GOP showing signs of backing down from vow to block Obama SCOTUS pick

The Washington Times ^ | 02/16/16 | Dave Boyer and Stephen Dinan

[Enlightened1]

SenateJudiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, Iowa Republican, didn't rule out confirmation hearings and a vote by his panel on an Obama selection.

"I would wait until the nominee is made before I would make any decision," Mr. Grassley said Tuesday in a conference call with Iowa radio reporters. "In other words, take it a step at a time."

Asked whether he thought the controversy over filling the court vacancy might endanger his re-election chances this fall, Mr. Grassley said, "I think I have a responsibility to perform, and I can't worry about the election. I've got to do my job as a senator, whatever it is. And there will be a lot of tough votes between now and the next election."

His comments appeared to be a softening from a statement shortly after Justice Scalia's death, when Mr. Grassley said it was "standard practice" not to nominate or confirm candidates for the Supreme Court in an election year.

"It only makes sense that we defer to the American people who will elect a new president to select the next Supreme Court Justice," Mr. Grassley said in a statement Saturday.

Sen. Thom Tillis, North Carolina Republican, voiced caution about blocking any Obama nominee automatically.

"I think we fall into the trap if [we] just simply say, sight unseen, we fall into the trap of being obstructionists," Mr. Tillis said on Tyler Cralle's radio show.

[Democratic-Republican]

"Thus, I'll never understand the rise of Trump over Cruz."

It's pretty simple. Trump is getting more support than Cruz for the same reasons that more people listen to Lady Gaga than Rachmaninoff and more people will watch the Star Wars movie than 13 Hours.

1) Poor taste;
2) Limited education;
3) Marginal intellect;

Hank

Ah, you two are the smart intelligent ones and everyone else are stupid vulgarian hicks. And you wonder why some Cruzers turn people off.

An alternate theory is that all those people are NOT stupid vulgarian hicks but instead far wiser than yourselves, and want to, and intend to win this one by backing someone who can compete in the swing states.

It wasn't that long ago that Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid were also dissin' large groups of stupid vulgarian hicks ...

[Freedom56v2]

Lost my bet.

I didn’t think the Vichy republicans would cave until the Friday evening news cycle.

---

Sadly true ;(
Though Wickedly clever comment!! ;)

[Democratic-Republican]

Giving
Obama
Power!

Good one! I wish I thought of that. Modification ...

Giving
Obama
Power
enthusiastically!

[goodtomato]

“We play that game, time after time”. Time to play the ballot box game. Do as we wish or your out! It’s that simple!

[goodtomato]

Well “ditch Mitch” blew that strategy before the bell!

[GraceG]

The GOPe has a 48 hour spine.....sometimes less....

[wastedyears]

Is anybody really surprised?

[Freedom56v2]

the public is tired of them, and will elect Trump.

Many say it could be a bad thing, but the RINO’s brought it on. It’s like saying obama is the greatest gun salesman, meaning anything the RINO’s do only helps Trump.

---

Agreed. Upside is trump elected.
However, Supremes have lifetime appointments—Trump has 4 or 8 years. Do we win the battle but not the war?

[Califreak]

I didn’t come up with it, another FR member did, I forget who.

Yours is better.

[Axenolith]

Or they could just go to 7 justices when Ginsburg retires...

[Axenolith]

The main downside to that is that he’s a wildcard in picking a judge...

[dp0622]

“we might fall into the trap....”

yeah, of having a #####ing spine!!!!!

guys, we have to leave the keyboard and do something if they start an approval process.

i dont know what, i’m not smart enough, but i’ll follow someone who is.

it will be another death blow to the republic.

dem animals riot at the drop of a pin. I’m not saying we should ever do that, but we need to do something.

[gleeaikin]

He’s from Iowa. Having spent some time there I have the impression that Iowans tend to favor fair play. Also there are a lot of Democrats. He probably can’t afford to look/sound too obstructionist.

[wiggen]

First off Grassly is a pretty stand up guy. Second saying no right off the bat was probably a bad idea. Red meat for the masses for sure but way better to say of course we’ll listen and then say no. There are a great many voters who don’t want to hear such partisanship before a nominee is even presented. Now you impress them and later reject and impress us. Its a game and the Republicans tried to pass go on the first throw of the dice.

[Bobby_Taxpayer]

Trump smump. He won’t have anything to say about it. The lame brains in the Senate will wait till after the election to acquies in a lame Dutch session.

[vannrox]

He is right. I do not see this as any kind of retreat.

[jokemoke]

This is exactly why Trump will win this election.

[Bryanw92]

>>Cruz was the first one to say that the Senate should not take up any nominees during Obama’s term.

>>Thus, I’ll never understand the rise of Trump over Cruz.

How are the two even connected? The idea that the senate should not confirm an Obama appointment is not exactly revolutionary. I was online when the breaking news popped up and my first thought was that the Senate better not confirm Obama’s replacement. So the first person I heard say it was me.

So I’ll choose my candidate over more than just one comment.

[TMA62]

I agree. The senate can’t stop obama in naming a nominee. But they can not schedule any hearings, nor committee votes, etc. They can have the nominee wait until January of next year until obama leaves office.

[TMA62]

I agree. The senate can’t stop obama in naming a nominee. But they can not schedule any hearings, nor committee votes, etc. They can have the nominee wait until January of next year until obama leaves office.

Also, they can vote ‘no’ in the committee and vote no in the senate. In other words, there are MANY areas where the republicans can appear as reasonable but still halt any election year nominees.