Ruth Bader Ginsburg dies:

https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/18/politics/ruth-bader-ginsburg-dead/index.html

A long distinguished career on the Supremee  Court..

May her lasting spirit allways fly high...

Couldn't even make a half-assed condolence statement or wait for a funeral before Moscow McTurtle started slobbering over the chance to further stack the court with people willing to sign off on whatever election chicanery they have planned.

9 hours ago, T-Dub said:

Couldn't even make a half-assed condolence statement or wait for a funeral before Moscow McTurtle started slobbering over the chance to further stack the court with people willing to sign off on whatever election chicanery they have planned.

When Obama was in his last year didn't the Dem's want to hurry and fill Scalia's seat when he passed?  No matter who is president I feel our Congress is worse.

1 hour ago, westside bengal said:

When Obama was in his last year didn't the Dem's want to hurry and fill Scalia's seat when he passed?  No matter who is president I feel our Congress is worse.

Scalia died in February of that year.  Not sure how much of hurry that would have been.

4 hours ago, Montana Bengal said:

Scalia died in February of that year.  Not sure how much of hurry that would have been.

I understand.  My point is either party will take the position that suits them best in that moment of time regardless of what their position was before.  With her advancing age and medical history there were folks urging RBG to retire during the Obama presidency when the Dems controlled the Senate so they could choose her replacement.   I have no doubt some of those same folks are saying now we should wait.  It has nothing to do about respect for RBG and everything to do with "politics."

9 hours ago, westside bengal said:

I understand.  My point is either party will take the position that suits them best in that moment of time regardless of what their position was before.  With her advancing age and medical history there were folks urging RBG to retire during the Obama presidency when the Dems controlled the Senate so they could choose her replacement.   I have no doubt some of those same folks are saying now we should wait.  It has nothing to do about respect for RBG and everything to do with "politics."

 

I don't disagree, but given the current climate I find the prospect of a Republican-stacked judiciary absolutely terrifying. 

 

To be clear I don't think a Democrat-stacked court is good either, but I honestly don't think the outcome of that would be nearly as horrific.

2 hours ago, T-Dub said:

 

I don't disagree, but given the current climate I find the prospect of a Republican-stacked judiciary absolutely terrifying. 

 

To be clear I don't think a Democrat-stacked court is good either, but I honestly don't think the outcome of that would be nearly as horrific.

I do not disagree with that thinking at all.   But as a lifetime Democrat my honest feeling is the Democrat Party today is not the same party of 20-30 years ago and that does concern me a little too.

6 hours ago, westside bengal said:

I do not disagree with that thinking at all.   But as a lifetime Democrat my honest feeling is the Democrat Party today is not the same party of 20-30 years ago and that does concern me a little too.

 

I'm not sure how relevant either part will be in the long term.  The Dems because they're rotten & soft, the Repubs because they took a hard right and seem headed for the nearest cliff like some kind of death cult tour bus.   I keep expecting one or both to split, or have some kind of internal power shift, but it hasn't happened.  Our two party system might need to be dismantled at a judiciary level.

On 9/19/2020 at 8:07 AM, T-Dub said:

Couldn't even make a half-assed condolence statement or wait for a funeral before Moscow McTurtle started slobbering over the chance to further stack the court with people willing to sign off on whatever election chicanery they have planned.

He gave condolence. Of course Biden will wait for the funeral before he does a 180 on his thoughts of replacing a seat in a POTUS' last year.........wait a minute

 

“There is no doubt — let me be clear — that the voters should pick the president and the president should pick the justice for the Senate to consider,” Biden said in New Castle, Del., after a day of campaigning in Minnesota. “This was the position of the Republican Senate took in 2016 when there were almost 10 months to go before the election. That’s the position the United States Senate must take today.”

 

That's pretty much word for word what he said on the Garland nomination

On 9/20/2020 at 12:33 AM, westside bengal said:

I understand.  My point is either party will take the position that suits them best in that moment of time regardless of what their position was before.  With her advancing age and medical history there were folks urging RBG to retire during the Obama presidency when the Dems controlled the Senate so they could choose her replacement.   I have no doubt some of those same folks are saying now we should wait.  It has nothing to do about respect for RBG and everything to do with "politics."

Good post...

Sad some many are closed minded anymore..

9 months on Garland 

2 months on this.

 

To compare the two is laughable.

 

If they force this ESPECIALLY if they do it in the lame duck session, Dems should very seriously consider expanding the court if they win the Senate and Presidency.

Also RBG's dying wish was for them to wait till the next President came into office 

 

Good to know the GOP is not willing to honor the request of a dying woman.

 

Lindesy Grham is the most laughable of them all, not only did he talk about "using his words against him" he was completely projecting when he talked about Dems having a "craven lust for power" during the Kavanah hearings. 

there is always a tweet

 

18 hours ago, Jamie_B said:

Also RBG's dying wish was for them to wait till the next President came into office 

Naw - we all know her final statement was written by George Soros, or they guy who maintained Hillary's email server.

 

It's really hard to pick which one is the worst - Lady G, who said unequivocally to hold him to his words regarding a new justice about waiting until the election, is now saying that he's allowed to change his mind because of something Obama did in 2013-2014, and also because they were mean to butt-chuggin' Brett. 

I am sure that RBG will go down in history as a fine and highly respected jurist, as she should.

 

But whining that we should  be following the dying wish of a politician is just a little too much "politics" for me.

Politicians are elected to office, she was not elected to anything, she was not a politician. 

1 hour ago, Jamie_B said:

Politicians are elected to office, she was not elected to anything, she was not a politician. 

HAHAHAHA.  If they are not politicians then why would it matter if it was Trump or Biden who would make the pick?

 

The President nominates someone for Justice and the Senate can either confirm or deny the selection.

And since everyone of those nominations are based on assumed political beliefs of those nominated then I still call them politicians.

 

Listen, my whole point is both parties continuously  select dumb shit candidates for office.  The last thing I want to set precedent on is selecting a candidate based on the dying wish of another.

10 hours ago, westside bengal said:

HAHAHAHA.  If they are not politicians then why would it matter if it was Trump or Biden who would make the pick?

 

The President nominates someone for Justice and the Senate can either confirm or deny the selection.

And since everyone of those nominations are based on assumed political beliefs of those nominated then I still call them politicians.

 

Listen, my whole point is both parties continuously  select dumb shit candidates for office.  The last thing I want to set precedent on is selecting a candidate based on the dying wish of another.

They are public servants. It's important because everyone even judges have interpretations of the law that people agree with or dont agree with. But they arent elected so that doesnt make them politicians. 

 

I agree with you about the parties choosing shit candidates though.

26 minutes ago, Jamie_B said:

They are public servants. It's important because everyone even judges have interpretations of the law that people agree with or dont agree with. But they arent elected so that doesnt make them politicians. 

 

I agree with you about the parties choosing shit candidates though.

I understand what you are saying.  I just have a broader interpretation of what a "politician" is.

 

 

Ah, more "MUH BOTH SIDES!!!" prevaricating.  

 

It really doesn't seem that hard to pick one.   All this "enlightened centrism" shit is just apathy with extra steps.

 

 

 

Kind of surprised that he masked up.

I wouldnt have a drink with either of the candidates..

Do you want socialism or capitalism..

I prefer capitalism....

44 minutes ago, claptonrocks said:

I wouldnt have a drink with either of the candidates..

Do you want socialism or capitalism..

I prefer capitalism....

 

Thank goodness we're not voting on who to drink with then, eh?

 

If you think Biden is a socialist you clearly don't know what that word means.  

 

Still, I'm curious; why do you prefer capitalism?  

35 minutes ago, T-Dub said:

 

Thank goodness we're not voting on who to drink with then, eh?

 

If you think Biden is a socialist you clearly don't know what that word means.  

 

Still, I'm curious; why do you prefer capitalism?  

Biden may nit be a socialist but he'll follow the lead of the radicals to get elected..

Then he ll turn over the reins to Harris..