Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has passed away

#3,326
#3,326
hog88 said:
I'm with you on that, there needs to be an upper age limit just like there is a lower one for political office and federal judges should be limited to 12 year terms.
Click to expand...

It's funny, well not funny but ridiculous, that maybe one of the only topics that people in this country broadly agree on is term limits for those in the government and we can't get them enacted. Goes to show you that our representatives probably don't represent anyone but themselves. I'd vote across the board for the "term limits party" if there was such a thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ajvol01, 0nelilreb and McDad
#3,327
#3,327
Wafflestomper said:
It's funny, well not funny but ridiculous, that maybe one of the only topics that people in this country broadly agree on is term limits for those in the government and we can't get them enacted. Goes to show you that our representatives probably don't represent anyone but themselves. I'd vote across the board for the "term limits party" if there was such a thing.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with term limits for elected officials, only federal judges.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tvolsfan
#3,328
#3,328
Wafflestomper said:
It's funny, well not funny but ridiculous, that maybe one of the only topics that people in this country broadly agree on is term limits for those in the government and we can't get them enacted. Goes to show you that our representatives probably don't represent anyone but themselves. I'd vote across the board for the "term limits party" if there was such a thing.
Click to expand...

Amen. Probably the clearest example of how maintaining/growing power is job #1 - all else flows from that Prime Directive
 
  • Like
Reactions: McDad
#3,331
#3,331
Wafflestomper said:
Really? Why's that?
Click to expand...

They limit my right to select my representation.

Now, let me make myself clear. I think the 17th amendment needs to be repealed and we go back to state legislatures picking Senators. So in that scenario I think term limits for the senate would be appropriate because Senators are representing the state, not me directly. I think term limits for President are appropriate because we do not directly elect the POTUS. I think term limits for House members are wrong because that is my direct representative in DC and I shouldn't have an arbitrary limit on who I choose to represent me.
 
#3,333
#3,333
MontyPython said:
Just in case there's any question whether Trump's SCOTUS stuffing will backfire...

View attachment 308458
Click to expand...

How will it back fire ? You mean to tell me that what you guys on the left have been saying for 4 years wasn’t true about the blue wave and because of Trump replacing RBG like the Dems / Joe Biden are on video saying that a president .. “ SHALL “ appoint a justice , this is going to cause the backlash ? Come on man , make up your talking points.. umm I mean minds .
 
#3,335
#3,335
0nelilreb said:
How will it back fire ? You mean to tell me that what you guys on the left have been saying for 4 years wasn’t true about the blue wave and because of Trump replacing RBG like the Dems / Joe Biden are on video saying that a president .. “ SHALL “ appoint a justice , this is going to cause the backlash ? Come on man , make up your talking points.. umm I mean minds .
Click to expand...

Ain't rocket science dude.

Most people don't support replacing SCOTUS judge now.

So, here's how it works: When El Presidente does something people don't like, that reduces likelihood of said person voting for El Presidente.

Logic. WOOT.
 
#3,336
#3,336
AM64 said:
Then I guess Biden will win in a landslide, and all your trials soon be over ... unless something has to go to the SC for resolution. The 9th circus is not doing your job as well as it had been either. You think your side will have learned a lesson since the last time they held everything, overplayed the hand (elections have consequences), embittered more than they pleased, and lost the totalitarian game?

I'm a little undecided on a few things - like whether the GOP should start the Ukraine investigations before or after the inauguration. Biden's been in politics longer than Trump, so he and Kammy may understand they have to burn the DOJ down to save it - and themselves. I guess that means kick it off first, so Biden and Harris would look cynical if they started firing people before the investigation was over. My real wish in all this would be that Trump taught the GOP about fighting fire with fire and they continue playing your game against you. Then perhaps in time both parties could learn about everything in moderation.
Click to expand...
You not only drank the kool-aide, you bathed in it.
 
#3,337
#3,337
hog88 said:
It's not nonsense. SCOTUS justices should not put themselves and their desires over the office they hold.
Click to expand...
She didn't. But we do have a POTUS doing that very thing.

All she did was rightfully allow her concerns for a better world to factor into her retirement decisions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bnhunt
#3,338
#3,338
MontyPython said:
Ain't rocket science dude.

Most people don't support replacing SCOTUS judge now.

So, here's how it works: When El Presidente does something people don't like, that reduces likelihood of said person voting for El Presidente.

Logic. WOOT.
Click to expand...

Those people that won’t vote for him because he is replacing RBG wasn’t going to vote for him anyway which brings us back around full circle to what I said . This isn’t an election where Trump replacing RBG will cost him a lot of votes . It ain’t rocket science dude. Use your noggin for something besides a hat rack .. WOOT
 
#3,340
#3,340
luthervol said:
She didn't. But she did rightfully allow her concerns for a better world to factor into her retirement decisions.
Click to expand...

She screwed up and listened to the media and allowed her ideology to convince her to stay just a little too long .
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#3,342
#3,342
0nelilreb said:
Those people that won’t vote for him because he is replacing RBG wasn’t going to vote for him anyway which brings us back around full circle to what I said . This isn’t an election where Trump replacing RBG will cost him a lot of votes . It ain’t rocket science dude. Use your noggin for something besides a hat rack .. WOOT
Click to expand...

Oh, I see. Well then. 62% is a landslide victory for Biden.

Enjoy.
 
#3,343
#3,343
MontyPython said:
Oh, I see. Well then. 62% is a landslide victory for Biden.

Enjoy.
Click to expand...

Lol I’ll enjoy it either way it goes . I’m digging Trumps 200 judges and 3 SCJ appointees . Because I enjoy laughing , I’m not totally against the liberals holding all the power , I’m actually curious to see what the dog does when it catches the truck it’s been chasing .

C3557D6E-41E1-4CD7-B5A0-8B98F2D287F2.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64, TNVOLNAVY, Rickyvol77 and 1 other person
#3,344
#3,344
0nelilreb said:
Lol I’ll enjoy it either way it goes . I’m digging Trumps 200 judges and 3 SCJ appointees . Because I enjoy laughing , I’m not totally against the liberals holding all the power , I’m actually curious to see what the dog does when it catches the truck it’s been chasing .

View attachment 308485
Click to expand...

Cool.

Well, Day 1 = expanding SCOTUS to 11 to 13 judges.

Life is good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: luthervol
#3,350
#3,350
luthervol said:
No one felt the pain of that more than her. That's an added layer of sadness and why so many hoped she would live until the next administration. Trumpism represents everything she spent her life fighting against. Same with John Lewis.
Click to expand...

Ridiculous assertion that could never be proved, deification of political leaders is always comical. And yes, she was very politically active despite her charge to be impartial
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top