The Republican-controlled Congress is not "dysfunctional." It would "function" perfectly well if there were an occupant in the White House who gave the Republicans everything they wanted. With divided government they act like petulant children. Voices in the press decrying "dysfunction" render invisible the corporate oligarchy that has bought off the institution.
Senate Republicans have given him absolutely no reason to play nice with them nor observe the asinine gentility that obfuscates the partisan rancor of that institution.
I recently interviewed Harry DeMell, an immigration lawyer since 1977 and a member of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, about the current immigration crisis.
Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee announced that they will not consider any nominee put forward by our nation's president. This is unconscionable. If they carry through on this threat, it will be directly incompatible with their solemn responsibilities under the U.S. Constitution.
The Republican-controlled Senate's refusal to consider, hold hearings for, or even meet with any Supreme Court nominee proposed by President Obama is not "just" partisan politics as usual.
Let us, as the grassroots, hold their feet to the fire. Let us have a popular movement arise to march onto this battlefield. (Perhaps people could begin organizing a Yuge March on Washington to converge on the Capital in the days before the Senate votes on an Obama nominee.) Let us bring all our forces to bear on this pivotal battle.
As a consequence of endless Republican obstructionism, voters are frustrated and angry with Washington. This has led to the rise of Donald Trump as a Republican presidential candidate, and a civil war within the party.
U.S. Sen. Mark Kirk, R-Ill., on Monday broke ranks with Republican leaders by saying he recognizes President Barack Obama's right to nominate a replacement for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia and that the GOP-controlled Senate should consider the nominee.
With Justice Scalia gone from the Court, no one can say what will happen next, with respect to forced arbitration or any other issue. But the exceptionally strong words of Justices Ginsburg and Kagan raise a very real possibility that the Supreme Court's love affair -- with forcing Americans into arbitration even when it lets corporations break the law with impunity -- may finally be over.
Filling a vacancy on the high court should be viewed as a solemn obligation, not as a political prerogative.
The death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has led, almost immediately, to extensive and partisan political fighting in Washington. This is, in part, a fitting tribute to a man who served on the Supreme Court for almost thirty years, and whose greatest contributions in that capacity were ultimately more political than judicial.
Most people also know that Justice Scalia was a bastion of Conservatives on the U.S. Supreme Court. At least, that is how he is usually described And some people now also know about his unlikely friendship with Justice Ruth Bader-Ginsburg.
Belief in a single contradiction, no matter how innocent-seeming (or justified in a particular political situation) turns logic in on itself, giving us the logical grounding to believe anything no matter how idiotic or untrue.
The current partisan battle to replace the late Justice Scalia, for example, makes it apparent that a fine point needs to be put on presidential appointment power. In addition, two other questions perpetually provoke deep division and heated debate -- particularly in an election season.
If Pope Francis is changing the emphasis of issues for American Catholics, that's only because we American Catholics -- both conservative and liberal -- have not been listening carefully enough.
The Constitution contains no provision that would allow the Senate to reject nominations that occur during the last year of a president's term, or to reject nominations whenever the Senate just so happens to be politically opposed to the sitting president.