Breaking News Dems to SCOTUS - "Heal" or be "Restructred."

Speaker4thesilent · Aug 21, 2019

HistoryMinor said:
Reducing the amount of votes needed to a simple majority and using the vp to do it, pushing through a literal frat bro, etc

Harry Reid dug the Democrats grave on that one. In 2013 he broke out the ‘nuclear option’ first. Turnabout is fair play.

I’ve already covered what actually happened with Kavanaugh. Your credulity in the matter is noted. So, again, all I see is a complaint about something the Democrats did first, and a complaint that a rape accusation that didn’t hold water did not automatically disqualify an excellent jurist, just because he’s an Originalist.

If you have a legit reason, I’d still like to hear it.

HistoryMinor · Aug 21, 2019

Speaker4thesilent said:
Harry Reid dug the Democrats grave on that one. In 2013 he broke out the ‘nuclear option’ first. Turnabout is fair play.

I’ve already covered what actually happened with Kavanaugh. Your credulity in the matter is noted. So, again, all I see is a complaint about something the Democrats did first, and a complaint that a rape accusation that didn’t hold water did not automatically disqualify an excellent jurist, just because he’s an Originalist.

If you have a legit reason, I’d still like to hear it.

Yeah whatever man, we're not going to agree on who broke the country.

Cherico · Aug 21, 2019

HistoryMinor said:
Yeah whatever man, we're not going to agree on who broke the country.

I agree I think the people who broke our country were the idiots who fired on fort sumpter.

HistoryMinor · Aug 21, 2019

Cherico said:
I agree I think the people who broke our country were the idiots who fired on fort sumpter.

Guess which side protects monuments to those traitors.

Speaker4thesilent · Aug 21, 2019

HistoryMinor said:
Guess which side protects monuments to those traitors.

Just because they were wrong doesn’t mean that they weren’t brave, or that the soldiers who fought for what they believed in don’t deserve to be remembered.

Please recall that most southerners didn’t own slaves. They were asked to volunteer because their states were being attacked, so they did. Or they were drafted. There was a lot of that.

If nothing else, those monuments are a reminder why we shouldn’t let ourselves get so divided that we have to have another civil war to sort the mess out.

HistoryMinor · Aug 21, 2019

Speaker4thesilent said:
Just because they were wrong doesn’t mean that they weren’t brave, or that the soldiers who fought for what they believed in don’t deserve to be remembered.

Please recall that most southerners didn’t own slaves. They we asked to volunteer because their states were being attacked, so they did. Or they were drafted. There was a lot of that.

If nothing else, those monuments are a reminder why we shouldn’t let ourselves get so divided that we have to have another civil war to sort the mess out.

The wehrmacht had to have been brave too, they still were serving Nazis. As for the poor southerner argument, it's more complicated than that. The oligarchs tended to give patronage to local sharecroppers and townsfolk. Compare it to the poor Mexicans who serve a Hidalgo and join militias to protect his land.

Battlegrinder · Aug 21, 2019

This really isn't the right thread for a discussion on CSA symbols and war memorials, though if you want to have that debate, I have a thread for it here.

ShadowsOfParadox · Aug 29, 2019

Speaker4thesilent said:
a complaint that a rape accusation that didn’t hold water

frankly I'm of the opinion that this sunk any chance at all that the Dems had of actually blocking Kavanaugh. If anyone let an unsubstantiated claim like the ones against Kavanaugh block him we'd very quickly not have a Supreme Court.

Urabrask Revealed · Aug 29, 2019

ShadowsOfParadox said:
frankly I'm of the opinion that this sunk any chance at all that the Dems had of actually blocking Kavanaugh. If anyone let an unsubstantiated claim like the ones against Kavanaugh block him we'd very quickly not have a Supreme Court.

That was the intention behind the accussation, to establish a precedent that would allow the Democrats to block any candidate the Republicans put forward.

Isem · Aug 29, 2019

Wouldn't threatening the court without actually having the power to carry out your threats just make even the left leaning justices dislike you? I haven't heard of many people in positions of power who enjoy having their power curtailed and I suspect the same holds true for judges.

Speaker4thesilent · Aug 30, 2019

Isem said:
Wouldn't threatening the court without actually having the power to carry out your threats just make even the left leaning justices dislike you? I haven't heard of many people in positions of power who enjoy having their power curtailed and I suspect the same holds true for judges.

If the leftist judges weren’t ideologues? Yes. However, they are. So they are willing to subordinate almost anything to their ideology.

S'task · Aug 30, 2019

Speaker4thesilent said:
If the leftist judges weren’t ideologues? Yes. However, they are. So they are willing to subordinate almost anything to their ideology.

That's not true.

Look, I'm no fan of Ginsburg and look forward to the day she is no longer a justice (though I hope she resigns and lives for another decade or more rather than dying), but even she has spoken against court packing. Given that she's outright the most ideological of the justices on the court, and definitely the leader of that wing, I'd have to say that the liberal justices ARE NOT fans of the idea either.

Isem · Aug 30, 2019

Speaker4thesilent said:
If the leftist judges weren’t ideologues? Yes. However, they are. So they are willing to subordinate almost anything to their ideology.

From what little I'm aware, mainly from hearing a pair of lawyers talk about it, I'm under the impression that while the left leaning judges are ideologically biased they weren't fond of the idea either.

Lanmandragon · Aug 30, 2019

Isem said:
From what little I'm aware, mainly from hearing a pair of lawyers talk about it, I'm under the impression that while the left leaning judges are ideologically biased they weren't fond of the idea either.

Power trumps ideology every time and this would rob the justices of power.

Laskar · Aug 30, 2019

Lanmandragon said:
Power trumps ideology every time and this would rob the justices of power.

Power works in strange ways. Ginsburg has got to know that her time is limited, and there is a good chance she'll die and be replaced during the Trump administration. There is every chance that the case law she has worked so long to construct will be wiped away by her successor. A court-packing scheme would let her ideological allies put more justices on the court that think like she does. If she were concerned with power over ideology, she would welcome the court-packing.

But she's speaking out against it.

Therefore, she's more concerned with her ideology than power, and part of her ideology is that nakedly partisan power grabs will undermine the authority of the Supreme Court.

Speaker4thesilent · Aug 30, 2019

S'task said:
That's not true.

Look, I'm no fan of Ginsburg and look forward to the day she is no longer a justice (though I hope she resigns and lives for another decade or more rather than dying), but even she has spoken against court packing. Given that she's outright the most ideological of the justices on the court, and definitely the leader of that wing, I'd have to say that the liberal justices ARE NOT fans of the idea either.

Alright, I hadn't read that yet. Mea culpa.

ShadowsOfParadox · Aug 30, 2019

Urabrask Revealed said:
That was the intention behind the accussation, to establish a precedent that would allow the Democrats to block any candidate the Republicans put forward.

precedent goes both ways though and I fully expect that if the Dems pulled it off it's not like the Republicans(how do you shorten that easily?) would NOT respond in kind, they totes would.

Urabrask Revealed · Aug 30, 2019

ShadowsOfParadox said:
precedent goes both ways though and I fully expect that if the Dems pulled it off it's not like the Republicans(how do you shorten that easily?) would NOT respond in kind, they totes would.

Except the MSM and the Left in general would shriek about how DARE the republicans use a precedent to combat them, they have no right to do that, only the Left should be allowed to use every trick in the book, and all that tiresome bullshit the Democrats and their lackeys love so much.

ShadowsOfParadox · Aug 30, 2019

yes but this is post Trump. sane people don't pay attention to MSM except to laugh.

PsihoKekec · Aug 30, 2019

Sane people are a minority.

Breaking News Dems to SCOTUS - "Heal" or be "Restructred."

Crazed Deplorable

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Crazed Deplorable

Well-known member

Someday we will win, no matter what it takes.

Well-known member

Let them go.

Well-known member

Crazed Deplorable

Renegade Philosopher

Well-known member

Well-known member

Would you kindly?

Crazed Deplorable

Well-known member

Let them go.

Well-known member

Swashbuckling Accountant

Users who are viewing this thread