Weekly Address: It’s Time for the Senate To Do Its Job

[cal04]

Source: White House

In this week's address, the President repeated his call for Republicans in the United States Senate to give Chief Judge Merrick Garland a fair hearing and a vote. It has been 45 days since President Obama nominated Judge Garland to the Supreme Court. The President highlighted that Senate Republicans have said that Judge Garland is a man of experience, integrity and impeccable qualifications. Despite this, most Senate Republicans refused to do their job and give Judge Garland the consideration he deserves. The President made clear that the Supreme Court must remain above partisan politics, and that's why the President did his job in nominating Merrick Garland. Now, it's time for the Senate to do its job.

Read more: https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/04/30/weekly-address-its-time-senate-do-its-job

---

It’s now been 45 days since I nominated Judge Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court. Judge Garland is a man of experience, integrity, and unimpeachable qualifications. Judge Garland is someone who Senate Republicans are on record saying is “a man of accomplishment and keen intellect;” a man who’s “honest and capable;” a man whose “reputation is beyond reproach.” Those are all quotes from Republicans in the Senate.

But so far, most Senate Republicans have refused to even meet with Judge Garland. Which means they’ve also refused to do their job and hold a hearing on his nomination, or an up-or-down vote. But they’ve still found time to head home for recess over the next week.

This is an abdication of the Senate’s responsibility. Every Supreme Court nominee since 1875 who hasn’t withdrawn from the process has received a hearing or a vote. For over 40 years, there’s been an average of 67 days between a nomination and a hearing. This time should be no different. This is not about partisan politics – it’s about upholding the institutions that make our democracy work.

more at link
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2016/04/30/weekly-address-its-time-senate-do-its-job

[Katashi_itto]

1. Bwhahahahaa!

[HeartoftheMidwest]

2. "Republicans, do your jobs"

.....weekly address since January, 2009?

[Equinox Moon]

3. Sad thing is...They do think they are doing their job

Their plan is to destroy the government.

It astounds me that it is allowed for members of congress to be subversive and intentionally tear down the government. How is this not treason?

[potone]

5. They don't view Obama as a legitimate president.

They don't view any Democratic president as legitimate. That is why they impeached Bill Clinton. They really do believe that they have the right to rule this country. Obama has had a rougher time of it because he is African American, and they can't accept having a black man in the White House. I am sure that they would love to impeach him but even they can't find any excuse for it in his personal life or financial dealings, and as for the things that he has done as president that are dubious legally--such as drone strikes--they are on board with that, so they can't criticize him for that.

The only thing that gives me pleasure when I think about Republicans is that they haven't managed to destroy Obama, or make him a one-term president. I think he will be regarded with approval by historians for the calm way he steered us through the crises he faced at the beginning of his term as well as for some of his other achievements.

Their behavior has been disgraceful from day one of his presidency and I think has backfired on them. The rise of Trump is a response on the part of Republican voters who are fed up with the Republicans in Congress. That should give them pause.

[mdbl]

4. Mitch Mcconnell and his Repug Senate buddies are poor excuses for Senators

C'mon voters, throw them all out!

[Third Doctor]

21. Imo

They are poor excuses for human beings.

[Scarsdale]

6. No paychecks.

Between "recess" and refusing to do their jobs, WHY are they being paid? Useless politicians, the entire group of repubs. The Benghazi investigation is all they are doing. That has been beaten to death already. Time to move on, do the work they were ELECTED to do. In a private company, they would have been fired for being deadwood. Why can't voters recall them since they are just taking up space, doing little or nothing.

[Indydem]

8. Perspective.

This is the job they were hired to do.

Their constituents don't want anyone to the left of Scalia to fill the vacancy.

Their constituents want an ongoing Benghazi investigation until something comes up to derail Clinton.

What you are essentially expecting them to do (when using a private company as the model of comparison) is to go against their shareholders because you (a non shareholder) want them to.

Not happening.

[fasttense]

7. He's starting to sound like a broken record.

His nominee is kind of a wimp when it comes to liberal rulings so I really don't care if he is confirmed or Not.

Funny, the RepubliCONS are fighting him on this but thet sure rolled over for fast tack.

[greymattermom]

9. So what happens if another conservative Supreme Court justice dies?

Say, if Clarence Thomas died, then what? Refuse to have hearings on a replacement?

[Ligyron]

13. That would leave liberal justices as the majority.

They wouldn't know how to act.

[SmittynMo]

10. Do it's job?

Hilarious. They have no clue as to what their job entails.

Ya know, in the real world, people that don't have a clue are commonly called "fired".

However, it's a prerequisite for the Senate.

[SujiwanKenobee]

11. Goshdarnit.

They'd just better "cut that out"! Finger wag.

[Dustlawyer]

12. Just like it's time for Obama to start acting like a Democrat and appoint a REAL LIBERAL

Justice for the open spot in the court! Pull Garland and tell them they had their chance! Since the MSM is not covering this story he needs to appoint a liberal Justice every 2 weeks! Keep pointing out that they are not doing their job, but stop with the financially conservative types that are going to keep screwing us!

[Indydem]

16. How?

If he withdraws Garner from consideration, then Garner is done. It would be highly unusual to re-nominate the same person for the position.

How many "Liberal" candidates do you think will get any more consideration than Garner? Are there 20 of them to nominate?

Whether you like it or not, this situation is the chickens coming home to roost on how Bork was treated. Up until that point, Justices were routinely approved. Now it is all political - for both sides.

[Dustlawyer]

19. I don't want Garner! There are liberal judges that can be nominated, but Obama wants corporate

Judges who will protect the money for the rich, but be socially liberal.

[Indydem]

20. And how would those judges get approved?

Are you saying that the Republican Senate must approve any nominee that Obama wants?

That's a fantasy.

Not going to get the Senate back this cycle either.

So how does this work, in the real world?

[Dustlawyer]

22. They won't, but they are snubbing someone we don't want so we might as well

send someone up that represents us.

[trudyco]

17. +1

[malthaussen]

14. Reminds me of Gerald Ford...

... ripping pages off the calendar because Congress refuses to act.

-- Mal

[BumRushDaShow]

15. K&R

And thanks for the weekly post!

This needs to be a big campaign issue.

[redstatebluegirl]

18. They are doing the job they have been "paid" to do by the Koch brothers and the other nuts.