Oops: Sheriff Joe Biden Said POTUS Shouldn’t Nominate A SCOTUS Candidate During The Political Season

Allahpundit call this “game over

In which C-SPAN archivists drop a 20-megaton political warhead directly on Obama and the Democrats. The best part? Biden actually goes a little further than Republicans have gone this month in opposing an election-year replacement for Scalia. Not only doesn’t he want a vacancy filled, not only doesn’t he want the Judiciary Committee to even hold hearings on a nomination, he wants the president to decline making a nomination altogether. The current GOP line is that Obama has every right as president to offer a nomination, just as the Senate has every right to withhold its advice and consent. Biden 1992 wanted Bush 41 to keep any nominations in his pocket. Amazing.

He wonders how the White House spins this, when we now have Biden, Obama, Harry Reid, and Chuck Schumer all on record calling for obstruction of Supreme Court nominees during election season.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

RSS feed

You can login to comment with:

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

15 Comments

Comment by Jeffery
2016-02-22 19:05:05

Vice President Biden was wrong then (provided we believe that you are not lying). Big deal. Joe has been wrong before.

It’s. Always. Politics.

Obama is required to submit a nominee and the Senate is required to “advise and consent”. It’s simple, regardless of what Mr. Biden said.

Was there an opening on the Supreme Court in 1992?

Clarence Thomas was confirmed 1n Oct 1991, Ginsburg in 1993, replacing “Whizzer” White who retired in June 1993. It was a shame that Justice Thurgood Marshall couldn’t wait to retire until Clinton took office. Think of how much better off America would have been without Thomas on the court.

What opening was Biden discussing? He wasn’t. I guess he was talking about the potential retirement of Justice White.

 
Comment by William Teach
2016-02-22 20:38:24

provided we believe that you are not lying

Are you delusional? Do you see the Tweet? From CSPAN. Do you think I created this? Do you think I manufactured a video of Joe from 1992? Get serious.

Obama is welcome to make a pick. He should make a pick. He’s entitled to make a pick. And the GOP is welcome to either ignore the pick or hold hearings and a vote.

 
Comment by Jeffery
2016-02-22 21:25:20

I thought maybe you got the link from jimhoft.

As I suspected based on 1) the source (right wingers) and 2) the fact there was no vacancy at the time, there’s more to the story.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2016/02/22/3752298/no-joe-biden-didnt-say-that-the-senate-should-block-supreme-court-nominees-during-an-election-year/

He concluded: “I believe that so long as the public continues to split its confidence between the branches, compromise is the responsible course both for the White House and for the Senate,” he said. “Therefore I stand by my position, Mr. President, if the President [George H.W. Bush] consults and cooperates with the Senate or moderates his selections absent consultation, then his nominees may enjoy my support as did Justices Kennedy and Souter.”

He was warning President Bush about nominating another extremist like Judge Bork. Obama should also follow the same advice – nominate (within reason – always a reach with right-wing extremists) a reasonable candidate. Then, it will fall upon the godawful Senate Republicans if they decide to torch a reasonable nominee. That’s what frightens the party of no Republicans – more bad press as anti-American obstructionists.

Never, ever trust a conservablog.

Biden’s office has released the following statement: “Nearly a quarter century ago, in June 1992, I gave a lengthy speech on the Senate floor about a hypothetical vacancy on the Supreme Court. Some critics say that one excerpt of my speech is evidence that I oppose filling a Supreme Court vacancy in an election year. This is not an accurate description of my views on the subject. Indeed, as I conclude in the same statement critics are pointing to today, urged the Senate and White House to work together to overcome partisan differences to ensure the Court functions as the Founding Fathers intended. That remains my position today.”

 
Comment by drowningpuppies
2016-02-22 21:44:42

He was warning President Bush about nominating another extremist like Judge Bork.

– the little guy who exaggerates often and claims Biden didn’t mean what he explicitly stated in his speech

 
Comment by John
2016-02-23 08:58:18

Quite frankly I do not pay as much attention to what politicians say as to what they do
As long as the GOP votes to confirm a well qualified nominee as the Senate Dems did for Bush I don’t really care what they say
Is that your position also Teach? That they should confirm a well qualified nominee of the POTUS ? That is what a majority of Americans believe

 
Comment by William Teach
2016-02-23 09:07:06

I thought maybe you got the link from jimhoft.

Jim Hoft writes for CSPAN? You’re an idiot. And you have lots of anger issues.

 
Comment by William Teach
2016-02-23 09:30:26

Your definition of well qualified is certainly different from mine. Anyone Obama puts up is not qualified, because they will certainly fail to follow the constitution. And, guess what? This is politics. The Dems failed to vote for many of Bush’s well qualified nominees for multiple levels of courts.

 
Comment by Jeffery
2016-02-23 10:12:29

It’s always politics. I agree.

But no, Democratic nominees are not automatically disqualified because their political opinions differ from yours.

As I pointed out, someone edited the speech.

Why not JUST show the part of the speech where he said:

“I believe that so long as the public continues to split its confidence between the branches, compromise is the responsible course both for the White House and for the Senate,” he said. “Therefore I stand by my position, Mr. President, if the President [George H.W. Bush] consults and cooperates with the Senate or moderates his selections absent consultation, then his nominees may enjoy my support as did Justices Kennedy and Souter.”

A reading of that edit of the SAME GODDAMNED speech reaches the opposite conclusion.

It’s always politics.

President Obama is obligated by our Constitution to submit a nominee to the Senate. The Senate is obligated by our Constitution to “advise and consent” regarding the nominee. It’s easy. If the Senate Republicans wish to block all Democratic nominees, then we’ll have an 8 membered (or fewer, depending on deaths and retirements) Supreme Court for many years or until the Republicans lose control of the Senate.

The angle Republicans are contemplating right this minute is whether their operational obstructionism hurts them politically.

Obama will not submit a FAR-RIGHT nominee. He will likely submit a left of center moderate that the FAR-RIGHT will label a communist baby killer. The nominee will support Roe v Wade, which is all that matters to both sides.

The rightists always cry about the Constitution, but abortion is their concern.

 
Comment by john
2016-02-23 11:35:38

So Teach here we have your fav POTUS crush weighing in on the matter. Who should you look to for correct behavior? Biden or The Great Ronald Reagan http://wonkette.com/598981/zombie-ronald-reagan-tells-republicans-to-do-their-job He said that in 1988 an election year
And of course the Dem Senate DID do its job and confirmed his nominee

 
Comment by gitarcarver
2016-02-23 12:16:38

Unfortunately john, while Reagan was speaking in 1988, his made his nomination on November 11, 1985 – a year before the elections.

You just aren’t real good with history, are you?

And of course the Dem Senate DID do its job and confirmed his nominee

Robert Bork ring a bell?

 
Comment by drowningpuppies
2016-02-23 12:44:31

As I pointed out, someone edited the speech.

– the little one who exaggerates and denies the meaning of the explicit words of Biden because someone edited the speech

I sadly predict, Mr. President,” Biden continued, “that this is going to be one of the bitterest, dirtiest, Presidential campaigns we will have seen in modern times.”

“I am sure, Mr. President, after having uttered these words some will criticize such a decision and say it was nothing more than an attempt to save the seat on the Court in the hopes that a Democrat will be permitted to fill it, but that would not be our intention, Mr. President, if that were the course to choose in the Senate to not consider holding hearings until after the election. Instead, it would be our pragmatic conclusion that once the political season is under way, and it is, action on a Supreme Court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign is over. That is what is fair to the nominee and is central to the process. Otherwise, it seems to me, Mr. President, we will be in deep trouble as an institution.”

 
Comment by Jeffery
2016-02-23 14:06:46

So President Reagan didn’t actually say those words?

“move quickly and decisively” to “make sure there’s a full, nine-member Supreme Court to interpret the law and to protect the rights of all Americans.”

The President is required to submit a nominee and the Senate is required to do what hey do best, jack-off while watching internet porn.

 
Comment by drowningpuppies
2016-02-23 14:22:40

…and the Senate is required to do what hey do best, jack-off while watching internet porn.

-the little guy who exaggerates often and uses obscene sexual metaphors to express his little opinions

 
Comment by Constitutional Insurgent
2016-02-25 22:30:41

“Obama will not submit a FAR-RIGHT nominee. He will likely submit a left of center moderate that the FAR-RIGHT will label a communist baby killer.”

But Obama’s nominee will be a communist baby killer.

The Senate Judiciary Committee can schedule hearing whenever they wish in whatever year they choose, there is no time constraint specified in the U.S Constitution, Article. II., Section. 2.:
[The President] He shall … nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, … Judges of the supreme Court,

 
Comment by gitarcarver
2016-02-25 22:39:12

The President is required to submit a nominee and the Senate is required to do what hey do best, jack-off while watching internet porn.

Welp, apparently Jeffery has inside, intimate knowledge into what Obama and Biden did when they were denying hearings and votes on Bush judicial appointees.

 

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Bad Behavior has blocked 10927 access attempts in the last 7 days.