-
Senate confirms ACB to the Supreme Court, solidifying conservative tilt
Wow this is historical! Just 1 week before the election. All the progressive changes made in 30 years could be undone. -
37 Replies
-
Thank God.
-
Ah yes. Thank God. Hello ’50s here we come. When Elvis shaking his hips was risque…
-
Well, Barrett was – is? – a “handmaid” in her church.
The past is our future. Know your place.
-
-
-
Quote from Voxel77
Wow this is historical! Just 1 week before the election. All the progressive changes made in 30 years could be undone.
Yeah, she’ll singlehandedly remove women from the workplace, put african americans in shackles and require daily prayer in public school.
More likely, there will be a conservative majority for about 2 years until Thomas gets some kind of cancer or Roberts has another seizure and president Biden confirms whoever he wants using Harris as the tie-braker.
If Obama had gotten his way, he would have had 3 appointees, with one of them in the run-up to an election*.
Really, spare us the hyperbole.
* [size=”1″]Yes dear, what the republicans did then was wrong. Democrats would have done the same to a republican president, so cry me a river.[/size]-
The sanctimonious crap from liberals is really getting stale. They always act like what they want and what they want the justices to do is the “right” thing and the alternative is some form of regression or armageddon. It’s that exact attitude that makes people despise them. Only 25-30% of the whole country labels themselves as “liberal.” Perhaps recognize that people disagree with your views and your “progressive vision” and they aren’t demons for it.
-
Quote from fw
Quote from Voxel77
Wow this is historical! Just 1 week before the election. All the progressive changes made in 30 years could be undone.
Yeah, she’ll singlehandedly remove women from the workplace, put african americans in shackles and require daily prayer in public school.
More likely, there will be a conservative majority for about 2 years until Thomas gets some kind of cancer or Roberts has another seizure and president Biden confirms whoever he wants using Harris as the tie-braker.
If Obama had gotten his way, he would have had 3 appointees, with one of them in the run-up to an election*.
Really, spare us the hyperbole.
* [size=”1″]Yes dear, what the republicans did then was wrong. Democrats would have done the same to a republican president, so cry me a river.[/size]
Horse manure. Name a Republican candidate who was not even given a hearing. Just 1.
Name a Republican nomination where Democrats pulled the same power grab that Republicans have. Just 1 where a Democrat was rammed through a week before a national election. Just 1.
Name a situation where a Republican candidate was not even considered and given a hearing 9 months before a national election using the election as an excuse to not even have a hearing. Just 1.
Cry me a river that “both sides” are equally bad and Democrats would do the same. Name an identical situation as we have seen played out by Republicans. Just 1.
“They would have done it” is a playground excuse. As your Daddy probably said when you were a child, “Would you jump off the bridge too…?”-
Sour grapes. Take your ball and go home.
-
BO nominated Merrick Garland who was considered a moderate/centrist. I think it would’ve played better if the GOP also nominated a moderate/centrist type of judge.
Amy Barrett isn’t even slightly qualified to be on the SCOTUS but that’s the name of the game with the GOP judicial appointments. She’s not the first wholly unqualified person they’ve put on a bench. Even if you force the conservative onto the court pick someone better qualified.
– 2 years private practice
– never tried a case
– never argued an appeal
– never argued before SCOTUS
– served as a judge since 2017
-
Quote from DICOM_Dan
– 2 years private practice
– never tried a case
– never argued an appeal
– never argued before SCOTUS
– served as a judge since 2017
Eleana Kagan (just to pick a recent appointment) was never a judge before she became an associate justice. So where a number of eminent supreme court justices.
Just more griping.-
Kagan was the US solicitor general for some amount of time.
-
Quote from DICOM_Dan
Kagan was the US solicitor general for some amount of time.
She was not a judge. She was an administrator and law professor.
On whether ACB is qualified to sit on the bench. Hey, I am not the expert on this, but the ABA standing committee on judicial appointments who is thinks so:
[link=https://www.abajournal.com/news/article/why-amy-coney-barrett-got-a-well-qualified-rating-from-aba-standing-committee]https://www.abajournal.co…aba-standing-committee[/link]-
Even Alito got a hearing and confirmation with Democratic Senators, fw.
-
As we said, Garland should have gotten a hearing. So, by your logic, if he had and then was voted down, you would be happy now and not complain at all? So you’re just mad Garland didn’t get a hearing? Fine. That doesn’t seem to be reason enough to change the rules though given the outcome wouldn’t have changed. I also firmly believe that you’d be complaining no matter what unless Dems had supermajorities of everything.
-
HAd Garland been rejected, no, I’d not be happy but he’d have had a hearing. And there would have been a 2nd nominee to consider. So the question would have been would any and all Obama nominees been rejected regardless for the reason being Obama would not have nominated a Federalist approved Conservative.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Quote from Frumious
Horse manure. Name a Republican candidate who was not even given a hearing. Just 1.
I have always said that not giving him a hearing and running out the clock was wrong. He should have received the full vetting and hearings and if the republicans had the stomach for it, they should have voted him down.-
Quote from Cubsfan10
Sour grapes. Take your ball and go home.
Quote from fw
Quote from Frumious
Horse manure. Name a Republican candidate who was not even given a hearing. Just 1.I have always said that not giving him a hearing and running out the clock was wrong. He should have received the full vetting and hearings and if the republicans had the stomach for it, they should have voted him down.
So “both sides” argument is the BS here then.
-
Quote from Frumious
So “both sides” argument is the BS here then.
So it is your opinion that had the tables been turned and Trump been faced with a 51/49 democratic senate, he would have been able to get a justice confirmed (not ACB, any justice) ?-
Quote from fw
Quote from Frumious
So “both sides” argument is the BS here then.
So it is your opinion that had the tables been turned and Trump been faced with a 51/49 democratic senate, he would have been able to get a justice confirmed (not ACB, any justice) ?
When? Now? No. Too soon before election.
In February 2016, had TRump been President? Absolutely YES!
-
Quote from Frumious
Quote from fw
So it is your opinion that had the tables been turned and Trump been faced with a 51/49 democratic senate, he would have been able to get a justice confirmed (not ACB, any justice) ?
When? Now? No. Too soon before election.
In February 2016, had TRump been President? Absolutely YES!
In February 16, Obama was president.
So with ‘resistance Shumer’ in the senate, Trump would have gotten appointees through. Sure.-
Quote from fw
Quote from Frumious
Quote from fw
So it is your opinion that had the tables been turned and Trump been faced with a 51/49 democratic senate, he would have been able to get a justice confirmed (not ACB, any justice) ?
When? Now? No. Too soon before election.
In February 2016, had TRump been President? Absolutely YES!
In February 16, Obama was president.
So with ‘resistance Shumer’ in the senate, Trump would have gotten appointees through. Sure.
Based on what exactly? “Past practice?”
Oops, you can’t even point to a similar past practice of abuse by Democrats, can you.
Like I said, even Alito got not only a hearing but was confirmed with Democratic votes. So your argument is empty.
-
Quote from Frumious
Oops, you can’t even point to a similar past practice of abuse by Democrats, can you.
I am pointing to Shumer who as a payback for republican efforts to make Obama a ineffective president, vowed to obstruct Trump at every turn. And that’s what he did. Even Nancy Pelosi is willing to deal if she thinks she can gain something from it.-
? Schumer didnt have the power to obstruct
-
Reminds me of the movie tommy boy
Farley- that Veronica Vaughn her and I got it on
Sandler- no you didnt
Farley -I knew a guy who
Sandler- no you dont
Farley – well it would be good right
-
Quote from Chirorad84
Reminds me of the movie tommy boy
Farley- that Veronica Vaughn her and I got it on
Sandler- no you didnt
Farley -I knew a guy who
Sandler- no you dont
Farley – well it would be good right
Billy Madison
-
“…We are all now dumber for having listened to it.”
-
Cubs, are you still arguing with the Saul Alinskys here?
-
The typical sexist left speaking out again. If she had a tatt, aborted a child in her life, had 2 piercings (one we cannot see) and shaved the side of her head… she would be a model candidate. She’s smart, kicks ass and take names. The left thought Roberts was in rights pocket. Huh? Looks like a constitutionalist always does the right thing.
Forget it and drive on. If Joey becomes President, he can do the same thing if he chooses’ 20 days before the election. It’s the right of the President who is currently in office to nominate whomever they want at anytime.
Now… get out there and stack the court for your girl AOC. -
The left is sexist as I write about unseen piercings.
-
Exactly like RBG, Sotomayor, Kagin & OConnor.
-
“People voted for it” isn’t really applicable when you have this many ballots coming thru mail, with no authentication or authorization mechanisms. At this point it’s whoever cheats the system better.
If we want legitimate vote by mail it needs to be digital, with 2 factor authentication, and automated checks for citizenship, criminal records, and previous physical address to ensure true residency.
Until then, anything that’s not in-person voting with ID cannot be legitimate from mathematical standpoint.
-
What cheating?
-
You dont know how voting by mail works, do you.
-
Quote from Casino Royale
Cubs, are you still arguing with the Saul Alinskys here?
Someone has to try to balance out Frumi, Chiro, and Dergon on here. -
Their ramblings will be silenced, effectively, when Trump dominates the election and they can’t do anything about it. The sheriff is gonna be back in town, and now there’s a score to settle. They have their reward. Now they’re going to get a new one.
-
Quote from Chirorad84
? Schumer didnt have the power to obstruct
The question was whether democrats would have confirmed any of Trumps picks with Shumer in charge, and they wouldn’t have. -
I am not aware that Schumer obstructed anything that Trump proposed.
As for threats, I also recall Republican promises that should Hillary get elected, she would get no Supreme Court judge confirmed & they would institute investigations throughout her term, Benghazi!’s for years in multiple investigations.
And let’s not forget McConnel’s plan to have no fingerprints on anything Obama and Democrats did regardless of country’s need. Even the plans started by Bush for the recession were opposed by Republicans so as not to provide any success story for Obama and Democrats.
If you are complaining of obstruction, start with your party for the escalation to no compromise for anything. -
Gridlock has been the norm for the majority of US history. For example, most of our major modern policies stemmed from the New Deal when Dems had supermajorities. Ditto Obamacare in the modern era.
If the US people want significant change and want to vote in supermajorities then so be it. Otherwise, changing the rules despite the peoples’ wishes is not a good idea.
Remember, the people did elect Trump and did elect a Repub Senate. They also elected a Repub House and then decided to go back to a Dem House. Ditto when Obama was in office with Dem and then Repub House. That’s how it is supposed to work. It’s not supposed to be that a particular party significantly changes the rules.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
