What's new
By:

Supreme Court Justice Kennedy to Retire

Status
Not open for further replies.
Red said:
I'm not convinced Clinton would not have sought to appoint moderates, and not someone as partisan toward the Right, as Kavanaugh chose to be toward the Left in his opening statement last Thursday, but yeah, clearly neither Clinton nor any other Democrat would have nominated a strong conservative. I do agree with JAZZGASM that Roberts is actually likely to swing toward the center given the very real concerns the Justices must have of preserving the legitimacy of our highest court. At any rate, what Clinton would have actually done is something we will never know. In contrast, and in the real world, not the hypothetical alternate time line where Clinton won the 2016 election(and if the multiverse theory tells us such alternate time lines exist, I wish I lived there right now, lol)Trump's appointments are what matter now.

And a short piece by the former dean of the Yale Law School, commenting on the effect of Kavanaugh's partisan statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee:

https://www.politico.com/magazine/a...ugh-confirmation-temperament-yale-dean-221086
Click to expand...

Clinton would likely have had to appoint a moderate judge to get through the Republican controlled Senate.
 
Let’s pretend Clinton gets two appointments, then Clarence Thomas comes out talking about the importance of a balance and the swing vote. I don’t think most would have any problem recognizing the belief/statement for what it is: partisan BS. Of course one isn’t concerned about balance when those perceived as being on the same ideological side — the correct, compassionate ______ [whatever] side — wields the power. But when those perceived as opposite ideologically wield said power, the damn sky is falling. But I suppose that’s justified, since them damn other-siders are just flat wrong, if not overtly evil.
 
Sens. Collins and Manchin might want to double their security details and upgrade home security.
 
It's ironic that a political party that has spent the last few decades whining about "activist judges" is now bragging about how their judges will now rule from the bench. Sell off your morals? Check. Sell out on fiscal responsibility? Check. Collude with Russia? Check. Rationalize for Trump? Check. Why? "So we can control the courts. You know, the stuff we've accused liberals of doing for decades."

I guess this is how you rule when you're a minority and your agenda is unbelievably unpopular.

It'll be interesting to see where the GOP goes after Trump. Will a new (moderate) conservative party emerge? You know, one that actually does care about decency, foreign policy (not just attacking globalists), free markets (not trade tariffs and farmer bailouts), and fiscal policy? Democrats have a real opportunity if they can move into and become the new moderate party.
 
fishonjazz said:
How come?
Click to expand...

Good question. Was an effigy of them hanging from a tree? Were their spouses depicted as a monkey? Did Sarah Palin put them in targets on a website? It’s a weird post for sure. Not sure what he’s basing his fears on.
 
Stoked said:
Just looking at the response to their votes. Some crazy people out there.

Also lmfao at Thriller. Get bent
Click to expand...

A bunch of angry tweets and a bunch of people protesting in DC? That’s called any weekend these days. But don’t worry, Collins will be ousted from the senate soon enough. Until then, we’ll settle for the house and Ending Dean Heller and Ted Cruz. That’ll be nice this November.
 
The Thriller said:
A bunch of angry tweets and a bunch of people protesting in DC? That’s called any weekend these days. But don’t worry, Collins will be ousted from the senate soon enough. Until then, we’ll settle for the house and Ending Dean Heller and Ted Cruz. That’ll be nice this November.
Click to expand...

I’m fine with her being voted out. I doubt it’ll be a problem.

I thought you didn’t want to interact with me? Run along now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page
Back
Top