Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Obama not going to Scalia funeral
Date:	2/18/2016 8:38:25 AM

Good, he won't be missed.  Would be an insult for a man with contempt for the Constitution and our country to attend the funeral for a man who was the exact opposite, a true American and patriot. 

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Obama not going to Scalia funeral
Date:	2/18/2016 8:59:54 AM

But he is going to pay his respects when his coffin lies at the Supreme Court.  Political theatre?  Who knows. 

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Obama not going to Scalia funeral
Date:	2/18/2016 10:09:11 AM (updated 2/18/2016 10:09:58 AM)

Biden will attend the funeral. Time for MM to bit*h about that.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Obama not going to Scalia funeral
Date:	2/18/2016 11:37:30 AM (updated 2/18/2016 11:38:48 AM)

Nah....happy to give crazy Uncle Joe pay last respects.  Let's hope he doesn't grope any babes at the funeral.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Obama not going to Scalia funeral
Date:	2/18/2016 1:50:39 PM

Everybody is entitled to his own opinion...including His Arrogance.  Of course His Arrogance is of the opinion that he is also entitled to his own facts!  In my opinion he is not, and that is a fact.

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	Obama not going to Scalia funeral
Date:	2/18/2016 2:19:55 PM

Your post reeks of sour grapes.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	??????????
Date:	2/18/2016 2:22:14 PM

Does anyone understand the post above?  The only facts presented are that Obama is not going to the funeral.  Are those my facts?  I don't think so.  All the rest was opinion.  

Archie, your ability to think critically is nearly non-existent.  You are approaching Goofy territory here........

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	?????????? INDEED
Date:	2/18/2016 3:27:52 PM (updated 2/18/2016 3:40:04 PM)

MM do you and Mr H even remember your original post?  If not read it again!  It did have a fact (Obama not going to Scalia funeral) but then you expressed an "opinion" to which I said you are entitled in my post.  You expressed opinion after your statement of "fact" by praising Justice Scalia for his patriotism and love of the Constitution and denouncing President Obama's "disdain" for the document...THAT is your opinion, not a statement of universally accepted fact.  Are you man enough and honest enough to agree with that assessment of the post?  Probably not, you consider yourself one of those especially anointed right wingers who is charged for letting the rest of us know which of your "opinions" are actually "facts"!!

Looks like I'm right...you don't even know the difference between opinion and fact when it comes from you!

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	?????????? INDEED
Date:	2/18/2016 4:44:46 PM

Of course I remember the post and all I can say is I don't lend much credence to ignoring the message and attacking the messenger.  That usually happens when one has lost an argument on merit.  I don't know that I would describe the former justice as MM did but I didn't have any trouble separating the fact from opinion, and frankly don't give a hoot if MM claims to be fact what in my mind is opinion.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	?????????? INDEED
Date:	2/18/2016 5:07:57 PM (updated 2/18/2016 5:18:15 PM)

Frankly Mr H I don't give a hoot to who or whether anybody is winning or losing an argument.  I did not attack the messanger.  I attacked his message only (specifically the final 3/4ths of his message, a display of arrogance...in my opinion) by pointing out correctly that the message was an opinion and no more, even it it was stated as if it were fact.  I am sure that you can sort fact from opinion...some folks on this forum cannot.

PS:  I often disagreed with Justice Scalia's legal opinions, but I basically agree with MM's assessment of the late Justice...he was a patriot and a defender of the Constitution...it is also my opinion that the president could be described with exactly the same words.

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	?????????? INDEED
Date:	2/18/2016 5:23:31 PM

You don't consider referring to someone as "His Arrogance" a personal attack?  Wow.  I am done, you can't see the forest for the trees (and yes, that is my OPINION).

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Indeed, Indeed
Date:	2/18/2016 5:32:30 PM

Archie, what the heck are you talking about?  Other than the topic my entire post was my opinion. You have a different one then let's hear it.  Your public school education has once again failed you. Now had I said "It was a fact that.......", then your post might make sense. But I said no such thing. You are totally unhinged and irrational. 

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	?????????? INDEED
Date:	2/18/2016 5:36:44 PM

Yeah, I am arrogant for thinking what I think about dear leader but Archibald isn't for thinking the opposite. Such is the illogic of left wing nuts. I think you're wise not to get dragged down to his level of inanity, he will beat you soundly just on his vast experience. And that too is my opinin, but an objective third party might consider it fact if they read a lot of his stuff. I pray every day I am not in one of his buildings unless the structural engineer was competent. 

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	?????????? INDEED
Date:	2/18/2016 7:15:02 PM (updated 2/18/2016 7:16:31 PM)

Mr H, I do not apologise for referring to MM as His Arrogance.  He has just agreed that he is arrogant about his opinion and beliefs.  I think he is arrogant to the extreme of considering his opinions as gospel and arrogant in considering anyone with differing opinions as somehow less noble.  I too can be arrogant, but I am arrogant in the espousing of facts.  I know MM and probably you will disagree, but I have refuted his claims of "fact" with actual facts presented with references to proof on more than one occasion.  I say yet again, there is nothing more frightening than a man who is certain his opinions and beliefs and only his opinions and beliefs are right!  See the recent long string related to abortion!!  He and anyone may hold and argue for their cause, they show arrogance when they denigrate me or anyone else for doing the same!

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	?????????? INDEED
Date:	2/18/2016 10:15:29 PM

As I said, I am done.

Name:	Council Rock Doc -	Reply
Subject:	?????????? INDEED
Date:	2/19/2016 12:28:50 PM

Obama a Patriot?  A President who saddles us with a 19 soon to be 21 Trillion dollar debt load, the mess of Obamacare, (where the FACTS show that just as many people lost their healthcare as those that gained it), Islamo pandering and allowing our enemies to parade around and humiliate our warriors?  That kind of patriot?  Puleeeeeze Archie.

Name:	Buteye -	Reply
Subject:	?????????? INDEED
Date:	2/19/2016 1:12:03 PM

Well said!

Name:	lucky67 -	Reply
Subject:	Obama not going to Scalia funeral
Date:	2/20/2016 8:10:02 AM

So where will Obama be if not at funeral ??????

Name:	Shortbus -	Reply
Subject:	Obama not going to Scalia funeral
Date:	2/20/2016 11:23:26 AM

Probably going to a foam party with Rubio to check out the buoys.

http://www.towleroad.com/2016/02/marco-rubio-gay/

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Obama not going to Scalia funeral
Date:	2/20/2016 1:50:42 PM

President Obama will spend Saturday focused on his opportunity to shape the future of the Supreme Court instead of attending the funeral of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

On Friday, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest said Obama will spend his weekend looking at the records and job histories of potential candidates.

They will also be packing for their trip to Cuba.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Obama not going to Scalia funeral
Date:	2/20/2016 7:21:20 PM

Um, Flyfisher, he is the President of the United States.  It is his call whether he attends the funeral or sends a representative.  It's not like he didn't pay his respects.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Obama not going to Scalia funeral
Date:	2/20/2016 7:27:38 PM

Oh, no doubt Obama doesn't have the time to attend the Scalia funeral because he has a very busy day with lots of work to complete his plan to destroy America!!  Wish that was funny, but not a few on this forum will consider it is probably true.

Name:	lucky67 -	Reply
Subject:	Obama not going to Scalia funeral
Date:	2/20/2016 7:43:11 PM

Hound---My question was where was he ?? What was so important he couldn't attend ? Getting ready to appoint SusAn Rice to Court ??

Name:	Lifer -	Reply
Subject:	Obama not going to Scalia funeral
Date:	2/20/2016 8:54:08 PM (updated 2/20/2016 8:56:29 PM)

If it was one of the left wingers he would have been front and center delivering the eulogy and taking selfies while others delivered theirs.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Obama not going to Scalia funeral
Date:	2/20/2016 9:32:34 PM

I've not heard Susan Rice's name mentioned.  She has no chance of being confirmed.  At least one of the potentials who has been bandied around got unanimous approval on her last confirmation. 

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Obama not going to Scalia funeral
Date:	2/20/2016 9:39:59 PM

It's not like he doesn't have other things to do.  I mean, there is a war in Syria... and he is supposed to be reviewing records and resumes for Supreme Court nominees.  As I understand it, there is a lot to read.  Who knows, maybe he didn't like Scalia and just decided to do the minimum expected of him.  I saw that Biden was at the funeral, so it's not like the WH ignored it.

Name:	Lifer -	Reply
Subject:	Obama not going to Scalia funeral
Date:	2/20/2016 11:22:22 PM

Are you really that gullible to believe that bovine shinola? He will never review anything be cause he already has his selection made. The only qualification will be that they are radical left wing nutjob who legislates from the bench. Reviewing files would require actual work and his laziness has been well documented. He doesn't even start his days till 10am usually.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Heh Heh
Date:	2/21/2016 9:30:37 AM

See what I mean!!

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Heh Heh
Date:	2/21/2016 9:56:15 AM

Frankly, I have no idea what time he starts his day.  Maybe he is a nightowl and works into the night. Maybe he rides to school with his daughters every morning. 

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Heh Heh
Date:	2/21/2016 10:26:02 AM (updated 2/21/2016 10:27:11 AM)

No Hound, don't make false assumptions,  pay attention to what Sen Cruz and Lush Limpbaugh tell us... he sleeps til 10 but then he jumps out of bed and works all the rest of the day plotting America's demise.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Actually
Date:	2/21/2016 11:25:09 AM

Two of the names mentioned received unanimous approval in 2012 and 2013.  One is from Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Grassley's state of Iowa.  He was a strong supporter of her nomination in 2012 to the Appeals Court.  She was confirmed 96 - 0!  Of course that will make no difference in today's world where both sides now place the good of the party ahead of the best interest of the nation!

Name:	lakngulf -	Reply
Subject:	"The Way We Were"
Date:	2/21/2016 12:26:16 PM

Rightly or Wrongly, both Dems and Repubs think what they are espousing and doing IS "for the good of the country".   And their actions will follow suit.  It is the state of politics in which we find ourselves.  Just because one person promotes someone as "this is for America" does not make it so.  The framers of the Constitution were very wise to put togehter a system and tries to avoid the extremes.  Unfortunately, Court Action making laws instead of interpreting, and other actions have led us astray, rightly or wrongly.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	"The Way We Were"
Date:	2/21/2016 10:47:57 PM

I agree that is "the way we were"...politicians actually believing that their actions were for the best of the country even when it turned out to be otherwise.  I do not think that is true anymore.  Today they know much of what they espouse is NOT for the best interest of the country as a whole but it IS in their best interest for getting the votes of their "base".  Stayin in office is always their first priority and the country be damned.  It is a sad commentary on the state of political situation in America today.

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	"The Way We Were"
Date:	2/22/2016 3:03:39 AM

Term limits.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Heh Heh
Date:	2/22/2016 9:16:37 PM

I didn't realize that Ted Cruz or Rush Limbaugh worked or resided at the WH too. 

If he is destroying the country, it's taking him an awful long time.  I mean, 7 years?  Must be that laziness that is so well documented. 

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Mr H I agree with you
Date:	2/22/2016 9:21:41 PM

Saints be praised!!  3 terms for Representatives and 2 for senators. 

Mr H I have also thought that the courts could be taken out of politics by setting up a "judges pool".  For the Supreme Court a non-partisan committee (this is the hardest part...how do you really get such an animal) would select a pool of 10 prospects. After this initial selection new pool members would be selected by the president. The prospects for the pool would be vetted and approved by the Senate.  When a court vacancy occured a replacement name would be drawn from a hat.  The sitting president would select a replacement to get the pool back to 10 anytime a menber was drawn to replace a justice or if a pool member died or retired. Since it would be the luck of the draw (most pool members would never be called) and there would typically be pool members selected by several presidents over many years. Don't laugh until you actually give it some thought.  It might require a Constitutional amendment (a heavy lift for sure), but for the life of me I can't see how it would be worse than the current political goat rodeo that court selections have become and it would at least be a step in taking politics out of the courts.  I think the politization of the courts (it's even worse at state level) is one of the most dangerous trends around today!

Name:	Shortbus -	Reply
Subject:	Heh Heh, yea,yea big joke, Barry.
Date:	2/23/2016 3:28:38 PM

and then there is this disgusting moment:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DRutwOF0T48

Name:	Shortbus -	Reply
Subject:	Heh Heh, yea,yea big joke, Barry.
Date:	2/23/2016 6:01:25 PM

http://americanactionnews.com/articles/grassroots-victory-as-senate-stops-obama

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Mr H I agree with you
Date:	2/23/2016 7:31:01 PM

Actually from what I have read, term limits were in line with what the Forefathers believed.  They all had other careers, or endeavors and they believed that serving was a part time gig.   None of them that I can see envisioned that someone would go to the Capitol and just stay there for years and years.  I have a feeling they would not approve of what this has become. 

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Oh Pul-eez
Date:	2/23/2016 7:36:33 PM

He was one Justice.  He didn't run the court and he wrote his share of minority opinions and dessents. There are other conservative justices.