TexasCHLforum.com

sjfcontrol wrote:


Frankly, I don't care about any of that. He has put (and will put) more republicans into judgeships than Obama has/will. In a two-man race, he still wins.

With both houses in control of the Republicans, Obama can't put a judge anywhere. Even to get a supreme court judge appointed would require approval. He would be stopped cold.

And also, is a justice who may or may not be conservative (you never know how they will act on the bench) worth more trillions of debt and more permenate social programs??

The governmental madness has to stop. Romney will most likely just continue it. JMO

RPB wrote:

sjfcontrol wrote:As I said earlier in this thread to the person who was giving that same information...

Exactly how may Republicans has Obama nominated for the courts? How many do you expect him to?

Who wins?

R-Obama-ney will get Obama to stay in office since not many Conservatives will vote for him, (I certainly won't) so it isn't a contest between Obama and Romney anyway.

Proving my original point that those that refuse to vote for the Republican nominee, whoever that is and for whatever reason, are casting votes for Obama.

IF it's OK with you to have Obama win a second term, then stay home on election day (or vote for a hopeless 3rd party candidate).

fulano wrote: With both houses in control of the Republicans, Obama can't put a judge anywhere. Even to get a supreme court judge appointed would require approval. He would be stopped cold.

Never happen. No matter who O would nominate they would sail through the senate confirmations. No one in the senate has enough sand to stop it.

Anygunanywheere

anygunanywhere wrote:

fulano wrote: With both houses in control of the Republicans, Obama can't put a judge anywhere. Even to get a supreme court judge appointed would require approval. He would be stopped cold.

Never happen. No matter who O would nominate they would sail through the senate confirmations. No one in the senate has enough sand to stop it.

Anygunanywheere

In the past, maybe there would be no stopping a conformation, but, this is not your granddad's government.

The whole problem can be avoided if the Republicans nominate a conservative for the first time in the 21st century. The voters will have a clear choice and nobody threatens to stay home because the candidates are identical except for skin colour.

There is one flaw in my idea. It assumes the Republicans want to win.

fulano wrote:

anygunanywhere wrote:

fulano wrote: With both houses in control of the Republicans, Obama can't put a judge anywhere. Even to get a supreme court judge appointed would require approval. He would be stopped cold.

Never happen. No matter who O would nominate they would sail through the senate confirmations. No one in the senate has enough sand to stop it.

Anygunanywheere

In the past, maybe there would be no stopping a conformation, but, this is not your granddad's government.

You are saying that the current senate or even the next one if it is majority republicans will not confirm a liberal leftist SCOTUS appointee? You really think so?

I disagree. There is not enough ethics in the senate or house or for that matter the entire fed to do what is right.

Anygunanywhere

unhappycamper wrote:The whole problem can be avoided if the Republicans nominate a conservative for the first time in the 21st century. The voters will have a clear choice and nobody threatens to stay home because the candidates are identical except for skin colour.

There is one flaw in my idea. It assumes the Republicans want to win.

My sentiments exactly!

The Repubs apparently didn't want to win in '08 and they ain't doin' a whole lot better in '12...so far.

Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose.

The NRA will never endorse this anti gunner. We have shot ourselves in the foot again.

What is his position TODAY? He is flip flopper with a distinction on his shoulders.

Let him spell it out today!

We will have to wait and hear his speech in the Annual NRA meeting: http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/20 ... gun-owner/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Oldgringo wrote:Back on point: who knows what Mitt Romney, or any other politician, truly feels about anything until after they are elected?

I know how my candidate will be cause he has been consistent for over 30 years!

GeekDad wrote:

Oldgringo wrote:Back on point: who knows what Mitt Romney, or any other politician, truly feels about anything until after they are elected?

I know how my candidate will be cause he has been consistent for over 30 years!

I'll give you that on Ron Paul, the man has been consistent. I don't think anyone has to wonder where Ron Paul stands on an issue.

Can Obama put a recess appointment to the supreme court?

Beiruty wrote:What is his position TODAY? He is flip flopper with a distinction on his shoulders.

Let him spell it out today!

What Willard's position on any given issue is today happens to be irrelevant, because it could be something completely different tomorrow. The man has been on both sides of every issue imaginable, sometimes switching back and forth multiple times based on political expediency.