This just really and truly boggles the mind:
Megyn Kelly stated Thursday evening on The Kelly File that she can find no instance in history where a sitting president of the United States has failed to attend the funeral of a sitting Supreme Court Justice. It’s an unprecedented move on the part of Obama, who once again fails to uphold his duty as president, represent the country and set an example for the American people.
“If we want to reduce partisanship, we can start by honoring great public servants who we disagree with.”
The first American president to shirk attending a funeral of a sitting Supreme Court Justice (while demanding he be able to replace that Justice on the Court). All I can say is that I suppose history continues unbroken – BECAUSE BARACK OBAMA IS NOT AN AMERICAN PRESIDENT; HE IS AN UNAMERICAN PRESIDENT.
An incredibly Obama has said over and over since Scalia’s death that he has the right and the duty to nominate a replacement for Scalia.
That’s actually technically true, and all sides affirm that fact. But Obama had every bit as much of a right and a duty to honor the Justice he was demanding to replace at his funeral.
And since Obama callously and cynically and decisively shirked that particular right and duty, the United States Senate – which has the right and duty to “advise and consent” on ANY presidential nomination, has the right and duty to ADVISE Obama NOT to exploit this death by nominating anyone and the right and duty to absolutely REFUSE to consent to anybody Obama nominates.
The SAME Constitution that gives a president the right to nominate a Supreme Court Justice to fill a vacancy gives the Senate the right to say, “Up yours!” to a presidential nomination.
As a Senator himself, Barack Obama FILIBUSTERED Republican nominees to the Supreme Court:
However, the truth is that, when they were senators, Obama, Biden, and Clinton all tried to filibuster Justice Alito’s nomination to the court – and other Democratic party leaders such as NY Senator Chuck Schumer reveled in the idea that they were able to block every Bush #43 nomination to the federal courts.
“It is my view that if the president goes the way of Presidents Fillmore and Johnson and presses an election year nomination the Senate Judiciary Committee should seriously consider not scheduling confirmation hearings on the nomination until ever — until after the political campaign season is over.” — Sen. Joe Biden, June 25, 1992
So all you’ve got to do is just refer to this as “the Biden Rule.” But it’s a rule and it was started by Democrats. And now they’re screaming at us for following THEIR rules.
While Democrats in the upper chamber – including Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York and former Sen. Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, both of which called for blocking former President George W. Bush’s nominations – have slammed the GOP for its decision not to consider a nominee until after a new president is elected, Democrats have not always held that stance. The Democrat-controlled Senate passed a resolution in 1960 preventing a recess appointment, much to the dismay of Republicans.
As first reported by The Washington Post – S.RES. 334, also known as Expressing the Sense of the Senate That The President Should Not Make Recess Appointments to the Supreme Court, Except to Prevent or End a Breakdown in the Administration of the Court’s Business – passed the Senate in a 48-33 vote in an attempt to prevent former President Dwight Eisenhower from filling a seat last-minute.
Democrats have frequently played this same game. New York Sen. Charles E. Schumer, now the Senate Minority Leader and leader of all the Senate Democrats, said when a Republican was president that the Senate should not confirm another U.S. Supreme Court nominee under President Bush “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 Stevens replaced by another Roberts, or Justice Ginsburg by another Alito.”
And oh, I can go on. The Democratic Party is the party that turned the name of a Supreme Court nominee into a verb by so utterly pouring out their demonic hate to poison the nomination that the process became known as “Borking.” It had never been done before the Party of Cockroach Fascism started it. This infamous Ted Kennedy slander was the worst of the slanders:
“Robert Bork’s America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens’ doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists would be censored at the whim of government, and the doors of the federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for whom the judiciary is often the only protector of the individual rights that are the heart of our democracy.”
Robert Bork was a good man and eminently qualified to sit on the Court. But Democrats are truly breathtakingly evil and hypocritical people.
Speaking of “being qualified,” Barack Obama actually openly ACKNOWLEDGED that Judge Roberts was qualified. But that didn’t MATTER then:
Obama admitted that Roberts was eminently qualified. He praised him highly.
“There is absolutely no doubt in my mind Judge Roberts is qualified to sit on the highest court in the land. Moreover, he seems to have the comportment and the temperament that makes for a good judge. He is humble, he is personally decent, and he appears to be respectful of different points of view. It is absolutely clear to me that Judge Roberts truly loves the law. He couldn’t have achieved his excellent record as an advocate before the Supreme Court without that passion for the law…”
But, no he wasn’t going to vote for him anyway.
“I ultimately have to give more weight to his deeds and the overarching political philosophy that he appears to have shared with those in power than to the assuring words that he provided me in our meeting. The bottom line is this: I will be voting against John Roberts’ nomination.”
In short, Obama chose to vote against Roberts because of his perceived conservative politics. Nothing else.
Republicans have the SAME right and duty to reject any judge Obama nominates simply because they don’t agree with Obama’s “overarching political philosophy.” Period.
Democrats are abject, disgusting, despicable hypocrite vermin. And their past actions need to now catch up to them. They need to be exposed for what they are.
Here’s another thing: the Senate is now firmly in Republican hands (after disgraceful Democrats were caught being evil maybe a million times too often). But when Democrats owned the Senate, they shoved their crap right down the Republicans’ throats and changed the damn Senate rules to do it with a process that was so toxic to the Constitution that it was called “the nuclear option.”
On November 21, 2013, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid declared that “unbelievable, unprecedented obstruction” by Republican filibusters had made the confirmation process “completely unworkable.” As a result, he said, Democrats were forced to eliminate virtually all nomination filibusters. […]
For nearly all of its history, proceeding to a final vote on a matter before the Senate required a supermajority.
But not when Democrats stole the show.
Now, quite simply, they should be allowed to eat the fecal matter that forced down the throats of everyone who disagreed with them when they were in control.
The Republican majority Senate will do what the hell it wants and the Democrat minority will shut the hell up. By the Democrats’ own damn rules.
If Obama gave a flying damn about the unity of the United States that he has so fractured and broken that on the Republican side we have Donald Trump and on the Democratic side we have socialist Bernie Sanders, he would yield in this election year and allow the incoming president to nominate a Justice with the support of a majority of the people.
But Obama DOESN’T give a flying damn about uniting America. That was, as I pointed out only months into his dishonest presidency, merely one of his signature lies.
And Barack Obama just officially DISQUALIFIED himself from having ANY right to nominate Justice Antonin Scalia’s replacement by his pretty, cheap, and depraved refusal to honor that great man.
I think it’s beyond safe to say that were it Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s funeral, Barak Obama would have bothered to at least pretend he is a legitimate president and shown up.
But Obama is a rabid ideologue, so the demons that control every move he makes would not allow him to step into that cathedral to honor Justice Antonin Scalia.
For the record, I actually have far more respect for BOTH Ginsburg (whose opinions I despise) as WELL as Scalia (whose opinions I affirmed): because both of them were able to do what Barack Obama has NEVER ONE SINGLE TIME IN HIS LIFE been able to do; they were able to look past their differences and find the things they held in common and unite as dear friends around those things. That says a lot to praise about both of these figures.
Just as it says a lot about just how petty and vindictive a figure Barack Obama is.
Antonin Scalia believed that “there is no conflict between loving God and loving one’s country.” But Barack Obama is a malignant narcissist blasphemer who believes that HE is God and that to serve anyone or anything BUT Obama is sin.
The funeral is over. Obama never bothered to show up. Because Obama is a disgrace to the presidency and a disgrace to the United States of America that Justice Antonin Scalia spent his life faithfully serving. And even Ruth Bader Ginsburg would affirm that fact.