TexasCHLforum.com

SewTexas wrote:I completely understand that they were on opposite sides of the spectrum. Here's the thing though. This is a President who now is going to want his nominee to get a hearing. This is a President who as Senator voted to block 4 nominees and is already fussing about the senate possibly blocking his nominee before the Judge is even buried! If he went to the funeral he would be able to say that he was the bigger person, he "was trying to bridge the gap" yada yada yada. 'Course it would also have made him look more presidential if he'd have put on a tie to have his televised words after the Judge passed....
I miss Reagan.

At this point, ideology is irrelevant. Justice Scalia SERVED his nation with great distinction, humility, humor, and a keen insight, for thirty years and the presidencies of Reagan, GHW Bush, Clinton, GW Bush, and Obama. He DESERVES the UNQUALIFIED RESPECT of this president.

He has not gotten it, which given the general lack of class which Obama exhibits SO frequently as to be national joke, it is not surprising.

If Justice Ginsberg succumbs to her cancer eventually, and we have a republican president at the time, I would expect NO LESS from that president than I expect from Obama - regardless of her particular judicial philosophy.

SewTexas wrote:

WildBill wrote:

The Annoyed Man wrote:Obama will not attend Scalia funeral....sends Biden instead: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/o ... ral-219384

Not too surprising. That duty is frequently delegated to the Vice President.

Bush went to and spoke at Renquist's funeral. It's not surprising in that Obama couldn't be bothered to go to his own aunt's funeral.

He's too busy running the Surrender to Terror campaign........

Obama will not attend Scalia funeral....sends Biden instead: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/o ... ral-219384

WildBill wrote:

LSUTiger wrote:The CIA Heart Attack Gun apparently really exists. A quick google search pulls up numerous articles about it. If it really works or not using 1975 technology? IDK. But I think if we can fake a moon landing we can perfect technologies to effect hard to detect cause of death by 2016. Technology has gotten better in 41 years I'm sure.

Whether or not a it was used in Scalia's death or even if a conspiracy exist, is up for debate.

People question events and its OK but if infowars comes up with the same questions, suddenly it's not credible?

The idea is simple IMHO, it's possible and it's fishy. The timing is perfect. Too perfect.

Since 1972 we've lost our ability to fake moon landings. That's why we haven't been back since.

BWAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAA!!!!!

LSUTiger wrote:

mojo84 wrote:Guys, I just can't consider anything from Infowars as credible.

They've just been wrong with too many of their conspiracy theories. While I do belief there are some fishy things surrounding this, I do not think Infowars is a credible source to use.

The CIA Heart Attack Gun apparently really exists. A quick google search pulls up numerous articles about it. If it really works or not using 1975 technology? IDK. But I think if we can fake a moon landing we can perfect technologies to effect hard to detect cause of death by 2016. Technology has gotten better in 41 years I'm sure.

Whether or not a it was used in Scalia's death or even if a conspiracy exist, is up for debate.

People question events and its OK but if infowars comes up with the same questions, suddenly it's not credible?

The idea is simple IMHO, it's possible and it's fishy. The timing is perfect. Too perfect.

Faked the moon landings? You had me up until that point....then you lost me.

Apollo astronaut Al Bean landed on the moon during the Apollo 12 mission is the friend of a friend of mine. My friend is the actor Dave Foley. Dave spent a lot of time with Bean, asking him about the Apollo 12 mission, while he prepared for playing the part of Al Bean in the "From the Earth to the Moon" mini-series Tom Hanks made for HBO. Al Bean is one of seven STILL LIVING men who walked on the moon. Are you saying that all 12 of these men were/are liars, including the seven who are still alive.......and that they continue to lie about this? Your saying that MY father in law, who worked on the Apollo program (he designed and built guidance packages for spacecraft during the 40 years he worked at NASA/JPL) and witnessed a lunar launch at Canaveral is a liar? I know a LOT of good, honorable, decent people who worked on the space program, and 12 American men DID walk on the moon. They left artifacts there which can be seen today......not to mention the descent stages of the lunar modules which were left behind as the LEMs blasted off and returned to dock with the command modules in lunar orbit, and which can be seen today.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/LRO/n ... sites.html

This picture was taken on Sept. 5, 2011 by the NASA Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter of the Apollo 17 landing site.


This one was taken of the same site in 2009, with different lighting conditions:


Apollo 15 landing site:


Etc., etc., etc.

Please.

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Any person nominated by Obama must first get out of the Senate Judiciary Committee before the Senate debates and votes. Chairman Grassley has given a strong indication his committee will not act on any nomination.

Chas.

On top of that, have we already forgotten that SCOTUS struck down recess appointments in 2014 when it ruled that the administration had violated the Constitution in 2012 with recess appointments?

http://www.scotusblog.com/2014/06/court ... n-english/

Court strikes down recess appointments: In Plain English

With only four decisions remaining when the Justices took the bench today, we knew we would have to get something good: all four decisions had the potential to be blockbusters. And we did indeed, starting with a unanimous declaration by the Supreme Court that the president violated the Constitution in 2012 when he appointed three commissioners to the National Labor Relations Board during a brief recess of the Senate. Let’s talk about the decision and what it means in Plain English.

As unlikely as it sounds, the Court’s decision in National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning was its first pronouncement on the scope of the president’s power to make recess appointments. And the Court’s opinion was a mixed bag for both sides. Noel Canning, the soft-drink bottling company challenging the president’s recess appointments to the NLRB, and the conservative and business groups that supported it certainly regarded it as a victory in the sense that the specific recess appointments at issue were deemed invalid. But the president and his supporters could also declare victory, at least to a point: the Court upheld his power to make other recess appointments – as long as they are made during recesses that last at least ten days.

So, if the Senate keeps its recesses to less than 10 days, Obama won't be able to make a recess appointment........ and THAT raises the specter of what Democrats did in Texas and Minnesota when they left the state so that they couldn't be compelled to vote on something. Wouldn't it be surpassing strange if Senate democrats "ran away from home" for 12 days, effectively paralyzing the Judiciary Committee, giving Obama a chance to claim it as a recess, and appoint a "recess" SCOTUS justice? I doubt it could ever happen, but still......... kind of a creepy thought, isn't it?