Posted on Feb 22, 2016
Charles Krauthammer: Win one for Nino : News
2.22K
10
5
4
4
0
Let’s understand something about the fight to fill the Supreme Court seat of Antonin (“Nino”) Scalia. This is about nothing but raw power. Any appeal you hear to high principle is phony — brazenly, embarrassingly so.
In Year Seven of the George W. Bush administration, Sen. Chuck Schumer publicly opposed filling any Supreme Court vacancy until Bush left office. (“Except in extraordinary circumstances.” None such arose. Surprise!) Today he piously denounces Republicans for doing exactly the same for a vacancy created in Year Eight of Barack Obama.
Republicans, say the Democrats, owe the president deference. Elections have consequences and Obama won re-election in 2012.
Yes. And the Republicans won the Senate in 2014 — if anything, a more proximal assertion of popular will. And both have equal standing in appointing a Supreme Court justice.
See the rest of the article...........
In Year Seven of the George W. Bush administration, Sen. Chuck Schumer publicly opposed filling any Supreme Court vacancy until Bush left office. (“Except in extraordinary circumstances.” None such arose. Surprise!) Today he piously denounces Republicans for doing exactly the same for a vacancy created in Year Eight of Barack Obama.
Republicans, say the Democrats, owe the president deference. Elections have consequences and Obama won re-election in 2012.
Yes. And the Republicans won the Senate in 2014 — if anything, a more proximal assertion of popular will. And both have equal standing in appointing a Supreme Court justice.
See the rest of the article...........
Charles Krauthammer: Win one for Nino : News
Posted from stltoday.com
Supreme Court
Republicans
Democrats
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 3
2
2
0
"If McConnell succeeds, he will have resoundingly answered the “what did we get for 2014?” question. Imagine if the Senate were now in Democratic hands. What we got in 2014 was the power to hold on to Scalia’s seat and to the court’s conservative majority"....they won control in 2014, and to this day, what did the GOP do? I know both parties suck royally, but after all that running off with the gums about what they were "going" to do vs. what they "actually" did, nothing was done....as usual. I don't really care about who gets the chair. Put someone in there who's qualified. If the GOP HAS to block this, go ahead. They're in a position of power....FOR NOW. With elections for congress and President, you can "win" and still loose BIG. McConnell better watch out. BTW IF Trump was to win, McConnell's gonna WISH he let Obama put someone in there.
(2)
(0)
2
2
0
Actually, I think that the current battle over the seat vacated by Scalia is much like the meeting of Lee and Meade at Gettyburg. Neither side wanted or expected it. Both were thrown off balance by it.
It seemed obvious to most observers that Ginsburg was the most likely to die or retire during Obama's Administration. Thus, a Leftist executive could be expected to nominate a Leftist jurist and the Republicans (more Left than Right) would confirm the nomination with little more than a token gesture of opposition. No harm, no foul. However, it was Scalia who kicked the bucket and suddenly the opening appeared to make a historical shift in the ideological balance of the Supreme Court to the Left.
Let's face it. Even though he is sitting in the cat bird seat with a comfortable majority, McConnell was shaken to his roots. He knows that he isn't up for the battle. Why else would he launch his attack preemptively? I can almost see Harry Reid licking his chops at the prospect of victory. Even though he didn't have sufficient votes to pass Obamacare, he was able to sneak it through the Senate with legislative legerdemain like the master of chicanery that he is. Managing this fight is simply too delicious to pass up.
What are the odds? I'm not confident enough to bet the farm, but I would put my money on Reid.
It seemed obvious to most observers that Ginsburg was the most likely to die or retire during Obama's Administration. Thus, a Leftist executive could be expected to nominate a Leftist jurist and the Republicans (more Left than Right) would confirm the nomination with little more than a token gesture of opposition. No harm, no foul. However, it was Scalia who kicked the bucket and suddenly the opening appeared to make a historical shift in the ideological balance of the Supreme Court to the Left.
Let's face it. Even though he is sitting in the cat bird seat with a comfortable majority, McConnell was shaken to his roots. He knows that he isn't up for the battle. Why else would he launch his attack preemptively? I can almost see Harry Reid licking his chops at the prospect of victory. Even though he didn't have sufficient votes to pass Obamacare, he was able to sneak it through the Senate with legislative legerdemain like the master of chicanery that he is. Managing this fight is simply too delicious to pass up.
What are the odds? I'm not confident enough to bet the farm, but I would put my money on Reid.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
Thanks for sharing COL Mikel J. Burroughs. I am glad this story has a picture of Associate Justice Antonin Scalia in his prime. Hopefully the Republican leadership will stand firm. They can have a hearing for any Obama nominee to replace Justice Scalia but that replacement should be somebody who believes the US Constitution should be followed according to the letter of the document and not that it is a living breathing document as progressives believe.
(1)
(0)
SGT Lou Meza
I believe most voters would be ok with Obama naming a nominee and the Senate voting up or down if we want the Constitution to be followed according to the letter of the document . The only problem I see is with who interprets the document . Maybe a panel of three ordinary people since it is very easy to read and understand .
(0)
(0)
LTC Stephen F.
SGT Lou Meza - as somebody who has read the Constitution multiple times I understand it to be very readable and understandable as written.
Having read the Federalist papers in college I understand how much debate went into writing a document which has stood the test of time and served as the model for every constitution written after it.
COL Mikel J. Burroughs CPT Jack Durish
Having read the Federalist papers in college I understand how much debate went into writing a document which has stood the test of time and served as the model for every constitution written after it.
COL Mikel J. Burroughs CPT Jack Durish
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google