his days on the NV gaming commission). He just speaks softly and has big hands.
debbie
@Mustang Bobby:
They’re rerunning it now. “For them [Dems] to act holier than thou is holier than thou.” Is this what now passes for homespun wisdom?
Baud
@debbie: I think that’s just a whisper proposal. No one has gone on the record to support it.
debbie
@Betty Cracker:
I like Reid’s bad-assedness, but remarks like that will only make McConnell dig in harder.
amk
allies on the left ?
some mythological persons?
debbie
@Baud:
Bastards. You know how desperate they are when they use Joe’s words as a precedent.
dedc79
@Mustang Bobby: that NPR interview was infuriating. They just let him rattle off BS talking points (“the Democrats would do this if the situation was reversed….”) without challenging anything. Not that I’m surprised…
Mustang Bobby
@debbie: Yeah, that and saying the Democrats would do the same thing is projectile vomiting. I wish the meek little interviewer on NPR had said, “Can you cite one example of that happening, Senator?” and see if he comes up with Bork, who got a full hearing and an up/down vote.
Gin & Tonic
@RedDirtGirl: 500 is a “TBogg unit.”
dedc79
@debbie: i think its safe to say McConnell would be the same obstinate ahole even if Reid didnt know how to tweet.
Germy
@Betty Cracker: Harry Reid has always been a bad ass. When he was a young man he beat the shit out of someone because he “just didn’t like him.”
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2010/10/25/desert-storm-nicholas-lemann
RedDirtGirl
@Gin & Tonic: Ah, thanks.
OzarkHillbilly
@debbie: You can’t reason with these people. Logic and facts have no place in their conversations.
Baud
@Germy:
Yeah, I think the myth of a weak Harry Reid arose from the left when he couldn’t wrangle a public option out of the Senate.
OzarkHillbilly
@dedc79:
Of course they didn’t. It is not their job to rebut Republican talking points. That is a job for Democrats.
Shalimar
Sure, Garland is an old white guy. But, by all accounts, he is the most qualified old white guy in the country. It doesn’t hurt to have one of those on the Supreme Court, and none of the current white guys fits that description.
I like Sarlin’s idea, except that Garland deserves his chance to see this out at least til the election.
Mustang Bobby
@Shalimar:
He’s two months younger than me, you whippersnapper, you.
dedc79
@Shalimar: Hillary is the one who could give a signal that Garland is a time limited offer.I doubt she’ll wade into this though.
dr. bloor
@Betty Cracker:
Some time during the Van Buren administration, I think.
Baud
@dedc79: No, her stance is to support the president. For the time being, the push will be to get Garland a hearing amd a vote.
Ben Cisco
Of COURSE he is. When is he not?
OzarkHillbilly
@dedc79: Hillary isn’t President yet.
Linda
Obama is playing Let’s Make a Deal with the GOP. You can pick this sturdy washing machine OR curtain number 2. If a Repub wins in November, it’s a trip to Spain. If a Dem wins, it’s a coop full of chickens.
However, a big reason that nobody is voting is that Repubs are afraid some primary opponent somewhere down the line will use their cooperation with Obama against them and they will be outflanked to the right, like Cantor was. Because for all their anti government talk, they cling to their government gigs like a baby to their mamma’s titty.
Schlemazel (parmesan rancor)
I hope the GOP continues to block this appointment for 2 reasons. FIrst, it really points out what a bunch of inflamed assholes they all are and that is nice for us. Second, if I knew nothing about this guy just the fact that Orrin Hatch says he is a good choice tells me I don’t want him. I have not read much about the guy but some of it is troubling and being a favorite of the wingnuts would be a deciding factor.
NorthLeft12
I agree with a number of other commenters here, if Garland is eminently qualified, has a record as a judge that indicates he is not an inflexible partisan, and is free of any shady history, then his race, gender, and age should not matter a whit.
Yeah, I know there are some that will call this a missed opportunity and demand that a previously un[der] represented group get a seat on the SCOTUS, but there will be more opportunities in the very near future.
However, my feeling is that no hearings will happen, and as usual, there will be no electoral repercussions to the Republicans. The vast majority of the US public just does not see the ongoing actions of the Republicans as worthy of any punishment or action. Re: the last three or so Congressional elections.
OzarkHillbilly
@Betty Cracker: Also, he was a Gold Gloves boxer.
Schlemazel (parmesan rancor)
@NotMax:
THANKS!
That just went to my friends on FB. I love Murrow, we so badly need a man like him today.
“Just because your voices reaches the end of the earth dose not mean you know more than when it only reached the end of the bar.” – E.R. Murrow
Baud
The Ninth Justice should be a Twitter poll. Let the American people decide the close cases!
NonyNony
@debbie: I believe you used “but” where you should have used “and”.
From Reid’s perspective, the longer this drags out and the more obstinate Republicans look, the better the odds of picking up seats in November. Reid has always had his eye on the politics first, outcomes second. He makes a good balance with Obama, who tends to view things the other way round.
BillinGlendaleCA
@Baud: BTW, not the ocean; but I got you an infrared water shot(s).
BillinGlendaleCA
@Baud: Still ain’t gettin’ twitter.
Baud
@BillinGlendaleCA: Cool. How’d they turn out?
BillinGlendaleCA
@Baud: Here they be.
ETA: I should note, the selfie is out of focus(but does show the effect of infrared and mirrored sunglasses) and the video was shot by accident and was a test to see if I could do the necessary editing on video.
dr. bloor
@Schlemazel (parmesan rancor):
Why the “if?” You pretty plainly don’t know anything about this guy.
Dmbeaster
The myth of the weak Harry Reid has more to do with the patient slow steps necessary to get things done in the Senate when he was herding a majority vs. bomb throwing when in the minority. He is very good at both, but they are very different optics.
Schlemazel (parmesan rancor)
@NonyNony:
That is a great take on Reid. I doubt anyone is ever going to be successful leading the Senate unless they are a bare knuckles, horse trader with a good grasp of the politics. I can’t imagine how you deal with all those titanic egos (made worse by todays media world) and all the competing interests unless you do put politics first. Listen to those calls LBJ made to Dixiecrats to win their vote on the civil rights act. That guy was a great Senate leader & he knew when to kiss & when to kick. My guess is all the great one do
DrZZ
@pat: And Hillary also gets to pick the new chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Colombia, which is not only an important job in of itself, but a proving ground for a future Supreme Court pick.
Schlemazel (parmesan rancor)
@dr. bloor:
How did you come to that conclusion? All I said was if I HAD nothing else to base it on Hatch’s endorsement would convince me this is the wrong guy.
and perhaps you could educate us all with your deep insight into the man and his rulings. Please be sure to cite case numbers & quote opinions – thanks
Baud
@DrZZ: Good point.
Dmbeaster
@dedc79:
NPR = Nice Polite Republicans
Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class
There is another factor that I really think lurks here – Roberts is extremely sensitive about his place in history, and doesn’t strike me as an inflamed pustule. I think he’s ripe for a leftward turn, and could well become the Earl Warren of the 21st century. There may not be near the number of 4-4 votes that you may expect this year.
Baud
@BillinGlendaleCA: Cool. I like the contrast between the water and the trees.
Your selfie could be an album cover.
NorthLeft12
@Germy: Really? This anecdote sort of capsulizes the whole idea of what being tough is all about. I had a response to a post by Bill James [yeah the baseball stats guru] that challenged his assertion about how Trump makes people feel that the US will be “tough” again. He is promoting the myth that Obama is weak and that is why the US does not get its way all the time…like it never did before.
I proposed that James mistakes Trump’s bullying and obnoxiousness for toughness.
In the anecdote, Reid comes off as an insecure bully. I guess you could call that being a bad ass, but I prefer the more accurate description that I provided; an insecure bully. Not sure that I would ever bring up this kind of childhood anecdote if I was in his place except if I acknowledged that these were the actions of an insecure bully and that this incident made me realize [even back then] that I was an asshole and needed to change direction.
Chyron HR
@Schlemazel (parmesan rancor):
Why, I heard a rumor that he’s good personal friends with Senator James “Muh Snowball” Inhofe. Any true progressive would agree that such a right-wing person should be kept well away from the levers of power.
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@Mustang Bobby: It was infuriating. The interviewer was so deferential to him that I wanted to throw things.
(Breathlessly) “So you mean there’s a chance that he’ll be approved after November?”
His answers were so slimy and (it seemed to me) he knew it.
The optics of the GOP’s position are horrible. I hope they get beat about the head for the next few months and then finally capitulate.
1) Garland couldn’t be better qualified.
2) Garland has shown that he has the judgement to be a great judge. (None of his decisions on the DC Circuit have been granted cert by the SCOTUS.)
3) He was effusively praised by GOP Senators in public.
4) He was privately recommended to Obama by Hatch and others as someone who would easily gain approval by the Senate.
As much as they hate Obama, he’s the President. He has the responsibility to chose a SCOTUS justice. He’s done so. The GOP would be thrilled if Donnie or Hillary were to have picked Garland.
Obama isn’t going to be on the SCOTUS. Garland is.
Them throwing up “process” and the snippets of the “Biden Rule” speech from 1992 (has autoplay video) is just an attempt to throw more mud on a Democratic President (a AA one too, of course). Biden’s speech was about a President convincing a justice to resign so he could be replaced in an election year. And later on he says that if the President consults with the Senate or moderates his pick to compromise when the government is split, then he would be happy to consider the nomination just as Kennedy and Souter were considered. (Watch the whole thing.)
Biden saying the Senate could throw up roadblocks to a President convincing SCOTUS justices to resign so s/he could try to pack the court in an election year seems to me to be an appropriate shot-across-the-bow. That’s not the situation here and McConnell and Grassley and Hatch know it.
It’s infuriating. I hope the GOP pays a huge price for this, but they’re not going to be punished by NPR if this morning is any indication.
Grr…
Cheers,
Scott.
dr. bloor
@NorthLeft12: You’re missing something important here: Harry doesn’t go around waving his dick just because he can, and he never, ever punches down.
Big difference.
NotMax
@Schlemazel (parmesan rancor)
In that case, here’s the page with the options for the various codes to add it to your FB, etc.
Lurking Canadian
@Linda: That’s not exactly the scenario. It’d be “my guy or door #2” if the president had explicitly said the nomination expires when the polls open in November.
There is still a chance that the Senate flips, Hillary wins and the Asshole Brigade votes to confirm in a panic because he’s way better than what’s coming in February 2017.
It is possible (and many have speculated) that the president will withdraw the nomination if Hillary wins, but that is not clear and certainly is not explicit.
over_educated
@debbie: If one were thinking strategically about the next election, one might be inclined to think that was the plan…
Schlemazel (parmesan rancor)
@NotMax:
Very nice thanks
Linda
@Lurking Canadian:
It is possible (and many have speculated) that the president will withdraw the nomination if Hillary wins, but that is not clear and certainly is not explicit.
True enough. But would that not be the ultimate “bucket?”
NorthLeft12
@dr. bloor: No, I think you are missing my point. Why would someone bring up an anecdote like that? Would you bring up a childhood event where you beat someone up for no other reason than he was new [different], well dressed, and well spoken? WTF?
I appreciate that Reid has fought the good fight for his party and his constituency [ordinary folks], and mostly saves his barbs and attacks for the Republicans and their masters. The anecdote seems to be presented to the audience to somehow validate his “bad assness”.
Baud
@Linda: I don’t think he will withdraw.
Linda
@dr. bloor: Also, too, Reid never wrote checks he couldn’t cash–promising legislation that didn’t happen. Trump’s followers would be heartbroken if he got elected and Mexicans didn’t pay for the wall.
hueyplong
Dana Millbank is a pearl-clutcher whose concerns are shared by no one on the right or on the left.
The fact that Obama continues to act in good faith when each of us long ago would have given up on that is a good thing, not a bad thing. When acting in good faith works out well (as it should), we view it through our own filters and call it “(fill in number)-th level chess.” If Democrats are smart enough energetically to work the media and create their own campaign ads endlessly demonstrating how the GOP’s reaction to this nomination is small minded, spiteful and wrong, the elections will go well and the Supreme Court will be inoculated against infection for decades to come (Democrats doing the appointing and, in the Senate, the approving of judicial appointments).
It’s fine to get the public mad about this situation– the public should be mad about this situation. But if we’re watching this with an eye to electoral strategy, we should simply be happy right now, because it’s a winning issue with positive practical, long term effects. We’ll be charitable to Millbank and say that he’s playing his role toward that end instead of actually fretting for real.
OzarkHillbilly
@Lurking Canadian: Obama is no doubt obligated to Garland to do everything he can to get him appointed to the Supreme Court, and no doubt had to explain his strategy for success. I can not see Garland going thru the inevitable political circus unless he thought Obama had at least a 50-50 chance of succeeding, and would in fact do everything he could to get him there, and I doubt very much he would have accepted a “unless Hillary wins” sunset clause on his nomination.
Roger Moore
@Mustang Bobby:
Because they still have outdated ideas of what is politically advantageous to say. They’re used to the Lee Atwater school of dog whistling, so they veil everything behind fancy words. That’s why Trump is eating their lunch in the primary.
Paul in KY
@debbie: VP Joe needs to get out there & disavow them or explain the nuance.
Schlemazel (parmesan rancor)
@Chyron HR:
exactly – As if Hatch’s okay were not enough that would convince me something is seriously wrong with this guy!
I am so looking forward to dr. bloods extended post telling us everything we need to know about Garland (Judge, not Judy btw, doctor)
OzarkHillbilly
@NorthLeft12:
Well, you could go read the article Germy linked and you might actually find out why it was brought up, and then you wouldn’t have to make assumptions about it.
Mary
@Paul in KY: Like this, you mean? http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/03/04/opinion/joe-biden-the-senates-duty-to-advise-and-consent.html?referer=&_r=0
O. Felix Culpa
@Mary: Good article. Clear and to the point. Thanks for the link.
ETA: And thank you, Uncle Joe!
Paul in KY
@Botsplainer, Cryptofascist Tool of the Oppressor Class: I think you’re over-optimistic on the Warren thing. However, I don’t think CJ Roberts likes all this brinksmanship on the nominee hearing & knows it is completely bogus (what Republicans are doing). Very unseemly (in his eyes).
OzarkHillbilly
@Chyron HR: @Schlemazel (parmesan rancor):
And long time Scalia best buddy Ruth Bader Ginsburg is a sellout!!!
Schlemazel (parmesan rancor)
@OzarkHillbilly:
mostly my original comment was meant tongue in cheek but I wonder if RBG would have suggested him for the appointment. a subtle but critical difference.
Paul in KY
@NorthLeft12: I thought it was a commentary on how shitty his life was at time.
Emily68
@Germy:
I read Harry’s autobiography. There’s a picture of him in late teens or early 20s, wearing what was then called dungarees, with a duck’s ass hairdo and doing a pretty good James Dean slouch. He looks mild mannered, but don’t let looks fool you.
Paul in KY
@Mary: Yep! Glad the Veep took my advice here…
satby
@I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet: NPR, never good, was horrible this morning. The next story was about the police at Trump’s rally who arrested the black guy who got punched being under investigation, but they never said why. My poor exchange girls listen to me argue with NPR every morning.
Wag
@NorthLeft12:
And I think your last point was exactly the reason why Senator Reid did bring up the childhood incident
OzarkHillbilly
@Schlemazel (parmesan rancor): I think RBG very much appreciates the separation of powers enshrined in our constitution and would have kept her mouth shut on the issue. Which is a long winded way of saying it is a difference with out distinction, ;-)
MomSense
@satby:
I’m starting to think we should be roommates in Florida. I do the same thing every morning. I don’t stop listening to the damn program (why?WHY?WHY?).
Paul in KY
@MomSense: Munchausen’s Syndrome?
OzarkHillbilly
@MomSense: Because FOX is worse?
I have a slightly different strategy for dealing with this situation. When they start interviewing a Republican, I turn it off. They never never NEVER ask the questions I think they should ask, and they don’t push back on some of the more egregious BS** so why should I sit and listen and get my blood pressure up, scream at the radio and generally get pissed off because they don’t do the job the way I think they should?
** I think the reason they don’t push back sometimes is because they don’t see why they should do the DEMs work for them in the limited time a radio spot on politics offers. For pushback listen to Diane Rheem (and even she fails more than I like) I’m OK with that to the extent that I do want to hear from GOPers and the last thing I want to listen to is a lefty FOX news with the equivalent of a Hannity or O’Reilly.
MomSense
@Paul in KY:
Given the lack of radio stations, it could also be Stockholm Syndrome.
Karen
@satby:
Wasn’t NPR liberal at one time? Like PBS?
NorthLeft12
@OzarkHillbilly: Funny, I read the article, and really did not see any context beyond a general “What was your childhood like?” kind of question.
That Reid would then bring up this anecdote indicates what about him? He was/is a bully/bad ass/tough guy/intolerant jerk/insecure etc…….what do you think? You could take it as just a brutally honest retelling of memorable events from his past, or something he is proud of and thinks illustrates his character?
The fact that the commenter picked this out as something admirable tells me more than I want to know.
Paul in KY
@MomSense: Can you just put on some killer tunes instead?
japa21
@Karen: Only according to the GOP.
retiredeng
@NotMax: Wish we had Murrow now. He was especially great reporting from a war zone. Which appears to be what we have here at home this year.
geg6
Toomey is getting hammered in social media and on tv. The primary is a little over a month away and there are three Dems running for the Senate nomination: Joe Sestak, Katie McGinty and John Fetterman. They are all running ads now and every one of them is slamming Toomey hard. I’m a Fetterman fan, but Sestak and McGinty are both fine if they are who I have to go to the mat for against that asshole. I especially hate him because he is an embarrassment to my Irish family background. My great-grandmother’s maiden name was Toomey and her family was active in the building of the labor movement here in Western PA and Eastern OH. They were all coal miners and steel workers and we have sepia photos of them at labor rallies and with bloody faces from company goons. It appalls and embarrasses me that he may actually be related to us. Anything I can do to beat and humiliate him politically, I will do. Glad to see the Dem challengers are all on the same page.
OzarkHillbilly
@NorthLeft12: I have it printed for my “over breakfast” reading so I can not say about the context yet.
Which is the way I am taking it right now, either way it certainly gives a rather interesting counter point to Carson’s story of attempted stabbing a buddy or cousin or some one somewhere for some reason.
MomSense
@OzarkHillbilly:
It seems like news programs think that as long as they present both sides of any and every issue, they are being objective. What happens when one side is just demonstrably false? Why leave it at that? What about context and fact checking?
It just drives me nuts.
MomSense
@Paul in KY:
Yeah, this morning I switched to Howlin’ Wolf.
OzarkHillbilly
@MomSense: I know, it drives me nuts too, but looking at it from a purely “covering politics” angle, I find it easier accept, but I still shut it off when Inhofe gets on and gives his latest greatest insights on the hoax of global warming. Just not worth it and I can always turn it in again in about 5 mins.
LAO
@MomSense:
@OzarkHillbilly:
This is the great victory of Fox News and it’s elk. The fear of being called “liberal” has scared the mainstream media from calling out the bat shit lunacy of the right.
OzarkHillbilly
@LAO: That is certainly part of it, sometimes I think a major part of it, but NPR and PBS (I presume) both have to bend over backwards to be “non-partisan” because they get a certain amount of money from the govt.
Paul in KY
@MomSense: Very good choice!
Germy
@NorthLeft12:
I was unclear in my post. I tend to write and link to articles in a hurry because I’m always juggling three or more things at once.
I was responding to someone who had bought into the “Reid is weak” meme. I wanted to illustrate that he was born poor to a dysfunctional family; his father shot himself. Believe me, there’s nothing I hate more than a bully.
I know the term “bad ass” is often used as a complement. I inadvertently gave the impression that I somehow approved of Reid’s fights as a young man. I don’t admire that sort of violence.
What I was trying to illustrate was that Reid is a scrapper, not a weakling. Of course he was wrong to pick fights with classmates.
Eric U.
@OzarkHillbilly: we need to go back to the equal time doctrine so they don’t have to justify a dem coming on and debunking the lies. It’s really hard to debunk lies with truth anyway
NotMax
@satby
Maybe find another station which is running Fresh Air? Or Democracy Now?
Germy
@NotMax: Here’s how I know there’s no such thing as The Liberal Mainstream Media: I never see Amy Goodman on any of the morning political talk shows.
Eric U.
@Germy: yeah, you see conservative bloggers all over the cable news, much more rare to see liberal bloggers. Unless they are known for circular firing squads
Buycans
A new Serial ep! Anyone else just aching for Sara to connect the entire issue to the Pres. Obama = BAD fixation of the right? That there is nothing the Prez can do that the right won’t oppose? If you think that if Bowe was still captive at this moment that they wouldn’t blame the Prez for not doing all he can?
GAHHHHH, it is so frustrating,
Germy
Some People Never Know:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yfM_HbIx7LQ
jl
@Paul in KY:
” VP Joe needs to get out there & disavow them or explain the nuance. ”
Never want to release The Biden too early in the game. That shit gets weird quick. There is a time for the loose cannon.
sherparick
I just thought it was hoot McConnell and Hatch pontificating President Obama “politicizing” the Supreme Court nomination process by nominating a candidate that Hatch and other Republicans had praised to the ceiling. The attack ads and social media posts write themselves about the obstructionist, do nothing Republican Senate who draw their Senatorial salaries and fail to do their constitutional duties. Hatch was on NPR Morning Edition this AM and he sounded like a man suffering from constipation.
Obama’s pick of Garland is also consistent with POTUS own views and preferences. Garland was on his short list for both of his previous appointments of Sotomayer and Kagan. Garland was probably the second choice when he nominated Kagan.
Democratic turnout is going to be more than motivated if Trump is on the Republican ticket. The Bernie Bros may be hating Hillary, but hard to believe that the prospect of a Trump making himself the Juan Peron of the United States that in his vale of tears, you really do have to choose the lesser of two evils (or is that weevils).
Germy
@jl:
True. The Biden is a card that is best played close to one’s chest. Timing is everything with the Joe.
Gelfling545
@Mustang Bobby: Funny thing is I haven’t heard Sanders or HRC being particularly toxic to the GOP candidates. Waste of time really. All the toxicity is within their party.
Gelfling545
@Baud: Given that it screams out loud that they are acting in bad faith, I’m not surprised no one is rushing to embrace it.
Jay C
@Betty Cracker:
LOLWUT? Right after he became Leader, IIRC. He’s no LBJ, for sure, but Harry’s been the most effective Democratic Senate Leader I can recall for a long time. My guess is that if Judge Garland does get his nom to the Seante floor (whatever happens there), it will be Reid’s doing. Too bad he’s retiring, he’d be a ton of help in a Clinton 45 Admin….
jl
@Gelfling545: Too late for that lame duck confirmation BS to be a whisper. I heard about it on the news this morning. I think a couple of Senators are publicly behind it. The idea is so obviously obnoxious and absurd, except as an open insult aimed at Obama that I wonder whether those two Senators are up for election and they think some racist air horns will be helpful to them in their states. I’ll have to look around on the intertubes to see who said it.
Hal
What is this fantasy that the “base” isn’t going to be fired up about the denial of a hearing for Garland because he’s an old white guy? Just to know that the gop is standing in the way is a motivator in and of itself.
I think some of us who follow these issues closely are mistakenly thinking that large segments of the voting population know about, let alone care about, this supreme court fight. It wouldn’t surprise me if most Americans didn’t know who Scalia was, let alone that he’s dead. I’m not convinced that of all the issues that are going to arise from a Clinton/Trump election fight, the supreme court will even register to most people in November.
Gelfling545
@Paul in KY: He has. Nuance is lost on that crowd.
jl
@Gelfling545: Do you have a link? I can’t find anything on youtube, but it is packed with BS Biden Rule gotcha clips posted by wingers and I haven’t worked through all of them yet.
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@jl: See the NYTimes link at #54. It has video of Biden’s speech in 1992. Watch the whole thing, and it’s clear that McConnell and the rest are lying about what Biden was saying. (As I said in #54, Biden was saying the Senate didn’t have to take up a nomination for a resignation in an election year, especially in the case when the President didn’t confer with the Senate about their views. But even then, a moderate nominee would get a hearing like Kennedy and Souter did.)
HTH.
Cheers,
Scott.
burnspbesq
Here is what i wrote earlier this morning (on FB, in response to a steaming pile of crap dropped by Cole and Panagakos):
I would be extremely happy to ultimately be wrong about this. Take a shot at convincing me I’m wrong.
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@burnspbesq: McConnell only has power over his herd of cats when they are united. The fact that Senators are saying (so soon after he threw up the various red lines) that they’re willing to meet with him, they’re willing to entertain the idea of hearings and a vote in November, shows that McConnell’s support on this is very tenuous. With a little bit more pressure, the good Majority Leader may have to find a way to climb down (just as he has on many occasions in the past).
But we’ll see.
Cheers,
Scott.
jl
@I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet: Thanks. Yes I know what Biden said back then in full context. I was looking to see if Biden has responded recently to the bogus and non-existent ‘Biden Rule’ manufactured by GOP pols over the last few weeks.
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@jl: March 4 Biden OpEd at the NY Times.
HTH.
Cheers,
Scott.
Bob In Portland
The blackout continues.
jimmiraybob
Who in the mainline press* is shouting about this blatant and anti-Constitutional attempt to stack the court with a conservative activist judge? Surely the Constitutional Conservatives and Constitutional Right and the Constitutional Tea Partiers – all steadfast proponents of democracy** – are up in arms**.
* Tired of hearing the term mainstream.
** Yes, sarcasm.
jl
@I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet: thanks
Paul in KY
@jl: Will keep our Biden dry for the time being then.
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@Bob In Portland: Dutch Safety Board has what you’re looking for. If you’re really looking…
HTH.
Cheers,
Scott.
Chyron HR
@I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet:
That’s just part of the cover-up. Everybody KNOWS Beau Biden shot down MH17 and faked his death afterwards.
Bob In Portland
@I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet:
It’s okay, NotSure, to keep your eyes squeezed shut.
Because complete investigations about airliners being shot down don’t require knowing where the missile was fired from.
So the Dutch Safety Board has all the answers? Like the only people who had missiles that could bring down the airliner were the Ukrainian army?
So if the the Dutch report says that the only people capable of shooting down MH17 were the Ukrainians, then that means that I was right, that the shootdown was a false flag and the rationale for the sanctions against Russia were bogus.
So that suggests that when I said it sure sounded like a false flag in July 2014 I was right and all the willing gobblers of propaganda here at Balloon Juice were wrong.
So the sanctions directed against Russia were done based on a lie. That means that the tape which Ukraine produced in the hours after the shootdown was also a lie. But because it was produced so quickly it appears that the shootdown wasn’t an accident but a deliberately planned propaganda act.
This makes the control tower recordings all the more vital because we have the problem of two Ukrainian fighter jets escorting MH17 into the shooting zone.
So what happens when you concede that the Ukrainians shot down the airliner and the US lied about it to conceal the real killers? You can’t. Gin & Tonic can’t concede that the US sponsored the coup, and that a large portion of the ruling group are fascists. Or that what’s left of the Ukraine is in economic freefall or that now some of the fascist groups are moving for an overthrow of the current junta.
You live in a fantasyland, where our Secretary of State doesn’t know that a coup is happening in Honduras, because, presumably, no one in the CIA, which has a mighty contingent in Honduras and within the Honduran military, never noticed the coup plans. That a country that’s dependent on American military aid would act on behalf of the wealthy class of Honduras without getting clearance from the US.
You have someone who apparently doesn’t understand the difference between literal and figurative (about synagogues burning in Kiev) but when I find a synagogue set ablaze south of Kiev he feels the need to say it wasn’t within Kiev’s city limits, not to mention the fire in the trade union building on May 2, 2014 where fascists “roasted” (their term) anti-coup protesters.
How many lies do you have to excuse, no believe, until you are part of the lie?
Bob In Portland
@Chyron HR: Whistling past the graveyard. If the only people with a capable weapon to knock out MH17 were the Ukrainian army, as the Dutch Safety Board as well as the US report cited above state, then why is it necessary for you to cling to your illusions?
I'mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet
@Bob In Portland: Take it up with the Dutch investigators, Bob. Obviously nothing I post here will satisfy you, so posting more is a waste of both of our times. I’m sure they’ll be happy to hear about the evidence you’ve been able to uncover, being halfway around the world from the site and all…
Let us know what you hear back, ‘k?
(roll-eyes)
Cheers,
Scott.
Bob In Portland
@I’mNotSureWhoIWantToBeYet: It’s not about my satisfaction. It’s about you clinging to a lie. But thanks.