Merrick Garland nominated for Supreme Court

[PhatMack19]

Obama went with a safe pick?

 

 

 

[Hagar]

Not even close to what I expected.  Based on the info, he's brilliant.  Wiki labels him a Centrist, which to someone my age would make him a moderate liberal.  

I hope PNGtex post his opinion.  As I've said before, my knowledge of Law is limited to watching Matlock. 

If Hillary is elected I suspect she'll nominate someone who'll make this guy look like a flaming conservative.  

[Hagar]

Well, here's something, and it's not good.  Confirms my theory on Centrist.  

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[LumRaiderFan]

7 minutes ago, REBgp said:

Well, here's something, and it's not good.  Confirms my theory on Centrist.  

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

He is definitely not a friend of industry.

[baddog]

33 minutes ago, REBgp said:

Well, here's something, and it's not good.  Confirms my theory on Centrist.  

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

Anti-Second Amendment. He can kiss my arse. I suppose this is when and how I will die.

[Hagar]

Well guys, it confirms what I've been saying about how much things have changed in my lifetime.  If this guy is labeled a Centrist, I'm out of touch with things.  

 

[LumRaiderFan]

6 minutes ago, REBgp said:

Well guys, it confirms what I've been saying about how much things have changed in my lifetime.  If this guy is labeled a Centrist, I'm out of touch with things.  

 

If someone is labeled a centrist in the media, most times they are a liberal.

To many in the left media, he probably is a centrist.

 

[Hagar]

What's the expression, "Fold like a house of cards"?

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[LumRaiderFan]

9 minutes ago, REBgp said:

What's the expression, "Fold like a house of cards"?

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

We knew this was coming.  

Gotta give it to the Dems, if the roles were reversed, they wouldn't budge an inch on this.

[nappyroots]

3 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

We knew this was coming.  

Gotta give it to the Dems, if the roles were reversed, they wouldn't budge an inch on this.

I agree with you on the dems not budging an inch. Also the pubs would be doing just like obama and picking a nominee. Neither party does the right thing all of time and they are more worried about themselves than the people that elected them, most of them only cater to the people at election time

[westend1]

Why doesn't someone post a link to a reputable source?  Breitbart and hotair is the best you have?   Talk about LIV!  Jeez

[Hagar]

2 hours ago, nappyroots said:

I agree with you on the dems not budging an inch. Also the pubs would be doing just like obama and picking a nominee. Neither party does the right thing all of time and they are more worried about themselves than the people that elected them, most of them only cater to the people at election time

Certainly something we can agree on.  You may enjoy this quote as much as I do:

The more you observe politics, the more you've got to admit that each party is worse than the other.    Will Rogers

 

[Hagar]

2 hours ago, westend1 said:

Why doesn't someone post a link to a reputable source?  Breitbart and hotair is the best you have?   Talk about LIV!  Jeez

Ok we1, here's a reputable link I'm confident you'll approve of. 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[smitty]

It's my understanding is that this individual feels the 2nd Amendment is is not for the citizenry but ONLY for militias.  This is one reason obama nominated him.  So, would he vote to take your guns away?  Sounds like it!

[Englebert]

Based on what little I've read about his views of the 2nd Amendment, he should not be allowed to sit on any court, much less the Supreme Court.

 

[77]

if Yobama wants him he cant be good for America. Remember he hired Hillary and we know how she  did!

[LumRaiderFan]

Not sure if Obama even cares if this guy gets appointed...him and the Dems will use this "process" as another example of how unreasonable those mean Republicans are.

[westend1]

3 hours ago, Englebert said:

Based on what little I've read about his views of the 2nd Amendment, he should not be allowed to sit on any court, much less the Supreme Court.

 

Tell us what you read.  All I have ever seen is that he voted for an en banc review of a gun ban case out of DC.   Do you even know what that is or how he voted in the case?

[Hagar]

On March 16, 2016 at 2:09 PM, LumRaiderFan said:

If someone is labeled a centrist in the media, most times they are a liberal.

To many in the left media, he probably is a centrist.

 

You know LRF, your post is a Readers Digest version of one more thing that puts ticks in my shorts.  Repubs today are equal to the Dems in the 70's.  Dems are so far left they're in the Crawford boxes (stands behind left field at Astros baseball field).  Very few real conservatives left.  And most Dem politicians are either Socialist are Communist.  Labels, they are a changing.  

[PN-G bamatex]

I've never read any of Garland's opinions, so I can't comment on where he stands politically or philosophically in regards to how the law should be applied.

That having been said, assuming his label as a moderate is accurate, this is a politically brilliant move by the Obama administration. We have numerous Republican senators facing reelection in blue and purple states this year. They already have a tough row to hoe for that reason alone, and the chaos in the GOP presidential primary isn't making that any easier. Obama throwing up a moderate and daring a GOP-dominated Senate delegation that's backed itself into a corner with its own base to go with the "we won't even take him up for consideration" strategy helps shake up GOP support among independent and moderate voters, and blows yet another hole in the hull of those GOP senate campaigns.

You can say what you want about Obama, but he plays the game very well.

[Hagar]

5 hours ago, PN-G bamatex said:

I've never read any of Garland's opinions, so I can't comment on where he stands politically or philosophically in regards to how the law should be applied.

That having been said, assuming his label as a moderate is accurate, this is a politically brilliant move by the Obama administration. We have numerous Republican senators facing reelection in blue and purple states this year. They already have a tough row to hoe for that reason alone, and the chaos in the GOP presidential primary isn't making that any easier. Obama throwing up a moderate and daring a GOP-dominated Senate delegation that's backed itself into a corner with its own base to go with the "we won't even take him up for consideration" strategy helps shake up GOP support among independent and moderate voters, and blows yet another hole in the hull of those GOP senate campaigns.

You can say what you want about Obama, but he plays the game very well.

He, and those behind moving the Democratic Party so far left, don't just play the game well, "they" are masters.  I'll say it again, I'm totally against "them", but I have to grudgingly admit that what "they" have accomplished has to be recorded as the playbook for taking over a Democracy without firing a shot (as, I believe, Nitika K. predicted).  And as the left got "lefter" (new word lol) the right started moving left to attract what little fallout from the left it could.  Yep, "they" play the game exceptionally well.  

[TxHoops]

On March 17, 2016 at 3:14 PM, LumRaiderFan said:

Not sure if Obama even cares if this guy gets appointed...him and the Dems will use this "process" as another example of how unreasonable those mean Republicans are.

I think you may have smashed the nail on the head.  Some theories are they hope he doesn't get confirmed.  Because as Rebgp pointed out, he may look like a neoconservative compared to who Hillary would appoint.  I share that opinion.   

[nappyroots]

On 3/19/2016 at 6:47 PM, REBgp said:

He, and those behind moving the Democratic Party so far left, don't just play the game well, "they" are masters.  I'll say it again, I'm totally against "them", but I have to grudgingly admit that what "they" have accomplished has to be recorded as the playbook for taking over a Democracy without firing a shot (as, I believe, Nitika K. predicted).  And as the left got "lefter" (new word lol) the right started moving left to attract what little fallout from the left it could.  Yep, "they" play the game exceptionally well.  

We need to throw away the left and the right and form a new party....the middle

[westend1]

40 minutes ago, nappyroots said:

We need to throw away the left and the right and form a new party....the middle

Nah.  We need to move right fiscally and left socially.  Not sure why this is so hard to understand..

[Hagar]

2 hours ago, nappyroots said:

We need to throw away the left and the right and form a new party....the middle

I can assure you, for a conservative of my age, the right has already been "thrown away".