Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has passed away

My post about Carter deserving to be on Mt. Rushmore was a joke, Luther. He should be on Mt. Vesuvius because he blows, just like Vesuvius did.
I knew, but you also got my point.
The Dotard actually believes he deserves to be there and would love to be there. How asinine and pathetic is that?
 
I hope you can once again find your way back to understanding the importance of character.
Old man cynicism is hard to shake.
I won't. Because it isn't logical to want a Boy Scout as president just for the sake of character. The ability to lead is needed more than character (assuming I cant find both).
 
I won't. Because it isn't logical to want a Boy Scout as president just for the sake of character. The ability to lead is needed more than character (assuming I cant find both).
Well we're screwed with the current guy on both fronts and the other option isn't any better
 
Ocasio-Cortez to Followers on Ginsburg Death: ‘Let This Moment Radicalize You’

During a 41-minute monologue posted to her Instagram on Friday, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) decried potential forthcoming action on replacing Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg led by President Donald Trump and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY).

Ocasio-Cortez urged her followers to be proactive in their opposition to any appointment made by Trump, who she called authoritarian.

“We have an authoritarian president,” she said. “That’s what we have. He has no regard for the dignity of human life.”

She also urged her followers to be radicalized about the upcoming election.

“Let this moment radicalize you,” Ocasio-Cortez said. “Let this moment really put everything into stark focus because this election has always been about the fight of and for our lives. And if anything, tonight is making that more clear to more people than ever before.”

Ocasio-Cortez to Followers on Ginsburg Death: 'Let This Moment Radicalize You'
 
  • Like
Reactions: Franklin Pierce
I won't. Because it isn't logical to want a Boy Scout as president just for the sake of character. The ability to lead is needed more than character (assuming I cant find both).
Especially when they character is based on a spectrum
 
I won't. Because it isn't logical to want a Boy Scout as president just for the sake of character. The ability to lead is needed more than character (assuming I cant find both).
It's very logical to want a person of character for president.
What is illogical is assuming a person of character cannot be president.
 
I won't. Because it isn't logical to want a Boy Scout as president just for the sake of character. The ability to lead is needed more than character (assuming I cant find both).

For some people poor character is still a nonstarter. To call this illogical is like hiring an employee because they are efficient and ignoring the fact that they are a serial rapist.
 
It's very logical to want a person of character for president.
What is illogical is assuming a person of character cannot be president.
Your first statement isnt logical. It could only be logical if character and leadership are interwoven. Many great leaders had flawed characters. It could possibly be logical if you wanted the president only to be a figurehead.

Your second statement is not related to any point I've made.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
For some people poor character is still a nonstarter. To call this illogical is like hiring an employee because they are efficient and ignoring the fact that they are a serial rapist.
It doesn't matter to me what is/is not a non starter for others in a discussion about what is/is not important to me.
 
Oh, I guess I did. So instead of lying, you ignored the actual post where I made my argument and asked germane questions.

I agreed that the Republicans are power-grabbing letches, and then asked if there is anything unconstitutional about what they're doing now. (Which I'm sure you know and knew was the reference I was making above.)

But you chose to ignore the questions since your argument falls apart when you can't attack with your whataboutism.

What do you think my argument is, exactly?

So far all that’s happened is people have fallen all over themselves to confirm what I’m saying.
 
The problem is this. If the Republicans jam this through going against the rule they made up last go round and the democrats take the majority in the Senate... you will see some actions taken that weaken our democracy. Whether it is enlarging the Court or abolishing the filibuster, representation will not be about representing the will of the people, but rather for grabbing as much power as you can for your side while able.

You are going to see that regardless. I'm sure they will blame it on the Republicans like they always do... But the filibuster was always going to be gone the second the Dems got the senate back.
 
It doesn't matter to me what is/is not a non starter for others in a discussion about what is/is not important to me.
It doesn’t have to matter to you. I’m just pointing out for everyone else why what you called illogical is, in fact, logical.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: luthervol

VN Store



Back
Top