General Discussion

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)

49. Interesting that you wont tell us where you stand. I support the Democrats on this.

Tue May 13, 2014, 09:56 AM

May 2014

It's about time they stand up to the Republicans.

First of all you dont present any evidence that Pres Obama doesnt like this guy. He has appointed many other conservatives without being "forced" by the, apparently powerful, Republicans.

Second, the Pres was a party to this negotiation in which it appears Chambliss got the best of.

Third, We must draw the line at Michael Boggs.

Fourth, "I'm just irritated at the dishonesty of pretending this was Obama's pick when it was Chambliss's, a pick Obama gave him in return for his not blocking four other appointments. " What dishonesty? No one is saying what you are accusing. Everyone knows about the "blue slip" problem. Are you saying that Democrats opposed to Boggs are "dishonest".

Do you support the appointment of Michael Boggs or not?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

74 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

DEMOCRATIC OPPOSITION Lines Up AGAINST Obama Judicial Nominee [View all] Segami May 2014 OP

Why does the President do stuff like this? Enthusiast May 2014 #1

He Doesn't Have To Run Again... And Is Seeking His "Bi-Partisan" Legacy... WillyT May 2014 #4

Did nobody read the article? Chambliss picked him Recursion May 2014 #35

There you go again BainsBane May 2014 #37

Another Michael Boggs fan steps forward. nm rhett o rick May 2014 #48

Not liking Boggs isn't mutually exclusive w/ understanding the politics involved KittyWampus May 2014 #59

Right. That's exactly what I said BainsBane May 2014 #63

I did jump to a conclusion. Your snarky comment seemed to imply that you supported Michael Boggs. rhett o rick May 2014 #66

Once again, it's the bad Republicans responsible and not the Pres. nm rhett o rick May 2014 #40

Yes, Rhett. It's called "Politics". Which involves "Opposition". KittyWampus May 2014 #60

So where do you stand? Do you agree with the OP? nm rhett o rick May 2014 #67

Yes. Obama made that deal. That gave us Boggs. cui bono May 2014 #71

I imagine he thinks he will make a fine judge Dragonfli May 2014 #13

It's sad. That's all I can say. Enthusiast May 2014 #18

Facepalm. Obama didn't pick him, Chambliss did Recursion May 2014 #34

Yes of course, Obama has nothing to do with appointing federal judges Dragonfli May 2014 #39

So do you support the Pres on this or the Democrats that want to block the rhett o rick May 2014 #42

Sigh Recursion May 2014 #44

Interesting that you wont tell us where you stand. I support the Democrats on this. rhett o rick May 2014 #49

As the OP pointed out, Senatorial privilege creates this problem. Should the President msanthrope May 2014 #17

Is it really better to fill a vacancy with someone that can do great damage? Dragonfli May 2014 #19

No; this is a deal. He appoints four, they appoint two Recursion May 2014 #27

A vacant seat means people like my clients get to sit in places like, PRISON, for longer. It means msanthrope May 2014 #31

They get to get quick "justice" from ...... him? Dragonfli May 2014 #38

The federal docket needs to move...slow courts benefit no one. And yes...we lawyers msanthrope May 2014 #52

At least you are honest about preferring bad judges that screw over Women and minorities Dragonfli May 2014 #54

Yes....I want a federal judge in a circuit I don't practice in so my clients will pay me quicker!! msanthrope May 2014 #57

And as the OP points out, Democrats should get some backbone and tell rhett o rick May 2014 #45

Democrats blue-slipped Sotomayor under Bush....again, do you have a solution to the Senatorial msanthrope May 2014 #55

I will gladly give you my ideas, but you only ask questions. Tell us how you stand. rhett o rick May 2014 #58

I think the package deal will be passed by a majority of Democrats. Boggs isn't the most troubling msanthrope May 2014 #62

I agree with you. Well, except for your last paragraph. I guess you just can resist. rhett o rick May 2014 #65

You can disparage Boggs all you want...I have no interest in defending him. The fact remains, msanthrope May 2014 #69

The Republicans are using the Democrats rule yeoman6987 May 2014 #61

This is another "rule" that is being abused and needs to end. nm rhett o rick May 2014 #68

"Judge swaps" aren't exactly new Recursion May 2014 #25

I s'pose it's less controversial than wife swaps for the same purpose. Nuclear Unicorn May 2014 #50

I think he sees himself ... GeorgeGist May 2014 #32

A possible lifetime appointment for a right wing hack by Obama because of neverforget May 2014 #2

Thanks for this post. His other Judicial Appointment is the one Who Approved BinLaden's Killing... KoKo May 2014 #3

So, where are the cheerleaders telling us Le Taz Hot May 2014 #5

Call me when the opposition starts parroting RW libertarian talking points. baldguy May 2014 #7

Isn't Boggs the opposition? Dragonfli May 2014 #14

Try actually reading the OP before commenting. baldguy May 2014 #21

Well, I did: he hates Women, Gay folks, and Minorities Dragonfli May 2014 #23

Ah, I see. For you, political positions are pre-defined and don't depend on contextual information. baldguy May 2014 #24

So, you really like this guy and his abhorrent positions eh? Dragonfli May 2014 #28

There you go again, using your own prejudices to set up a straw man to knock down. baldguy May 2014 #29

In other words... theHandpuppet May 2014 #33

BINGO bobduca May 2014 #46

Here is what the OP says: "This is not a nominee who will represent Obama or further his legacy. rhett o rick May 2014 #70

Now now. Let's not be too critical. progressoid May 2014 #11

What's your remedy to the blue slip problem then? You do realize that the President must msanthrope May 2014 #15

^^^ Here's your answer. U4ikLefty May 2014 #20

*shrug* it even says in the article this is part of a deal (nt) Recursion May 2014 #26

I've already written to my Democratic Senator who sits on the Judiciary Committee. eom MohRokTah May 2014 #6

Some days. Autumn May 2014 #8

More like every single day woo me with science May 2014 #72

In January, Georgia may have Senator Nunn n2doc May 2014 #9

Sonia Sotomayor was appointed by George H.W. Bush under similar circumstances. tritsofme May 2014 #10

I am surprised at those that ask why? This is typical of Pres Obama's nominations and appointments. rhett o rick May 2014 #12

So what's your solution to the blue slip problem? nt msanthrope May 2014 #16

They have no clue about what you're talking about, so don't expect an answer. baldguy May 2014 #22

I think that's disrespectful to the OP, frankly. The OP put together a very well researched piece msanthrope May 2014 #30

Why does it seem that this is the only president ever to face with that devastating problem? rhett o rick May 2014 #36

Except for every past President too. W had to appoint Sotomayor to her last court, too Recursion May 2014 #41

Every President faced this problem...thus, Sotomayor was appointed by Bush. Again...do you msanthrope May 2014 #53

Absolutely typical. woo me with science May 2014 #73

Blumenthal is my good Senator, he'll fight back on this. n/t Jefferson23 May 2014 #43

snip* To secure his legacy, President Obama needs to act now,and make as many nominations Jefferson23 May 2014 #47

Is there any evidence that Pres Obama doesnt like Michael Boggs? If not, rhett o rick May 2014 #51

I'm not sure there is evidence he disapproves. I don't think a conversation about Jefferson23 May 2014 #64

When you sup with the devil use a long spoon rock May 2014 #56

K&R woo me with science May 2014 #74