Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Seattle Conservative

The Senate has a Constitutional DUTY—Advise and Consent.

Sandra is wrong once again, and she is wrong on this Constitutional point, once again.

Consent means you agree. If you do not agree, you should not give your consent. Appointment is the prerogative of the President, and consent is the prerogative of the Senate. Consent is NOT a rubber stamp.

Let Obama nominate Kermit the Frog for all I care.

That doesn’t mean every senator should consent to it.

Vote whoever Obama nominates down if he/she would/will not adhere to the Constitution. There is no other position that should honestly be taken.

Someone call Linda Graham and tell him he’s wrong, too.


211 posted on 02/21/2016 9:29:39 AM PST by Alas Babylon! (As we say in the Air Force, "You know you're over the target when you start getting flak!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 190 | View Replies ]


To: Alas Babylon!

Agree 100%.


215 posted on 02/21/2016 9:37:29 AM PST by Seattle Conservative (God Bless and protect our troops)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies ]

To: Alas Babylon!

Good one AB!

I been pondering all this and once again the Republicans messed up. But there’s an unusual twist.

Here’s my take: The Republicans know that the base is pissed, the base has been pissed since McCain, the base got more pissed with Romney and now the base is nominating a reality show host for God’s sake.

So in knee jerk reaction, Mumbles McConnell comes out right away and says he won’t even let a nominee come up for a vote.

Now this “base” that so scares the elite,the elite think they are a bunch of un-thinking Rubes listening to Rush Limbaugh for God’s sake. They WANT to hear action words, so the elite decided, so tell them we’ll not even VOTE on a presidential Supreme court nominee.

Of course this crazed base that the elite GOP simply do not understand have fine brains and, given just a little time for thought, would probably shrug shoulders and agree to consider Obama nominees. Obama IS the President and the constitution does not state, to the effect, that the president is not to appoint supreme court nominees within a year of an election.

We also now must deal with air between the legs Republicans in the senate who will have to actually vote DOWN Obama’s choice, if justified of course, and defend their vote.

They would rather just not deal with it those bunch of lili-livered turds.....sheesh.

Bah, humbug.


222 posted on 02/21/2016 9:47:49 AM PST by Fishtalk (https://aschooloffishblog.wordpress.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies ]

To: Alas Babylon!

FNC just played a clip of Dingy harry reed several years ago stating the Senate has no obligation to even bring up the name,so they are toast.


253 posted on 02/21/2016 12:43:55 PM PST by rodguy911 (Sarah Palin our secret weapon --Home of the free because of the brave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson