• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens retiring

Redress

Redress

Liberal Fascist For Life!
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 5, 2008
Messages
112,952
Reaction score
60,480
Location
Sarasota Fla
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens retiring - Yahoo! News

AP 11:30 am-Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, the court's oldest member and leader of its liberal bloc, is retiring. President Barack Obama now has his second high court opening to fill.

Stevens said Friday he will step down when the court finishes its work for the summer in late June or early July. He said he hopes his successor is confirmed "well in advance of the commencement of the court's next term."

Stevens' announcement leaves ample time for the White House to settle on a successor and for Senate Democrats, who control a 59-vote majority, to hold confirmation hearings and a vote before the court's next term begins in October. Republicans have not ruled out attempts to delay confirmation.
Click to expand...

Will be interesting to see who Obama picks, and how the nomination goes.
 
I bet the GOP filibusters literally any pick and doesn't even bother to claim it's based on qualifications rather than ideology.

edit: And the longer they filibuster, the more it's going to hurt them. Imagine the ads for the 2010/2012 elections: "The GOP is using parliamentary tactics to stall the appointment process for the most important seat in the country."
 
Last edited:
Hmmm, I wonder who'll get it: Jerry Springer or Oprah.
 
Erod said:
Hmmm, I wonder who'll get it: Jerry Springer or Oprah.
Click to expand...

So do you ever debate things here or is it just all partisan all the time?
 
Deuce said:
So do you ever debate things here or is it just all partisan all the time?
Click to expand...

The latter. Obama is teh antichrist you know.
 
Deuce said:
So do you ever debate things here or is it just all partisan all the time?
Click to expand...
I know I hate when people are so partisan! Now let's get back to discussing how the GOP is going to filibuster literally any pick and won't even bother to claim it's based on qualifications rather than ideology...
:roll:
 
Taylor said:
I know I hate when people are so partisan! Now let's get back to discussing how the GOP is going to filibuster literally any pick and won't even bother to claim it's based on qualifications rather than ideology...
:roll:
Click to expand...

Touche, well played.
 
Taylor said:
I know I hate when people are so partisan! Now let's get back to discussing how the GOP is going to filibuster literally any pick and won't even bother to claim it's based on qualifications rather than ideology...
:roll:
Click to expand...

Beat me to it. And with such panache, too.:2wave:
 
I wonder what the Party of ‘No’ will say …
 
So anyway, now that the ultra-partisanship has been dispensed with(hopefully), talking about the actual topic without hysterics, any one heard of any of these?

The leading candidates to replace Stevens are Solicitor General Elena Kagan, 49, and federal appellate Judges Merrick Garland, 57, in Washington and Diane Wood, 59, in Chicago.
Click to expand...
 
Chappy said:
I wonder what the Party of ‘No’ will say …
Click to expand...

Let's give them the chance to say "no" before getting bent out of shape please.
 
Deuce said:
So do you ever debate things here or is it just all partisan all the time?
Click to expand...

Let's say after this crew, I don't have much confidence in Obama.

Czar%20Watch%5B5%5D.jpg


images


images


Do you?
 
Erod said:
Let's say after this crew, I don't have much confidence in Obama.

Czar%20Watch%5B5%5D.jpg


images


images


Do you?
Click to expand...

Can we see the stupidity for another thread please. This is actually important stuff.
 
If only we all could keep our wits sharp and remain working till age 90!

As for the next candidate, I'm not sure there's going to be much difference in judicial philosophy. I'll be largely disinterested unless Obama is able to find a real standout among standouts and even then, we probably won't know that to be the case until they've served on the court for some time.

I suppose it will be interesting to see what demographic they target.
 
Taylor said:
If only we all could keep our wits sharp and remain working till age 90!

As for the next candidate, I'm not sure there's going to be much difference in judicial philosophy. I'll be largely disinterested unless Obama is able to find a real standout among standouts and even then, we probably won't know that to be the case until they've served on the court for some time.

I suppose it will be interesting to see what demographic they target.
Click to expand...

According to the article, he still swims and plays tennis daily. That is incredible at his age.
 
Chappy said:
I wonder what the Party of ‘No’ will say …
Click to expand...

Redress said:
Let's give them the chance to say "no" before getting bent out of shape please.
Click to expand...

No bending out of shape here. :)

I just have no confidence in the core element of the Republican Senate caucus being responsible and focusing on the nominee's qualifications.

But, we'll see, and I for one would enjoy being pleasantly surprised by some honest statesmanship showing up in the upper chamber.
 
Last edited:
Chappy said:
I wonder what the Party of ‘No’ will say …
Click to expand...

I'm not familiar with this Party of No. Is this just another contrived hyperpartisan term meant to cloud discussion rather than open the channels to honest debate?
 
Redress said:
Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens retiring - Yahoo! News



Will be interesting to see who Obama picks, and how the nomination goes.
Click to expand...

Obama is going to be in a pickle on this, no matter what he does. The far left is going to want a radical, and Obama won't deliver it. He can't, without losing the moderates. And the Republicans, still smarting over their defeat on health care, are going to stonewall any nomination completely. One of two things is going to happen. There will either be an invocation of the "nuclear option", since there won't be anyone on either side willing to compromise this time, or Obama will make this a recess appointment. I predict the former, as Republicans won't be able to reverse it, as they could if they took over after a recess appointment has been made.
 
jallman said:
I'm not familiar with this Party of No. Is this just another contrived hyperpartisan term meant to cloud discussion rather than open the channels to honest debate?
Click to expand...

The Party of ‘No’ is the label I have attached to the Republican Party because of its members propensity to say “No” to everything, no matter in many cases having sponsored precisely the same thing as recently as the year before, e.g., Pay-as-you-go.

I don't think that's hyper-partisan. I'm not calling the Republicans, a bunch of fascists or worse (is there worse?); I'm not twisting the party name up to offend. I am criticizing them and I think I am thoroughly justified in doing so. I think the Republican Party leadership has acted irresponsibly in a time of national urgency.

There is nothing wrong in being partisan. I do so as best I can accurately and without rancor. I don't think politics is a zero-sum game where one side's victory must come at the other side's expense. But, I do think we must evaluate and make judgments about what we are for and what we are against. That's the point in participating in forums such as these, it's an exercise in working these things out.
 
danarhea said:
Obama is going to be in a pickle on this, no matter what he does. The far left is going to want a radical, and Obama won't deliver it. He can't, without losing the moderates. And the Republicans, still smarting over their defeat on health care, are going to stonewall any nomination completely. One of two things is going to happen. There will either be an invocation of the "nuclear option", since there won't be anyone on either side willing to compromise this time, or Obama will make this a recess appointment. I predict the former, as Republicans won't be able to reverse it, as they could if they took over after a recess appointment has been made.
Click to expand...

What do you think the political fallout of blocking the nomination by republicans will have, and the use of the "nuclear option" will have? Will this have an effect in November?
 
Chappy said:
The Party of ‘No’ is the label I have attached to the Republican Party
Click to expand...

Oh so it is a hyper partisan smear tactic intent on clouding the discussion with idiotic sound bytes rather than open an honest discussion.

As long as we're clear about that.
 
jallman said:
Oh so it is a hyper partisan smear tactic intent on clouding the discussion with idiotic sound bytes rather than open an honest discussion.

As long as we're clear about that.
Click to expand...

Well she's not wrong. The republican party has time and time again said no to just about everything the President has asked for, or introduced. and alot of those ideas were the republicans ideas! that they supported but dropped as soon as the president picked them up. What cowardice and bad sports.

Anyway, who thinks Joseph Stalin is a front runner for supreme court?
 
Chappy said:
No bending out of shape here. :)

I just have no confidence in the core element of the Republican Senate caucus being responsible and focusing on the nominee's qualifications.

But, we'll see, and I for one would enjoy being pleasantly surprised by some honest statesmanship showing up in the upper chamber.
Click to expand...

Just curious.... did you consider the Democrats the "party of no" when they blocked and filibustered Bush's judicial nominations ???

Back to the topic.. it doesn't matter too much who Obama chooses. He'll be simple replacing one left leaning judge with another. He's certainly not going to nominate a conservative and I agree that he won't nominate a far left jurist. He's in enough hot water now with out turning up the heat more.
 
Gill said:
Back to the topic.. it doesn't matter too much who Obama chooses. He'll be simple replacing one left leaning judge with another. He's certainly not going to nominate a conservative and I agree that he won't nominate a far left jurist. He's in enough hot water now with out turning up the heat more.
Click to expand...

Do you agree with Dan that the republicans will block any nominee that Obama might pick?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom