Political Discussions for "Adults"

The Batlord · 05-04-2022, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lisnaholic

That's overstating things a little, I think. The GOP carry the bulk of the blame, because it is their active machinations for years that has led to today's corrupt the Supreme Court.
Pro-choice sympathisers who didn't bother voting are just a lesser version of Dem politicians who have not wanted to bite the bullet imo. That blame game goes back at least as far as the Obama era, when they let Bitch McConnell break the law with impunity. As I understand it, Congress "shall" debate and vote for Supreme Court candidates nominated by the sitting President. That means they have to, and when McConnell said no, Obama should have said, "Ok, you waive your right, so merik garland goes straight to the Supreme Court without a hearing". Instead, like the non-voters you criticise, for the Dems it was a case of, "What the GOP is doing is wrong, but I don't have the energy to fight for what's right."

Historically, that's not a very courageous position, and after the proud Civil Rights era of the 60s, today's America is not going to look so good, I fear.

PS: Another "good guy" I would call out is Ruth Bader Ginsberg, who should've guessed that she might not outlive the next uncertain, up-coming presidency. But instead of retiring in a timely manner during the Obama presidency, she put her own vain hubris above the good of the Supreme Court and so let Trump get another perjurous judge nominated in her place.

No Obama could not have done that. But the Dems were certainly gutless about fighting for it. And giving Trump an agreement to let his picks pass as if it would lead to bipartisan goodwill was pure idiocy. And yes **** Ruth Bader Ginsberg.

rubber soul · 05-05-2022, 05:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lisnaholic

That's overstating things a little, I think. The GOP carry the bulk of the blame, because it is their active machinations for years that has led to today's corrupt the Supreme Court.
Pro-choice sympathisers who didn't bother voting are just a lesser version of Dem politicians who have not wanted to bite the bullet imo. That blame game goes back at least as far as the Obama era, when they let Bitch McConnell break the law with impunity. As I understand it, Congress "shall" debate and vote for Supreme Court candidates nominated by the sitting President. That means they have to, and when McConnell said no, Obama should have said, "Ok, you waive your right, so merik garland goes straight to the Supreme Court without a hearing". Instead, like the non-voters you criticise, for the Dems it was a case of, "What the GOP is doing is wrong, but I don't have the energy to fight for what's right."

Historically, that's not a very courageous position, and after the proud Civil Rights era of the 60s, today's America is not going to look so good, I fear.

PS: Another "good guy" I would call out is Ruth Bader Ginsberg, who should've guessed that she might not outlive the next uncertain, up-coming presidency. But instead of retiring in a timely manner during the Obama presidency, she put her own vain hubris above the good of the Supreme Court and so let Trump get another perjurous judge nominated in her place.

I'm not a constitutional scholar, but I don't think there is a rule that says the Senate cannot stall a judicial appointment, even by way of never holding a hearing. In any event, a President cannot simply put someone on the Supreme Court without Senate approval, otherwise you have a dictatorship.

As far as RBG, yes, she should have retired long before she died, probably under the Obama administration (her health had been poor for at least a decade). Retiring during the Trump era would have been counterproductive as they simply would have shifted the court sooner. Maybe she had counted on Hillary winning in 2016 a little too much.

The Batlord · 05-03-2022, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheBig3

Well played, but you know what I mean. The people who said your vote doesn't matter, or that the two parties are the same are just as responsible for this as Trump was in appointing 3 Supreme Court Justices.

I mean you were responding to a post where I was only talking about Democrats with "they" so it would stand to reason grammatically that you were also talking about Democrats. This happened with our last interaction where you seemed to be responding to my post by ignoring what I had actually written to interject a furious screed that was spinning over and over again and it comes across just a tad unhinged.

But to address your point yes the two parties aren't the same and some people don't like voting cause they want to LARP as revolutionaries online but it doesn't do much to disabuse these folks of these notions when the Democratic Party doesn't actually expend any energy fighting for anything but just uses issues like abortion rights and vapid idpol to fundraise off of.

rubber soul · 05-03-2022, 10:00 AM

I think the biggest problem is the Constitution itself. I don't know the answer as to who would appoint the justices, but the politicians should certainly not be allowed to pick them. Judges are supposed to be impartial, not be ideological, right or left.

SGR · 05-03-2022, 10:47 AM

What's the possibility this thing is a hoax? Regardless, would the Supreme Court be allowed to comment on it and clarify? I don't think there's ever been a leak like this in the past, but correct me if I'm wrong.

rubber soul · 05-03-2022, 10:50 AM

They didn't. It was leaked and Roberts is pissed. He's calling for an investigation.

SGR · 05-03-2022, 10:51 AM

yeah, just saw confirmation on that, thanks rs

Queen Boo · 05-04-2022, 08:53 PM

Don't worry ladies, just become a Republican's mistress and tell him it's his, you'll get an abortion AND a free trip to Canada.

Lisnaholic · 05-05-2022, 06:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord

No Obama could not have done that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rubber soul

I'm not a constitutional scholar, but I don't think there is a rule that says the Senate cannot stall a judicial appointment, even by way of never holding a hearing. In any event, a President cannot simply put someone on the Supreme Court without Senate approval, otherwise you have a dictatorship.

OK, I guess I'll retract the suggestion that Obama could have worked around McConnell's thwarting of the President's power to nominate a judge - mainly because a two minute google search doesn't produce any answers to support my case

Quote:

As far as RBG, yes, she should have retired long before she died, probably under the Obama administration (her health had been poor for at least a decade). Retiring during the Trump era would have been counterproductive as they simply would have shifted the court sooner. Maybe she had counted on Hillary winning in 2016 a little too much.

Yeah, she didn't understand that she had been nominated to join a justice relay race, and instead of passing on the batton, she clung to it until she died on the track and messed things up for her entire team.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Queen Boo

Don't worry ladies, just become a Republican's mistress and tell him it's his, you'll get an abortion AND a free trip to Canada.

Yeah, it'd be good to have some stats on Republican's wives and mistresses getting abortions.

rubber soul · 05-05-2022, 06:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lisnaholic

OK, I guess I'll retract the suggestion that Obama could have worked around McConnell's thwarting of the President's power to nominate a judge - mainly because a two minute google search doesn't produce any answers to support my case

I will say the the President can make recess appointments for cabinet members if the Senate would happen to stall on that. There's nothing he can do when it comes to the judiciary however.

05-03-2022, 10:47 AM	#5 (permalink)
SGR No Ice In My Bourbon Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: /dev/null Posts: 4,327	What's the possibility this thing is a hoax? Regardless, would the Supreme Court be allowed to comment on it and clarify? I don't think there's ever been a leak like this in the past, but correct me if I'm wrong.

05-03-2022, 10:51 AM	#7 (permalink)
SGR No Ice In My Bourbon Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: /dev/null Posts: 4,327	yeah, just saw confirmation on that, thanks rs