Thilli$: Don’t ‘obstruct’ President Barry

thom-smokingOur senior senator says he’d vote for Bernie Sanders before Ted Cruz.  Now, it appears our junior senator wants to play nice with Barry Obama:

Senate Republicans’ widespread vow to automatically block any Supreme Court nominee President Obama puts forth may be wavering.

Within minutes of Justice Antonin Scalia passing away on Saturday, Republicans declared that they would automatically block any replacement Obama would appoint during the 11 months he has left in office. Soon after, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) announced his intention to block any replacement until a new president takes office in 2017.

But a conservative senator from North Carolina is breaking with his colleagues and calling for the GOP to at least give consideration to a potential replacement.

Appearing on The Tyler Cralle Show on Tuesday morning, Sen. Thom Tillis (R-NC) cautioned against vowing to automatically block any nominee.

“I think we fall into the trap if just simply say sight unseen, we fall into the trap of being obstructionists,” Tillis said.

burrtTHIS GUY was sent to DC with explicit marching orders to obstruct the hell out of Barry Soetero Hussein Obama. The GOP was given the Senate majority with the explicit mission to obstruct the hell out of Barry Soetero Hussein Obama. Allowing Barry to put one of his far-left law school professor pals on the high court to round out a 5-4 liberal majority bent on cannibalizing what’s left of The Constitution is unacceptable.  

This guy is not one to go rogue.  He got someone’s blessing from on-high.  Folks, if we don’t stay on top of these people, the screwing — by our own alleged teammates and representatives —  will be complete.

35 thoughts on “Thilli$: Don’t ‘obstruct’ President Barry

  1. Tillis and Woodhouse and Company are rubber stamps for Obama. They are as fake as professional wrestling. Don’t believe me? Look at all the liberal legislation they support.

    1. Agree, Tillis was destructive with working class, Commercial Fishermen of NC. Tillis bowed to 2,300 CCA members which represents 1 % of Recreational Licensed Fishermen in NC. Wonder why?

      1. I have said many times, Tillas is a fake. He made a promise before we voted for him. He needs to be recalled. Need to check what our options are and how to proceed.
        Needs to be addressed ASAP

      2. Myron,

        Please show me when the gamefish bill passed the NC House.

        How did Tillis “bow to CCA” when the bill WENT NOWHERE?

        Keep up the lies. Good job.

    2. American Heritage tells a lot. Votes do not lie. And in my opinion, Tillis has been very disappointing. However I think this story is “unfinished’ and/or a little biased, which is disappointing on the Haymaker. At least put the whole Thom Tillis quote. He then goes on to say something along the lines of, “Obama should appoint someone exactly like Scalia with a similar resume” or something etc. Obama has a constitutional right to nominate someone for appointment, we as Republicans should not interfere with that process. However we as Republicans can deny the appointment if we do not think it is a fair nominee, that is the Senates Constitutional right. If we want to block Obama fine with me, lets just do it right so we as Republicans do not look foolish… If not too late.

      Below is a link to the story (and part of it below) with more of the quote and a link to the Sound Cloud so you, yourself can hear what Tillis has to say. I for one actually do not mind what Tillis said and think he is right. i would love to bash him on this one but I think the media is doing more of the bashing and if we do not take things out of context and focus on what Senator Tillis said as a whole, there is nothing really wrong with it. Again, my opinion.

      An ideological replacement for Scalia is “unlikely to happen,” Tillis conceded, “but I think we fall into the trap if we just simply say sight unseen—we fall into the trap of being obstructionist.”
      “All we’re trying to say is that based on this president’s action, it is highly unlikely,” Tillis explained. “And if [Obama] puts forth someone that we think is in the mold of President Obama’s vision for America, then we’ll use every device available to block that nomination, wait for the American people to voice their vote in November and then move forward with a nomination after the election and most likely with the next president.”
      The remarks are in contrast to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who last Saturday called on his colleagues not to move on any nominees until a new president is elected.

      Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/thom-tillis-supreme-court-warning-219333#ixzz40WrdMOQM

      1. I guess you approve of Tillis voting to rubberstamp lots of radical Obama judicial appointments? It is long past time to shut that down. Or maybe you approve of Richard Burr proclaiming what a wonderful appointment radical Max Cogburn was, and reiterating that even after Cogburn threw out our Traditional Marriage Amendment. Funny, Burr has finally shut up about how wonderful Cogburn is now that Cogburn was the deciding vote in the 2-1 decision to throw out our Congressional districts.

        Burr and Tillis have both been useful idiots for Obama. North Carolina needs to do better.

        It would help if you got your information from conservative sources, not the liberal ”Politico”. Listen to what Rush Limbaugh had to say about Tillis’ screed yesterday or read this article in RedState from its editor:

        http://www.redstate.com/leon_h_wolf/2016/02/17/memo-thom-tillis-one-gives-crap-youre-seen-obstructionist/

  2. Tillis is in a dangerous position since he is on the Judiciary Committee. He has been an Obama Republican on lots of other things, and only the extreme left, like your source ”Think Progress” would try to call him a ”conservative”

    If Tillis goes Obama Republican on this, he needs a very strong resolution against him at the state GOP convention. It needs to go beyond those that censored Burr. The party needs to demand Tillis’ immediate resignation if he caves in to Obama on the SCOTUS nomination.

    1. Here you go again, Michelle, calling for resolutions against officials. How has that worked out for you so far?

      Maybe there needs to be a resolution against you.

      1. Bob you sound like a liberal fat cat. Are you supporting Bernie or Hillary? Run on down to mother jones and blog there with people who agree with your liberal mind set.

  3. Since we gave them landslides in the last two elections, most of the Republican Senators have bent over and grabbed their ankles for Obama!
    Why would they stop now?

  4. Greg Brannon warned that Tillis couldn’t possibly stand to protect the Constitution because he has no clue what it says. Because of his ignorance of the Constitution, he will never see the dangers of putting a liberal judge on the Supreme Court. Tillis has shown once again that he is not willing to keep the oath that he swore to keep! All federal races must be based on the Constitution, which is the contract for America! Not following the original intent of the Constitution is why we are experiencing the fall of the American Republic today. Elections have consequences and Tillis’ win as our Senator will be detrimental to NC. Richard Burr is cut from the very same cloth and has had more time to prove is inability to uphold the Constitution. We need Greg Brannon to offset Tillis and his left-wing votes. Any other outcome to this election, will just double NC’s doom!

  5. Worse, it’ll be 5-3-1 with Kennedy no longer swinging between majorities. Instead, he’ll just be the occasional 6th liberal vote.

  6. The last 18 months of George Bush’s term the Democrats would not allow him the courtesy of allowing him to appoint a SCOTUS so this is rather hypocritical on their part.

  7. I have no faith that Thom Tillis will do what’s right for the American people. He has proven that he will only do what’s right for Thom. He’s a freshman who was given an important committee assignment, there are strings attached to that.
    The people of NC need to blow up his phone lines, hold him accountable on social media. Shine the light-make him feel the heat.

  8. Once again, the freshman Senator Tillis, who’s safe for now and not up for re-election for several years, has been tapped by the powers that be to float the suggestion that Obama’s nominee should be considered.

    It’s obvious – somebody told him to say this. McConnell?

  9. Allright, somebody gets to be out of step with the crowd. After mulling things over I think it’s appropriate for the Senate judiciary committee to hold hearings. It’s their job, and we pay them to (hopefully) ask hard questions of nominees. I wish Tllis wasn’t a member, though. If the tables were turned (GOP pres and Dem Congress) I’m sure everyone on here would be fuming if they refused to meet and vote.

    1. No, I agree. Obama is well within his constitutional authority to nominate someone, and the Senate should consider whoever it is…and then quickly reject them.

      At least, if I were a Senator, I’d of course be happy to dutifully listen to anything submitted, and then I’d vote “no”, unless the candidate were a dream candidate Scalia-ish clone. 🙂

      I’d have no problem, either, with a Senator saying so… that “I’ll consider whoever Obama nominates, and if he’s not awesome-perfect, I’ll roll the dice and see who the next President offers up”.

      That seems like a perfectly sensible decision to me. *shrug*

      1. Our problem is that we have to be worried about he “no” votes. Even letting the nominee be heard is likely to raise the drive by media into a frenzy in the states where senators may vote no, thereby making them think they have to vote yes. Unfortunately the senators have not realized that regular people no longer listen to the media and will support them voting no.

        1. Certainly, that should be a worry, but if I’m being consistent with myself, I think “that” is where a fight would rightly need to take place.

          It’s rare you’ll find me on the side of advocating that a vote “not” go forward because I’m afraid of the outcome, and I dont here.

          All those Senators are citizen’s representatives, even the idiots. If the leadership fails to make a strong enough case to those on-the-fence members, that’s really their fault.

          (Yeah, I do understand the real world – but I’m not in the Senate, and am free to think only about how “I” would need to conduct myself, and I dont see a rational principle that would invoke a different course) 🙂

  10. Total overreaction to Tillis’ remarks by the ultra rightists who post here. Tillis didn’t say an Obama nominee should be confirmed. It may be a good strategy for the GOP Senate to hold hearings, string them until after the November elections. Then act one way or the other, depending on if a Republican wins the election and the GOP holds the Senate. If so, reject Obama’s nominee.

    If Hillary wins and the Dems control the Senate, if might be smarter to confirm a moderate than to wait for a Democrat President to nominate an ultra liberal.

    1. Maybe you ought to consider the position of the American people, who seem about equally divided on the issue of whether Obama’s nomination should be considered – with 43% (which includes 71% of Democrats) saying yes, and 42% (which includes 73% of Republicans, saying no. Independents have the same split as overall – 43% to 42%. These figures are from the NBC / Wall Street Journal poll.

      http://www.redstate.com/jaycaruso/2016/02/17/poll-results-senate-supreme-court-nominee/

      It looks like the public, or at least enough of it, would stand behind the GOP telling Obama ”no dice”.

    2. You are very supportive of Tillis Cyclops. Could that be because you are an ultra liberal? What has Tillis done which demonstrates conservative leadership? He refuses to de fund Obama Care, stop illegal immigration, stop federal life time judge appointments…. after promising all the above to get elected.

  11. “THIS GUY was sent to DC with explicit marching orders to obstruct the hell out of Barry Soetero Hussein Obama.”

    Sorry, but I beg to differ – no one in their right mind could have possibly voted for Tillis and expected him to do anything other than be a firm member of the GOP establishment, which in no way bothers to “obstruct” President Obama, or believes in principles like “limited government”.

    He’s doing “exactly” what he gave us every indication he was going to do… he’s “not a Democrat”. So, well… that’s about it.

    And… why would he ever care what voters here in NC think? He’s “always” going to “not be a Democrat”. As long as that’s enough to get people’s votes, he doesnt care if you’re also holding your nose while you hand over your support….

    (And, when he’s up for for another round in a few years, he’ll be entrenched, and even harder to remove… awesome).

    1. One thing we need to do is work with our legislators to restore a majority vote as the standard to avoid runoffs. We get Obama Republicans like TIllis due to a divided conservative vote and a 40% treshhold to avoid a runoff. That standard is an affront to democracy.

      1. Yeah… honestly not given it too much thought, but that sounds like a good and reasonable idea. /agree.

        I’m not much of a fan to the idea of having people have to come back and re-vote, though… but some kind of “instant-runoff” scheme might be a solid alternative. *shrug*

  12. President Obama says the Constitution is “pretty clear” on replacing a Justice. I would like to hear Greg Brannon’s take on this as he is the one person most familiar with the Constitution.

    1. It “is” pretty clear. He’s free to nominate whomever he wants, and the Senate is given the role of advise and consent.

      Those are just the ground rules, and filling in the details within that framework is open to politics. 🙂

      The question at hand is on the part about the Senate’s consent, no?

  13. President Obama is going to continue to do his job, that includes nominating a new Supreme Court Justice. The Senate should do its job and hold hearings rather than continue to cry and sit on their hands.

    1. Hmmm. That was NOT the way Senator Obama handled things when the shoe was on the other foot and President Bush was making nominations to the SCOTUS. With Obama, it is one set of rules for Republicans and another for Democrats.

      1. That is not just with Barry. It is with all democrats. Just look at the current re-district controversy. You have to consider race, except when it does not benefit our party then you have to not consider race.

  14. Hey Thom, being an obstructionist in support of the Constitution and our Constitutional Republic is a GOOD thing!

  15. Tillis is right. Republicans need to get in line behind President Obama’s choice. This is critical to saving the Polar Bears.

    Scalia’s last court decision was to halt President Obama’s EPA rules on coal. We need a new progressive justice who will go along with President Obama’s green energy plans. Those EPA rules would have greatly increased the cost of electricity, forcing consumers to use less of it.

    The big money man of our hard core environmentalist movement, billionaire Tom Steyer, has issued a warning to Republicans that our movement regards getting this Supreme Court seat as vital to the effort to save the Polar Bears. They need to heed what Tom Steyer is telling them and get with President Obama’s program. At least Tom Tillis seems to be moving that direction.

    We have an ace in the hole in getting Richard Burr on board as well. Burr’s consultant, Paul Shumaker, took a bunch of money from our hard core environmental movement to support President Obama’s green energy programs in the General Assembly, along with Dee Stewart. These two progressive consultants are our bridge into the GOP.

    Also remember that Thom Tillis as a state legislator was always on our side on green energy, even as a freshman legislator, and that he has personally been an investor in a bank that invests mostly in green energy projects. Of course he is going to be on our side.

Comments are closed.