Supreme Court vacancy is tangible test for 2016 candidates

"Now, the prospect of President Barack Obama’s successor nominating a Supreme Court justice immediately after taking office offers a more tangible way for voters to evaluate the contenders." - article

To which the GOP ShiaTea immediately responded: "Delay! Delay! Delay!"

So, voters have another snapshot of the GOP ShiaTea to evaluate the contenders.

This one shows them doing nothing.

Just like the last seven years.

"Ladies and Gentlemen, The Party of Personal Responsibility"

If the Republican Senate obstructs a nominee who is qualified, respected and with a track record of impartiality; the Democratic candidate whether Clinton or Sanders will win. There will be a backlash that will shake up Washington politics for the next generation. Republicans are playing with fire if they try to deny Pres. Obama's constitutional duty.

Schedule: Obama nominates, GOP ShiaTea stonewalls, Americans see GOP ShiaTea as Losers. End of.

By coming out and saying that they will refuse to engage in the process before a nomination has even been named, I think it's fair to say that the judge is irrelevant and the driving force is that they don't want Obama to have the choice.

Exactly. They don't care about the people, nor what is right for the people. Only for their own power.

Schedule: Obama nominates, GOP ShiaTea stonewalls, Americans see GOP ShiaTea as Losers. End of

Not this time, the people can see right through the devious games that the Dems are trying to play.

By coming out and saying that they will refuse to engage in the process before a nomination has even been named, I think it's fair to say that the judge is irrelevant and the driving force is that they don't want Obama to have the choice.

Now that the shoe is on the other foot, the Dems cry foul??? Say it ain't so!!!!

Exactly. They don't care about the people, nor what is right for the people. Only for their own power.

You know, I'm actually enjoying this. You know what they say about payback.......

Strangerland, it's just so hard to understand the GOP's endgame here. Obviously they will stall and obstruct any nominee Obama makes before he even nominates anyone.

But what happens next? After successfully stopping a Democratic President from choosing a Supreme Court justice, they will suddenly go along with the process if Hillary or Bernie gets elected? That doesn't make any sense. And if the Republicans win the White House isn't it painfully obvious that Democrats will just return the favor and refuse to confirm any GOP nominee?

So, like I said, prepare for 8 justices for years to come regardless of which party get the WH. The GOP has effectively killed the Supreme Court nomination system and that practice will be continued for a long, long time.

Superlib, as I noted yesterday, the possibilities the GOP is playing with are: (1) The GOP wins big be retaining the senate and winning the presidency. (2) The GOP wins a little by gaining the presidency but losing the senate. (3) Status quo, with the GOP retaining the senate and the Dems winning the presidency. (4) The GOP suffers a huge loss by losing both.

In fact, #3 would be also present a risk to the GOP as a new Dem president would have all the time in the world to wear down GOP obstructionism and thus might want to nominate someone more conservative than Obama likely will.

For those who claim that the Dems have and would do the same thing, that the last time this happened, with Anthony Kennedy ultimately elected unanimously 97-0 under a Dem-controlled Senate (the Democrats facilitated the process and supported a consensus candidate, and Kennedy has turned out to be an excellent Justice) shows their claim to be completely void of truth.

@CrazyJoe

There will be a backlash that will shake up Washington politics for the next generation.

Not allowing Obama to further "fundamentally change America" is the backlash. You may not have figured this out yet but Washington politics has already been shaken up on both the Left and Right. The rules have changed and there is no going back. Obama doesn't give a damn about America - he cares only about his Leftist ideology.

Obama has shown that he will use any means necessary to achieve his goals - Constitution be damned. Senator Reid changed the rules during the middle of a Congressional term to end the filibuster for lower court nominees so he could pack the DC court with Leftist judges. It was not how things were done but it was Constitutional. It is not un-Constitutional for the Senate to delay or ritually "Bork" one or two Obama nominees. It has been done before. The Dems will get to whine and complain just as Republicans did. They will have live with it just as conservatives have had to do. Enjoy the show people - it's only going to get better.

Wolfpack, that you for your succinct summary of the Republican position on this. It is, of course, entirely incorrect - Only a "true believer" would term Obama "leftist," and the idea that he's run roughshod over the Constitution is belied by the fact that the Supreme Court has ruled in his favor time and again (he may be pushing the envelope a bit, but he willingly accepts where the chips fall) - but that is all beside the point.

Republicans seem to think that their familiar brand of obstructionism carried out the the extreme level of abrogating the duties prescribed to them by the Constitution and thus preventing the Supreme Court from fulfilling theirs will play with the electorate. Don't pretend that there is any precedent for this: There isn't. Accept that your party seems on the edge of fundamentally altering the relationship between the three branches of government for partisan gain. It is impossible to argue otherwise.

If you win, good for you. Bad for America in terms of the way government has historically functioned, of course, but Republicans don't care about that.

Would you libs endorse a Trump nominee? Yet you want conservatives to trust Obama! He has proven his judgement is not the best for the nation. You all make it sound like Obama's choice would be middle of the road and flawless. Your only fooling yourselves. Thinking minds see right through the BS.

Would you libs endorse a Trump nominee?

If it was a proper nominee, and vetted by congress, of course.

You all make it sound like Obama's choice would be middle of the road and flawless.

And your comment shows the problem. Obama may very well choose someone middle of the road, yet without having any indication whatsoever of who he may choose, Republicans have already determined they will not support that choice no matter what.

You would rather be partisan than do what is right for the country.

Wolfpack: Not allowing Obama to further "fundamentally change America" is the backlash. (snip) Obama doesn't give a damn about America - he cares only about his Leftist ideology.

A Supreme Court justice died. Obama's job is to recommend a new one. That's the law. Telling me that Obama doesn't give a damn about America isn't any kind of reasonable, rational argument for denying the President something he has the right to do. It's just someone who is so deranged about Obama that he throws out a meaningless phrase while crippling our highest court.

I've grown tired of reading these bumper stickers from Republicans who think they are actually giving sound arguments. The GOP controls the Senate, but you don't hear anyone here saying, "Republicans are crazy so we need to shut down the Senate as long as they have a majority." That's what your talking points amount to.

I don't care what you think about Obama when the discussion is about his legal rights and responsibilities. Your bubble masters have poisoned your brain to think any kind of obstruction is saving America. Democrats here talk about the budget, and immigration, healthcare, etc. You guys only seem to offer "we gotta stop the Communist." No wonder Trump is dominating your party. He was made for what the GOP has become these days.....empty suits with empty rhetoric.

Now please begin the carpet bombing of Syria.

Would you libs endorse a Trump nominee? ... He has proven his judgement is not the best for the nation.

That's the whole point, Wolf. Your hypothetical does not include a nominee. Democrats had problems, for example, with Reagan's first two nominees in '87, but they did fulfill their requirements, and when Reagan finally nominated Kennedy, he was confirmed unanimously. McConnell has basically stated that Obama could nominate Jesus Christ and he wouldn't get a committee hearing.

The Senate unilaterally stating that they will not consider any nominee whatsoever from a sitting US president is clearly unprecedented and irresponsible.

McConnell has basically stated that Obama could nominate Jesus Christ and he wouldn't get a committee hearing.

Jesus Christ would never survive a Repubican vetting.

Obama has shown that he will use any means necessary to achieve his goals - Constitution be damned. Senator Reid changed the rules during the middle of a Congressional term to end the filibuster for lower court nominees so he could pack the DC court with Leftist judges.

This is the hurdle that Dems can't and don't want to face up to. When the Dems had the majority, they and libs just had the floor and told conservatives to shut the heck up, likewise on JT and now that they are exposed for the hypocritical obstructionist lying bunch the party truly is, they cry foul and injustice.

It was not how things were done but it was Constitutional. It is not un-Constitutional for the Senate to delay or ritually "Bork" one or two Obama nominees.

No, and in fact, Obama should be blocked from trying to put an ideologue Justice to the court, one that vote ONLY by ideology.

It has been done before. The Dems will get to whine and complain just as Republicans did. They will have live with it just as conservatives have had to do. Enjoy the show people - it's only going to get better.

Amen. Oh, and the Democratic Party needs to be destroyed...... Along with the other spineless Republicans.

A Supreme Court justice died. Obama's job is to recommend a new one. That's the law.

He can do that, but we have 3 branches of government and I know the Dems have short memory and want Obama to circumvent the system, but there is a Congress and for far too long, the man has side stepped and walked all over them and now that they do have the power to block him from appointing someone radical and the Supreme Court had to also remind him, he's just the president and not a Tyrant.....well, he thinks differently, but we already know that.

Telling me that Obama doesn't give a damn about America isn't any kind of reasonable, rational argument for denying the President something he has the right to do.

No, not only is it reasonable, given Obama's "I don't care what you think" attitude, it's rationable and logical to intervene given his history and thumbing his nose at the constitution and the law.

It's just someone who is so deranged about Obama that he throws out a meaningless phrase while crippling our highest court.

I've grown tired of reading these bumper stickers from Republicans who think they are actually giving sound arguments.

I feel the same about the Democrats, welcome to my world.

The GOP controls the Senate, but you don't hear anyone here saying, "Republicans are crazy so we need to shut down the Senate as long as they have a majority." That's what your talking points amount to.

You guys had your chance with a majority and you guys screwed up royally, suck it up!

I don't care what you think about Obama when the discussion is about his legal rights and responsibilities.

But he's not above the law and you and every other liberal can't blame the action that has been taken to block him. It's Obama's and the Dems fault. They created the climate and they should deal with it.

Your bubble masters have poisoned your brain to think any kind of obstruction is saving America. Democrats here talk about the budget, and immigration, healthcare, etc.

Whoooooa! When do you guys talk about the budget? You guys keep blowing it up, spend like crazy, with immigration, you guys were pushing 5 million people to get amnesty and damn anyone that gets in their way, refuse to close the borders, are against illegals getting IDs (we all know why) and with healthcare, you guys rammed the thing through without a single GOP vote and thank God for that! It would have been an absolute travesty if they would have done that. There hasn't been that much that the Dems would talk over with the GOP and Obama. He was always, it's my way or the highway."

You guys only seem to offer "we gotta stop the Communist." No wonder Trump is dominating your party. He was made for what the GOP has become these days.....empty suits with empty rhetoric.

Uh-huh, in other words, Dems area really panicking!

Now please begin the carpet bombing of Syria.

That. Should have a long time ago.

And your comment shows the problem. Obama may very well choose someone middle of the road, yet without having any indication whatsoever of who he may choose, Republicans have already determined they will not support that choice no matter what.

You would rather be partisan than do what is right for the country.

That would be the president who will soon be gone by the end of this. In all my years on this planet, I have never seen any president violate the constitution, the same one that this nut job thinks he knows about.

StrangerlandFEB. 15, 2016 - 02:48PM JST McConnell has basically stated that Obama could nominate Jesus Christ and he wouldn't get a committee hearing. Jesus Christ would never survive a Repubican vetting.

I'm not so sure there, we all know Jesus was a lifelong Republican. If only to say thanks for all those brave Americans that died fighting the crusades nearly a thousand years ago.

The end times are coming, Obama if the fifth trumpet of the end times! eeeeeek!!

Attorney General Loretta Lynch looks to be an interesting candidate. She's been recently vetted for her position by a Senate GOP-controlled committee so intent on blocking any Obama nomination that it took them 119 days to move to vote - longer than the previous seven AGs combined. Forcing the GOP to pull the same stunt again only a year later would put them in a tight spot.

Read an interesting idea: McConnell is being so intransigent because he is dealing from a position of weakness, not strength. Any move to initiate consideration of an Obama nominee would drive the frenzied right even more into a frenzy, and the participation of any GOP senator in such a process could well lead to their being "primaried" by a candidate too far right to be elected; i.e., 2010 revisited. So McConnell's damned either way, but refusal to move on a Lynch nomination would make his political calculations all too obvious.

Another interesting and funny but ultimately impractical idea is for Clinton to promise to nominate Obama upon assuming office. That would certainly guarantee her victory.

Or how about Republicans telling us Obama should be denied his rights so Trump can choose the next nominee? Please, I'm hoping a Repiblican says that just once...heh.

Another interesting and funny but ultimately impractical idea is for Clinton to promise to nominate Obama upon assuming office. That would certainly guarantee her victory.

And then from the unicornverse, liberals finally woke and then were hit with a dose of harsh reality.

The comments suggest Obama would select a neutral nominee and if that would be the case, fine. Obama's past suggests he will select at minimum left leaning. Knowing extreem left will not fit. Or he may play the anti GOP and just do that and continue to say "the GOP are obstructionists" into early November.

I recall during a recent "government shutdown" when the Obama administration shut down parks! It was at additional cost to add fencing and security all due to no money supposedly. What a clown show that was. And the intentional pain imposed to USA residents as well as international tourists.

I recall during a recent "government shutdown" when the Obama administration shut down parks!

Only in the Bubble, Mark. The Insane Republican party own the government shutdowns. How is the weather in the Bubble today? I hear the slime storms can get messy this time of year...

"I've grown tired of reading these bumper stickers from Republicans who think they are actually giving sound arguments." - comments

Like this one . . . ?

"The Country Be Damned! We're Republican'ts!"

After the tears of laughter are wiped, the same old GOP ShiaTea bumper sticker is recycled, "Shut It Down! At ANY Cost!"

(Too bad they didn't have the chance to see George W. Bush's forged yellow cake documents used to start the Bush/Iraq War.)

Having destroyed the middle east, the GOP ShiaTea turns its creative powers to the Supreme Court. For a bunch with a resume like the ShiaTea, the Supreme Court is the last place anyone would want their obstruction.

The controlling ethic of the GOP ShiaTea is a long since described goal, "Make Government Small Enough to Drown in the Bathtub." (see: Grover Glenn Norquist)

In their campaign to remove Government from the States the GOP ShiaTea has just found another test to fail. Dismantling the Supreme Court is an ideal goal for the "Party of Personal Responsibility." Another chance to destroy a region of the globe for private profit.

Maybe the GOP ShiaTea will replace the Supreme Court with a Privatized Supreme Court? (Oh! Wait, they already replaced People with Corporations, Mission Accomplished!

Obama's constitutional duty.

His constitutional duty is to heed the representatives of the people, who happen to be their congressmen and senators. They have the constitutional right and duty to block his appointments if they feel it is in the interest of their constituents. Obama is not a king or an emperor, his power is limited to one branch of government, and a small part of that.

But Obama would not be facing such opposition if he had not singlehandedly lost his party's majorities in the congress and senate. Those losses are his fault, not the republicans', and now he has to face the consequences. You can try to blame opposition to Obama's policies and appointments on republican congressmen, but you have to remember that Obama is to blame for them being their in the first place, right?

And don't think for a second that the same thing wouldn't happen if the tables were reversed, and a liberal justice had died during the last 9 months of a republican administration.

As someone once said, "elections have consequences".

@SuperLib

A Supreme Court justice died. Obama's job is to recommend a new one. That's the law.

You are so right. I agree with you 100%. And it is also the law that the Republican controlled Senate may choose to confirm that recommendation or not. Well, it will likely be not. Deal with it. That whole 'elections have consequences' line from Obama goes both ways you know. And I love it when it gets thrown back in the Emperors face.

I've grown tired of reading these bumper stickers from Republicans who think they are actually giving sound arguments. The GOP controls the Senate, but you don't hear anyone here saying, "Republicans are crazy so we need to shut down the Senate as long as they have a majority." That's what your talking points amount to.

Well I've grown tired of hearing these bumper sticker pronouncements from the Left. Not confirming another racist Lefty judge like Sotomayor will not cause the SC to "shut down". You are being overly dramatic. If a case comes down to a 4-4 Left v. Right tie the case will be decided by what the lower court decided. Life goes on. It has happened before.

You guys only seem to offer "we gotta stop the Communist."

Coming from a party that only likes to talk about stopping the fascist, war-mongering, racist (pick any left leaning demographic) Republicans that sure is a funny statement on your part.

Now please begin the carpet bombing of Syria.

See what I mean? You are getting hysterical. Look - your side is winning. PC is changing American culture to the point where we are beginning to attack our own fundamental rights and beliefs. Immigration from third world countries is flooding America with people whose political traditions are Leftist. Isn't the Left constantly telling everyone that they are winning due to demographics (not to mention Orwellian PC brainwashing by public school systems from bottom to top)? But that doesn't mean that the people who cherish America as it was founded will not continue to fight for what they believe in. They may feel that they are losing America but they have not given up on themselves. You will have to get used to that - I have.

@Laguna:

Read an interesting idea: McConnell is being so intransigent because he is dealing from a position of weakness, not strength.

McConnell - as much as I dislike the man myself - is the Senate "Majority" Leader. Dirty Harry Reid is the "Minority" Leader. That's all you need to know about who is dealing from a position of strength or weakness. "Elections have consequences" - BO

@MarkG

I recall during a recent "government shutdown" when the Obama administration shut down parks! It was at additional cost to add fencing and security all due to no money supposedly. What a clown show that was. And the intentional pain imposed to USA residents as well as international tourists.

Even during a fiscal crisis Obama will spare no expense to inconvenience an elderly WWII veteran wanting to visit the open air memorial in DC. He even hired security guards to keep them out. Classy no??

@kc-shia-tea

In their campaign to remove Government from the States

You are uninformed on this matter. Conservatives want less Federal government and more State/local government in it's place. Get yourself educated.

Wolfpack: You are so right. I agree with you 100%. And it is also the law that the Republican controlled Senate may choose to confirm that recommendation or not. Well, it will likely be not. Deal with it.

Is this the part where we pretend your party is actually following the process? Your leaders have come out and said that they will block any Obama nomination. Even Cruz said he will filibuster any candidate. That isn't Congress doing their job of vetting, that's congress creating gridlock. They are using their position to try to prevent Obama from doing something he has every right to do, and as far as I can see all you have to offer is right-wing platitudes as if that's some kind of credible legal position.

Not confirming another racist Lefty judge like Sotomayor will not cause the SC to "shut down". You are being overly dramatic. If a case comes down to a 4-4 Left v. Right tie the case will be decided by what the lower court decided. Life goes on. It has happened before.

And I'm fine with that as a temporary solution while Republican continue their gridlock, which I'm sure you will agree will extend if Clinton or Sanders is elected. You guys lost a conservative judge and a 4-4 status quo tie is a lot better than a 5-4 loss with conservative majorities getting the victory.

sangetsu3: They have the constitutional right and duty to block his appointments if they feel it is in the interest of their constituents. Obama is not a king or an emperor, his power is limited to one branch of government, and a small part of that.

Perfect bubble execution here. Take a kernel of truth (Senate must vet candidates) and apply it to a situation where Republicans are refusing to even start the process. Obama is trying to fulfill his duties as President. Republicans don't want him to choose a justice so they have completely shut the system down. Now please use "emperor" a few more times and pretend that it actually means something other than mental masturbation.

Look, we all know you guys simply don't want Obama to choose the next justice because he is Obama. At least come out and say that and save us all time. I don't want to have to sort through "emperor" and "he's destroying America" posts masquerading as actual legal reasons from blocking a President from performing his duties. Your party could have just as easily said, "We are looking forward to Obama's nominee" and then used procedural tactics to delay it. But they didn't. They have the position that they refuse to even begin the process which is straight up dereliction of duty. Too often GOP leaders shoot first and ask questions later, then they can't walk back their comments because they've whipped their base into a frenzy.

American politics have become personal and ugly.

MadvertsFEB. 15, 2016 - 09:01PM JST I recall during a recent "government shutdown" when the Obama administration shut down parks!

Only in the Bubble, Mark. The Insane Republican party own the government shutdowns. How is the weather in the Bubble today? I hear the slime storms can get messy this time of year...

Hey madverts, the WW2 memorial was fenced and guarded at additional cost to guard. Hate me all you want, I make my own mind up. I am not programmed to throw insults for silly reasons.

Bottom line?

The President will nominate and the GOP ShiaTea will prove, again, incapable of productive thought or action. Maybe the GOP has been destroyed?

Trump keeps kicking Jeb in the teeth with the GeorgeW boot.

What is there left of the GOP ShiaTea?

Another hissy fit like Cruz's filibuster implosion executed on the American People?

This time it's Supreme! Same product, different flavor, same ole GOP ShiaTea.

@SuperLib

Is this the part where we pretend your party is actually following the process?

First off, I am not a Republican. Republicans do not believe in America's Founding principles. That's why there is a rebellion among conservatives throughout the country. They say they do, but when it comes time to take action they fold to the Dems every time. I cannot endorse any party that helps run up a $19 trillion deficit, tolerates institutionalized racism (ie affirmative action), and allows the Dems to take away the peoples choice to remain free of government coercion.

Now about process. Remember the process where Obama said he did not have the authority to grant millions of illegal immigrants legal status? He correctly stated that only Congress could allow that. Well, he did it anyway. How about the process where Harry Reid dropped the nuclear option on Republicans in order to stack the circuit courts with Leftist's. Both sides have been hypocrites. Senator Schumer declared that W Bush would get no more SC justices a full 18 months before the end of his second term. Process you say? If only the Right is supposed to follow process it amounts to unilateral surrender. Now it would come as no surprise to me if the GOP actually did fold to the plea for process and gave Obama another far Left justice. I hope they don't. And if they somehow do the impossible and actually try to do something to preserve America's Founding principles. I will thoroughly enjoy listening to and reading every whining word of America's Lefty's.

They are using their position to try to prevent Obama from doing something he has every right to do...

That is demonstrably false. The president has every right to nominate a replacement justice. And I am sure he will. However, he explicitly does not have the right to confirm said justice himself. Although if he can figure out a way to do so I no doubt believe he will - the Constitution be damned.

And I'm fine with that as a temporary solution while Republican continue their gridlock, which I'm sure you will agree will extend if Clinton or Sanders is elected.

No if Sanders or Clinton become president the Senate will confirm another Lefty judge and the inevitable take over by Socialism will be just about over. Should one of them win then the Senate will most certainly be in the hands of the Dems anyway. But in such case I would love to see one or two of them "Borked" along the way. If the Democrats are going to ruin America why not have a bit of fun while we are at it.

Now please use "emperor" a few more times and pretend that it actually means something other than mental masturbation.

Well it that's all that those that believe in the Constitution can get out of the continued erosion of America's freedoms, I believe I'll take it.

Look, we all know you guys simply don't want Obama to choose the next justice because he is Obama. At least come out and say that and save us all time.

No one is hiding that bit of news. Obama doesn't believe in America as it is as outlined in the Constitution. He wants to fundamentally change that America without even bothering to amend the Constitution it is based on. That is your Emperor Obama.

Too often GOP leaders shoot first and ask questions later, then they can't walk back their comments because they've whipped their base into a frenzy.

I hope you are right this time. But they are just as likely to give Obama everything he wants anyway. And if they do, you will get to enjoy reading my condemnations of them shortly thereafter.

@marcG and others

I have been quite satisfied with Obama, who took risks, did things that needed doing, doubled the stock market, and "got" four of our national enemies (or, had the good luck to be on watch when they died of natural cases in some cases). They were bin Laden (which "Obama" got, giving full credit to him since any Republican who had been president at the same time would have taken full credit for himself), Kim, Ghadaffi, and even Omar. Obama has enhanced the stature of America and the American presidency by running a clean administration, not having any scandals to speak of (except for stupid noise manufactured by his enemies), has not gotten the Presidential dick sucked in the oval office, and has been a really awful Muslim sleeper agent, supporting things like gay marriage and womens' rights. The fact that most Conservatives can say things like "Obama is the worst president ever" and actually believe them, without having the honesty to even admit some of the man's strengths, makes me feel very sad for that half of America.

(Incidentally I voted Republican every year of my life until Bush II turned me off for good.)

doubled the stock market

Can't argue with you there. The 1% have gotten richer than ever under Obama. None of the fat cats Obama bailed out were sent to prison and of course none of the idiots in Congress who came up with the regulations that allowed the fat cats to get away with the financial crisis were held accountable either. Average incomes are lower now than after the recession ended just six months after Obama took office. And don't forget the recession ended way before his non-shovel ready stimulus kicked in. He even outdid Bush's huge deficit spending by a mere multiple of two. There was a time when Democrat senators running for president called that un-American. I happen to agree with candidate Obama's assessment then and now.

Obama has enhanced the stature of America and the American presidency by running a clean administration

Well yeah if you omit selling guns to drug lords, using the IRS to deter the free speech rights of your political 'enemies', presiding over the largest oil spill disaster in human history, allowing Edward Snowden to get away with the largest single intelligence breach in American history, creating a failed state in Libya, failing to take the threat of ISIS seriously until it was too late, failing to protect your diplomats in Libya after receiving numerous requests for security assistance before and after they were attacked - then lying to the faces of the families of those killed as to the reasons why they were killed in order to protect himself just months before his re-election. I guess some might consider that a cleanly run administration. I didn't even mention the numerous unconstitutional "legislative" actions he "passed" all by himself in order to get his way when Congress opposed him.

If the Republicans - the people he reverently refers to as his "enemies" - refuse to rubber stamp his Supreme Court nominee I bet he gets real upset about that. All those other things his administration is responsible for - not so much.