CINOs, RINOs – Any Difference?

CINOs, RINOs, it’s all the same. Whether they’re Catholics-in-Name-Only or Republicans-in-Name- Only, they just can’t resist not keeping their powder dry. Take, for example, the current situation of the vacancy in the Court due to the passing of Justice Scalia. The RINOs just can’t keep their mouths shut. Yes, El Presidente has the authority to nominate a Justice to fill the vacant seat but the Senate also has the authority to either confirm or reject that nominee. They don’t have to say beforehand what they intend to do and they can continue to review and reject, if necessary, any nomination put forth by the lame-duck president that attempts to denigrate the memory of Justice Scalia. If the lame-duck attempts a “recess-appointment” that appointment is only temporary according to the Constitution.

Then there is the matter of the CINOs on the court who have the ability, even now, to control the rulings of the court in favor of traditional standards of morality. But, they have shown no semblance of unity in favor of such standards even though they continue to claim the label Catholic. What a disgrace!

Get AQ Email Updates

7 comments on “CINOs, RINOs – Any Difference?

  1. Are there any PINOs (P for “Protestants”) or DINOS (D for “Democrats”) out there?

    I think the Big-O will nominate a woman “of color” (Afro, Asian, Latina or Muslima) to be the next SCJOTUS (or to use the feminine form, SCJOTA).

    • [Will enough RINO Senators roll over and join the Demoncrat minority to insure confirmation for her or any other Obamanation?]

      Supreme Court Expert Thinks Obama Will Pick Pro-Abort Attorney-General Loretta Lynch to Replace Scalia


      STEVEN ERTELT FEB 15, 2016 |

      Justice Anton Scalia only passed away two days ago and already everyone and anyone has an idea on who they think President Barack Obama will pick to take his seat on the Supreme Court. One of the names being bandied about today by experts on the high court is pro-abortion Attorney General Loretta Lynch.

      As NBC News reports:

      Tom Goldstein, who runs the influential SCOTUSblog, had earlier predicted Ninth Circuit Judge Paul Watford would make the top of President Obama’s shortlist. But in a revised blog post, Goldstein said he now believes Lynch is the leading contender.

      Lynch is a “very serious possibility,” Goldstein wrote. “The fact that Lynch was vetted so recently for attorney general also makes it practical for the president to nominate her in relatively short order.”

      Lynch would be the first black woman ever nominated to the nation’s highest court and that would play in her favor as the pro-abortion media would likely celebrate that fact.

      “I think the administration would relish the prospect of Republicans either refusing to give Lynch a vote or seeming to treat her unfairly in the confirmation process,” Goldstein wrote. “Either eventuality would motivate both black and women voters.”

      Lynch has a strongly pro-abortion background. She defended partial-birth abortions, and, during her confirmation hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Lynch admitted to pro-life Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina that she once signed onto a brief the Planned Parenthood abortion business submitted in its legal battle to overturn the Congressional ban on partial-birth abortions. The Supreme Court eventually sided against Planned Parenthood and upheld the ban on the gruesome abortion procedure.

      Lynch signed on to an amicus brief in the Partial Birth Abortion case before the Supreme Court where she served as an amici in favor of Planned Parenthood. She argued that the ban against the killing of partially born children was “unconstitutionally vague and threatens the integrity of the criminal justice system.”

      As Attorney General she failed to watch the Planned Parenthood expose videos that show the abortion company potentially breaking federal law to sell the body parts of aborted babies. And she refused to say if the Obama administration was enforcing a law to stop allowing babies to die who survive failed abortions.

      After Scalia’s death, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said the Senate will not take up a vote on a replacement for deceased pro-life Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia until after the presidential election.

      Such a promise prevents pro-abortion President Barack Obama from selecting a third pro-abortion Supreme Court justice to follow Sonia Sotomayor and Elana Kagan, both of whom are thoroughly committed to unlimited abortions and upholding Roe v. Wade.

      Democrats will undoubtedly push for the nomination and a confirmation vote for a new left-wing judge.

      “The President can and should send the Senate a nominee right away,” Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid said on Twitter. “The Senate has a responsibility to fill vacancies as soon as possible.”

      The ranking Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee took a similar line.

      “I hope that no one will use this sad news to suggest that the President or the Senate should not perform its constitutional duty,” Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., said Saturday. “The American people deserve to have a full functioning Supreme Court.The Supreme Court of the United States is too important to our democracy for it to be understaffed for partisan reasons. It is only February. The President and the Senate should get to work without delay to nominate, consider and confirm the next justice to serve on the Supreme Court.”

  2. [Besides a recess appointment, another scenario on how the Big-O can get his way]

    How Obama Could Win Supreme Court Battle — Even If Republicans Take the White House

    by ARI MELBER – 2/16/16 –

    Senate Republicans are pledging to block any Supreme Court nomination by President Barack Obama until after November, hoping a Republican will replace him and fill the vacancy left by Justice Antonin Scalia.

    But even if the Senate refuses to confirm Obama’s pick and a Republican wins the White House, there is one way Obama can still get his nominee confirmed.

    It could all come down to 17 crucial days in January.

    If Democrats win back the Senate [24 Republican seats are up for re-election and only 10 Democratic ones] and lose the White House in November, they would control both branches of government for about two weeks before Obama leaves office. That overlap in the transition of power is set in stone. The Constitution mandates the new Congress begins work on January 3, while President Obama stays in power until January 20.

    So if Democrats take back the Senate, President Obama could send a Supreme Court nominee to that new Democratic majority, which would have 17 days to change the filibuster rules and ram in a vote before a new President takes power.

    “If a Democratic Senate comes in on January third, President Obama could send in his Supreme Court nomination,” explained a former Obama administration lawyer. “Then Democrats could apply the ‘nuclear option’ to Supreme Court nominations, and vote in Obama’s nominee by a simple majority.”

  3. Too much is being made IMO of what Congress will do or what Obama might do and not enough attention is being focused on the supposedly Catholic Justices currently serving on the Court. If they voted as true Catholics on pro-life issues , there would not be the opportunity for the Obama surrogates to do their dirty deeds. But, fact of the matter is they are NOT Catholics and their bishops will do nothing to rein them in.

  4. [The RINOs are starting to roll over]


    Republicans show signs of caving on Obama nomination to Supreme Court

    Published: 2/16/16
    author: BOB UNRUH

    Will Senate Republicans hold firm to a vow by Sen. Mitch McConnell to block any consideration of a Supreme Court nominee to replace the late Justice Antonin Scalia until President Obama leaves office?

    The GOP is showing signs of division on the issue.

    Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa – chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, which holds the hearings for Supreme Court nominees – told Radio Iowa Tuesday he isn’t ready to make that commitment.

    “I would wait until the nominee is made before I would make any decisions,” he said. “In other words, take it a step at a time.”

    But Grassley said he doesn’t plan to confirm any pick by Obama.

    “This is a very serious position to fill, and it should be filled and debated during the campaign and filled by either Hillary Clinton, Senator Sanders or whoever’s nominated by the Republicans, and [they should] make this decision a very important part of the election coming up,” he said.

    Other Republican senators have indicated they are open to hearings.

    On Tuesday, Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., told radio host John Howell that the Senate “might” grant a hearing.

    Howell began by telling Johnson: “I think that you should go through the process. If you don’t, I think the party winds up looking like obstructionists.”

    Johnson replied: “Well, John, we might. I have no idea how the process plays out. Again, What I’ve heard Leader McConnell say — and maybe he said something else — is let’s, in the end, let the American people decide. So, if President Obama appoints a Justice Scalia clone, my guess is we confirm a Justice Scalia clone. That’s not gonna happen. We already know the type of justices he put on the court. And so I doubt a liberal activist justice judge would be confirmed by the Senate.

    “And if we choose to not to confirm, either by not acting or by voting that choice down, either way it’s an action. It’s not giving consent to his nominee. And again, the advice is, let the American people decide the direction of this country. I think it’s a very reasonable position.”

    Howell argued that Republicans will look “like petulant children” if they don’t put an Obama nomination up for a vote.

    Johnson responded: “So put it up for a vote and vote an individual down. I don’t think there’s much of a difference one way or another.”

    In another interview, he said: “I’ve never said that I wouldn’t vote, or that we shouldn’t vote. I have no idea how the process plays out, I’m not in control of it. I’m not the majority leader, I’m not chairman of the Judiciary. By the time I would actually take the vote, if it comes to that, I’ll take a vote.”

    ‘McConnell will back down. That’s a simple reality’

    Other Republican senators who have indicated they don’t support McConnell’s vow to block a nomination include Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C. and Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky.

    Appearing on “The Tyler Cralle Show” Tuesday, Tillis said, “I think we fall into the trap … of being obstructionists” if Republicans reject any nominee “sight unseen.”

    And while Paul said Obama “has a conflict of interest” in appointing a justice, he would “look at” an Obama nominee.

    “It’s going to be very, very, very difficult to get me to vote for a presidential nomination from this president,” he said. “I will look at it if it comes down, but my threshold for voting for somebody is going to be very, very high.”

    Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid’s deputy chief of staff, Adam Jentleson, said Tuesday he believes McConnell will relent.

    Jentleson tweeted: “The next step in this process will be for Senator McConnell to back down and give President Obama’s nominee a hearing and a floor vote.”

  5. The Senate should not even consider any Obama Nominee for the Supreme Court until it has concluded a rigorous investigation of Justice Antonin Scalia’s assassination. At that point it should consider only those nominees who have a history of acting like the Constitution means what it says.

    God preserve America and Western Civilization !

    in XTO,

  6. [Hat-tip to gpmtrad (offline): “Apostate Turns Into Cartoon Character”]


    Glenn Beck: God Brought About Scalia’s Death So America Would Vote For Ted Cruz

    SCOTT GREER, Associate Editor

    One of Ted Cruz ‘s biggest supporters think there’s a very powerful force behind the Texas senator’s bid for the White House, and it’s responsible for Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia’s death during an election year.

    On Tuesday, conservative radio host and vocal Cruz backer Glenn Beck asserted on his talk show that God brought about the death of Scalia so America would “wake up” and vote for Cruz.

    Speaking in the voice of the heavenly father, Beck told his audience, “You’re welcome. I just woke the American people up. I took them out of the game show moment and woke enough of them up to say, look at how close your liberty is to being lost.”

    Reverting back to his own voice, the radio host added, “You now have lost your liberty. You replace one guy and you now have 5-4 decisions in the other direction. Just with this one guy, you’ve lost your liberty so you’d better elect somebody that is going to be somebody on [the Supreme Court]… The Constitution is hanging by a thread. That thread has just been cut and the only way that we survive now is if we have a true constitutionalist.”

Leave a Reply