With a new president on the horizon, Democrat Chuck Schumer calls for a delay in replacing Scalia


No no no, you’ll have to wait

Time for the new guy to have a chance 

New York Sen. Charles E. Schumer, a powerful member of the Democratic leadership, said Friday the Senate should not confirm another U.S. Supreme Court nominee under President Obama “except in extraordinary circumstances.”

“We should reverse the presumption of confirmation,” Schumer told the American Constitution Society convention in Washington. “The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. We cannot afford to see Justice Scalia replaced by another Stephens, or Justice Alito by another Ginsberg.”

Well okay, that’s not quite what he said on this morning’s news programs, when he called for the Senate to give genuine consideration to whomever Obama selects, it’s what he said (with some Justices’ names reversed) back in 2007, when Bush had 18 months left in his term, and Schumer didn’t want to see any Supreme Court vacancies filled during that period.

There’s nothing unexpected about political hypocrisy – in fact, the Republicans are all over the networks this morning too, staking out the 2007 Schumer position, but it can cause one to sigh.



Filed under Uncategorized

25 responses to “With a new president on the horizon, Democrat Chuck Schumer calls for a delay in replacing Scalia

  1. Anonymous

    Amy Schumer is funny sometimes too….

    • Walt

      Amy Schumer is never funny. She is HORRIBLE.

      • Anonymous

        I would assume any “easy ” girl would be your kind of girl….

      • PackYiur

        Amy Schumer is finished.
        She has been caught red handed stealing other comedians jokes.
        There are multiple comedians coming forward, posting videos of their work from some years ago, then cutting to recents stand up specials, and movies where she blatantly rips the same joke, sometimes verbatim!
        She is a heffer, a thief, a liar, and a deny’er
        Show is over for her!
        Good riddance!

  2. Anonymous

    Democratic Senate confirmed Anthony Kennedy in 1988, in Reagan’s last year. But we are dealing with the stupid party, you know…..

  3. FF

    Obama should nominate whomever he chooses, and the senate should use its constitutional prerogatives and approve or deny that person. Plus, I don’t know what everyone is in an uproar about, Justice Ginsberg is about a year away from retirement, Breyer maybe 2 or 3. The glacial pace of the court ensures not much precedent can be established in that time

    Then you have the fact that a 4-4 court upholds lower court rulings – and most of the cases conservatives have rejoiced over have been 5-4 reversals. The Clean Plan the court just put a stay on was a reversal of a unanimous decision so when it comes back to the court, it’s put in play again

    I think politically, the republicans get more enthusiasm selling their base on the court to change “back” rather than make the presidential election some kind of referendum. Let endangered republican senate candidates in blue states vote to approve. Imagine if this delay thing resulted in the flip of the senate and a republican president? The first 6 months of that administration would be a disaster

    Other than that, I’d think the republicans would be better off to Bork an Obama nominee than to do nothing. I don’t think it would hold

    • Good advice, FF. But this is The Stupid Party. They don’t know how “to Bork.” They can’t hold faux hearings, pretend to be troubled, and reluctantly vote no. They go thermal nuclear from the start — look at what the idiot McConnell said, “The American people‎ should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President.”

      The Dems, and Obama in particular, will have a field day with this. It will extinguish whatever small chance any Republican would have had in November. It is political malpractice in the first degree.

  4. Anon

    The Kennedy argument is flawed to a degree. It is standard practice for Supreme court justices to time their retirements to allow for like minded justices to take their place. Nixon appointee Lewis Powell (Kennedy’s predecessor) retired in 1987 at age 80 in part to ensure his replacement was nominated by a republican president.This is completely in contrast to the situation of Reagan appointee Scalia, who never would have voluntarily retired under an Obama administration.

  5. Anonymous

    Below is an excerpt from a CNN article. The bigger unspoken loss here is that Scalia (and Ginsberg) had very different interpretation of the law, but they were best friends and consummate professionals. Truly a class act. Unfortunately we don’t see this anymore from either side of the aisle, I honestly believe the Dem’s, lead by Obama are the worst offenders of unprofessionalism in today’s political world.

    Washington (CNN)—Polar opposites on the bench, Justices Antonin Scalia and Ruth Bader Ginsburg had a long, deep, an unexpected friendship.

    Ginsburg remembered her “best buddy” as someone who both revered the Constitution and the Supreme Court.

    “Justice Scalia once described as the peak of his days on the bench an evening at the Opera Ball when he joined two Washington National Opera tenors at the piano for a medley of songs. He called it the famous Three Tenors performance,” she said in a statement on Sunday. “He was, indeed, a magnificent performer. It was my great good fortune to have known him as working colleague and treasured friend.”

    During a joint appearance with the woman he also has called his “best buddy” on the bench, Scalia said, “Why don’t you call us the odd couple?”

    “What’s not to like?” Scalia joked at the event hosted by the Smithsonian Associates. “Except her views on the law, of course.”

    • peg

      I loved this article, Anon. What an ideal example of how two extremely bright people with viewpoints that are often at odds with one another can still be close buddies.

      Sometimes I truly despair of the vitriol that goes around today. Is it seriously impossible to be friends with someone whose opinions differ from yours on abortion, gay marriage, single payer, gun rights, etc.etc? For many of us, the answer is “Yes; impossible.”

      What a sad world it is that these people demand others march in lockstep to their perceptions – or be shunned!

  6. Just the Facts!

    Get real guys….Shumer is a plant for Hillary. Hillary and Obama hate each other. He’s just laying the ground work for her possible win for the White House and wants to reserve a spot for their radical appointee….JTF!

  7. Dollar Bill

    On the Scalia vacancy, the Constitution is quite clear: a Democrat President does not have the authority in the last 11 months of his 4 year term to appoint a SC justice. Because strict constructionism. Because Obummer killed Scalia in his sleep. Because the American people deserve to be heard. Or something some scrotum-gobbling, perverted homo fag said that CF read on Drudge. Only a libturd could disagree.

    • AJ

      DB, you’re back! When the Hildabeast screws Bernie out of the nomination (you can count on it), you’re going to vote for fellow outsider Trump, right? Cause the insiders can’t be allowed to f*ck the people and the TPP must be stopped at all costs. Pass it on.

      Yes to all of your questions because only a stinkin’ Libturd could disagree.

    • housecat

      Bill, it seems you’ve caught a sense of humor during your extended absence. If it weren’t for the tell-tale Marxist Red gravatar, I would have sworn this comment was a parody. Btw, how many mgs are you taking for that?

    • FF

      That’s not Bill. That’s the ghost of Scalia spoofing him

    • Anonymous

      Because Jesus..