Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Looks like the first nominee up is a Native American female.

Told ya..

houndawg wrote:Looks like the first nominee up is a Native American female.

Told ya..

Link?

jus' funnin' ya, its a district court appt.... but I think he's practicing for the upcoming circus..

Locking up a very large voting block for the (D)'s! Smart move!

why not use the nomination to put conk hate on display in front of the whole nation? Let the country see what they look like in broad daylight. Rafael Eduardo Cruz filibustering a Latino/Latina nominee with impeccable credentials would make a wonderful backdrop for the election....

houndawg wrote:why not use the nomination to put conk hate on display in front of the whole nation? Let the country see what they look like in broad daylight. Rafael Eduardo Cruz filibustering a Latino/Latina nominee with impeccable credentials would make a wonderful backdrop for the election....

Good idea. How about finding one first?

CAA Flagship wrote:

houndawg wrote:why not use the nomination to put conk hate on display in front of the whole nation? Let the country see what they look like in broad daylight. Rafael Eduardo Cruz filibustering a Latino/Latina nominee with impeccable credentials would make a wonderful backdrop for the election....

Good idea. How about finding one first?

I wouldn't be surprised to find that Barack Hussein Obama- all praise be upon him, the compassionate, the merciful - has a list of names that just happen fit those criteria on his desk right now.

Of course. The whole objective is to fuck over the (R)'s in the election and not find a good SC Justice.

andy7171 wrote:Of course. The whole objective is to **** over the (R)'s in the election and not find a good SC Justice.

Wrong, sandy, the object is to find a good SC Justice, somebody like Ginsberg, and fvck over the Rs in the election. Because payback


If you're like most of us and find conk squealing music to your ears, you're going to hear a symphony this year..

houndawg wrote:Looks like the first nominee up is a Native American female.

Told ya..

Elizabeth Warren?

"GOP Judiciary: No hearing on Obama court nominee

Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee have come to a consensus decision to not have hearings or a vote on a Supreme Court nominee in 2016.....

.....Republicans have sought to use Vice President Biden's past words as a weapon against Democrats.

Biden in a 1992 floor speech in the Senate argued that if there were to be a Supreme Court vacancy, it should not be filled until after that year's election.

GOP lawmakers on Tuesday cited that speech in their comments........"
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/2704 ... rt-nominee

CID1990 wrote:

houndawg wrote:Looks like the first nominee up is a Native American female.

Told ya..

Elizabeth Warren?

That made me laugh = well done

BDKJMU wrote:"GOP Judiciary: No hearing on Obama court nominee

Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee have come to a consensus decision to not have hearings or a vote on a Supreme Court nominee in 2016.....

.....Republicans have sought to use Vice President Biden's past words as a weapon against Democrats.

Biden in a 1992 floor speech in the Senate argued that if there were to be a Supreme Court vacancy, it should not be filled until after that year's election.

GOP lawmakers on Tuesday cited that speech in their comments........"
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/2704 ... rt-nominee

Except that it was never put to test.


Congress has never refused to stonewall all SCOTUS nominees from a President in the HISTORY of our country. They all need to be removed from office.

houndawg wrote:

andy7171 wrote:Of course. The whole objective is to **** over the (R)'s in the election and not find a good SC Justice.

Wrong, sandy, the object is to find a good SC Justice, somebody like Ginsberg, and fvck over the Rs in the election. Because payback


If you're like most of us and find conk squealing music to your ears, you're going to hear a symphony this year..

Why not a native American? We've successfully put an underqualified candidate in during the last two elections based on white guilt, and what drums up that sentiment better than the trail of tears?

The Republicans may as well go ahead and let the process start. Seeing as how Hillary will be the next President, what is the point in punting until after Jan 2017 and losing any leverage they have in trying to get at least a moderate through in 2016?

ASUG8 wrote:

houndawg wrote:
Wrong, sandy, the object is to find a good SC Justice, somebody like Ginsberg, and fvck over the Rs in the election. Because payback


If you're like most of us and find conk squealing music to your ears, you're going to hear a symphony this year..

Why not a native American? We've successfully put an underqualified candidate in during the last two elections based on white guilt, and what drums up that sentiment better than the trail of tears?

Look, if you're going to claim that no one is anti-Obama because of race, then you don't get to claim that everyone who's pro-Obama feels that way because of white guilt. Sorry.

houndawg wrote:

CAA Flagship wrote: Good idea. How about finding one first?

I wouldn't be surprised to find that Barack Hussein Obama- all praise be upon him, the compassionate, the merciful - has a list of names that just happen fit those criteria on his desk right now.

With the RBGs health, the Obama Administration, If they were smart, already had a list of people.

dbackjon wrote:

CID1990 wrote:
Elizabeth Warren?

That made me laugh = well done

I'm surprised you aren't advocating for Fauxahontas.

dbackjon wrote:

BDKJMU wrote:"GOP Judiciary: No hearing on Obama court nominee

Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee have come to a consensus decision to not have hearings or a vote on a Supreme Court nominee in 2016.....

.....Republicans have sought to use Vice President Biden's past words as a weapon against Democrats.

Biden in a 1992 floor speech in the Senate argued that if there were to be a Supreme Court vacancy, it should not be filled until after that year's election.

GOP lawmakers on Tuesday cited that speech in their comments........"
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/2704 ... rt-nominee

Except that it was never put to test.


Congress has never refused to stonewall all SCOTUS nominees from a President in the HISTORY of our country. They all need to be removed from office.

Doesn't matter. Biden advocated for it.

Grizalltheway wrote:

ASUG8 wrote:
Why not a native American? We've successfully put an underqualified candidate in during the last two elections based on white guilt, and what drums up that sentiment better than the trail of tears?

Look, if you're going to claim that no one is anti-Obama because of race, then you don't get to claim that everyone who's pro-Obama feels that way because of white guilt. Sorry.

The racists don't need race as a reason to hate Obama. 7 years of failures have provided the alternative excuse.

dbackjon wrote:

BDKJMU wrote:"GOP Judiciary: No hearing on Obama court nominee

Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee have come to a consensus decision to not have hearings or a vote on a Supreme Court nominee in 2016.....

.....Republicans have sought to use Vice President Biden's past words as a weapon against Democrats.

Biden in a 1992 floor speech in the Senate argued that if there were to be a Supreme Court vacancy, it should not be filled until after that year's election.

GOP lawmakers on Tuesday cited that speech in their comments........"
http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/2704 ... rt-nominee

Except that it was never put to test.


Congress has never refused to stonewall all SCOTUS nominees from a President in the HISTORY of our country. They all need to be removed from office.

"Elections have Consequences" and "I Won"

Barack Obama said both. Now Mitch McConnell is going to make him eat those words.

HI54UNI wrote:

dbackjon wrote:

Except that it was never put to test.


Congress has never refused to stonewall all SCOTUS nominees from a President in the HISTORY of our country. They all need to be removed from office.

"Elections have Consequences" and "I Won"

Barack Obama said both. Now Mitch McConnell is going to make him eat those words.

We'll see when Hillary nominates Barack Obama.

Grizalltheway wrote:

ASUG8 wrote:
Why not a native American? We've successfully put an underqualified candidate in during the last two elections based on white guilt, and what drums up that sentiment better than the trail of tears?

Look, if you're going to claim that no one is anti-Obama because of race, then you don't get to claim that everyone who's pro-Obama feels that way because of white guilt. Sorry.

Why can't you simply dislike a president for spewing BS and adhering to failed policies?

houndawg wrote:

HI54UNI wrote:
"Elections have Consequences" and "I Won"

Barack Obama said both. Now Mitch McConnell is going to make him eat those words.

We'll see when Hillary nominates Barack Obama.

Say wut?

Hillary?



houndy ain't feeling the Bern no more?

Baldy wrote:

houndawg wrote:


We'll see when Hillary nominates Barack Obama.

Say wut?

Hillary?



houndy ain't feeling the Bern no more?

duncedawg is a front-runner.