Advice AND Consent

2016_March_16_Merrick_Garland_profile_by_The_White_House - Copy

Despite what the Democrats, liberals, progressives, law school academics, and their ilk want you to believe, the Senate does not have to give a hearing to Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, nor do they have to vote on the nomination.

By refusing to have hearings or vote on the nomination, they are doing their job, not shirking their job.

Here’s what the Constitution says about Supreme Court appointments:

[The president] shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court

By and with the advice and consent of the Senate …

The meaning is simple. In order to appoint a judge to the Supreme Court, Obama has to solicit the advice of the Senate. Did he, before nominating Merrick Garland? Doubtful.

A president should get the advice of the Senate and then take their advice into consideration when choosing the nominee. Otherwise, what happens?

The Senators aren’t going to “consent” to seating the nominee. It’s as simple as that.

The Constitution puts the Senate in the driver’s seat.

If advice is missing, then consent will not be given. If consent is refused, even if advice was given, the Senate still has done its Constitutional duty.

So then it’s back to the drawing board for the president. It’s not his choice alone, although we know how Obama wishes it were. He was recently quoted criticizing that pesky “separation of powers”:

President Obama said Wednesday it was “very frustrating sometimes for the president” … to have separation of powers in the U.S. government. …

“This makes it hard sometimes for America to change as rapidly as we need to to respond to changed circumstances or problems … It’s sort of like herding cats,” Obama said. “You’re constantly trying to get everybody to work together and move in the same direction at the same time, and that’s difficult.

Difficult, especially if your preferred method of rule is dictatorship.

If the Senate is not allowed to advise on an appointment, then why would anyone, even progressives, expect the Senate to consent to the nominee?

Where in the text is it written that the president simply selects his nominee, then hearings are held, and then–as Democrats and the media would like us to believe--the Senate MUST do its “job” and “consent” if the nominee is otherwise “qualified?”


The Senate must advise and the Senate MUST CONSENT, and it’s perfectly within their Constitutional power and right to refuse to consent, no matter if the nominee is qualified.

When Judge Scalia sadly left us, many in the Senate immediately advised Obama to hold off on a nomination and to let the next president fill the vacancy so that We the People will have a new say in the makeup of the Supreme Court. (A new say is necessary because of changed circumstances since the last presidential election in 2012.)

By advising Obama to hold off on a nomination, the Senators were following the advice of none other than Obama’s own Vice President, Joe Biden.

Obama did not take Joe’s advice, nor the Senate’s advice, and so he and his supporters should not be surprised when his nominee is neither considered nor confirmed.


110 responses to “Advice AND Consent


    • I agree that she’s way more liberal than she and FOX would like us to believe. That said, I do think she’s an excellent lawyer with a great mind. If I ever needed a lawyer, I wouldn’t mind having her in my corner. She’s NOT stupid. Not by a long shot. It’s really unfair, imho, for someone to be born with brains and beauty. 🙂 But she is very much like your typical leftist feminist. iow, not really a feminist at all. It is NOT empowering to make women forever VICTIMS of sexism or whatever. The left is totally PATERNALISTIC towards women. Why SHOULD women get government-mandated paid leave when they CHOOSE to reproduce? Their CHOICE, right? Not ours. Men don’t get the same benefits, in most cases. Why is it the responsibility of the employer AND the other employees to subsidize another employee’s CHOICE to reproduce? Is it fair? HARDLY. Unconstitutional, too. REGARDLESS of marital status, gender, sex, etc. Everyone is supposed to be equal and treated equally. Why should other employees have their salaries and benefits reduced OR the shareholders see their profits reduced or customers see prices raised, all because a company gives benefits to employees with children that are not given to employees without children? The money HAS TO COME FROM SOMEWHERE. Where else but from the pockets of the other employees, the customers, or the shareholders? This is not equal treatment under the law, IF the government FORCES companies to give paid leave to mothers. Is it? But leftist feminists want this UNEQUAL TREATMENT, which is, in essence, treating women AS IF THEY CANNOT COPE FOR THEMSELVES AND BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN CHOICES. This is the same “logic” they use when they treat black people AS IF they’re are lesser beings who need THEM to oversee their care. The “soft bigotry of low expectations.” Sound familiar? GWB was spot on with that one. BIGOTS, not advocates. It’s INSULTING TO WOMEN AND MINORITIES WHEN THE LEFT TREAT THEM AS CHILDREN.

    • Wow. Hey, did you ever notice that Qaddafi resembled Barry?

      Neo-conservatives? Is Hillary now a neo-conservative?

  2. I do get stuck on STUPID some days NOW HERE THIS # 3 WOW
    getting kind of HAIRY pull a RABBIT from the TRICKSTERS HAT???

    • And who even KNOWS about Barry’s second “surge”, this time to speed up planting more muslims THROUGHOUT the USA?

    • And who even KNOWS about Barry’s second “surge”, this time to speed up planting more muslims THROUGHOUT the USA? Here’s a key part:

      “‘The 10,000 (figure) is a floor and not a ceiling, and it is possible to increase the number,’ Kassem told reporters.”

      McCaskill, some time this past week, stated that she personally went to Jordan to inspect the vetting process and she (a major OBOT and Barry apologist) OF COURSE declared that the vetting is VERY stringent and also stated (OF COURSE) that we “should” bring in way more “refugees” than 10,000. So the writing is on the wall. He’s GOING TO INCREASE THIS SURGE, no matter what the people want. HE WILL BRING IN AS MANY AS POSSIBLE BEFORE HE LEAVES OFFICE. GUARANTEED. Being refugees, having green cards, means they become citizens within a short time (5 years, iirc) AND THEN they VOTE. And then, serial migration. MORE flowing in. Seeded across the country. DELIBERATELY. Jihad from within.

  3. Trump/Rubio 2016. The race to 1066. ~ @Free Republic ^ | 4/7/2016

    OK. So Trump looks like he might end up a few delegates short of 1237. Maybe, maybe not. If he were to offer the VP to Rubio, in exchange for his 171 delegates, he the would only need to get to 1066. He freezes out Cruz, he freezes out Kasich & rewards them for their machinations with a loss. He solidifies his vote in Florida by adding Cuban American voters & other Rubio supporters. He wins back some of the disaffected fedgov employees of NOVA that went for Rubio & improves his chances in VA. He somewhat assuages the establishment. He can also name Rubio as “immigration czar” & help his numbers with Hispanics. Rubio will be out of government next year without his Senate seat, but if he is VP he will become the President of the Senate & the deciding vote in some cases. Rubio will jump at the chance to be the VP, imho. Cruz and Kasich hung around in a cynical attempt to keep Trump from 1237, while Marco bowed out gracefully & did the honorable thing. I think this is a win, win for both men. Trump must win on the first ballot. It would be much easier with Rubio’s delegates.
    ?????????????????????????????????????????????????? ~ ???

  4. still weird ….really it is!!! ….4 sure the changing TIDES???

    • Because it’s all within the “penumbra” of theological doctrine, you see. It tells Catholics how to live their lives: Basically, imho, he’s saying: However you’re living you life, continue. Am I wrong?

  5. …..NOT TrusTED…..4 s u r e …fools

    • Seriously? Why wait two weeks? Are they waiting for Cruz to win even more delegates? Didn’t he release his BC, or am I mistaken? I don’t recall seeing anything on the document asking for the mother’s citizenship. I don’t think that’s on any BC. Is it?

  6. “We’re talking about American citizens (who) think a guy who’s Canadian-born is eligible to be a U.S. president – without any documentation whatsoever. If Ted continues on – we are going to release the files we have, two weeks from tonight, & we will bury Ted Cruz forever in American politics… If we have to stop this guy from defrauding this nation, then we are going to do that.” – J.B. Williams, N.A.L.C. …..^^^^^

    • It’s not an immigration policy gone “awry.” It’s EXACTLY as Barry has planned all along.

      I guess the best that we can hope for is that OUR culture, which values assimilation, and our younger people, who value conformity, will “corrupt” the young muslim kids-to-come, as they go to school together. Is it not always so? They follow their peers.

      So unless the muslim parents keep their kids in their own little enclaves (as in Europe, as in Moelenbeek in Belgium, as perhaps in Dearbornistan), our CULTURE will win out and in a few generations these kids will be all-American. It’s a hope I have, at least.

  7. TRUMP ROCKS!!!!!!

    • Cruz is pulling some nasty stuff in the meetings that determine who all become the delegates. For example, in MO, they’re packing the groups they send to the convention with Cruz supporters. They’re bound to vote Trump in the first round, but WILL vote Cruz in the second round. AGAINST the will of the voters.

    • Praying for that outcome, because otherwise they make Shrillary the POTUS. UNLESS, of course, Trump and Sanders join up and go 3rd party. 🙂

  8. While Christ calls us to love our enemies, He does not say that we must act as though their policies well-intentioned when they are not. Hence we must love even people like Harris, ……… while taking every step necessary to prevent her from oppressing Americans she doesn’t like.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s