I'm fair both sides are hypocrites . Just in this specific case when both the VP and President have taken tactics similar to what the GOP is suggesting their attacks come hollow.

 

True. I was referring to this instance.

Obama has a short piece on SCOTUSblog explaining what he is looking for in his nominee. It's mostly platitudinous but I suppose the interesting part is his emphasis on "life experience."

 

A Responsibility I Take Seriously : SCOTUSblog

Biden in ?92: Wait to Appoint New SCOTUS Justice Until After the Election | Mediaite

 

I was just about to post this article.

 

It's hysterical how can Obama or Biden attack the GOP now?

 

I was ready for Obama to begin nominations until I saw the video on tv.

 

The gop looks no different then the dems on this matter.

 

Continue on.

Who would Biden have been talking about in that video? Was there already speculation about Byron White's retirement that early?

 

Ultimately I'd imagine the Republicans would've wished White had retired in 1992 and given Bush a crack at the nomination; when he finally retired the next year -- after Clinton's election -- one of the most consistently conservative voices on the court was replaced by Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

I can't be the only one who thinks this is going to blow up in the Republican's face, can I?

 

Would Republicans Really Oppose a Republican Nominee?

Republican Governor of Nevada Brian Sandoval is being vetted as a possible nominee. Prior to being governor he was appointed to a federal district judge position by George W Bush and approved unanimously by the Senate. He is seen as being a centrist. Would Republicans balk at approving a fellow Republican who was previously approved to a federal judge position unanimously?

 

Link is in UKMF's post above that he posted at the same time I was posting this

I can't be the only one who thinks this is going to blow up in the Republican's face, can I?

 

Would Republicans Really Oppose a Republican Nominee?

 

I am a very conservative dude but just cannot believe how much the R's have screwed this up so far. The D's are no better BTW. They have said and would be saying the same thing if the roles were reversed. But I expect that from the D's. I just don't know why McConnell didn't just shut up early, then said if and when Obama nominates someone, we will take it up at that time. Then if the R's don't like him/her, which is fairly certain, don't vote for him/her. The R's have actually made Obama look like the adult in the room on this so far...which is hard to do...

I can't find it to post it, but in response to Uncle Joe in 1992 Republican Judiciary Chair Strom Thurmond argued a nominee should be made in an election year. So, gg, you're right. Both sides just need to do their jobs.

If Obama nominates Sandoval, the Rs have to confirm it. He's the type of judge I'd expect a conservative President to nominate.

I saw McConnell confirming again this morning that he will not even allow a hearing on Obama's nominee. Of all the things happening in this crazy political cycle, I believe the handling of this bothers me the most. I see it as the crystallization of what is wrong in Washington DC - bipartisanship over governing. I have commented on this in the past. The lack of statesmanship in our government is at an all time low and it is the biggest reason why Congress approval rankings sink lower and lower. This stance by the Republicans causes me to look away from their candidates.

 

For example, I guarantee you I will never again vote for Thomas Massie. Yes, I have voted for him in the past. I now see that he represents everything wrong in Washington. He is an obstructionist that will do everything he can to block governing by elected representatives.

 

This Republican stance of not voting turns me off. And the claim that some Democrat said the same thing in the past turns me off even more. Is that the way we govern now? Something someone said 20 years ago is our guideline, even when we thought it was stupid when it was said back then? More bipartisan bulloney.

 

If the Republicans continue with this stance of avoiding their responsibility for the next 9 months or longer, it will hurt them more than help them. Even some of their own senators up for election are saying this is not the right stance. If this stance continues, I believe the Democrats will gain control of the Senate this fall.

 

I would have much more respect for Republicans if they moved forward and voted against the nominee than if they just refuse to do their duty. If they do nothing, our Supreme Court will likely go a full year with only 8 justices. That is a disgrace when it is done for purely political reasons.

I saw McConnell confirming again this morning that he will not even allow a hearing on Obama's nominee. Of all the things happening in this crazy political cycle, I believe the handling of this bothers me the most. I see it as the crystallization of what is wrong in Washington DC - bipartisanship over governing. I have commented on this in the past. The lack of statesmanship in our government is at an all time low and it is the biggest reason why Congress approval rankings sink lower and lower. This stance by the Republicans causes me to look away from their candidates.

 

For example, I guarantee you I will never again vote for Thomas Massie. Yes, I have voted for him in the past. I now see that he represents everything wrong in Washington. He is an obstructionist that will do everything he can to block governing by elected representatives.

 

This Republican stance of not voting turns me off. And the claim that some Democrat said the same thing in the past turns me off even more. Is that the way we govern now? Something someone said 20 years ago is our guideline, even when we thought it was stupid when it was said back then? More bipartisan bulloney.

 

If the Republicans continue with this stance of avoiding their responsibility for the next 9 months or longer, it will hurt them more than help them. Even some of their own senators up for election are saying this is not the right stance. If this stance continues, I believe the Democrats will gain control of the Senate this fall.

 

I would have much more respect for Republicans if they moved forward and voted against the nominee than if they just refuse to do their duty. If they do nothing, our Supreme Court will likely go a full year with only 8 justices. That is a disgrace when it is done for purely political reasons.

 

Supreme Court -- Merrick Garland: Republicans’ Nomination Blocking Is Indefensible

Obama likes to believe he alone holds the right to appoint Supreme Court justices while he holds office. Unfortunately for him, the Executive and Legislative branches are co-equal in this matter. There is no time frame mandated to fill a vacancy. There is no reason for Congress to acquiesce.

I hope the Republicans don't act on Garland and then Hillary nominates Obama for the Court. That would be just what bastards like McConnell deserve. ( I hope you all missed ole SF over Spring Break )

Obama likes to believe he alone holds the right to appoint Supreme Court justices while he holds office. Unfortunately for him, the Executive and Legislative branches are co-equal in this matter. There is no time frame mandated to fill a vacancy. There is no reason for Congress to acquiesce.

 

He alone does hold the right and the responsibility to nominate a Supreme Court Justice. Congress has the right to not approve his nominee. They both have a job to do to insure our highest court is fully functioning by having all 9 seats full. To interrupt the process is just stupid.