MERRICK GARLAND

I think I’d vote for him were I a Senator.  I’d at least consider it.  (Actually, since I wrote that, I’ve decided I probably would not)

When I heard Obama yesterday morning in the Rose Garden say we’re “at a time when our politics are so polarized….we should play it straight,” I couldn’t believe my ears.   I’m wondering if he ever heard this:

“It is about a principle, not a person, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said on the Senate floor, reiterating his vow not to meet with Obama’s nominee in an election year.

I’m betting he had heard what McConnell had said after Scalia died, aren’t you?  But Obama, ever the GREAT DIVIDER, decides to nominate a judge who most people could and might say should please both sides of the aisle.  Very brilliant on Obama’s part because it makes Republicans look even worse for not voting up or down on Garland.

Of course, THIS had happened during Reagan, and that’s worth reading.  Does it make McConnell look like a hypocrite?   Of course, it was  clearly when things hadn’t been destroyed by the hideous OBAMA CREATED DIVISION in the government that this happened:  Democrats controlled the Senate and Anthony Kennedy was confirmed 97-0

Obama is at his typical GREAT DIVISION MAKING again;  he was told “we won’t buy it, it’s not the person, it’s the principle,” yet Obama says “we are so polarized we should play it straight?”  Am I missing something here?

Then there was this, which really interested me:

“He(Garland)  put himself through Harvard Law School by working as a tutor, by stocking shoes in a shoe store, and — what is a painful moment for any young man — selling his comic book collection,” Obama said. “It’s tough. Been there.

“Been where?” Obama?  I have never heard a thing about who paid for Harvard (other than that wizened rich Arab whose video lasted about 3 days and which I happened to see, saying he’d paid for everything for Obama, but then the video disappeared.  I might add that’s the only video I’ve seen disappear so we need to stop sending videos around that say “the left’s going to delete this video so watch it now!” Some are dated 4 years ago).  But I digress.

THIS NOMINATION IS ANOTHER VERY SAD VERSION OF OBAMA’S DIVISIVENESS AND NONE ON THE LEFT HAS PICKED UP ON THAT, OF COURSE.   CNN’S SPENDING THE DAY RUNNING THE TAPE OF REPUBLICAN SENATOR ORIN HATCH RAVING ABOUT GARLAND A FEW YEARS BACK…..In other words “See? A Republican liked him then, they’re only turning now because they won’t be agreeable! They’re the “party of NO!”..(BS)

Thoughts?
Z

Advertisements
This entry was posted in America, Obama, Supreme Court. Bookmark the permalink.

17 Responses to MERRICK GARLAND

  1. Isn’t the Senate Constitutionally-obligated to hold hearings for a SCOTUS nominee?

  2. The HuffPo article certainly does make McConnell look like a hypocrite!

    Is he trying to make sure that Hillary is elected in November? I believe he has stated that he’d rather see Hillary as POTUS rather than Trump.

  3. jerrydablade says:

    Appease the CNN types by presenting this guy with a participation trophy, patting his head and sending him home.

  4. Kid says:

    Bubba Clinton put him in his current position and on the 2nd Try. That’s good enough for me to not vote for the guy.

  5. geeez2014 says:

    Kid, I heard more after I’d written this post and am not as sure I’d give him a yes vote than I was…probably not. But he does seem to be an honorable man.

    Jerry..exactly

    AOW, no…they’re not obliged by anything to vote yes or no from what I’ve heard. And I haven’t heard that McConnell said that.

  6. geeez2014 says:

    SORRY TWO BLOG POSTS POSTED AT THE SAME TIME…THE ONE THAT WAS UP WILL BE UP TOMORROW. THANKS FOR YOUR COMMENTS….

  7. Silverfiddle says:

    No way I’d vote for that guy. He’s qualified, for sure, but he would tip over the ideology of the court.

    McConnell better stand firm on this one. I predict he allows the Senators like Kirk and Ayotte who are going through reelection campaigns in blue states to kick up a big fuss and make big, showy, public stands against him, which is all well and good.

    If you see them cave and say they will hold hearings, it’s all over. The backroom deals will start and he will be confirmed.

  8. geeez2014 says:

    SF…ya, I’ve learned a bit more and he’s lefter than I’d thought.

    You predict he’ll let Kirk and Ayotte, up for reelection in Dem states, kick up a fuss against him, but that they’d at least have given him a chance to impress Demj voters??? Is that how you think they’ll play it?
    If they have hearings, it’s over, you’re right.

  9. geeez2014 says:

    Does anybody agree with me about what Obama pulled? He wants to pull people together (ya, right) and then does exactly what mcConnell had asked him not to?
    And the LECTURE Obama gave the Republicans about “Doing their duty” “because I’ve done MINE”

    WOW.

  10. Kid says:

    Z, Yea obama always says (reads form a teleprompter something they write for him) the opposite of what’s happening. You could fill books with all the BS. This is what the dems do though, they know their supporters are by and large lazy and stupid and will never verify anything, so they say whatever sounds good. How about clinton recently “No Americans died in Libya” and “I saved America” talking to unions ion Michigan. Someone pass me an air sick bag. And sorry for mentioning the beast.

  11. I’ll see your McConnell hypocrisy with Schumer, and raise you a Biden.
    No vote.

  12. Silverfiddle says:

    I can’t believe President Obama picked a heterosexual, CIS-gendered, white male. I thought he would pick a minority, female, person of color to really grind it in on the hated GOP.

  13. Sparky says:

    That’s rich that man totally devoid of principle would say it’s about principle.
    The Repub’s had better not allow this Garland turkey through or they are through. He’s VERY anti-2nd Amendment.

  14. bocopro says:

    Well . . . I see it through 2 different filters:

    First, Garland is pretty much anti-2nd, and if that one ever goes, the whole structure comes crashing down.

    Second, if the “establishment” GOPers cave on this, even a little, they simply verify and authenticate the wave of disgust, distrust, discontent, and dismay that Trump has surfed into prominence.

    And at THAT point, the 2nd will be of paramount importance because the only option left to citizens will be that ominous justification for revolution “that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.”

    Somebody oughta read that aloud every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday morning when the House and Senate are in session.

  15. geeez2014 says:

    bocopro; some probably NEVER have read that!

    Sparky; ya, I’m learning he’s too anti-2nd for America.

    Kid, ya, do NOT mention her again 🙂

    SF…it is surprising….at least they can’t call us racist for not approving Garland; but I guess they can we’re bigots because he’s Jewish. Wait for it.

    Ed….NEVER ‘raise Biden’ 🙂

  16. John M. Berger says:

    I’m with Sparky on the anti- 2nd Amendment issue.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s