Political Discussions for "Adults"

The Batlord · 05-04-2022, 08:14 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.

Queen Boo · 05-04-2022, 09:53 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.

rubber soul · 05-05-2022, 06:24 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.

Lisnaholic · 05-05-2022, 07:18 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, 07:43 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.

The Batlord · 05-05-2022, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lisnaholic

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

I'd like to know the stats on them getting kicked in the stomach.

Lisnaholic · 05-05-2022, 05:37 PM

HaHa! Soon to be the only legally available method of abortion in the US.

On the topic of Supreme Court justices and how they are selected, Sen Whitehouse on the Judiciary Committee has made some eye-opening comments about how corrupt the process has been for years:-

grindy · 05-17-2022, 07:24 AM

I have a question about the "Great Replacement" conspiracy theory. Are the conspiratards actually trying to give some reasons why those "shadowy elites" are replacing white people? In the US it seems to be at least partly about the dumbass rhetoric that the democrats try to increase their voter base. Is this the only reason they give, even in other countries? Or is it, as so often, that the conspiratards don't really care about asking why and just assume the "elites" are evil.

I read up a bit on Wikipedia etc. but didn't really find an answer and to be honest I'm a bit too disgusted to really do a deep dive into this topic.

rubber soul · 05-17-2022, 08:14 AM

If the statistics are right, whites will no longer be a majority by 2045 and that is freaking a lot of whites out. In 1980 nearly 80% of the US was white. Today that figure is at 57% thanks, in large part, to Hispanic immigration. The reasons minorities tend to lean Democrat is that the Republicans seem to want to make their lives miserable. Instead of trying to expand the base by pushing conservative values (and you'd be surprised at how many blacks and Hispanics are, in fact conservative. many Mexicans are devout Catholics for example (anti-abortion, etc.). Instead, they push for their deportation or wanting to the deny minorities basic rights that whites take for granted. Needless to say, many whites buy into that and fall into the Qanon trap. Anyway, it boils down to the demographics, or at least the alarmist version of that.

grindy · 05-17-2022, 08:17 AM

If I understand correctly the theory is that it's all a plan, a directed attempt to replace white people with non-white, not just an effect of other liberal policies. But maybe I misunderstood.

05-05-2022, 05:37 PM	#9597 (permalink)
Lisnaholic ...here to hear... Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: He lives on Love Street Posts: 4,444	HaHa! Soon to be the only legally available method of abortion in the US. On the topic of Supreme Court justices and how they are selected, Sen Whitehouse on the Judiciary Committee has made some eye-opening comments about how corrupt the process has been for years:- __________________ "Am I enjoying this moment? I know of it and perhaps that is enough." - Sybille Bedford, 1953

05-17-2022, 07:24 AM	#9598 (permalink)
grindy . Join Date: Oct 2014 Location: . Posts: 7,201	I have a question about the "Great Replacement" conspiracy theory. Are the conspiratards actually trying to give some reasons why those "shadowy elites" are replacing white people? In the US it seems to be at least partly about the dumbass rhetoric that the democrats try to increase their voter base. Is this the only reason they give, even in other countries? Or is it, as so often, that the conspiratards don't really care about asking why and just assume the "elites" are evil. I read up a bit on Wikipedia etc. but didn't really find an answer and to be honest I'm a bit too disgusted to really do a deep dive into this topic. __________________ *A smell of petroleum prevails throughout.*

05-17-2022, 08:17 AM	#9600 (permalink)
grindy . Join Date: Oct 2014 Location: . Posts: 7,201	If I understand correctly the theory is that it's all a plan, a directed attempt to replace white people with non-white, not just an effect of other liberal policies. But maybe I misunderstood. __________________ *A smell of petroleum prevails throughout.*