Obama Nominates Merrick Garland To Supreme Court

I can't lie, this makes me nervous as hell. He should have played the safe route and nominated a liberal. I highly doubt Trump can beat Clinton in a General Election.

 

He is a centrist but would be expected to align with the more liberal judges on most issues. And the GOP in the Senate are already saying no confirmation hearings until the next election.

Obama also knows this, and by picking someone who is totally qualified and middle of the road, he is exposing the Republicans for the obstructionists that they are, and will probably help defeat some GOP Congressmen. He is putting their butts to the fire. Obama knows what he is doing. lol

The electorate want Obama and Congress to do their jobs, and do them now. This will not sit well and will hurt the GOP, which is already in a world of hurt.

 

It is a win/win for Obama. A liberal would justify the GOP in stalling, and this guy is not as conservative as you might think. He is wayyyyy to the left of Scalia. This is a well thought out chess move by the Obama administration and the Democrats.

 

Ok if you say so. I didnt reseach him. I trust Obama.

 

He was nominated for his current position in 1997 by Bill Clinton, so that should say something. He is not a liberal, and he is sort of harsh on criminal justice issues(Ocky will hate him), but he is more of a moderate, and the important thing is that he has been widely praised by Republicans previously, so they cannot claim he is too liberal to start proceedings. Obama has called their bluff. They won't start the confirmation proceedings, and the Dems are already bashing them over it since it is someone they have praised before. It is just to show how obstructionist the GOP Congress is, and to help defeat GOP Congressmen(and women) to help bring about a more Dem. friendly Congress after the election.

It is just the latest move in a chess game to get both the White House and one (or both) Houses of Congress.

 

I would be a little more concerned if I thought the GOP would go ahead and allow it, but I don't think they will-they have painted themselves in a corner, and Obama is playing them.

*now if they call Obama's bluff.....but I don't think it will happen.

 

Garland is a centrist and someone that cant completely side with the side of right is telling. Him being appointed to his current position by Bill means nothing to me as clintons presidency was NOT as pro-black as most people of color believe. Nearly all of his major moves were against the poor and black.

 

It is not going to matter because the GOP will not consider proceedings to get him to the Supreme Court. He is a pawn in a chess game.

*Also I think Clinton made some bad decisions especially when it came to his criminal justice policies, but that has to be seen in the light of the times-the crack epidemic with a large spike in the levels of crime unseen even in the worst of the 70's and early 80's. Their was some hysteria about that-I remember it well, and their were plenty of black leaders and community members who supported what he did at that time for the same reason-they were desperate. If you call him out, you need to call out ALL of the people who supported those policies as well, and there were quite a few blacks in that group. Fair is fair. Major parts of it were a big mistake, but there were alot of people supporting that mistake who also did not know how flawed it was.

He was not only elected, he was re-elected, and who supported him: He had 83% of the black vote in 92, 84% in 96-two years after the Crime bill.

Just sayin'


I know this is not going to be popular on here...but it needs to be said. It is not like Bill Clinton was some kind of demon surrounded by Saints. A number of people made some really bad mistakes given how they viewed the situation at the time-which is unfortunate since the crack epidemic was running it's course and crime rates would probably have dropped on their own due to that and demographic shifts and changes. Hindsight is 20/20.


Now benefiting from private prisons...another matter..

People need to acknowledge the mistakes and the damage that was done, but ALL involved need to do that, the enactors and the enablers both.

 

I agree to a degree. Calling republicans bluff at this stage is iffy... Trump is their leading candidate so anything is possible at this point. Either way the next democratic president, which im sure there will be, will still have this pick and I hope its a black woman.

 

I hope it is a black lesbian or bisexual with a disability and who has a 99% chance of living to 110 with all of her faculties intact. And she starts her term at the ripe old age of 50.

 

Quite frankly this is a boring SAFE middle of the road choice broken out of the same typical mode. Jewish, Ivy-Leaguer from Illinois, with Centrist Politics. THIS CHOICE IS BORING!!!

Now an Bi-Racial Muslim Transgendered Asian from Wyoming would be an interesting choice.

 

No...that choice and the black woman and the black gay lesbian Methuselah I mentioned would be good choices AFTER the election with a Dem prez and Dem Congress-because they might actually get the job! lol

The Wyoming candidate should also be an atheist and a vegan I think and use medical marijuana.

 

Yes, Vegan, medical pot, secular humanist, who went to Berkeley Law.

 

And is distantly related to Ho Chi Minh or Mao Zedong, supports sustainable energy sources, And enjoys French culture.

 

Garland is actually a standard issue moderate Democrat. On most important issues, with the exception of a slight bias in favor of law enforcement, he is to the left of where the Democratic party has moved in recent years. His judicial opinions are well reasoned, balanced and faithfully apply valid legal precedent. He is well known for building consensus and broad based coalitions among his fellow judges through logical reasoning and faithful application of the law as opposed to appealing to political bias (or Scalia's and Alito's blind allegiance to the Federalist Society).

I would have been cheering if a true liberal like The Notorious Ruth Bader Ginsburg had been nominated. Yet, with the nomination of Garland, I am willing to take a seat and rest easy knowing that if he is confirmed, I will not have to hide in a bunker in an undisclosed location waiting for the morality police and the regular police to come get my gay, Black ass.

 

I actually feel bad for Garland. His record shows he's highly qualified and he seems like a genuinely kind man... but he's being used as a political pawn which is unfortunate.

 

You are right-he is being used as a pawn. Hopefully he realizes that it is a part of a greater good at least. There is always a chance that the GOP gives in?

 

Hopefully. The way he teared up at his nomination speech makes me think that he's under the impression the GOP will. But they're not even trying to have a hearing under the nonexistent "Biden rule" which was really more of a suggestion. I swear that man should never be allowed to speak lol.

 

Yeah I think you a right the GOP is not going to do anything and he is a sacrificial lamb. If it works toward getting at least one part of Congress to go Democratic I hope he will appreciate his sacrifice. Hopefully it is Trump and he loses big and takes some governors and(just enough) Congressmen with him when he goes down.