What's new
By:

RBG RIP

JazzyFresh said:


Now Democrats are openly calling for Trump to be impeached for doing nothing wrong which is nothing new and also want a war where millions die like they did to keep blacks as slaves. Violence is in the blood.

Scary people
Click to expand...

Thread for responding to lies spread by JazzyFresh

It can be considering/difficult balancing the various preferences board users. I understand the reaction of people who don’t read to read an exchange with a poster who seems more interested in spin than in fact, but I’m one of the people who think it is also important to counter lies. Hence...
jazzfanz.com jazzfanz.com
 
Beer said:
If you can't see the absurd hypocrisy on both sides right now you are stupid and a liar.
Click to expand...

It's true that the scripts have flipped on nominating the SCOTUS. It's also true that none have ever been confirmed this close to an election.
 
Beer said:
If you can't see the absurd hypocrisy on both sides right now you are stupid and a liar.
Click to expand...
I can see it.

One side gets a 2/10 and the other gets a 10/10 with aggravating circumstances.
 
Im conflicted.

RBG made a dying wish that she not be replaced til the next election . I just wish she would have listened to other people when they asked her to step down during Obama's presidency. I wonder why she didn't, but it was her dying wish when she was dying. I cant reconcile this.
 
“Sen. Mitt Romney said he would support a floor vote on President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court, essentially clinching consideration of Trump’s nominee this year despite the impending election,” POLITICO noted in a breaking news alert Tuesday. “


$50 bet that whoever Trump picks will get bullied ad nauseam by the tolerant left. $20 that some sort of scandal, most likely by an anonymous source, will come fourth. $10 that at least one person dies in Democratic ran riots before confirmation.
 
Last edited:
Eminence said:
Lol, Bork was not deserving of a supreme court seat and should've faced criminal charges for his role in the Saturday Night Massacre.
Click to expand...
His involvement in that scandal is always glossed over by people airing their grievances over his failed nomination.
 
Comrade in Seattle said:
Im conflicted.

RBG made a dying wish that she not be replaced til the next election . I just wish she would have listened to other people when they asked her to step down during Obama's presidency. I wonder why she didn't, but it was her dying wish when she was dying. I cant reconcile this.
Click to expand...

She thought Hillary would win the 2016 election and choose her replacement. It didn't work out that way.
 
Bit off topic, but does anyone else have the unfortunate experience of growing up when Beyblades were popular and unfortunately not being able to take RIP seriously?
 
Can you guys believe who the GOP nominated for the Supreme Court? Amy Barrett. She is that racist who "adopted" err I mean kidnapped two kids from Haiti and turned them into chlid slaves in her home.
 
One Brow said:
It's true that the scripts have flipped on nominating the SCOTUS. It's also true that none have ever been confirmed this close to an election.
Click to expand...

Brennan was appointed with even less time before the election (think an October nomination). Look at the history on both sides. 10 times in history a Sup. Ct. Justice was nominated in an election year when the President and Senate were from the same party. They were confirmed 9 of 10 times.

When opposite parties controlled both parties, the nominations were usually delayed. This is the status quo.

As I recall Honest Abe was one of the only Presidents to delay a nomination.
 
TheGoldStandard said:
Brennan was appointed with even less time before the election (think an October nomination). Look at the history on both sides. 10 times in history a Sup. Ct. Justice was nominated in an election year when the President and Senate were from the same party. They were confirmed 9 of 10 times.

When opposite parties controlled both parties, the nominations were usually delayed. This is the status quo.

As I recall Honest Abe was one of the only Presidents to delay a nomination.
Click to expand...
The Brennan example isn't really a good one though, that was a recess appointment meaning the next senate would ultimately decide whether they'd end up sticking, further I don't think the left would be nearly as upset if Trump was nominating a liberal, or hell even a moderate to fill RBG's seat.
 
Zombie said:
The Brennan example isn't really a good one though, that was a recess appointment meaning the next senate would ultimately decide whether they'd end up sticking, further I don't think the left would be nearly as upset if Trump was nominating a liberal, or hell even a moderate to fill RBG's seat.
Click to expand...



If we flip the script would Dems not seek an appointment? Seems it would be foolish not to. They tried with Obama, but couldn't push it through with a Republican controlled Senate. I am no fan of Trump and much of today's Republican party, but I can't blame them for this one.

Obama hinted as much to RBG without actually asking her to retire. And she should have if she wanted to have a left leaning ideological judge succeed her.

Seems a good idea for any Supreme to retire when the get to 80 when their party controls the White House and Senate.
 
Last edited:
TheGoldStandard said:
If we flip the script would Dems not seek an appointment? Seems it would be foolish not to. They tried with Obama, but couldn't push it through with a Republican controlled Senate. I am no fan of Trump and much of today's Republican party, but I can't blame them for this one.

Obama hinted as much to RBG without actually asking her to retire. And she should have if she wanted to have a left leaning ideological judge succeed her.

Seems a good idea for any Supreme to retire when the get to 80 when their party controls the White House and Senate.
Click to expand...
No arguments from me there, and yeah, these days it would be almost criminal politically not to make every effort to fill a SC vacancy when you have a chance. I was just pointing out how different the Brennan situation is to where we are today. It's unfathomable that a president from either party would nominate a justice from the other side of the aisle.
 
Zombie said:
No arguments from me there, and yeah, these days it would be almost criminal politically not to make every effort to fill a SC vacancy when you have a chance. I was just pointing out how different the Brennan situation is to where we are today. It's unfathomable that a president from either party would nominate a justice from the other side of the aisle.
Click to expand...

That is a good point. So why appoint Brennan at all? Oh yeah, to get the Irish Catholic vote as Ike was worried he'd lose. The first time IIRC that a Supreme nomination was done with the main/sole purpose to shore up votes. The Brennan appointment was a linchpin to many of the issues with the court today along with Marbury v. Madison. But that is another discussion.
 
Catchall said:
She thought Hillary would win the 2016 election and choose her replacement. It didn't work out that way.
Click to expand...

Right, but the savvy move is do retire when your party controls the White House and Senate. Obama was most concerned about losing the Senate. At the time, Republicans had a 77% chance of taking the Senate in the mid-term election which can to fruition at the end of 2014, which could mean compromising on any potential candidate for Obama and Hillary if she had won.
 
TheGoldStandard said:
That is a good point. So why appoint Brennan at all? Oh yeah, to get the Irish Catholic vote as Ike was worried he'd lose. The first time IIRC that a Supreme nomination was done with the main/sole purpose to shore up votes. The Brennan appointment was a linchpin to many of the issues with the court today along with Marbury v. Madison. But that is another discussion.
Click to expand...
Yeah I was just thinking about that. The difference lies not so much in it being a particularly noble or "sporting" thing to do, but that making a play for a different parties voters via a SC seat just doesn't make any sense anymore.

As for Marbury vs Madison, the role of the judiciary is going to come into sharp focus over the next few years. While judicial review has, in recent history at least, had its defenders on the left, I think there's a good chance that's going to change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top