Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has passed away

[0nelilreb]

Ruthie was confirmed in 44 days, I believe. It's only fair to do that with her successor. You know.,.....the successor named by Trump.

Right .. to honor RGBs memory we should do it in exactly 44 days . I’m so proud of you wanting to honor Ruth like that . Lol

 

[1972 Grad]

Right .. to honor RGBs memory we should do it in exactly 44 days . I’m so proud of you wanting to honor Ruth like that . Lol

That is probably pretty close to election day, isn't it?

 

[luthervol]

All you just did was agree with him, you know?

I was explaining why his and Bongo's beliefs have an element of justifiable truth.
You did get that didn't you?

 

[Orangeburst]

That is probably pretty close to election day, isn't it?

Just looked it up. 44 days from today. Come on Trump do it tonight.

 

[luthervol]

I encourage the Dems to try to disqualify her because of this. It's sure to endear huge swaths of middle America, and earn them votes.

Trump's got a pretty firm lock on the religious extreme - the world's greatest irony.
I loved what he said when all of the religious guys laying their hands on him left his office.

 

[Orange_Crush]

I was explaining why his and Bongo's belief have an element of justifiable truth.
You did get that didn't you?

You expect your relativity to hold water as justification? That's so very cute.

At the end of the day, you're agreeing with and justifying the statements that:

Conservatives debate issues.
Liberals demonize people.

Ouch.

 

[Orange_Crush]

Trump's got a pretty firm lock on the religious extreme - the world's greatest irony.
I loved what he said when all of the religious guys laying their hands on him left his office.

Your attention on Trump aside, I'll repeat myself:

PLEASE try to attack her for her religious beliefs. Nothing like allowing the fringe extremism that seems to be running your party to alienate more moderates.

 

[luthervol]

You’re serious? It’s 2020 Luther.

Sometimes those on the far right can't clearly see anything that has happened in the past 40 years.
I use analogies that take that 40 year developmental lag into account.

 

[Carl Pickens]

Republicans will lose senate and the presidency if they do. And Dems will eliminate filibuster and pack the courts.

This will not have any impact on how people vote

 

[0nelilreb]

That is probably pretty close to election day, isn't it?

How Scalia Compared With Other Justices

I was curious .. this gives the days that it took all SOTUS picks to be confirmed . They range from 1-128 days . Most seem to be under under 90 days easily . There are 103 days left in the year as of today . I’m good with the next pick being average in that grouping .

 

[Carl Pickens]

Trump's got a pretty firm lock on the religious extreme - the world's greatest irony.
I loved what he said when all of the religious guys laying their hands on him left his office.

The greatest irony is those with an IQ over 85 still voting democrat

 

[Orangeburst]

How Scalia Compared With Other Justices

I was curious .. this gives the days that it took all SOTUS picks to be confirmed . They range from 1-128 days . Most seem to be under under 90 days easily . There are 103 days left in the year as of today . I’m good with the next pick being average in that grouping .

Nahhh..ram it like Willie Brown

 

[luthervol]

I came from the generation that "children should be seen, and not heard." Also, from "the world doesn't owe you a living."

It's like the Last of the Mohicans.

 

[Redleg68]

No, not all. Formed by conservative law students just recently.
Federalist Society - Wikipedia

Got it. Didn't actually realize the in depth impact of that group. IN some areas they seem to be a little too far right, like some other groups are too far left. Would be nice to have a balanced group somewhere.

 

[AM64]

Dr Spock and parents appeasing their children have ruined them. Children's self esteem comes from accomplishments achieved not spoken words.
My youngest laughs at some of her cohorts in college. Self entitled and non starters.

So refreshing to find somebody else who hates Spock and all his drivel. The idiot probably did more to spawn the liberal revolution in this country than any other individual. Imagine how different libs might be if their parents had had the come to Jesus moment right there in the grocery store when the brats didn't get what they wanted and the PC police had never been born.

 

[0nelilreb]

The greatest irony is those with an IQ over 85 still voting democrat

How many times have you heard the old saying .. “ well you are just too smart for your own good aren't you , bless your heart “ LOL

 

[VolStrom]

Nahhh..ram it like Willie Brown

Heels up Harris.

 

[hjeagle1vol]

 

[0nelilreb]

It's like the Last of the Mohicans.

Not really , as long as the left keeps going hard left it will by its very nature create more Mohicans .

 

[0nelilreb]

View attachment 307788

It can’t anybody say this isn’t a true Meme . Lol

 

[luthervol]

"Prudent", huh? You always respond with nebulous relativity.

And because when it suits you, you don't like it when political parties act political. lol

Do you have anything that isn't asinine? Like... Anything constitutional? Or are you just going to beg for mercy after the Democrats have played dirty pool against this administration for 3 1/2 years? (Hint: I don't think they're in the mood to give Nancy and the gang quarter after the ****-show they've run over the past 3 1/2 years, or cater to your relative sense of "prudence".)



Hold on. I have a quote for you. Oh yah!

When responding to:


You said:



And then, even before that...



Your memory issues should alarm you.

Not once did I say anything remotely close to "it should dictate policy".
Your inability to process should alarm you.

 

[37L1]

@BowlBrother85

See? Why would any Senator feel that representing this lot requires consistency? The go-to defense of everything is “the Democrats would do it, too” and the justification for everything is “the evil Democrats will gain power if we don’t!” If their constituents can be conned into believing both of these things simultaneously, why would any Republican senator worry over staying true to the statements they made four years ago?

When partisanship became the entire platform, there was no room left for consistency.

There is plenty of inconsistency and hypocrisy coming from the Democrats on this matter as well as for Ruth Bader Ginsburg herself. Partisianship has long been the MO of the Democrats.

Remember when there used to be a time when a President's SCOTUS choice would go through the formality of a Senate hearing but always be approved with 60 or more votes? The Republicans played nice with Ginsburg, (a refugee from the ACLU, what did you think you were going to get), as well as with Sotomayor and Kagan.

The road that leads to where we are now was being paved a long time ago, since the 80's and Reagan.

The Democrats started the change in that process with Bork, accelerated it with the hearings of Clarence Thomas and haven't backed off as the hearings for Kavanaugh and Gorsuch demonstrated. The last set of hearings involving Kavanaugh were particularly shameful, during which it was made crystal clear that the Democrats cared only about power and would attempt to destroy anyone that they saw as a potential threat in their quest for it.

Then we have that special move by Harry Reid that did away with the 2/3rds requirement for federal appointments leading to the "nuclear option" that is being employed now for SCOTUS.

After all of the above, is there anyone surprised that the Republicans are saying, "No more Mr. Nice Guy" if that's the way you are going to play and have responded in kind, if not upped the ante? Our most recent history on this is a record of tit for tat with no one reasonable enough to recognize when wrong things are happening, step up and say, "Hey, wait a minute. What are we doing?"

I am concerned that the selection process as envisioned by the founders has been totally corrupted by this erosion and that there is no conclusion other than all appointments shall be political and will remain this way as long as we draw from this poisoned well.

It wasn't supposed to be this way. In theory, it was to be independent judges voting on the merits of the case before them with no consideration given to political positions or personal beliefs. A true third branch of our government instead of a rubber stamp backing a political party's position. By now doing so, it is no longer an independent body but just an extension of another governmental branch.

Both parties are to blame but to cast that this reflection in the mirror is on only the Republicans and Trump, is, well, disingenuous for want of a less PC term for it.

 

[1972 Grad]

Looks like Breyer is 82. I wonder how much longer he will serve.

 

[BowlBrother85]

I'll ask you. From an independent that wants both scummy parties burned to the ground...

Do you have any constitutional reason that they shouldn't fill the seat immediately? Or is it just going to be this weird blend of begging for mercy while trying to guilt the opposition after you've supported 3 1/2 years of ****-show dirty politics from the Dems?

Because that's just a weak and ugly look, to be honest.

No. This isn't about the Constitution at all. It is about the hypocrisy of Republican Senators which is on full display right now. There is nothing in the Constitution which said that Merrick Garland shouldn't have received a vote in 2016. The justification from Republican Senators at the time, was that it was an election year, therefore, the winner of the 2016 Presidential election should be the one to make the nomination to fill Antonin Scalia's seat. As a result, Scalia's seat remained vacant for a year. Republican Senators didn't say anything at the time, about it being okay for the Senate to go ahead and vote for confirmation, if they were from the same party as the President. This is hypocritical and incredibly self-serving.

Also, Sen. Mitch McConnell frequently described Barack Obama as being a "lame duck" president, but in the strictest sense of the term, he wasn't. A "lame duck" is what you have in the current office holder from the time in-between when a successor has been named or elected and when they take office. Barack Obama was not a "lame duck" in March of 2016 when he nominated Merrick Garland for the Supreme Court. Obama did not become a "lame duck" until that November - 8 freaking months later.

 

[ajvol01]

Sometimes those on the far right can't clearly see anything that has happened in the past 40 years.
I use analogies that take that 40 year developmental lag into account.

When do you believe desegregation occurred?