Russian Women Discussion

RWD Discussion Groups => Odds and Ends => Topic started by: ML on September 18, 2020, 05:48:52 PM

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: ML on September 18, 2020, 05:48:52 PM
I am thinking it would be a mistake for Donald and Mitch to try to ram through a replacement in next few weeks.

It might even be a mistake for Donald  to nominate someone.

My reasoning:  Many folks, even true Republicans, might think this was 'over the top' given what happened with Obama's nominee.

It might be a real turn-off for such folks and even raise feelings of disgust toward Donald.

I would like to see it done; but think it would be too risky.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: jone on September 18, 2020, 06:46:54 PM
RBG's death is a great boon to the liberal cause - at this time.   She will be a rallying cry to get liberals to the polls.   "We must replace RBG with someone who thinks like her ......"

Were Trump to move ahead with a nomination, it would give Democrats the impetus to change the make-up of the court to expand it with over 50% of the Justices being liberal.   

ML, you are correct.   Pursuing a nomination prior to the election would be tantamount to handing the election to Joe Biden.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Confederate on September 18, 2020, 06:55:02 PM
I agree with Jone. Wait until after the election is over. Even though I have a weird feeling this election isn't going to be over when it should be.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 18, 2020, 07:06:00 PM

Antonin Scalia died 9 months before the election in 2016. Obama wouldn't be able to get his pick approved since a simple Senate majority vote is needed and Republicans had control of the Senate back then. Republicans control the Senate now but Democrats have tactics they can use to stall Trump's pick the same way they did Kavanaugh. Trump can go ahead and nominate somebody(most likely it would be a female) before the election the way Obama done and let the current Senate and the new Senate after the election deal with it.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: msmob on September 18, 2020, 08:26:27 PM
!"My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed,"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-54214729 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-54214729)
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 18, 2020, 08:33:45 PM
!"My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed,"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-54214729 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-54214729)

Bader's wishes have dick to do with the law. If President Donald John Trump wishes to nominate a replacement before the election that is completely his decision. His decision certainly isn't going to wait another 4.4 years for a new president to be installed

Make America Great Again!
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 18, 2020, 08:37:36 PM
I am thinking it would be a mistake for Donald and Mitch to try to ram through a replacement in next few weeks.

It might even be a mistake for Donald  to nominate someone.

My reasoning:  Many folks, even true Republicans, might think this was 'over the top' given what happened with Obama's nominee.

It might be a real turn-off for such folks and even raise feelings of disgust toward Donald.

I would like to see it done; but think it would be too risky.

Damn the torpedoes.  Nominate'em Trump and let's get this show on the road. I think Ted Cruz is about first on the list
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 18, 2020, 08:50:17 PM
RBG's death is a great boon to the liberal cause - at this time.   She will be a rallying cry to get liberals to the polls.   "We must replace RBG with someone who thinks like her ......"

Were Trump to move ahead with a nomination, it would give Democrats the impetus to change the make-up of the court to expand it with over 50% of the Justices being liberal.   

ML, you are correct.   Pursuing a nomination prior to the election would be tantamount to handing the election to Joe Biden.
From a strategic standpoint McConnell is making the right move.  He now puts Trump in a position to appear magnanimous when he states he is going to wait to after he wins the next election.    That said, the hypocrisy of McConnell and other republicans would be astonishing if they were to genuinely try to ram a pick in at this time.  I'm curious to see what the next moves are. 

Fathertime! 
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 18, 2020, 09:05:31 PM
 If Trump knows Republicans will control the Senate after the election, he can safely nominate somebody like Kavanaugh. If the Democrats take control of the Senate after the election and Trump retains the presidency, Trump would have to nominate a moderate to get a couple of Democrats to switch sides to get a majority vote. Maybe in the next few days experts can lay out all the possible scenarios. Avoid anti Trump media if you want honest answers.


There needs to be some time for people to mourn RBG before Trump can announce a pick but by that time, there may be less than 30 days till the election. Obama waited a month before announcing his pick after Scalia died. Announcing a pick may not gain him any votes but he may lose votes if people think he's being insensitive, pushy or selfish. My prediction is Trump is going to wait till after the election to make his nomination. There are currently 5 conservative judges and 3 liberal judges on the Supreme Court. No need to rush.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: msmob on September 18, 2020, 11:24:20 PM


Make America Great Again!

You mean 'Trampu' hasn't achieved that, yet ? ....
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 18, 2020, 11:28:00 PM
RIP RBG.

What news to wake up to!

Life is awful quirky. The good ol' gal has managed to put the GOP, Trump, and our country on the spot in a way no one else can.

Eerily, it's almost like she thought this through as a parting test of our political moral compass.

Talk about going out with a bang...

Smart as a whip I say.





Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 18, 2020, 11:38:14 PM
You mean 'Trampu' hasn't achieved that, yet ? ....

He's achieved that which is why he changed his slogan to "Keep America Great".  You can also make a campaign donation to the Trump campaign below to keep America great. You'll probably get a bumper sticker like I did. If he wins, you can then bust him for accepting foreign donations to his campaign which may get him impeached. I got to donate something to those tight Senate races since they vote on the next SCOTUS judge.

http://www.donaldjtrump.com/


RIP RBG.

What news to wake up to!


She was a fighter. People counted her out many times over the years she fought health issues but she would always bounce back.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 18, 2020, 11:47:13 PM
She was a fighter. People counted her out many times over the years she fought health issues but she would always bounce back.

And she has bounced back yet again - with one giant leap.

Let's see if McConnell and Trump are capable of acting with common decency, deliberation, and due diligence, or simply bow to desperation and hypocrisy.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 19, 2020, 01:19:42 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZCnCKCFhKBc
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: msmob on September 19, 2020, 01:39:51 AM
He's achieved that which is why he changed his slogan to "Keep America Great". 

Like I said, sense of denial is strong this morning ;)
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Trenchcoat on September 19, 2020, 05:16:33 AM
I'm glad RBG has breathed her last, the west needs to get away from feminism and the destruction it causes. This could be a turning point to make western society good again the way it used to be and the way it is in the FSU.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 19, 2020, 05:47:44 AM
And she has bounced back yet again - with one giant leap.

Let's see if McConnell and Trump are capable of acting with common decency, deliberation, and due diligence, or simply bow to desperation and hypocrisy.

And to what is this in which you refer? You're expecting them to dance in circles singing "Ding dong the wicked witch is dead" what?
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 19, 2020, 06:46:09 AM
I'm glad RGB has breathed her last, the west needs to get away from feminism and the destruction it causes. This could be a turning point to make western society good again the way it used to be and the way it is in the FSU.
Hola!  I"m curious from your view what would the supreme court now do that would make western society more like how it is in the FSU?  What aspect of feminism will be reversed from the death and replacement of RBG?   It seems to me that women are doing ok overall.  There may be less interest in creating the traditional nuclear family, although that has been occurring for many many moons.  Immigrants, (Often from South of the Border) do make up a lot of the young nuclear families nowadays. 

Fathertime! 
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Trenchcoat on September 19, 2020, 07:20:25 AM
Hola!  I"m curious from your view what would the supreme court now do that would make western society more like how it is in the FSU?  What aspect of feminism will be reversed from the death and replacement of RBG?   It seems to me that women are doing ok overall.  There may be less interest in creating the traditional nuclear family, although that has been occurring for many many moons.  Immigrants, (Often from South of the Border) do make up a lot of the young nuclear families nowadays. 

Fathertime!

Just getting feminists out of these sorts of positions in general should help. If it stops them having influence over the law that would give women the upper hand then that could go a long way to making relationships work again.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 19, 2020, 08:38:40 AM
!"My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed,"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-54214729 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-54214729)

Then she should have retired before she started falling asleep in her oatmeal.
She wanted to eat her cake and have it too. Either you retire when you know
who the president is or you hang on until you die. She did the later, her opinion
on who replaces her is as irrelevant as what the Brexit/Remain voters think about
it.

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 19, 2020, 08:47:58 AM
Let's see if McConnell and Trump are capable of acting with common decency,
deliberation, and due diligence, or simply bow to desperation and hypocrisy.

The ultimate would be nominating and approving her during a lame duck
session after an election in which the Dem's won. I really think the Dem's
are going to lose but I've been wrong many times before.

If I'm honest, all I care about is replacing her with a conservative justice.
The Dem's are always begging the Republicans to act with a common
decency that they lack. The Kavanagh debacle is evidence of that.
Democratic hypocrisy knows no bounds. 

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: ML on September 19, 2020, 09:13:51 AM
My additional thought after a morning walk and discussion with FSU wife.

1) Death of RGB is going to hurt Donald's chance of winning and hurt the chance that Repubs keep control of the Senate.  Reason:  Those in the middle and independents will be even more galvanized toward stopping another conservative justice from being on Supreme Court.  Same idea as to why religious right gave strong support to Donald in 2016 election.  Independents probably want a fairly balanced Supreme Court with one swing vote.  Roberts is going to be the swing vote going forward.

2) If Donald puts forth a candidate before election . . . he and the Repub controlled Senate are dead meat.

3) Although number 1 will probably happen even if Donald does not put forth a candidate before election . . . I think Donald should submit his nomination the day after the election (even as the results will not be known).  In this manner, the Repub controlled Senate will still have nearly two months to get Donald's nominee confirmed, even if Donald loses and Repubs lose control of new Senate.

4) If Donald wins re-election . . . Clarence and Samuel should resign within a couple of years . . . for same reason that Ruth should have resigned during Obama"s last term
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 19, 2020, 09:24:07 AM
Trump signals he may nominate somebody quickly. He could've thrown out a Tweet to feel how the people are going to react though. If he does nominate somebody quickly, it increases the chances it'll be a woman which makes it more difficult for Democrats to stall with sexual assault allegations. Trump also thanked Democrat Harry Reid who in the past had control of the Senate. He led the change in rules of needing a 60 vote majority to approve a SCOTUS justice to just 51.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-signals-he-will-move-to-replace-ginsburg-without-delay/ar-BB19d1si?ocid=spartan-ntp-feeds



1) Death of RGB is going to hurt Donald's chance of winning and hurt the chance that Repubs keep control of the Senate.  Reason:  Those in the middle and independents will be even more galvanized toward stopping another conservative justice from being on Supreme Court.  Same idea as to why religious right gave strong support to Donald in 2016 election.  Independents probably want a fairly balanced Supreme Court with one swing vote.  Roberts is going to be the swing vote going forward.


I believe most independents who voted for Trump last election knew full well he'd be nominating conservative judges to all high courts and aren't afraid he will nominate conservative judges next term. They will judge him solely on his job performance, not the judges he'll nominate.


4) If Donald wins re-election . . . Clarence and Samuel should resign within a couple of years . . . for same reason that Ruth should have resigned during Obama"s last term


RBG saw the polls and believed in them. I think she was planning to leave during Hillary's presidency.


Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 19, 2020, 09:44:10 AM
Democratic hypocrisy knows no bounds.

Example of dem hypocrisy in this context?

What you describe is a path of escalation.  Will the GOP up the ante?  My guess is they will despite doing exactly what they said they wouldn't.

They are faced with one helluva choice tho'.  We'll just have to see if their talk is cheap.  Will make for some rather revealing political ads.  Gotta admit she's a fav of a good portion of the younger crowd.

I do hope it raises voter participation considerably.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 19, 2020, 10:02:30 AM
My guess Trump will nominate Diane S. Sykes
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: ML on September 19, 2020, 10:34:56 AM


I believe most independents who voted for Trump last election knew full well he'd be nominating conservative judges to all high courts and aren't afraid he will nominate conservative judges next term.

Independents, and perhaps moderate Democrats and moderate Republicans, might have been OK with the prospect of a 5-4 court containing one swing vote.

But a 6-3 court containing one useless swing vote, is another story.

As has been discussed elsewhere, the make-up of S.C. is perhaps more important in the long-run than who is elected president for any 4 year period.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: jone on September 19, 2020, 10:56:40 AM
RIP RBG.

What news to wake up to!

Life is awful quirky. The good ol' gal has managed to put the GOP, Trump, and our country on the spot in a way no one else can.

Eerily, it's almost like she thought this through as a parting test of our political moral compass.

Talk about going out with a bang...

Smart as a whip I say.

You nailed it, BC.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 19, 2020, 12:50:50 PM
This could be an excellent opportunity for GOP to reach across the aisle in a neutral fashion without even appearing to do so.  GOP can decide they need to live up to their word and allow Trump the chance to finish the race on his own merits. If he wins, move forward with the nomination.  If he loses GOP has a better chance of surviving intact instead of having put all their eggs in Trump's falling basket. It would be a first step forward at the right time on the high road for a change, put the spotlight back on Trump with good chances of de-escalating the political divide in Congress.  Win-Win.

All sides should step back, test public reaction over the next days and ceremonies, and reflect before acting.

Anything less only sends us in a spiraling race down divided paths, destroying even the last smidgen of trust and good faith we have we have in politics, and each other.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 19, 2020, 01:28:28 PM
This could be an excellent opportunity for GOP to reach across the aisle in a neutral fashion without even appearing to do so.  GOP can decide they need to live up to their word and allow Trump the chance to finish the race on his own merits. If he wins, move forward with the nomination.  If he loses GOP has a better chance of surviving intact instead of having put all their eggs in Trump's falling basket. It would be a first step forward at the right time on the high road for a change, put the spotlight back on Trump with good chances of de-escalating the political divide in Congress.  Win-Win.

All sides should step back, test public reaction over the next days and ceremonies, and reflect before acting.

Anything less only sends us in a spiraling race down divided paths, destroying even the last smidgen of trust and good faith we have we have in politics, and each other.

I suspect that ship has left port long ago with the constant attacks on Trump and his administration. Not to mention the all out pull no punches attack on the Kavanaugh appointment. I'm relatively confident an olive branch from the president would be met with nothing but more attacks
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 19, 2020, 01:37:42 PM
Well, RBG put the ball squarely in GOP's court FP.  They have a choice, and responsibility for what happens with it.

We'll see...
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: calmissile on September 19, 2020, 02:32:01 PM
I doubt that Trump nominating a SC judge would be changing that many votes.  Why are the Republicans supposed to be 'nice' now, after all the efforts the dems have made to bring down his administration?  As far as I am concerned it is time to squash the leftists and return our country to the ideals of our founding fathers and those supporting the constitution.

My observations show me that the left is very loud and noisy but benefits from a media that exaggerates their size and power.  I expect the silent majority to give Trump a victory in the election.  We will see.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 19, 2020, 02:43:53 PM
As has been discussed elsewhere, the make-up of S.C. is perhaps more important in the long-run than who is elected president for any 4 year period.


If a Supreme Court Justice on the bench for 20+ years is more valuable than 4 more years of Trump and if a Senate majority of Republicans can muscle in Trump's pick before the election, then they should do so instead of taking a chance Biden gets to pick the next judge.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 19, 2020, 03:37:50 PM

For the record, I still think Trump needs to do what is best to win the presidency for himself. A SC judge is worth a SC judge. A 4 year president is worth much more since he/she may get to appoint an SC judge or two and hundreds of other judges. That is a President's influence on just the Judicial Branch.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 19, 2020, 03:50:11 PM
That is a President's influence on just the Judicial Branch.

Unless, of course, the GOP Senate uses 500 or so filibusters to block judicial and other appointments. Remember when this happened and what the result was?
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Confederate on September 19, 2020, 04:18:54 PM
I doubt that Trump nominating a SC judge would be changing that many votes.  Why are the Republicans supposed to be 'nice' now, after all the efforts the dems have made to bring down his administration?  As far as I am concerned it is time to squash the leftists and return our country to the ideals of our founding fathers and those supporting the constitution.

My observations show me that the left is very loud and noisy but benefits from a media that exaggerates their size and power.  I expect the silent majority to give Trump a victory in the election.  We will see.

 :clapping:  :clapping:  :popcorn:
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 19, 2020, 04:39:14 PM
Unless, of course, the GOP Senate uses 500 or so filibusters to block judicial and other appointments. Remember when this happened and what the result was?

Reid changing the rules

Keep in mind, the below link said the reasons getting an Obama judge approved was slow came from minority resistance AND Obama was slow to nominate. Obama shares the blame. There are charts showing median days he took to nominate a judge after vacancy.

http://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2020/01/28/judicial-appointments-in-trumps-first-three-years-myths-and-realities/

Table 6b: Median Days from Nomination to District Judge Confirmation—Through late January, Fourth Year (parenthetical indicates number)
 
For Vacancies in Districts with
Districts with
Senate during
2 R senators
1 D, 1R
2 D senators
No senators (DC/PR)
Trump
217 (71)
343 (35)
412 (22)
90-387 (5)
Obama
208 (19)
212 (28)
195 (46)
161-273 (4)

Take a look at table 6b in that link which I posted names and numbers above. Trump's judges in most cases take up to twice as long to get approved after nomination than Obama's judges. Blame that on the Democrats who obstruct. In districts with two Republicans, Obama got his judges from nomination to confirmed in less time than Trump. Republicans have been fair. Look at the huge difference when two Democrats decide on a judge or where the district is split with one Senator from each party. It is clear which party obstructs to delay more.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 19, 2020, 05:56:35 PM
Well, RBG put the ball squarely in GOP's court FP.  They have a choice, and responsibility for what happens with it.

We'll see...

Then they should do exactly what the Democrats would do and appoint
a conservative Judge and push them through. Then you would have
5 conservatives, 3 Left wingers and 1 moderate. If the situation were
reversed then the Democrats would never, ever, ever, ever take the
same chance that you are suggesting the Republicans to take. The
Dem's would consider it their birthright after not getting Merrick Garland

They would laugh in our faces if we asked them to wait after the election
when they had the majority in the Senate.

The days of reaching across the isle about appointments to the Supreme
court are gone forever.

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on September 19, 2020, 06:23:55 PM
Give RBG the respect she's earned. Let the country be in mourning for a week. After that, FILL THAT SEAT!! FILL THAT SEAT!!


Even she knew it was well within the POTUS Constitutional right to do so as every POTUS before him did. The difference between now and 2016 is both the executive and house of Senate are of the same political party. Make no mistake about it, these zany Democrats would've done it had THE Stooge had the Senate in 2016.


FILL THAT SEAT!! FILL THAT SEAT!!  A week, and not a minute longer!!!!


MAGA 2020!!!
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: tfcrew on September 19, 2020, 06:27:02 PM
Even if he loses the election  :o .....a lame duck Trump can still nominate someone.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 19, 2020, 06:33:05 PM



I've been thinking of various scenarios and the best scenario that benefits Republicans is Trump has to nominate somebody SOON to begin the process. That doesn't mean the Senate will vote on Trump's nominee before the election. They don't have to. On election day, they can lose their Senate majority and have Biden win the Presidency but the Republicans still maintain a Senate majority until Jan 3, 2021 and can approve Trump's SC nominee before a new President and Senate takes over should they lose everything in the election.


Liberals are hating on Lindsey Graham right now and the media will run with his words all the way up to the election hoping to get public support to pressure Republicans to back off. I doubt Republicans will back off and the price Lindsey will pay is he'll have to eat his words. Not the end of the world.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: jone on September 19, 2020, 07:55:25 PM
Everyone forgets about Peoria.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: jone on September 19, 2020, 07:58:55 PM
Then they should do exactly what the Democrats would do and appoint
a conservative Judge and push them through. Then you would have
5 conservatives, 3 Left wingers and 1 moderate. If the situation were
reversed then the Democrats would never, ever, ever, ever take the
same chance that you are suggesting the Republicans to take. The
Dem's would consider it their birthright after not getting Merrick Garland

They would laugh in our faces if we asked them to wait after the election
when they had the majority in the Senate.

The days of reaching across the isle about appointments to the Supreme
court are gone forever.

So speaks the Barry Goldwater theory of politics.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 19, 2020, 08:18:27 PM
I doubt that Trump nominating a SC judge would be changing that many votes.  Why are the Republicans supposed to be 'nice' now, after all the efforts the dems have made to bring down his administration?  As far as I am concerned it is time to squash the leftists and return our country to the ideals of our founding fathers and those supporting the constitution.
 
I think many of the votes will be changed (Or turnout increased) by the mere fact that trump will now have the ability to replace this particular liberal judge. 

It is a fantasy that leftists will be 'squashed'.  if trump succeeds in nominating a replacement as a lame duck or as the loser, it will further detach majority of voters from feeling represented as they might like to be.  The country will likely continue right on it's same path regardless.  There would just be more defiance. 

Fathertime! 
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 19, 2020, 09:20:20 PM
Give RBG the respect she's earned. Let the country be in mourning for a week. After that, FILL THAT SEAT!! FILL THAT SEAT!!


Even she knew it was well within the POTUS Constitutional right to do so as every POTUS before him did. The difference between now and 2016 is both the executive and house of Senate are of the same political party. Make no mistake about it, these zany Democrats would've done it had THE Stooge had the Senate in 2016.


FILL THAT SEAT!! FILL THAT SEAT!!  A week, and not a minute longer!!!!


MAGA 2020!!!


Hey brudda, they have conducted the breath test and she is dead. Damn the week. Fill the seat. It ain't going to fill itself
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 19, 2020, 09:34:16 PM
I think many of the votes will be changed (Or turnout increased) by the mere fact that trump will now have the ability to replace this particular liberal judge. 

It is a fantasy that leftists will be 'squashed'.  if trump succeeds in nominating a replacement as a lame duck or as the loser, it will further detach majority of voters from feeling represented as they might like to be.  The country will likely continue right on it's same path regardless.  There would just be more defiance. 

Fathertime!

The vote turnout will be what the turnout is. With President Trumps next four years expect more draining of the swamp
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Trenchcoat on September 20, 2020, 01:23:50 AM
I think we can all agree though that RBG sure was ugly looking.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 20, 2020, 05:17:44 AM
The vote turnout will be what the turnout is. With President Trumps next four years expect more draining of the swamp
I think certain events can increase turnout, and RBG dying weeks before the election is one of those things.  It really doesn't matter that much though, if the hypocritical conservatives can ram their pick through before the presidency is lost or the senate.   There is a chance that a few republican senators won't go along with this though and insist on waiting until the election has ended. 
Overall I don't think trump has drained a swamp at all.  He has succeeded at lowering the US standing around the globe, (Which I support), and he has helped fuel discontent internally which isn't a positive. 

Fathertime! 
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 20, 2020, 05:23:54 AM
Just getting feminists out of these sorts of positions in general should help. If it stops them having influence over the law that would give women the upper hand then that could go a long way to making relationships work again.
I'd say relationships are working just fine already if people want to be in them. 

Fathertime! 
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on September 20, 2020, 06:03:58 AM
The implications are many on both sides of the decision of whether to fill the vacancy. 

If the Democrats had behaved like traditional statesmen in Trump's 4 years, the nomination should be delayed or at least done with some cooperation with the Democrats.    Instead, the Democrats behaved as obstructionists, becoming worse with each year.  To echo 2tallbill, "The Dem's are always begging the Republicans to act with a common decency that they lack."

In fact given the accelerating  tone of the Democrats, I venture that if they do sweep in November,  they will undertake many changes to reduce the limited powers of the minority, such as eliminating the filibuster, stacking the court, etc. 

So, Trump should do his duty and nominate someone. 

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on September 20, 2020, 06:09:48 AM
Trump has stated he will nominate a woman. 

From what I read, the two leading candidates, are Amy Coney Barrett (supporter of religious freedom, pro-life and mother of seven including a special needs child and two adopted from Haiti) and Barbara Lagoa (Florida Cuban, pro-business).

Maybe any potential nominee will decline being named knowing the Democrats will respond with a cruel campaign to destroy them.  That's sad statement about hyper-contentious America.   
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 20, 2020, 06:13:27 AM
I think certain events can increase turnout, and RBG dying weeks before the election is one of those things.  It really doesn't matter that much though, if the hypocritical conservatives can ram their pick through before the presidency is lost or the senate.   There is a chance that a few republican senators won't go along with this though and insist on waiting until the election has ended. 
Overall I don't think trump has drained a swamp at all.  He has succeeded at lowering the US standing around the globe, (Which I support), and he has helped fuel discontent internally which isn't a positive. 

Fathertime!

The turnout is the turnout. Whatever event that may take place will turn out votes on both sides. I understand a couple of senators already claimed they won't vote for a confirmation on the vacant seat. No matter it can move along with them. It is his duty to fill the seat and with such a controversial election coming up that seat needs to be filled.

Please explain this "lowering of US standing around the globe"? I see it as exactly the opposite. No new wars, bringing our troops home, removed us from Syria and Afghanistan is soon to be history. He is actually making peace in the ME rather than causing more wars and death. I remember your fondness for Iran and they are pissed they are hindered from supporting terrorism and no chance for a nuclear weapon. The rest of the world is grateful and relieved. He's fueled a roaring economy that even the election virus couldn't defeat. Believe it or not, the world's economy feed's off of the US economy. Trump is America First as it should be. Finally a president that isn't bought and controlled by corporate America, China, Soros, or the Central banks. Wake up and smell the coffee
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 20, 2020, 06:19:49 AM
Trump has stated he will nominate a woman. 

Maybe any potential nominee will decline being named knowing the Democrats will respond with a cruel campaign to destroy them.  That's sad statement about hyper-contentious America.

Gator,

Take the Kavanaugh appointment as a lesson. No matter who gets the appointment by Trump or when, there is no length the left will not go to to destroy them. They are not beyond making shyte up to fit the narrative. Oh how I look forward to the day when voters are not so gullible 
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on September 20, 2020, 07:18:04 AM
Hey brudda, they have conducted the breath test and she is dead. Damn the week. Fill the seat. It ain't going to fill itself

I understand the rationale behind your statement although the week is a necessary time for proper diligence beyond what I mentioned. Now more than ever a nominee will not only be vedded as always, but will also need to be one with the strongest of character due to the likely hostile inquisition the numbnuts are sure to badger ‘her’ with.

Accepting a nomination under the current climate is not a very promising experience to go through as we’ve all witness with Kavanaugh.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 20, 2020, 07:56:29 AM
I understand the rationale behind your statement although the week is a necessary time for proper diligence beyond what I mentioned. Now more than ever a nominee will not only be vedded as always, but will also need to be one with the strongest of character due to the likely hostile inquisition the numbnuts are sure to badger ‘her’ with.

Accepting a nomination under the current climate is not a very promising experience to go through as we’ve all witness with Kavanaugh.

I agree with you and I was being facetious. It's going to take several weeks before a candidate can be properly vetted anyway. I'm relatively sure the candidate is already chosen and the process is underway. Remember Kavanaugh is/was squeaky clean and we saw what they did to him. The WH administration will want to head off all they can with that. "She" will be accused of everything under sun. As far as the left is concerned rape, incest, group sex in high school and a lifetime of financial impropriety charges are forthcoming. She will need to be a strong woman with a thick skin and high moral character
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 20, 2020, 08:41:31 AM
So speaks the Barry Goldwater theory of politics.

So speaks the Mitt Romney, Bob Dole, George HW Bush theory of politics.
Be so nice and get repeatedly outmaneuvered so that you lose again and
again. Tell me more about Gerald Fords second term. You aren't going to
vote for Trump regardless of what he does on this. People have an opinion
in Peoria, but will it change based on this?

Who is going to change their vote?

The Dem's haven't stopped rioting in Portland Or. The Dem's are still defunding
the police. Dem's are still attacking the police.


Will anti-cop platform be Markey’s mark?
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/will-anti-cop-platform-be-markey-e2-80-99s-mark/ar-BB19dUSR


Will Trump’s ‘law-and-order’ pitch prevail in Pennsylvania?
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/04/pennsylvania-election-trump-biden


Lawmakers React to Arrest of Dem House Speaker’s Aide in Portland Riots
http://www.nationalreview.com/news/oregon-republican-lawmakers-react-to-arrest-of-dem-house-speakers-aide-in-portland-riots/


Replacing Justice Ginsburg: Politics, Not Precedent
http://www.nationalreview.com/2020/09/replacing-justice-ginsburg-politics-not-precedent/


'It would burn through paper': Portland man charged for pointing laser into officer's eyes during protests
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/it-would-burn-through-paper-portland-man-charged-for-pointing-laser-into-officers-eyes-during-protests/ar-BB196xke
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on September 20, 2020, 09:42:39 AM
This will be a really wild ride if a nomination is indeed placed. With the required 3/5 for confirmation and the Republicans holding 53 Senate seats, we can spare Collins, Murkowski and the eternal idiot Romney from sitting this one out. Too close. Mitch need to make he has the affirmation if everyone else before giving THE Donald the green light.

Kavanaugh was confirmed by a 50-48 votes, while Gorsuch at 53-45.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 20, 2020, 09:45:29 AM

RBG will be buried at the most prestigious cemetery in America, Arlington National Cemetery. Although she was not in the military and not technically qualified to be buried there, the cemetery makes exceptions for those who have contributed much to America. Presidents and Senators are buried there. RBG will be the 14th Supreme Court Justice to be buried there.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 20, 2020, 09:49:04 AM
This will be a really wild ride if a nomination is indeed placed. With the required 3/5 for confirmation and the Republicans holding 53 Senate seats, we can spare Collins, Murkowski and the eternal idiot Romney from sitting this one out. Too close. Mitch need to make he has the affirmation if everyone else before giving THE Donald the green light.

Kavanaugh was confirmed by a 50-48 votes, while Gorsuch at 53-45.

Collins has already stated she thinks the vote should wait. She hasn't said she wouldn't vote or would vote against her party. Murkowski is a loose canon either way but both of those are likely to vote for the right candidate. Romney will vote against anything Trump. There likely will be a democrat or two that breaks the ranks
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Steamer on September 20, 2020, 10:18:35 AM
(http://scontent-ort2-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/p843x403/119846800_3593105824035001_328111135016584378_n.jpg?_nc_cat=111&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=aQ0mE24iEOIAX8tPVg7&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-1.xx&tp=6&oh=2a0e92f0e02fa57ec8d6618cdce1b771&oe=5F8C5EC7)
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Steamer on September 20, 2020, 10:22:29 AM
FILL THE SEAT !!
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 20, 2020, 10:27:40 AM



Some Senators will be scared to lose their jobs and Mitch needs to factor that into his strategy on what is best for the Republican party. Trump will nominate someone soon and the Senate vote probably won't happen until after the election. If Republicans lose the Senate, they will vote before Jan 3 which is the day the new Democrat majority Senate takes over. If the Republicans retain the majority in the Senate, they can relax, go home for the holidays and vote in Trump's nominee after Jan 3.


If Biden got to nominate a SC justice, he wouldn't nominate the best person for the job because he is aiming for diversity. Trump is not going to nominate the best person this time around because the best people for the job are obviously guilty of something like Kavanaugh was.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 20, 2020, 10:58:09 AM

Pelosi may consider Impeaching Trump to stall the Senate. She says she has a duty to protect the Constitution. How is Trump violating the Constitution if he nominates a judge right now? Maybe she and Schiff got another anonymous whistleblower complaint they've been waiting to use.

http://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/nancy-pelosi-impeach-scotus-nomination-155305894.html
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on September 20, 2020, 11:00:38 AM
Collins has already stated she thinks the vote should wait. She hasn't said she wouldn't vote or would vote against her party. Murkowski is a loose canon either way but both of those are likely to vote for the right candidate. Romney will vote against anything Trump. There likely will be a democrat or two that breaks the ranks

I’m mistaken with what I said above FP. Apparently a simple majority is all that’s required. VP Pence is the tie breaker if warranted.  If no Democrat breaks rank, and those 3 Republicans sit this one out and goes lefty, the Pence drops the gavel.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 20, 2020, 11:04:22 AM
Pelosi may consider Impeaching Trump to stall the Senate. She says she has a duty to protect the Constitution. How is Trump violating the Constitution if he nominates a judge right now? Maybe she and Schiff got another anonymous whistleblower complaint they've been waiting to use.

http://www.yahoo.com/huffpost/nancy-pelosi-impeach-scotus-nomination-155305894.html

Trump has constitutional authority and duty to make a nomination. It is up to the senate to take it to a confirmation. Make no mistake there is no hypocrisy here, on the republican senate. Obama's last nomination would have been confirmed if the democrats controlled the senate. That's politics and it was then as it is now, McConnell's decision as leader of the senate
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: ML on September 20, 2020, 11:12:11 AM
Two arguments for Senate confirming a Supreme Court nominee during this last year of Donald's first term . . . as I have heard from the 'right side.'

1) Both the Presidency and Senate controlled by same party; unlike when Obama nominated Garland.

2) Despite what many republicans said about not confirming during last year of a presidency with respect to Garland . . . this is a new era after what Dems did to Kavanaugh, so all civility out the window.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 20, 2020, 01:53:46 PM
this is a new era after what Dems did to Kavanaugh, so all civility out the window.

Dems or Kavanaugh's accusers?  Again, a vote in the Senate does not exonerate or otherwise vindicate but simply says 'it doesn't matter'.

Agree, civility was thrown out long ago so is escalation the only path left?
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 20, 2020, 02:49:23 PM
Dems or Kavanaugh's accusers?  Again, a vote in the Senate does not exonerate or otherwise vindicate but simply says 'it doesn't matter'.

Agree, civility was thrown out long ago so is escalation the only path left?

It's not escalation unless it happens to Dem's.

You can't be totally blind to history. Robert Bork, Douglas Ginsburg, Clarence Thomas
and you forgot the Democrat filibuster of Miguel Estrada and 8 other appeals justices?
What the Dem's did to Kavanaugh has never been done to a Dem.

Ginsberg who was the lefty head of the ACLA! They knew she was a left winger and
they didn't do ANYTHING to stop her nomination, they did the opposite, they voted
for her. 46 Dem's voted against Kavanaugh's nomination along with the two so called
independents Angus King and Bernie Sanders voting against him.

The Democrats started it. The GOP can't be the patsy every single time. They need
to push this candidate through and ignore the screaming from the left.

The Dem's have been playing hardball for 40 years. Now they cry like teenage girls
when they don't get their way while they are in the minority.

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on September 20, 2020, 04:23:08 PM
Quote from: ML
. . . this is a new era after what Dems did to Kavanaugh, so all civility out the window.

It isn’t only just Kavanaugh. It’s beyond him, even beyond Thomas.

There hasn’t been civility from the Dems even before Trump’s election. Remember what these numbnuts did the last time they held the majority. They crammed Obamacare down America’s throat. Make no mistake about it, if the roles were reversed they’d do it again, and again, and again.

http://youtu.be/fvJkcCRyVSI
Civility

MAGA 2020
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on September 20, 2020, 05:09:26 PM
Dems or Kavanaugh's accusers? 

Yes Dems.  Even Dianne Feinstein stirred the pot. 
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 20, 2020, 06:00:42 PM
Democrats' Armageddon option
On the table: Adding Supreme Court justices ... eliminating the Senate's 60-vote
threshold to end filibusters ... and statehood for D.C. and Puerto Rico. "If he holds
a vote in 2020, we pack the court in 2021," Rep. Joe Kennedy III (D-Mass.)

On ABC's "This Week," George Stephanopoulos asked Speaker Pelosi about the
possibility of impeaching President Trump or Attorney General Barr as a way to
stall a Supreme Court confirmation in a post-election lame-duck session.

http://www.axios.com/democrats-supreme-court-ginsburg-options-871f3e66-e7a4-4f40-9691-d20de1f4be61.html

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on September 20, 2020, 06:19:37 PM
Democrats' Armageddon option
On the table: Adding Supreme Court justices ... eliminating the Senate's 60-vote
threshold to end filibusters ... and statehood for D.C. and Puerto Rico. "If he holds
a vote in 2020, we pack the court in 2021," Rep. Joe Kennedy III (D-Mass.)


That will happen regardless.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 20, 2020, 07:25:23 PM
Democrats' Armageddon option
On the table: Adding Supreme Court justices ... eliminating the Senate's 60-vote
threshold to end filibusters ... and statehood for D.C. and Puerto Rico. "If he holds
a vote in 2020, we pack the court in 2021," Rep. Joe Kennedy III (D-Mass.)

On ABC's "This Week," George Stephanopoulos asked Speaker Pelosi about the
possibility of impeaching President Trump or Attorney General Barr as a way to
stall a Supreme Court confirmation in a post-election lame-duck session.

http://www.axios.com/democrats-supreme-court-ginsburg-options-871f3e66-e7a4-4f40-9691-d20de1f4be61.html
If it becomes necessary, I say the democrats pull out all stops including whatever Armageddon option they have.  It may come to that.  When the democrats play nice what winds  up happening is the country is ruled by a conservative minority.  In the case of the supreme court that branch could be dominated by a majority that represents a conservative minority in the country.  It would be a further example of how poorly our system is working nowadays.   It shouldn't be a surprise that there are (And would likely be) demonstrations galore....some of which turn into riots that the conservatives are unable to curtail.  This shall wind up getting interesting.

Fathertime! 
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Confederate on September 20, 2020, 08:08:40 PM
If it becomes necessary, I say the democrats pull out all stops including whatever Armageddon option they have.  It may come to that.  When the democrats play nice what winds  up happening is the country is ruled by a conservative minority.  In the case of the supreme court that branch could be dominated by a majority that represents a conservative minority in the country.  It would be a further example of how poorly our system is working nowadays.   It shouldn't be a surprise that there are (And would likely be) demonstrations galore....some of which turn into riots that the conservatives are unable to curtail.  This shall wind up getting interesting.

Fathertime!

So you don't believe that the Feds should stop violent anarchists from destroying US cities, assaulting bystanders and harming small businesses?

That's pretty sad because it could devolve into open civil war as normal people stand up for law and order on their own accord.

          http://youtu.be/szO9JWrz3f8
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 20, 2020, 08:48:22 PM
So you don't believe that the Feds should stop violent anarchists from destroying US cities, assaulting bystanders and harming small businesses?

That's pretty sad because it could devolve into open civil war as normal people stand up for law and order on their own accord.

          http://youtu.be/szO9JWrz3f8
I think the protests will continue and at times escalate into rioting.  If they can't control it now, it will be more difficult assuming the protests become more prevalent.   As far as 'normal people', I don't think the people that go out shooting protesters are normal.  That is not their job. 

I never saw more people hit the streets as back in 2005 or 2006 when the illegal immigrants and supporters hit the streets in the millions.  The protests were largely peaceful, and that show of force has cowered the government from doing anything too drastic to them ever since.

I get the feeling trump will escalate this issue as he does most things, and the result will be bad, as it often is. 

Fathertime!
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Confederate on September 20, 2020, 08:55:29 PM
I think the protests will continue and at times escalate into rioting.  If they can't control it now, it will be more difficult assuming the protests become more prevalent.   As far as 'normal people', I don't think the people that go out shooting protesters are normal.  That is not their job. 

I never saw more people hit the streets as back in 2005 or 2006 when the illegal immigrants and supporters hit the streets in the millions.  The protests were largely peaceful, and that show of force has cowered the government from doing anything too drastic to them ever since.

I get the feeling trump will escalate this issue as he does most things, and the result will be bad, as it often is. 

Fathertime!

I hope for peace and that people will be calm and work through normal channels.

I hope you're wrong about Trump making things worse.

As I see it it's the media which deliberately pours gasoline on any crisis they can manipulate, and someone is financing these lawless riots.

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 20, 2020, 08:56:47 PM
Trump has constitutional authority and duty to make a nomination. It is up to the senate to take it to a confirmation. Make no mistake there is no hypocrisy here, 

Ha!   It is interesting to see how some of the conservatives are squirming about the hypocrisy..   See no evil, hear no evil and say no evil.  This is going to be a hard sell.

Fathertime!
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 20, 2020, 09:01:22 PM
It is his duty to fill the seat and with such a controversial election coming up that seat needs to be filled.
It was also the duty of the senate to permit the filling of the seat during obozo's term. 

Fathertime!
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 20, 2020, 09:11:10 PM
Yes Dems.  Even Dianne Feinstein stirred the pot.

Christine Blassey Ford wrote a letter to Feinstein and requested to remain anonymous. her name and letter was leaked and there wasn't an investigation on who leaked it. When it comes to whistleblowing, there are times Democrats will protect that person's name and other times they'll release it. Luckily Christine wasn't killed by a radical right winger due to the Democrats reckless actions.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 20, 2020, 09:57:15 PM
It's not escalation unless it happens to Dem's.

You can't be totally blind to history.

Escalation is never limited to one side 2Tall.  You talk about the history and that proves my point, there will always be a 'well you did that first' that can go back to before the constitution.  A line can't be drawn defining who started what, when, where, and how.

Yet, we are where we are.  Any veil of civility has been torn down and the gloves are off.  Just as our citizens are fighting each other in the streets, our our governing body is now doing the same.

This has all the hallmarks of a leaderless, fear-driven society.  'Damn the torpedos, full speed ahead!'.  On one side we have a party that is fearful of a politically unbalanced Supreme Court.  On the other side we have a party that fears if they don't do something now to replace RBG now with a conservative judge they won't have the chance again for some time to come.

So back to my question 2Tall:  Is escalation the only path we have left?  If so, the Union is no more and we're back to square one with a pending, all out civil war.

Those who cannot see this are blind. 

So what my friend and fellow citizen is the answer? more escalation you say? 

There is only one choice available at this time and that is for the two warring parties to step back and let the people decide our fate.  Putting Union before Party is the only proper, just and peaceful path forward.

Either our endless political gaming and one-upmanship ends, or our nation ends.

Yes, it is that serious.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 21, 2020, 12:12:21 AM
Con,

in the video you posted, who were the aggressors?  Note there is a cutaway early on in the video.  Have the full version?
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Trenchcoat on September 21, 2020, 01:06:38 AM
!"My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed,"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-54214729 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-54214729)

Looks like the old hag is going to be denied her wish, Trump and the GOP look like they are going to put in her replacement BEFORE a new president is installed :D Looks like she didn't hang on long enough to avoid that one.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 21, 2020, 05:16:58 AM
Ha!   It is interesting to see how some of the conservatives are squirming about the hypocrisy..   See no evil, hear no evil and say no evil.  This is going to be a hard sell.

Fathertime!

It was also the duty of the senate to permit the filling of the seat during obozo's term. 

Fathertime!

You appear to be posting again for reaction again but, just is case you aren't  I'll give you some facts. The In politics, you do what you have the power to do. The power in this instance is in the hands of the senate majority leader.The people have spoken in that regard. This same power was in the hands of that same senate majority leader during Obama's nomination of Garland, not the minority leader. Obama's leadership lost the senate. There the people spoke and took that power away from Obama. That's the system whether you like it or not. The senate complied and did not vote on Garland. This is politics like it or not. When the same party controls the senate and the White House ending in a term of the president, the USSC nomination from the president is approved 100% of the time. It is the democrats crying "don't do as I do, do as I say". That my friend is hypocrisy
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 21, 2020, 05:25:25 AM

You can pretend all you like, but it is hypocrisy from right wing conservatives.    There is a list of statements floating about from people such as Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio, among many other senators stating clearly not to replace a judge in last months leading up to an election.     Your attempted cover is noted, and I don't suspect will be bought by the majority.     I'm not sure having a very conservative supreme court will have that great of an affect on the country, but it won't represent the people correctly. 

Fathertime!
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 21, 2020, 05:34:44 AM
You can pretend all you like, but it is hypocrisy from right wing conservatives.    There is a list of statements floating about from people such as Lindsey Graham and Marco Rubio, among many other senators stating clearly not to replace a judge in last months leading up to an election.     Your attempted cover is noted, and I don't suspect will be bought by the majority.     I'm not sure having a very conservative supreme court will have that great of an affect on the country, but it won't represent the people correctly. 

Fathertime!

Yeah just as I suspected, you're posting for reaction. I gave you the facts. Ignore them if you wish
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 21, 2020, 05:40:22 AM
Yeah just as I suspected, you're posting for reaction. I gave you the facts. Ignore them if you wish
I read your version of 'the facts'.  I also mentioned the same senators  stated under obozo they would not support replacing a supreme court judge last second before an election, and are now trying to do the very opposite under trump.  Straight hypocrisy, and partisanship....It is always interesting to read though how they concoct a new version of reasoning to justify their about face.    Nevertheless thanks for your reaction. 

Fathertime!   
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 21, 2020, 05:54:35 AM
I read your version of 'the facts'.  I also mentioned the same senators  stated under obozo they would not support replacing a supreme court judge last second before an election, and are now trying to do the very opposite under trump.  Straight hypocrisy, and partisanship....It is always interesting to read though how they concoct a new version of reasoning to justify their about face.    Nevertheless thanks for your reaction. 

Fathertime!

No need in getting your blood pressure up and red faced FT. Accept the truth or deny it. Makes no matter to me but, you have heard the truth. Proof positive that you can lead a horse to water and he can walk away thirsty ;D
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 21, 2020, 06:07:55 AM
No need in getting your blood pressure up and red faced FT. Accept the truth or deny it. Makes no matter to me but, you have heard the truth. Proof positive that you can lead a horse to water and he can walk away thirsty ;D
I am quite fine.  Your version of the truth is not accepted by most, and I continue to mention is going to be a VERY hard sell.  The rubio/graham statements will be replayed over and over by the 'evil media', and pounded into the public.  Even some conservatives will know in their heart of hearts it is straight hypocrisy/partisanship.  Others such as yourself, will try to use talking points to defend it.  I think trump may try to nominate, and may ever prevail, but it won't go over well with the people....but as we know that doesn't matter much!

Fathertime! 
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 21, 2020, 06:13:48 AM
I am quite fine.  Your version of the truth is not accepted by most, and I continue to mention is going to be a VERY hard sell.  The rubio/graham statements will be replayed over and over by the 'evil media', and pounded into the public.  Even some conservatives will know in their heart of hearts it is straight hypocrisy/partisanship.  Others such as yourself, will try to use talking points to defend it.  I think trump may try to nominate, and may ever prevail, but it won't go over well with the people....but as we know that doesn't matter much!

Fathertime!

He will nominate. What the senate does is up to McConnell and if they vote both Rubio and Graham will have a vote. Let's see what they do. Ginsberg herself stated publicly that the president should nominate during an election year.

McConnell has the power as soon as Trump sends over a nominee. Like it or not, both have the constitutional duty and authority. That's politics
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on September 21, 2020, 06:30:51 AM
So Friday or Saturday is the projected date laid out by THE Donald. A day after RBG’s services. Exactly the way I believed this should go.

FILL THAT SEAT!!
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on September 21, 2020, 08:54:48 AM

This has all the hallmarks of a leaderless, fear-driven society. 

What we have is anarchy.

Definition of ANARCHY - a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.


BC, the problem in our society is not "leaderless" but the nonrecognition of Trump's authorities as President.  This started before he took office and has been a constant action of the Democrats and left extremists throughout his four years.


'
Quote
On one side we have a party that is fearful of a politically unbalanced Supreme Court.  On the other side we have a party that fears if they don't do something now to replace RBG now with a conservative judge they won't have the chance again for some time to come.

Appointing judges is symptomatic but just the tip of the iceberg.  We don't need to go through the long list. 



Quote
There is only one choice available at this time and that is for the two warring parties to step back and let the people decide our fate. 

One side:   Destroying our cities, obstructing Presidential and Senate Authority at every opportunity,  etc.

Other side:  Governing under the authority granted by the Constitution.   
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on September 21, 2020, 09:04:14 AM
He will nominate. What the senate does is up to McConnell and if they vote both Rubio and Graham will have a vote. Let's see what they do. Ginsberg herself stated publicly that the president should nominate during an election year.

McConnell has the power as soon as Trump sends over a nominee. Like it or not, both have the constitutional duty and authority. That's politics


Exactly. What CNN and its followers intentionally dismisses is, RBG, as a SC justice, should know better than to politicize any bit of what the SC stands for, which she's been doing since her nomination.


Constitutionally, Trump is obligated to appoint a SC replacement ASAP especially since major cases are being brought over to the SC for ruling.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 21, 2020, 09:46:14 AM
The Senate’s Rural Skew Makes It Very Hard For Democrats To Win The Supreme Court
http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-senates-rural-skew-makes-it-very-hard-for-democrats-to-win-the-supreme-court/
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 21, 2020, 09:57:41 AM
What we have is anarchy.

Definition of ANARCHY - a state of disorder due to absence or nonrecognition of authority.


BC, the problem in our society is not "leaderless" but the nonrecognition of Trump's authorities as President.  This started before he took office and has been a constant action of the Democrats and left extremists throughout his four years.



Authority lies in our Constitution not a president, otherwise he/she would not be bound by it.  When trust in a leader has been lost, we are de facto leaderless. Most all Americans believe in our Constitution so I don't think we can call it anarchy.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: tfcrew on September 21, 2020, 10:51:41 AM
  Ginsberg herself stated publicly that the president should nominate during an election year.

McConnell has the power as soon as Trump sends over a nominee. Like it or not, both have the constitutional duty and authority. That's politics.
Quote
Asked if the Senate had an obligation to assess Judge Garland’s qualifications, her answer was immediate.
“That’s their job,” she said. “There’s nothing in the Constitution that says the president stops being president in his last year.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/11/us/politics/ruth-bader-ginsburg-no-fan-of-donald-trump-critiques-latest-term.html?referringSource=articleShare
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on September 21, 2020, 11:10:02 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/11/us/politics/ruth-bader-ginsburg-no-fan-of-donald-trump-critiques-latest-term.html?referringSource=articleShare (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/11/us/politics/ruth-bader-ginsburg-no-fan-of-donald-trump-critiques-latest-term.html?referringSource=articleShare)


That's not fair because she apologized at a later date that she even dared form an opinion about a presidential candidate, much less openly attack one. She knows the judicial branch of our government is a non-political entity. No one is infallible. Not even Ginsberg.


The mere fact she intentionally waited this long, instead of retiring because of her medical condition these past 4 years does cast doubts on the sincerity of her apology.


But doesn't matter, the country must march on based on the Constitutionality of our laws.


FILL THAT SEAT!!
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on September 21, 2020, 12:29:00 PM

When trust in a leader has been lost, we are de facto leaderless. 

The voters expressed their trust in Trump by electing him President. 

Some political opposition is expected.  In fact, it is an American tradition.  Beyond the pale obstruction is another matter, starting before the man took office. 

Quote
Most all Americans believe in our Constitution so I don't think we can call it anarchy.   

Agree to "most all Americans."   A relatively small number have long taken to riots in the streets, with three large cities named today as anarchist jurisdictions.   For months Biden and Democrat leadership at the Federal, state and local levels did not object to such anarchy.  That emboldened the rioters and supports anarchy. 

After watching the polls dip, Biden finally spoke on August 31 to condemn the riots.  Then in the next breath blamed Trump for "fomenting" the riots.  I don't know if Kamala has yet to condemn riots. 

Believing in our Constitution is recognizing the President is granted power by the Constitution to nominate SC judges, with the nomination confirmed or denied by the Senate.  I don't recall the Constitution placing limits on this power, meaning Trump can do it.

Likewise, the Democrats if they win the 2020 election will take steps to assure they never lose another election.  Drastic steps, more drastic than nominating a SC justice in an election year.    However, I feel fairly certain the Democrats were intending to do that anyway regardless of  RBG's death.   
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: jone on September 21, 2020, 12:55:37 PM

Authority lies in our Constitution not a president, otherwise he/she would not be bound by it.  When trust in a leader has been lost, we are de facto leaderless. Most all Americans believe in our Constitution so I don't think we can call it anarchy.

If trust in this President would be lost, then he would not have been acquitted in his impeachment hearings.  BC, you are playing politics in the guise of Constitutional authority.   Think this one through.   It is beneath you.   Trump is the legally elected President.   We have a way of moving on to another one.   It is called an election.   Subsequent to the election is the peaceful transfer of power. 

I may not like Trump.  But he is our President and he gets to make his choices.   At least until January.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: msmob on September 21, 2020, 12:58:47 PM
The voters expressed their trust in Trump by electing him President. 

NO, they didn't ..3m more of 'em voted for Clinton ... your EC system elected 'Trampu' ...

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on September 21, 2020, 01:26:13 PM
NO, they didn't ..3m more of 'em voted for Clinton ... your EC system elected 'Trampu' ...

Einstein's Parable of Quantum Insanity



Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 21, 2020, 02:32:09 PM
NO, they didn't ..3m more of 'em voted for Clinton ... your EC system elected 'Trampu' ...
My guess is this time around the number will be more than 3 million more votes for biden than trump.  Trump reelected by more of a minority, then appoints a supreme court judge that isn't supported by the people.  When/if this happens, it should be no surprise that people continue to protest within the 'most exceptional' country.  The rest of the world will also protest by not cooperating very much with what we try to demand. 

Fathertime!
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on September 21, 2020, 02:58:43 PM
My guess is this time around the number will be more than 3 million more votes for biden than trump.  Trump reelected by more of a minority, then appoints a supreme court judge that isn't supported by the people.  When/if this happens, it should be no surprise that people continue to protest within the 'most exceptional' country.  The rest of the world will also protest by not cooperating very much with what we try to demand. 

Fathertime!


Heck, I wish it triples at least....Maybe even more than that and still be re-elected. That'll prove he's really exceptional like me. This way he can finish all the walls in the south, and kick all the illegal morons out in our country finally.
 >:D
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 21, 2020, 05:13:22 PM
senators  stated under obozo they would not support replacing a supreme court judge last second before an election, and are now trying to do the very opposite under trump.  Straight hypocrisy, and partisanship....It is always interesting to read though how they concoct a new version of reasoning to justify their about face.   


If I told a guy on the forum if he loses his job, everybody should chip in $100 to help him out and a year later he loses his job. Who here is obligated to honor my words? Nobody.


Why did Lindsey Graham say that if in the last year of Presidency, a President shouldn't nominate a Supreme Court justice? Of course Obama was in his last year and everybody thought Hillary was going to win.

The Democrats could've told Lindsey and the Republican party they're willing to revise the rules according to Lindsey's proposal. Why didn't they do that? Because they thought Hillary was going to win the presidency and she will have the opportunity to nominate more Supreme Justices. Why eliminate her right to nominate a SC justice in her last year of the presidency? The Democrats probably would've taken Lindsey up on his proposal if they knew Trump was going to win. They are as much to blame as anybody.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: tfcrew on September 21, 2020, 05:48:15 PM
 
Quote
Just days before her death, as her strength waned, Ginsburg dictated this statement to her granddaughter Clara Spera: "My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed."
Even if that was true...and who knows? [It was not a public statement] Some wish will not change the language of the Constitution.
Fathertime is right...it is all hypocrisy. But everybody knows that hypocrisy is rampant on both sides.
If the Democrats get in there everywhere...congress-the senate -and the White House they might elect to add two more SC justice positions and regain control there too.
There is no law that prevents this. They should have initiated an amendment [limit to 9 justices] years ago...but congress is as lazy as they are spineless.
If the Democrats actually did this ...the integrity of the courts could become compromised and their decisions would wind up completely ignored.
Pelosi is hatching such a scheme...mark my words.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Confederate on September 21, 2020, 06:42:11 PM
Pelosi is pure evil. What a horrible person and an obstructionist of the peoples will.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on September 21, 2020, 06:47:30 PM
Pelosi is pure evil. What a horrible person and an obstructionist of the peoples will.

She wants to impeach Trump for doing what he’s obligated to do Constitutionally. She’s a numbnut like the rest of them.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: tfcrew on September 21, 2020, 08:51:12 PM
Another possible stunt would be to grant Puerto Rico and the Virgin Is. statehood. 4 more Democrat senators + extra representatives to muck up the swamp. Also...dump the Electoral College [that's been discussed before]
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 21, 2020, 09:09:59 PM
Another possible stunt would be to grant Puerto Rico and the Virgin Is. statehood. 4 more Democrat senators + extra representatives to muck up the swamp. Also...dump the Electoral College [that's been discussed before]
While they probably should be states if they want to be, I doubt that it is possible without bipartisan support.  The conservatives would rather have some level of control without full representation for them.  We probably borrow money to give to them to keep them bought off and not demanding independence or the right to vote.  It seems to be working. 

Fathertime! 
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 22, 2020, 06:21:52 AM
Fathertime is right...it is all hypocrisy. But everybody knows that hypocrisy is rampant on both sides.
 
It is so rare to see those 3 words at the beginning of this quote.   :D

The hypocrisy runs both ways, there are a majority of conservatives here that attempt to deny the hypocrisy and concoct any excuse they can think of.   I am really curious to see how the american people digest the rushing of the replacement for ginsburg by a conservative justice trump selects....and how the hypocritical conservative senators go along with it, after opposing the process under obozo when it was his final year.   
 If trump were to win in november, the democrats wouldn't be able to hold him up but trump may not feel confident that he will win so he has to rush the replacement.   a 6-3 court isn't (In my opinion) a good representation of what the american people desire, but it can be dealt with like everything else. 

Fathertime! 
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: tfcrew on September 22, 2020, 06:33:31 AM
While they probably should be states if they want to be ...
"If they want to be?" How about Samoa...Guam..and the Marianas then? More politicians jeting around and polluting the air. Super. 
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 22, 2020, 06:51:22 AM
It is so rare to see those 3 words at the beginning of this quote.   :D

The hypocrisy runs both ways, there are a majority of conservatives here that attempt to deny the hypocrisy and concoct any excuse they can think of.   I am really curious to see how the american people digest the rushing of the replacement for ginsburg by a conservative justice trump selects....and how the hypocritical conservative senators go along with it, after opposing the process under obozo when it was his final year.   
 If trump were to win in november, the democrats wouldn't be able to hold him up but trump may not feel confident that he will win so he has to rush the replacement.   a 6-3 court isn't (In my opinion) a good representation of what the american people desire, but it can be dealt with like everything else. 

Fathertime!

I don't know why you call Trumps duty and obligation to the oath he took on the bible to follow and protect the constitution hypocrisy. Instead of denying history. You maybe should re-read it. That is if you had read it one time previous or, maybe you didn't?
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on September 22, 2020, 08:49:15 AM
"If they want to be?" How about Samoa...Guam..and the Marianas then? More politicians jeting around and polluting the air. Super.


Isn't that silly?


Heck, even 5-O had been fighting for autonomy, if not downright secession and finally gain its independence from the contiguous.


Anywho, all the US needs is another blue welfare state, which I'm sure the Democrats is willing to subject the masses to in place of another 4 electoral seats.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 22, 2020, 11:02:46 AM
Pelosi is pure evil. What a horrible person and an obstructionist of the peoples will.

HR is the only body that is proportioned by population, as a leader of the majority whatever she does would represent the majority of 'peoples will' if backed by the majority of representatives.  If that is the case, she can't obstruct.

It is sad though that both parties are escalating by gaming the system.  Any shimmer of honour has been lost.

Not looking good.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: jone on September 22, 2020, 11:32:05 AM
One remembers back to the days of Harry Truman.   Not as President - or as FDR's VP.   But instead as chair of the war oversite committee - a position that launched him into the Vice Presidency and beyond.

Harry never treated a witness to his committee with anything other than respect and consideration.  Likewise, he treated his colleagues from across the aisle with equal respect.   As a matter of interest, he'd sometimes cut the hearings short and call all committee members - both parties - to his office for a snort .... and to get their stories straight.   

Will it take a war, again, to obtain the common purpose of governing our country with equanimity?

Someone asked me a couple of years ago why I didn't support Trump.   I harkened back to the primary season in 2016.   Trump consistently insulted each of his opponents.   Remember him telling Carly Fiorina that she was too ugly to be president?   

We're now in an era whereby many are saying that the Democrats deserve the treatment that they are getting because they behaved so poorly in the Kavenaugh hearings.   Well, they had a good example to learn by with our insulter-in-chief.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 22, 2020, 11:40:48 AM
Escalation is never limited to one side 2Tall.  You talk about the history and that proves my point, there will always be a 'well you did that first' that can go back to before the constitution.  A line can't be drawn defining who started what, when, where, and how.

Either our endless political gaming and one-upmanship ends, or our nation ends.

Yes, it is that serious.

Then the Dem's need to understand that they went too far and stop it.
The GOP has never tried to destroy a liberal left wing judicial candidate
but the Dem's have done it repeatedly.

Look at the nominations of Sotomayor, Kagan and Ginsberg.
Compare them to Kavanaugh, Thomas and Bork. Find anything
remotely similar to what Kavanaugh went through. 

The Dem's are the problem. You blaming it on the GOP is laughable.

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Confederate on September 22, 2020, 11:49:58 AM
Then the Dem's need to understand that they went to far and stop it.
The GOP has never tried to destroy a liberal left wing judicial candidate
but the Dem's have done it repeatedly.

Look at the nominations of Sotomayor, Kagan and Ginsberg.
Compare them to Kavanaugh, Thomas and Bork. Find anything
remotely similar to what Kavanaugh went through. 

The Dem's are the problem. You blaming it on the GOP is laughable.

Word.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 22, 2020, 11:57:21 AM
One remembers back to the days of Harry Truman.   Not as President - or as FDR's VP.   But instead as chair of the war oversite committee - a position that launched him into the Vice Presidency and beyond.

Harry never treated a witness to his committee with anything other than respect and consideration.  Likewise, he treated his colleagues from across the aisle with equal respect.   As a matter of interest, he'd sometimes cut the hearings short and call all committee members - both parties - to his office for a snort .... and to get their stories straight.   

Will it take a war, again, to obtain the common purpose of governing our country with equanimity?

Someone asked me a couple of years ago why I didn't support Trump.   I harkened back to the primary season in 2016.   Trump consistently insulted each of his opponents.   Remember him telling Carly Fiorina that she was too ugly to be president?   

We're now in an era whereby many are saying that the Democrats deserve the treatment that they are getting because they behaved so poorly in the Kavenaugh hearings.   Well, they had a good example to learn by with our insulter-in-chief.


Your story is a fictional fantasy which nobody still alive was part of. You've fondly
remembered stories of Tip O'Neal and the Gipper. Tip O'Neal hated Ronald Reagan
and he fought him on everything. Reagan would put together a plan and Tip would
publicly announce that it was dead on arrival before he even read it.

My Dad is 80 years old and he was 5 years old when Truman became president.
Who is this magic person who fondly remembers how Truman treated people
during committee hearings? 

Trump said about Carly "just look at her" He inferred that she was ugly. He
didn't directly say it. However, he has been plenty rude, plenty of times to
plenty of people. The Dem's have been rude for decades.

Biden said that Romney was going to put black people back in chains.
The GOP is going to make Grandma eat dog food.
The GOP wants you to breath dirty air and drink dirty water.
The Republicans want to kill your kids
Trumps war on children, women, _________ name of other group here.
The Republicans are racists, homophobes, sexist, blah, blah, blah
blah ti blah ti blah.

All of those things are worse than Trump inferring that somebody is
ugly, Marco Rubio is short, Joe Biden is sleepy, Jeb has no energy etc.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on September 22, 2020, 12:01:54 PM
...We're now in an era whereby many are saying that the Democrats deserve the treatment that they are getting because they behaved so poorly in the Kavenaugh hearings.   Well, they had a good example to learn by with our insulter-in-chief.

I get that you don't like Trump. Cool.

But excusing the Democrat's heinous treatment of an outstanding person of merit and standard, and the vile attempt to destroy his life, character and career because of Trump is simply BS.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: msmob on September 22, 2020, 12:05:28 PM

But excusing the Democrat's heinous treatment of an outstanding person of merit and standard, and the vile attempt to destroy his life, character and career because of Trump is simply BS.

His 'qualities' were never properly investigated ..  The Senate saw to that ..

*I* have a feeling if they had ... you might not be so vocal

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 22, 2020, 12:20:09 PM
His 'qualities' were never properly investigated ..  The Senate saw to that ..

*I* have a feeling if they had ... you might not be so vocal

Kavanaugh is so squeaky clean the democrats had to make up accusations of events that never happened by a woman who couldn't remember anything about the events she was sure that happened from her high school days. She had no collaborating witness to the event or even told anyone. She could not prove one mi'nute detail. You have been wrong about everything, everything all the time. Why pray tell do you think this would be the first time you were actually correct?
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Confederate on September 22, 2020, 12:27:59 PM
Because the Electoral College system is a method to ensure representational democracy and he doesn't favor that.

He favors rule by the mob. So even though he's over there in the UK, it hurt his feelings.

Correct doesn't matter, feels matters.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 22, 2020, 01:09:27 PM

Why bother? Anyone fed solely by fake news can't possibly have any idea of actual events in places they're not in.


add: So I guess Romney just committed to backing the nomination. Why am I feeling more than a bit skeptical?

Maybe he's happy with 5 more minutes of fame. I doubt he'll be a YAY
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Confederate on September 22, 2020, 01:22:39 PM
Maybe he's happy with 5 more minutes of fame. I doubt he'll be a YAY

I was thinking the same thing.

Or maybe he will be a loyal Republican.

I won't hold my breath.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: jone on September 22, 2020, 01:50:51 PM
I get that you don't like Trump. Cool.

But excusing the Democrat's heinous treatment of an outstanding person of merit and standard, and the vile attempt to destroy his life, character and career because of Trump is simply BS.

I don't excuse the Democrats.  But neither do I excuse Trump.  Sauce for the goose....
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on September 22, 2020, 02:05:55 PM
I don't excuse the Democrats.  But neither do I excuse Trump.  Sauce for the goose....


Not really. How exactly did Kavanaugh deserved any of it again?
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: jone on September 22, 2020, 02:13:17 PM

Your story is a fictional fantasy which nobody still alive was part of. You've fondly
remembered stories of Tip O'Neal and the Gipper. Tip O'Neal hated Ronald Reagan
and he fought him on everything. Reagan would put together a plan and Tip would
publicly announce that it was dead on arrival before he even read it.

My Dad is 80 years old and he was 5 years old when Truman became president.
Who is this magic person who fondly remembers how Truman treated people
during committee hearings? 

Trump said about Carly "just look at her" He inferred that she was ugly. He
didn't directly say it. However, he has been plenty rude, plenty of times to
plenty of people. The Dem's have been rude for decades.

Biden said that Romney was going to put black people back in chains.
The GOP is going to make Grandma eat dog food.
The GOP wants you to breath dirty air and drink dirty water.
The Republicans want to kill your kids
Trumps war on children, women, _________ name of other group here.
The Republicans are racists, homophobes, sexist, blah, blah, blah
blah ti blah ti blah.

All of those things are worse than Trump inferring that somebody is
ugly, Marco Rubio is short, Joe Biden is sleepy, Jeb has no energy etc.

Geeze, Bill,

I find your evaluation of Truman to be specious.   I've read more than a couple of books on Truman and my observations about his personality were his claim to fame.   I submit to you David McCullough's 'Truman' if you still think I'm wrong.   That is actually the book I was paraphrasing from.   

http://www.google.com/books/edition/Truman/8fp1A2s6aQwC?hl=en&gbpv=1&printsec=frontcover

As for Tip and Ronnie, I don't disagree with you ... but then, I have never mentioned them before on this forum.  You might want to point me to where I have.   The absolute abandonment of the rules of etiquette did not happen then to the point that all lack of etiquette is what we now experience.   

You have a problem seeing how Democrats think.   And you infer that they came upon this egregious treatment of Kavanaugh without provocation.   Yet, you dismiss the Republican refusal to hear Merrick Garland's nomination as normal in the course of doing business.

This attitude that the Democrats are entirely wrong and the Republicans are entirely right simply stirs the pot.  We are a collegial group, here.   Aside from a couple of posters, we present both sides of a topic fairly well.   Let's think about that for awhile.

Let's face it.   Trump is no Reagan.  Reagan had a side to him that allowed him to win his point while at the same time commiserating with his opponent.  Trump lacks any such abilities.  He is, plain and simply, a bully.  And allowing him (even encouraging him) to continuously stomp on people and not expect retribution is not realistic.

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 22, 2020, 02:16:20 PM
Maybe he's happy with 5 more minutes of fame. I doubt he'll be a YAY

Romney is a Mormon and Mormons really stick together. He can do almost
anything wrong and it will be ignored or forgiven.

However, one thing in politics is that with Mormons is you have to be pro-life.
If Romney doesn't vote for a possible prolife justice when he could and then
things change and the Dem's install a baby killer, then Romney will have some
'splaining to do.

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 22, 2020, 02:30:16 PM

The Dem's are the problem. You blaming it on the GOP is laughable.

I'm with jone on this, a lot has to do with civility that has now been completely thrown out the window in one quantum leap into the abyss.

It's sorta like here a few weeks ago where all we could do is insult each other, no one could get their point across in that atmosphere. No thinking involved at all.

It seems all we want nowadays is more noise, take the gloves off and brawl.  This only makes us less productive as we're wildly spouting this and that as fast as possible, but nothing else.

Think of target shooting, one with a .22 and the other with a shotgun.  Both hit the target, but is that really the point?

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 22, 2020, 02:38:30 PM
Romney is a Mormon and Mormons really stick together. He can do almost
anything wrong and it will be ignored or forgiven.

However, one thing in politics is that with Mormons is you have to be pro-life.
If Romney doesn't vote for a possible prolife justice when he could and then
things change and the Dem's install a baby killer, then Romney will have some
'splaining to do.

Good point
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 22, 2020, 02:45:40 PM
Geeze, Bill,

I find your evaluation of Truman to be specious.   I've read more than a couple of books on Truman and my observations about his personality were his claim to fame.   I submit to you David McCullough's 'Truman' if you still think I'm wrong.   That is actually the book I was paraphrasing from.   

http://www.google.com/books/edition/Truman/8fp1A2s6aQwC?hl=en&gbpv=1&printsec=frontcover

As for Tip and Ronnie, I don't disagree with you ... but then, I have never mentioned them before on this forum.  You might want to point me to where I have.   

Jone, I apologize
I think that it was Gator who brought up Tip and Ronnie, (but could be wrong there too).

Regarding the biography
I will have to study it and I spoke without information.


And you infer that they came upon this egregious treatment of Kavanaugh without provocation.   Yet, you dismiss the Republican refusal to hear Merrick Garland's nomination as normal in the course of doing business.

The Dem's spent three years investigating Kavanaugh the first time he was appointed
to the court back in 2003 and they drug him through it till 2006. The Dem's were
screwing with nominees far before anyone ever thought of a President Trump or
a Justice Merrick Garland.

Yet, you dismiss the Republican refusal to hear Merrick Garland's nomination as
normal in the course of doing business.

It has been for the Democrats since the 1980's
How many Justices did Ronald Reagan nominate that never made it through?
How about George HW? How about George W?

Now go name how many liberal supreme court nominations experienced the
same fate?


Clinton nominated Ruth Bader Ginsburg on June 15, 1993,
and she was confirmed on August 3, 1993

Clinton nominated Stephen Breyer on May 13, 1994,
and he was confirmed on July 29, 1994

Obama nominated Sonia Sotomayor on June 1, 2009,
Sotomayor was confirmed on August 6, 2009

Obama nominated Kagan Elena Kagan on May 10, 2010
she was confirmed August 5, 2010.

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 22, 2020, 02:48:39 PM
I'm with jone on this, a lot has to do with civility that has now been completely thrown out the window in one quantum leap into the abyss.

It's sorta like here a few weeks ago where all we could do is insult each other, no one could get their point across in that atmosphere. No thinking involved at all.

It seems all we want nowadays is more noise, take the gloves off and brawl.  This only makes us less productive as we're wildly spouting this and that as fast as possible, but nothing else.

Think of target shooting, one with a .22 and the other with a shotgun.  Both hit the target, but is that really the point?

The Dem's threw out civility in the early 1980's. The GOP jettisoned it in 2016.
The Dem's can dish it out but they can't take it. The GOP waited far too long to
start fighting back.

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on September 22, 2020, 02:49:15 PM
Unless something drastic comes up between now and the weekend, Amy Coney Barrett is Predictit.org's odds-on favorite.


Report said her camp was very disappointed she was passed up in favor of Kavanaugh the last time.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Confederate on September 22, 2020, 02:55:12 PM
I don't excuse the Democrats.  But neither do I excuse Trump.  Sauce for the goose....

I support Trump in that he's the lesser of two evils. I hope.

There are days I believe he's been drugged. His medical exam indicated he takes Ambien. From reading the indications that medication causes confusion, etc.

He should have at times been more Presidential. IMO.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 22, 2020, 02:59:18 PM

Isn't that silly? Blah, blah

I wasn't aware this had to be a partisan issue when I commented.     

In any event.  my view is an as follows.   If said semi-colonies such as guam, American Samoa, PR, and Virgin Islands would like to be states, I'd be in favor of that.  Currently that isn't the case, as perhaps the nations are feeling just fine with the current situation.  If a day comes where US financial resources are more scarce, and we aren't dumping money into these territories, they would have less incentive to permit affiliation with the US.  I wonder how the US would react to that.  I hope these thoughts don't also offend you. 

Fathertime! 
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 22, 2020, 03:03:17 PM
The Dem's through out civility in the early 1980's. The GOP jettisoned it in 2016.
The Dem's can dish it out but they can't take it. The GOP waited far too long to
start fighting back.

You seem to be doing a good job proving my point 2tall...
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 22, 2020, 04:34:09 PM
You seem to be doing a good job proving my point 2tall...

I meant to write "threw out civility" instead of though out civility.

I don't think we disagree too much on this, except how to move
going forward. If the Dem's wanted to act civil, I would be all for
the GOP doing the same.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on September 22, 2020, 04:35:56 PM

Your story is a fictional fantasy which nobody still alive was part of. You've fondly
remembered stories of Tip O'Neal and the Gipper. Tip O'Neal hated Ronald Reagan
and he fought him on everything. Reagan would put together a plan and Tip would
publicly announce that it was dead on arrival before he even read it.

It was I who frequently posted about how Tip and Ronnie managed to work together. 

I don't believe Tip actually hated Ronnie.  They shared many a cocktail together, and  then the next day go to war over political differences.  Yet, they almost always found a middle ground, and that is how our two-party system is suppose to work.   

Jone spoke of Trump's insults.  Tip insulted Reagan frequently, once calling him "the most ignorant man who had ever occupied the White House."   

This is covered in a book by MSNBC's Chris Matthews, entitled "Tip and the Gipper:  When Politics Worked."  Matthews wrote the book in 2013 to contrast the two with Obama and Boehner.  Here is Matthews'  interesting video about the two statesmen. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oraEdmIqysQ

Tip said this about Ronnie, and it seemingly applies today to Biden. :D

Quote
  “He only works three to three-and-a-half hours a day. He doesn’t do his homework. He doesn’t read his briefing papers. It’s sinful that this man is president of the United States.” 

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on September 22, 2020, 05:20:32 PM
Remember him telling Carly Fiorina that she was too ugly to be president?   

I recall Trump criticizing her sour facial expression.    Who wants a gloomy President?!   


Quote
We're now in an era whereby many are saying that the Democrats deserve the treatment that they are getting because they behaved so poorly in the Kavenaugh hearings. 


If you look at just the small box of  Kavenaugh and RBG's successor,  there is some Republican hypocrisy.  Yet, there is far more than this small box.   

Here is what you are ignoring - this acrimony had its origins years earlier in Obama's tenure.  The Dems have been bashing the country club Repubs for a long time.  And when Trump was elected, they resorted to some dishonest tactics.  As just one example, think about your lying and leaking Adam Schiff.  And what did Repubs do?  Those such as Sessions rolled over and let it happen.  Maybe Schiff should not have help concoct a hoax and instead have busied the committee with more pressing intelligence issues such as the IC's alarms about COVID. 

It started earlier than the REussian hoax.  Do your recall how Trump wanted to negotiate immigration reforms in the spirit of resolving a lingering issue?   Trump met with the Dems to reach a deal friendly to everyone, but Dick Durbin torpedoes it by outing his "shithole country" remark, as part of the Dem strategy not to solve immigration but make Trump look like a racist. 

Next is Nancy.  But let's stop here.     

Quote
Well, they had a good example to learn by with our insulter-in-chief.

Example to learn?  In their quest for power, the Dems already knew infinitely more about dirty tricks, and they used many of them to try and oust the novice politician Trump. 

Jone, I know you like congeniality.  All of us would prefer such.  However, one side is not very congenial.  Given all that you have said, I suggest you write-in a vote for Jeff Sessions. 
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Confederate on September 22, 2020, 06:54:48 PM
I recall Trump criticizing her sour facial expression.    Who wants a gloomy President?!   

 

If you look at just the small box of  Kavenaugh and RBG's successor,  there is some Republican hypocrisy.  Yet, there is far more than this small box.   

Here is what you are ignoring - this acrimony had its origins years earlier in Obama's tenure.  The Dems have been bashing the country club Repubs for a long time.  And when Trump was elected, they resorted to some dishonest tactics.  As just one example, think about your lying and leaking Adam Schiff.  And what did Repubs do?  Those such as Sessions rolled over and let it happen.  Maybe Schiff should not have help concoct a hoax and instead have busied the committee with more pressing intelligence issues such as the IC's alarms about COVID. 

It started earlier than the REussian hoax.  Do your recall how Trump wanted to negotiate immigration reforms in the spirit of resolving a lingering issue?   Trump met with the Dems to reach a deal friendly to everyone, but Dick Durbin torpedoes it by outing his "shithole country" remark, as part of the Dem strategy not to solve immigration but make Trump look like a racist. 

Next is Nancy.  But let's stop here.     

Example to learn?  In their quest for power, the Dems already knew infinitely more about dirty tricks, and they used many of them to try and oust the novice politician Trump. 

Jone, I know you like congeniality.  All of us would prefer such.  However, one side is not very congenial.  Given all that you have said, I suggest you write-in a vote for Jeff Sessions.

What you're saying here is likely all true. However I think it was the hardline attitude of Trump adviser Stephen Miller who stopped the immigration deal from happening.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 22, 2020, 07:09:25 PM
In a brilliant chess move Trump nominates Biden as SC justice. Republicans will soon vote to approve. Kamala, worried about losing her opportunity to become VP, said she now believes Tara Reade. Democrats are forced to bring out the women that accused Biden of sexual assault so they can stall the nomination by calling for thorough investigations like they did Kavanaugh. The Democrats strategy is by preventing Joe from becoming an SC justice, Joe retains the opportunity to become POTUS. In an interview when asked about his nomination to the SC, Biden said "C'mon man! You know the thing."

http://babylonbee.com/news/genius-trump-nominates-joe-biden-to-supreme-court
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 22, 2020, 07:50:04 PM
 
Here is what you are ignoring - this acrimony had its origins years earlier in Obama's tenure.  The Dems have been bashing the country club Repubs for a long time.   
So it was the democrats bashing the snowflake republicans that got conservatives all knotted up in the underpants.   Possible, but it was During obozo's term it was the republicans that nullified him from getting his pick through.  That is the type of event that creates acrimony and retaliation.  I'm sure there will be retaliation for the hypocrisy of the republican senators this time around too.  That is what makes us so 'exceptional'.

Fathertime!   
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: jone on September 22, 2020, 07:57:54 PM
Funniest samn thing:

Democrats are claiming Republicans have all turned 180 degrees.  What they fail to acknowledge is that they have done exacrly the same thing.

That is the ultimate hypocrisy.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 22, 2020, 08:01:30 PM

Democrats are claiming Republicans have all turned 180 degrees.  What they fail to acknowledge is that they have done exacrly the same thing.
and republicans have turned 180 degrees
...and in both cases the democrats are getting the raw end of the deal...so they have very good reason to squawk. 

Fathertime!   
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: tfcrew on September 23, 2020, 04:48:20 AM
.... was During obozo's term it was the republicans that nullified him from getting his pick through.   
"Obozo"? Seriously? (http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/Smileys/DarkB/cheesy.gif)  So the GPO senate was supposed to consent to a SC justice they really didn't want?
Gee...I think this is called politics.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: msmob on September 23, 2020, 04:52:56 AM
"Obozo"? Seriously? (http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/Smileys/DarkB/cheesy.gif)  So the GPO senate was supposed to consent to a SC justice they really didn't want?
Gee...I think this is called politics.

Exactly, such appointments shouldn't be political appointees, at all

The US could learn a lot from the UK .. 

However, our 'govt' .. having been found to be law-breakers..seeks to go down the US path ...  :wallbash:

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on September 23, 2020, 09:12:33 AM

The US could learn a lot from the UK .. 


The UK has done a superb job declining from the World's Top Power 100 years ago to barely making the Top 10 today. 

And before that, how did it go in 1776? 

 
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on September 23, 2020, 09:21:35 AM
Funniest samn thing:

Democrats are claiming Republicans have all turned 180 degrees.  What they fail to acknowledge is that they have done exacrly the same thing.

That is the ultimate hypocrisy.

Good point.   My point remains that the justice appointment conflict is just one small symptom of something much bigger, something very damaging to our democratic traditions.       

The Dems have promised "retaliation."   Jone, who will behave better with majority rule in 2021, Dems or Repubs?

I prefer split government in 2021, but that requires our elected officials to behave as statesmen. 
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: ML on September 23, 2020, 09:50:58 AM
Many Dems are saying that if and when they control both Houses of Congress, they will increase the number of SC Justices and then install 'their kind' of Justices.

- - - - - - - -

The Constitution places the power to determine the number of Justices in the hands of Congress. The first Judiciary Act, passed in 1789, set the number of Justices at six, one Chief Justice and five Associates. Over the years Congress has passed various acts to change this number, fluctuating from a low of five to a high of ten. The Judiciary Act of 1869 fixed the number of Justices at nine and no subsequent change to the number of Justices has occurred.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/about/faq_general.aspx

But exactly how does Congress do this ?
Must it pass both Houses by simple majority vote ?
President cannot veto this ?
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 23, 2020, 10:16:29 AM
Many Dems are saying that if and when they control both Houses of Congress, they will increase the number of SC Justices and then install 'their kind' of Justices.

- - - - - - - -

The Constitution places the power to determine the number of Justices in the hands of Congress. The first Judiciary Act, passed in 1789, set the number of Justices at six, one Chief Justice and five Associates. Over the years Congress has passed various acts to change this number, fluctuating from a low of five to a high of ten. The Judiciary Act of 1869 fixed the number of Justices at nine and no subsequent change to the number of Justices has occurred.

http://www.supremecourt.gov/about/faq_general.aspx

But exactly how does Congress do this ?
Must it pass both Houses by simple majority vote ?
President cannot veto this ?

Because the Constitution is involved, I hope much more than a simple majority is needed to change the number of justices. Link below says a President did veto a Judicial Act.

http://tinyurl.com/yxn8832s


I'm sure the Democrats are exploring all options. If they take the Senate, and Presidency this November, they may attempt to change the number of Supreme Court justices from 9 to 59 giving Biden 50 new appointees.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 23, 2020, 02:49:17 PM


I'm sure the Democrats are exploring all options. If they take the Senate, and Presidency this November, they may attempt to change the number of Supreme Court justices from 9 to 59 giving Biden 50 new appointees.
If the democrats can change the number lawfully than I will be all for it (Assuming Trump rams his pick through before the new senate is in place).  They have good reason to do everything up to going nuclear in response to the republicans senator's naked hypocrisy, and blatant partisanship.    That said, I wouldn't expect the dems to sweep into power in all 3 branches.  If they did, it would be quite an indictment by the american people on the direction trump has been leading the nation. 
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: tfcrew on September 23, 2020, 05:03:04 PM
~~~~~~~~~~Blame greedy Reidy~~~~~~~~~~~~~(http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/afb092120dAPC20200921034623.jpg)
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 23, 2020, 07:34:55 PM
CNN conducted a poll. Says 59% of the people want the next president to nominate the SC justice. 45% of the people in the poll said they are independent or a third party voter. I seriously doubt 45% of the people out there are close to being independent voters. How much did CNN pay for that poll? How many polls did they conduct before getting one they'd want to report on?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/poll-59-percent-think-president-elected-in-november-should-name-next-supreme-court-justice/ar-BB19m6a1?ocid=spartan-ntp-feeds
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: ML on September 23, 2020, 08:55:46 PM
Like others, I keep getting letters from Melania and Ivanka, as well as Donald.

And Donald has called me several times.

I always just hang up when he says: "I'm Donald . . . ." and I did so again this evening.

But then I immediately thought . . . maybe he was calling be about the Supreme Court vacancy !!
Too late, and I didn't have his private phone number to call him back.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 23, 2020, 11:24:02 PM
ML

(202) 456-1111 ext 666

:)
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 23, 2020, 11:38:56 PM
Like others, I keep getting letters from Melania and Ivanka, as well as Donald.


My wife walks in my room the other day and told me I got a letter from Melania. That part is true. I thought Melania had the hots for me but after opening the letter I learned she was the same as 99% of the women out there, a gold digger asking if I can send money with the excuse her husband family is in need. After praying for guidance and to remove my lustful thoughts, I immediately went to the RWD forum to read the ten commandments in the link below. Commandment #1 saved my money but I tried #4 and failed at #6.

http://www.russianwomendiscussion.com/index.php?topic=1740.0
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 24, 2020, 05:59:24 AM
CNN conducted a poll. Says 59% of the people want the next president to nominate the SC justice. 45% of the people in the poll said they are independent or a third party voter. I seriously doubt 45% of the people out there are close to being independent voters. How much did CNN pay for that poll? How many polls did they conduct before getting one they'd want to report on?

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/poll-59-percent-think-president-elected-in-november-should-name-next-supreme-court-justice/ar-BB19m6a1?ocid=spartan-ntp-feeds
I would say most people would prefer trump wait until after the election to install the next SC justice.  It seems he won't do that though, he is going to cram that pick in immediately and change the makeup of the court.  When trump sees an opening like this he takes full advantage if permitted.

  If Trump isn't reelected, all the democrats can do is unwind what policies they can of his, just as he unwound what he could of obozo's.    On the world stage we must look like directionless idiots.  How will other nations be able to trust any agreement with us, when the next president will unilaterally claim, 'circumstances changed' and we no longer abide by prior agreements.  When that sort of thing has happened to me personally in business, it can create a near permanent distrust.  We (The US) are not the only game in town though, nations can choose to bypass us. 

Fathertime!     
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 24, 2020, 06:27:18 AM
Trump needs to 'stack' the Supreme Court before the election is decided to try and bolster his chances if he actually loses the election.  He'll fight tooth and nail as announced.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIG9xPmg_FU

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 24, 2020, 06:57:46 AM
Democrats worry Feinstein can’t handle Supreme Court battle
Colleagues fear the oldest senator may struggle to lead Democrats on the Judiciary Committee.

Look at the friendly face behind her the Democrats always looking
to reach across the Isle. 
(http://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Ftse4.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DOIP.Bwxu-tcizK4b8HK-iGHXowHaFj%26pid%3DApi&f=1)

Feinstein, the oldest member of the Senate, is widely respected by senators in both
parties, but she has noticeably slowed in recent years. Interviews with more than a
dozen Democratic senators and aides show widespread concern over whether the
California Democrat is capable of leading the aggressive effort Democrats need
against whoever President Donald Trump picks to replace the late Justice Ruth
Bader Ginsburg.

And Feinstein's genteel demeanor, which seems like it belongs to a bygone Senate
era, can lead to trouble with an increasingly hard-line Democratic base uninterested
in collegiality or bipartisan platitudes.

http://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/23/dianne-feinstein-supreme-court-battle-420357

I think that the story says it all. The Democrats will lead an aggressive fight
against whoever Trump picks and the Dem's are uninterested in collegiality or
bipartisan platitudes.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 24, 2020, 06:58:31 AM
Trump needs to 'stack' the Supreme Court before the election is decided to try and bolster his chances if he actually loses the election.  He'll fight tooth and nail as announced.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIG9xPmg_FU

Needs to "stack"? LOL

He has a duty to the constitution to nominate a candidate. He swore an oath to protect and defend the constitution. What he needs is to have the brightest constitutional minds in place for an upcoming election that in all likelihood is going to be contested. Your statement would indicate you have a bigger problem with the constitution rather than President Trump, BC?
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: jone on September 24, 2020, 07:28:10 AM
Trump needs to 'stack' the Supreme Court before the election is decided to try and bolster his chances if he actually loses the election.  He'll fight tooth and nail as announced.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIG9xPmg_FU

I guess I can't follow your line of thinking.   Your take is that Trump will try and do an illegal taking of the election?   That is ludicrous even by the Democrats standards.   I think it is just more gasoline for the flames.   And, BC, you fall right into the middle of the conflagration.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 24, 2020, 07:33:44 AM
Let's look at a little history

History Is on the Side of Republicans Filling a Supreme Court Vacancy in 2020
Choosing not to fill a vacancy would be a historically unprecedented act of unilateral disarmament. It has never happened
http://www.nationalreview.com/2020/08/history-is-on-the-side-of-republicans-filling-a-supreme-court-vacancy-in-2020/

Who's violating norms these days?
When a vacancy occurs in a presidential year and the opposition party has a
majority in the Senate, the president can nominate, but the nominee is almost
never confirmed. There have been 10 such vacancies in the history of the republic.
Presidents made pre-Election Day nominations in six cases, but only one nominee
was confirmed before the election. That was in 1888.

Presidents whose parties had Senate majorities selected nominees in election years
19 times, and 17 of those nominees were confirmed.
The two rejections came
together in 1968, when President Lyndon Johnson’s nominee for chief justice,
Abe Fortas, and his nominee to replace Fortas as associate justice were blocked
by a bipartisan filibuster.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/whos-violating-norms-these-days
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 24, 2020, 07:42:28 AM
Trump needs to 'stack' the Supreme Court before the election is decided to try and bolster his chances if he actually loses the election.  He'll fight tooth and nail as announced.

Projecting a bit are we? It's the Democrats who said that they will add seats
to the Supreme court, not the Republicans. If you look at article two of the
constitution you will find that the President appoints Justices to the court
with advice and consent of the Senate. 

The Supreme court has had 9 seats since 1869. The Dem's didn't win
their elections so they want to pack the court if they ever win again.

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 24, 2020, 08:05:21 AM
 
Four years ago anti Trump media put out stories he won't quietly go away if he loses the election and that he'll try something to take it. I see nothing has changed with them and their faithful readers.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on September 24, 2020, 08:24:51 AM
Four years ago anti Trump media put out stories he won't quietly go away if he loses the election and that he'll try something to take it. I see nothing has changed with them and their faithful readers.

Let's not kid ourselves believing somehow this coming election is not going to get messy. We've all laid witness to our recent daily events all designed to do one thing - force mail-in voting. The Democrats already won this election.

Why else, 40+ days before election day, you never see Biden/Harris out there campaigning? What you have is a highly edited TV ads. Heck, Harris won't even conduct an open press conference. Biden holds only orchestrated 'townhall' meetings with 10 cars, a couple of teleprompter, 6 paid *random* folks asking *random* questions and a couple of cue cards and an accompanying press group to give raving reviews of another powerful night for Joe Biden even if it only happens 3-4 days/week at the most.

This election has already been decided. Best Trump and the Senate get this nominee in and confirmed before the election if possible. Lame Duck period could create a whole new mess of obstruction.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 24, 2020, 08:31:04 AM
This election has already been decided.


Joe is still nervous. He's hired hundreds of attorneys as part of a backup plan yet the media makes it sound like Trump is the guy that won't quietly go away. Hopefully Trump wins convincingly like last election to motivate Biden to quietly go away.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on September 24, 2020, 10:45:08 AM
Joe is still nervous. He's hired hundreds of attorneys as part of a backup plan yet the media makes it sound like Trump is the guy that won't quietly go away. Hopefully Trump wins convincingly like last election to motivate Biden to quietly go away.

Dunno BillyB, Sleepy Joe is unofficially half-dead so I doubt he is capable of any type of nerve sensation. He'll be our POTUS, batteries NIC.

Funny we'll be doing this (http://www.reuters.com/article/us-belarus-election-sanctions-exclusive/exclusive-u-s-uk-canada-plan-sanctions-on-belarusians-perhaps-friday-idUSKCN26F2A5) for the same act of cronyism the Democrats are doing here. I wonder if anyone will be 'sanctioning' us...
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Confederate on September 24, 2020, 10:52:18 AM
"Hopefully Trump wins convincingly".
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 24, 2020, 01:08:12 PM
"Hopefully Trump wins convincingly".
If polls are correct this time around, biden is up nationally by about 8 points it would seem.  I have a hard time believing that.  Nevertheless, if trump wins it is likely it won't be by much.  What if biden actually does win convincingly on election night?   Will the conservatives rebel and claim our election is fraudulent?  Should venezuela send an armada over to threaten us and enforce an embargo? 

Fathertime! 
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 25, 2020, 07:49:38 AM
Why else, 40+ days before election day, you never see Biden/Harris out there campaigning?
 What you have is a highly edited TV ads. Heck, Harris won't even conduct an open press conference. Biden holds only orchestrated 'townhall' meetings with 10 cars, a couple of teleprompter, 6 paid *random* folks asking *random* questions and a couple of cue cards and an accompanying press group to give raving reviews of another powerful night for Joe Biden even if it only happens 3-4 days/week at the most.

I think that they are spending the entire time several hours per day to
get Biden ready for a debate where he doesn't call anybody a lying dog
soldier pony or crap himself then rub through his hair plugs.

If they can't get him though a debate then they have to pull out and
it will be difficult for them to claim he's a high functioning idiot that
can have his staff run the country. If they get him through one debate
they can claim he won, the press will agree and he can say no more
debates because Trump is a bad orange man.

They only have 40 days to go and they are going to come up with
something to explain his absence and inability to go out and campaign.

Maybe claim that he has been exposed to covid or something/anything
so that he can't leave his basement.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 25, 2020, 08:01:55 AM
The problems with the article below is that it takes a constitutional amendment to
change Supreme Court Justice terms. It's not unusual that a Dem doesn't know that.
Democrats prepare bill limiting U.S. Supreme Court justice terms to 18 years
http://ca.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-termlimits-idUSKCN26F3L3

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 25, 2020, 08:35:00 AM
The problems with the article below is that it takes a constitutional amendment to
change Supreme Court Justice terms. It's not unusual that a Dem doesn't know that.
Democrats prepare bill limiting U.S. Supreme Court justice terms to 18 years
http://ca.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-termlimits-idUSKCN26F3L3

Sounds like a sore loser reaction to Trump being able to pick a 3rd Supreme court justice in his first term.

The new bill, seen by Reuters, would allow every president to nominate two justices per four-year term and comes amid heightened political tensions as Republican President Donald Trump prepares to announce his third pick for the Supreme Court after the death on Sept. 18 of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, with just 40 days to go until the Nov. 3 election.

Yeah, the Republicans and Trump are quickly going to agree to that before he nominates his 3rd pick.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 25, 2020, 09:30:07 AM
The problems with the article below is that it takes a constitutional amendment to
change Supreme Court Justice terms.

Sure?
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 25, 2020, 03:36:30 PM
I think that they are spending the entire time several hours per day to
get Biden ready for a debate where he doesn't call anybody a lying dog
soldier pony or crap himself then rub through his hair plugs.

If they can't get him though a debate then they have to pull out and
it will be difficult for them to claim he's a high functioning idiot that
can have his staff run the country. If they get him through one debate
they can claim he won, the press will agree and he can say no more
debates because Trump is a bad orange man.
 
Lets remember this assessment of the potential future president, so when/if he is in charge we can consider the USA's policies/sanctions/etc still a joke. 

Fathertime! 
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 25, 2020, 04:04:58 PM
Sure?

Yes, because the founders/writers of the constitution wrote about what they
meant and why they wrote what they wrote. They put together a set of documents
called the federalist papers. These papers are available for regular people who
are not lefty's to read. The particular federalist paper that clarifies the constitution
on this is called Federalist #78

Alexander Hamilton was so incredibly adamant about this lifetime tenure system
that he wrote:

“The inflexible and uniform adherence to the rights of the Constitution, and of
individuals which we perceive to be indispensable in the courts of justice, can
certainly not be expected from judges who hold their offices by a temporary
commission.”

By removing the concerns that come with reelection, judges can make their own
decisions independent from the desires of either special interest groups or the
masses.

http://guides.loc.gov/federalist-papers/full-text

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 25, 2020, 04:13:18 PM

 
By removing the concerns that come with reelection, judges can make their own
decisions independent from the desires of either special interest groups or the
masses.
 
..does not apply, as they would be in place for 18 years and not up for reelection.

 
People's life expectancy back in the 1700's was probably about 40 years old so they usually wouldn't serve that long...nowadays we have justices serving into their 90's.  It may not make sense nowadays have somebody guaranteed to serve a 40 year term or more. 

Fathertime! 
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: Confederate on September 25, 2020, 05:54:28 PM
9th Circuit Court overrules RBG death.

http://babylonbee.com/news/ninth-circuit-court-overturns-death-of-ruth-bader-ginsburg
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 25, 2020, 10:45:56 PM
Yes, because the founders/writers of the constitution wrote about what they
meant and why they wrote what they wrote. They put together a set of documents
called the federalist papers. These papers are available for regular people who
are not lefty's to read. The particular federalist paper that clarifies the constitution
on this is called Federalist #78

Hamilton didn't want a Bill of Rights either, but we got them.  The Federalist Papers remain a good insight into the minds of a few of the founders of our Constitution.  It is a great reference but remains a limited, and contextual.

Did the Constitution provide for term limits for the reelection of the Executive?  Considering a president could be elected over and over it was certainly envisioned that judges in the judicial branch, playing the role of arbiter balancing powers of the other branches, would need to be of longer duration.  But is that necessarily true today with two term presidents?

These were very bright men with a grand design, but they could not foresee all the possibilities the future could bring forth.  Thus they left it open, they understood the 'keep it simple stupid' principle.  Their work was based on the presupposition that government would generally be working for the good of all and not the few.  This is certainly not the case today.

That is exactly why Congress was given the power to decide how to implement and even change the judicial branch.  It is all part of this grand experiment with the Constitution providing the ballast that keeps our ship from capsizing.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: tfcrew on September 26, 2020, 11:11:29 AM
Trump needs to 'stack' the Supreme Court before the election is decided to try and bolster his chances if he actually loses the election.  He'll fight tooth and nail as announced.


By stack I guess we mean ~pack~ Take a look at the real picture----
(http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/payn_c17689920200922120100.jpg)
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 26, 2020, 11:28:10 AM
Hamilton didn't want a Bill of Rights either, but we got them.  The Federalist Papers remain a good insight into the minds of a few of the founders of our Constitution.  It is a great reference but remains a limited, and contextual.

Let's back up and remember what you asked. You asked "Are you sure?" to which
I replied yes.

Liberals consider the Constitution as a living breathing document that they believe
changes and expands or contracts to fit their various desires. 

Conservatives believe in the genius of the founding fathers to build a limited government
and that the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution are what makes our country great.

The Federalist Papers were the explanation of how everything was supposed
to work and the thinking behind the Constitution. The Federalist papers have
been sited in countless Supreme Court cases and decisions. If you want to
read somebody who didn't like them then you can read Justice Souter's
opinions on siting them.

Now the poor liberals wanting to shape and change things can't accept
the constitution because it doesn't let them do whatever they want and
the Federalist papers make it impossible to twist words around to get
that they want. The Framers didn't leave it open like you suggest,
they purposely made it very, very difficult to change the constitution.

Did the Constitution provide for term limits for the reelection of the Executive?

No it didn't, so what did they do? They passed an amendment to the constitution
limiting how many terms a president can have, just like they need to do if they
want to limit Judges. 

Hamilton didn't want a Bill of Rights either, but we got them.

James Madison was both one of the Authors of the Federalist papers and author of
the Bill of Rights (Jefferson inspired the Bill of Rights). Hamilton argued that the
bill of rights didn't need to be enumerated in the Constitution, the states disagreed
so they added them as amendments. Your point is irrelevant to whether justices
terms can be limited by congress without an amendment.

I think you are shotgunning here. Trying to throw a bunch of stuff against the wall
to see if any of it sticks. None of your arguments really addresses the fact that Judges
are appointed for life (with good behavior) and a constitutional amendment is the
only way to change that.

Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 26, 2020, 11:56:08 AM
I think you are shotgunning here. Trying to throw a bunch of stuff against the wall
to see if any of it sticks. None of your arguments really addresses the fact that Judges
are appointed for life (with good behavior) and a constitutional amendment is the
only way to change that.

They would remain judges, just elsewhere.

Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: tfcrew on September 26, 2020, 02:21:26 PM
(http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/gv092620dBP20200926124510.jpg)
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 26, 2020, 02:29:02 PM



Trump nominates....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDSfMpuSck0&ab_channel=FoxNews (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDSfMpuSck0&ab_channel=FoxNews)
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 26, 2020, 02:54:14 PM
They would remain judges, just elsewhere.

Your statement while interesting doesn't change what the constitution says.

They tried this before with the Republican contract with America and legislative term
limits. It was slightly different because it was the States that enacted the laws and
the representative supposedly represented the people in those states but the
Supreme Court determined that States couldn't limit how many times a congressman
can run for reelection.

Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: tfcrew on September 26, 2020, 03:12:00 PM
(http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/mle200924c20200924031004.jpg)
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 26, 2020, 04:35:54 PM

The word on social media is Amy Coney Barrett may have adopted her two black kids from Haiti illegally and she should be investigated. We'll see if they use that as a stall tactic but if they can prove the kids were adopted illegally, will they make the judge give them up?
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 27, 2020, 06:33:36 AM
The word on social media is Amy Coney Barrett may have adopted her two black kids from Haiti illegally and she should be investigated. We'll see if they use that as a stall tactic but if they can prove the kids were adopted illegally, will they make the judge give them up?
Her positions on issues may not be that bad either from what I briefly read. 
  I don't think attacking the lady on the basis of personal life is the way to go.  She also has a child with down's syndrome.    None of this changes the fact that certain republican senators are hypocrites to be called out such as lindsay graham

Fathertime! 
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: ML on September 27, 2020, 07:52:18 AM
News shows like to have on Senator John Neely Kennedy from Louisiana because of his colorful talk.

Today he said:  Those who don't think Schumer would do the same thing if he were in control as Mitch
is doing now . . .  'probably peaked in high school'.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 27, 2020, 08:00:00 AM
Her positions on issues may not be that bad either from what I briefly read. 
  I don't think attacking the lady on the basis of personal life is the way to go.  She also has a child with down's syndrome.    None of this changes the fact that certain republican senators are hypocrites to be called out such as lindsay graham

Fathertime!

The left has repeatedly proved especially in these last 4 years if nothing is there, they'll make it up and proclaim it to be the truth. You know, the old Gobbels line, "if you repeat the lie long enough it becomes the truth". The left is following the Nazi playbook to the tee. Nothing is out of bounds or off limits. I expect they parade a few men and women that claim she raped them in jr. high school
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 27, 2020, 08:15:24 AM
FP

Trump 'n Co. doesn't use the same tactic to a vastly greater extent?
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 27, 2020, 08:17:11 AM
FP

Trump 'n Co. doesn't use the same tactic to a vastly greater extent?

Nope
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 27, 2020, 08:26:07 AM
yeah right.  The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so help us, Trump.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 27, 2020, 08:33:26 AM
yeah right.  The truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth so help us, Trump.

Please do give examples?
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on September 27, 2020, 09:29:20 AM

Trump 'n Co. doesn't use the same tactic to a vastly greater extent?

The key word is "repeated."  Many of Trump's misrepresentations are optimistic embellishments, maybe careless talk, and yet quickly forgotten by normal people.     

Contrast the significance if not depravity of one vs. another.

Specious charges repeated by the left for four years:   

    -  Trump is a racist. 
    -  Trump lost the election. 
    -  Trump colluded with Russia. 
    -  Trump is destroying democracy.
    -  Trump is another Hitler.

Questionable charges repeated by the left not for four years , but 6 months:

    -  Trump is killing hundreds of thousands of Americans



Questionable charges repeated by the right:   

    -  Democrats are socialists  (not for four years , but for 24 months after Bernie, AOC, et al grew in number and influence)
    -  Democrats want the black  minority to be dependent upon the Federal government (I say it is an unintended consequence of Democrat policies, not the Democrats' objective)
    -  Biden is mentally unfit to be President


Debatable charges repeated by the right for four years: 

    -  China  represents an existential threat to our prosperity.
    -  Iran is a security threat to peace in the Middle East

BC, I am sure you will have other examples.  Please begin with just the most significant.  In other words, don't mention the inaugural parade.   
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 27, 2020, 11:31:43 AM
The word on social media is Amy Coney Barrett may have adopted her two black kids from Haiti illegally and she should be investigated.

She adopted them because she was racist

Watch the Demmies now claim that she can't be a Supreme
because she has kids at home.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 27, 2020, 11:35:57 AM
Democrats don't know what to do.

It's my belief they will fight everything, tell their base that Amy Coney Barrett
is the devil and will force women to have abortions in back alleys with coat
hangers.

The Dem's will protest and burn stuff.

Here is an article that lays out the various strategies the Dem's are weighing.

Democrats debate whether to engage - or withdraw - in Supreme Court fight
http://www.chron.com/news/article/Democrats-debate-whether-to-engage-or-withdraw-15599222.php
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 27, 2020, 01:19:33 PM

My wife is thrilled with Trump's SC nominee. The most important thing right now for my wife is unborn babies lives matter.

Here's a photo of Trump sitting with the Judge and her family in the Oval office yesterday. I hope he told her kids that although their mom has been thoroughly vetted every time she got a new appointment that promoted her, be ready for the Democrats to put on a show in front of the cameras as if she's never been vetted and now accusing her of committing worse acts than the criminals she put behind bars.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 27, 2020, 01:57:38 PM
She adopted them because she was racist

Watch the Demmies now claim that she can't be a Supreme
because she has kids at home.

Democrats don't know what to do.

It's my belief they will fight everything, tell their base that Amy Coney Barrett
is the devil and will force women to have abortions in back alleys with coat
hangers.

The Dem's will protest and burn stuff.

Here is an article that lays out the various strategies the Dem's are weighing.

Democrats debate whether to engage - or withdraw - in Supreme Court fight
http://www.chron.com/news/article/Democrats-debate-whether-to-engage-or-withdraw-15599222.php
It is always a bit amusing to read the Tourette's syndrome like phony characterizations staunch conservative like yourself makes.   
I'd say the democrats should grill her necessarily on issues they may have a problem with, like they would any other candidate.  There likely is no reason to go personal with her in particular.    The act of certain republican senators is where the issue of hypocrisy lies, not with this particular lady.    Her addition will likely lean the supreme court more conservative for now, but that isn't the end of the world.  The democrats should do what they can procedurally and when they can later take further steps as necessary. 

Fathertime!   
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: tfcrew on September 27, 2020, 02:18:48 PM
Quote
Joe Biden and Kamala Harris 'Strongly Oppose' Donald Trump's Supreme Court Nominee Amy Coney Barrett
Gee ...what a surprise (http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/Smileys/DarkB/undecided.gif)
Quote
Joe Biden (http://people.com/tag/joe-biden/) and Sen. Kamala Harris (http://people.com/tag/kamala-harris/) do not support President Donald Trump (http://people.com/tag/donald-trump/)'s Supreme Court nominee, federal judge Amy Coney Barrett. (http://people.com/politics/amy-coney-barrett-everything-to-know/)
   Both Biden and Harris released statements on Saturday, voicing their opposition (http://joebiden.com/2020/09/26/the-u-s-supreme-court-statement-by-vice-president-joe-biden/#) and urging Congress to postpone any decisions on the seat until after the election.
   "Trump's hand-picked successor to Justice Ginsburg's seat makes it clear: they intend to destroy the Affordable Care Act & overturn Roe. This selection would move the court further right for a generation & harm millions of Americans," Harris, 55, tweeted. "I strongly oppose Judge Barrett's nomination."
   Biden, 77, echoed Harris' remarks. "Today, President Trump has nominated Judge Amy Coney Barrett as the successor to Justice Ginsburg’s seat. She has a written track record of disagreeing with the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision upholding the Affordable Care Act. She critiqued Chief Justice John Roberts’ majority opinion upholding the law in 2012," he said in a statement.
http://people.com/politics/joe-biden-kamala-harris-strongly-oppose-trump-supreme-court-nominee-amy-coney-barrett/
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 27, 2020, 05:59:57 PM

Bad news for Democrats.

Democrats on the Judiciary Committee have “no procedural silver bullet” to stop Ms Barrett’s nomination from proceeding to the Senate floor before election day, minority whip Richard Durbin has said.

The No 2 Senate Democrat, who also sits on the Judiciary panel, told ABC News’s George Stephanopoulos on Sunday that his party could "slow it down perhaps a matter of hours, maybe days at the most - but we can’t stop the outcome”.


http://news.yahoo.com/people-voting-now-biden-pleads-172440187.html
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 27, 2020, 06:59:55 PM
FP

Trump 'n Co. doesn't use the same tactic to a vastly greater extent?

Violent protests? Shouting down those they agree with? Attacking people leaving
the convention?

Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 27, 2020, 08:27:21 PM
Violent protests? Shouting down those they agree with? Attacking people leaving
the convention?

Rioting, murder, destruction of property, civil unrest
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: tfcrew on September 28, 2020, 07:47:36 AM
(http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/bg092820dAPC20200927064510.jpg)
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on September 28, 2020, 09:13:00 AM
Violent protests? Shouting down those they agree with? Attacking people leaving
the convention?


Rioting, murder, destruction of property, civil unrest

The tactics are more than these attacks on law and order.  Even more sinister is not passing  COVID stimulus/relief bills, thus purposefully creating more economic pain among many voters.   Even partial bills are denied by the Dems.   Voters in dire economic straits do not vote for incumbents. 
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: tfcrew on September 28, 2020, 09:35:40 AM

(http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/MC-ACB-extremist-web20200928012729.jpg)


(http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/afb092820dAPR20200928044509.jpg)
(http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/alg092720dAPC20200927034506.jpg)
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 28, 2020, 11:44:39 AM
I predicted it and sure enough it happened.

The word on social media is Amy Coney Barrett may have adopted her two black kids from Haiti illegally and she should be investigated. We'll see if they use that as a stall tactic but if they can prove the kids were adopted illegally, will they make the judge give them up?

She adopted them because she was racist


Amy Coney Barrett is a ‘white colonizer’
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8779469/Amy-Coney-Barrett-white-colonizer-adopting-two-black-children-Haiti-professor-says.html

http://nypost.com/2020/09/28/bu-professor-suggests-amy-coney-barrett-is-a-white-colonizer/


Trump Supreme Court pick Amy Coney Barrett faces 'White colonizer'
attacks, other criticism from left, media

http://www.foxnews.com/media/trump-supreme-court-amy-coney-barrett-colonizer-left-media-attacks



Scalia: Dems will use Obamacare as 'red herring' in attacking SCOTUS pick Barrett
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/labor-sec-scalia-dems-will-use-obamacare-as-red-herring-in-attacking-scotus-pick-barrett


Newsweek had to run a correction after incorrectly reporting that Barrett was affiliated
with the same group that inspired "The Handmaid’s Tale," the popular Amazon series
based on the novel by Margaret Atwood depicting a fictional society that forces the few
remaining fertile women into sexual servitude.

How Charismatic Catholic Groups Like Amy Coney Barrett's People of Praise Inspired 'The Handmaid's Tale'
http://www.newsweek.com/amy-coney-barrett-people-praise-group-inspired-handmaids-tale-1533293


Anti-Catholic attacks on Amy Coney Barrett will help get Trump
re-elected

When the left attacks a conservative Catholic woman in this way, it only affirms
what Trump has been selling to his supporters: that Democrats are out to get them.
http://chicago.suntimes.com/2020/9/23/21452665/amy-coney-barrett-supreme-court-nominee-anti-catholic-bias

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on September 28, 2020, 01:37:51 PM
I've predicted that the Dem's are going to fight this nomination to the end.
I'm also predicting that the Dem's are going to fight dirty.


Feinstein focus on Barrett’s Catholic faith backfired once, now Biden backers are nervous
http://www.sfchronicle.com/politics/article/Feinstein-focus-on-Amy-Coney-Barrett-s-Catholic-15599868.php


Supreme Court Will Make 'Being a Woman' a Pre-Existing Condition, Nancy Pelosi Says

Pelosi warned Americans that should Trump and Republicans rush Barrett onto the court, seniors will be forced to leave nursing homes; college-age children will be kicked off health insurance plans; and women will be forced to return to a time when simply "being a woman" made it obscenely difficult to receive adequate health services.

"What I am concerned about is anyone that President Trump would have appointed was there to undo the Affordable Care Act. That is why he was in such a hurry, so he could have someone in place for the oral arguments, which begin November 10.

http://www.newsweek.com/supreme-court-will-make-being-woman-pre-existing-condition-nancy-pelosi-says-1534495
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: msmob on September 28, 2020, 05:45:57 PM
I predicted it and sure enough it happened.

Failing to notice that your President's actions in rushing through a Conservative, pro-abortion candidate to replace a liberal, abortion allowed, with sensible criteria, candidate, isn't helping at the polls ..

'Trampu' now only 'ahead' in one swing state that he flipped in '16

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/sep/28/us-election-polls-tracker-who-is-leading-in-the-swing-states

Boy, are these head to head debates going to be important..


Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on September 28, 2020, 06:42:42 PM
Where do these idiots find the limits of their decency? I cannot believe the appalling nature of these Democrats and their ilks and followers. Ibram  Kendi said this about Amy Barrett’s adoption of the two Haitian kids she have.

~ "Some White colonizers 'adopted' Black children. They 'civilized' these 'savage' children in the 'superior' ways of White people, while using them as props in their lifelong pictures of denial, while cutting the biological parents of these children out of the picture of humanity," ~

Unbelievable!
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 28, 2020, 07:41:28 PM
Where do these idiots find the limits of their decency? I cannot believe the appalling nature of these Democrats and their ilks and followers. Ibram  Kendi said this about Amy Barrett’s adoption of the two Haitian kids she have.

~ "Some White colonizers 'adopted' Black children. They 'civilized' these 'savage' children in the 'superior' ways of White people, while using them as props in their lifelong pictures of denial, while cutting the biological parents of these children out of the picture of humanity," ~

Unbelievable!
you are a victim of fake news.  lets see if I can help you with the complete quote:

Kendi wrote “Some White colonizers ‘adopted’ Black children. They ‘civilized’ these ‘savage’ children in the ‘superior’ ways of White people, while using them as props in their lifelong pictures of denial, while cutting the biological parents of these children out of the picture of humanity.” He continued, “And whether this is Barrett or not is not the point. It is a belief too many White people have: if they have or adopt a child of color, then they can't be racist.” He added, “I’m challenging the idea that White parents of kids of color are inherently 'not racist' and the bots completely change what I’m saying to “White parents of kids of color are inherently racist.” These live and fake bots are good at their propaganda. Let’s not argue with them.”

Now that the quote is correct, I don't see it as productive to make this sort of statement at this time.   This particular lady doesn't seem to be that bad, so I wouldn't want to see her made out to be a racist when she gets her due grilling. 

This particular commentator Ibram X Kendi isn't of much relevance but his quote will be misused, misquoted, and used as a written screed to mischaracterize the preponderance of people other than conservatives.  I hear his view, and there are parts of it that are sensible yet in the context of this woman they don't appear to apply.

Fathertime!   
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 28, 2020, 08:33:49 PM
“I’m challenging the idea that White parents of kids of color are inherently 'not racist' and the bots completely change what I’m saying to “White parents of kids of color are inherently racist.”



He said bots are changing his words. What bots? Regardless, his challenging the idea that White parents of kids of color are inherently 'not racist' is bad enough. Here is his tweet thread.


http://twitter.com/DrIbram/status/1309918635738173440 (http://twitter.com/DrIbram/status/1309918635738173440)

Guys like him want to plant a seed in people's heads that white people's intention for adopting kids of another race may not be honorable. Judge Barrett deserves praise. If Dr Ibram doesn't want white people to adopt black people, he should call on blacks to adopt all the black kids. People who have no intention of adopting kids, spending money on them and helping them grow shouldn't be questioning the intentions of those who do adopt kids and sacrifice a lot. We'll see if Democratic Senators stoop to Dr. Ibram's level during the hearings. Looking at the photo attached, I don't see those kids suffering. If they were still living and starving in an orphanage in Haiti, would Dr. Ibram feel they are better off?
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 28, 2020, 08:49:47 PM

And the guy is a professor teaching at Boston University. My wife had left leaning professors that try to manipulate students minds to think the way they do. First day of class last quarter one of her teachers said "I hope nobody in this classroom is voting for F'ing Trump".
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on September 28, 2020, 08:56:33 PM
LMAO! I guess Angelina Jolie/Brad Pitt, Madonna, Steven Spielberg, Tom Cruise/Nicole Kidman, Kate Capshaw, Sandra Bollock, Charlize Theron et al are all white *racist* colonizers in denial, LMAO!


These are all Hollywood numbnuts! All these libs, especially idiots like Ibram, really are a bunch of morons.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on September 28, 2020, 10:42:09 PM

Uh oh. Democrats have discovered SC nominee Barrett has ties to the faith based group People of Praise. She will be hammered about this in the Senate hearings. At least she doesn't belong to the Church of Scientology.

http://www.thehour.com/news/article/Barrett-tied-to-faith-group-ex-members-say-15604825.php
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 29, 2020, 01:15:25 AM
She has already answered for that stating she could keep her religious beliefs from interfering with her legal obligations of being impartial.

What she might get hammered on regards any conversations with Trump or WH representatives or anyone else for that matter how she would rule in pending cases.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on September 29, 2020, 04:24:03 AM
you are a victim of fake news.  lets see if I can help you with the complete quote:

Kendi wrote “Some White colonizers ‘adopted’ Black children. They ‘civilized’ these ‘savage’ children in the ‘superior’ ways of White people, while using them as props in their lifelong pictures of denial, while cutting the biological parents of these children out of the picture of humanity.” He continued, “And whether this is Barrett or not is not the point. It is a belief too many White people have: if they have or adopt a child of color, then they can't be racist.” He added, “I’m challenging the idea that White parents of kids of color are inherently 'not racist' and the bots completely change what I’m saying to “White parents of kids of color are inherently racist.” These live and fake bots are good at their propaganda. Let’s not argue with them.”

Now that the quote is correct, I don't see it as productive to make this sort of statement at this time.   This particular lady doesn't seem to be that bad, so I wouldn't want to see her made out to be a racist when she gets her due grilling. 

This particular commentator Ibram X Kendi isn't of much relevance but his quote will be misused, misquoted, and used as a written screed to mischaracterize the preponderance of people other than conservatives.  I hear his view, and there are parts of it that are sensible yet in the context of this woman they don't appear to apply.

Fathertime!

LMAO! How the heck can anything be fake news when I posted what the idiot posted in his Twitter page (http://mobile.twitter.com/DrIbram/status/1309918635738173440)word for word, which you repeated?!?!

Saying somehow it isn’t important whether it is directed to ACB or not to dupe snowflakes at large doesn’t diminish what the idiot said. It is you who bit into this dandy hook, line and sinker!

I can’t believe liberals bow to idiots like Ibram these days.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on September 29, 2020, 05:07:44 AM
GQ,

Here are the two tweets to put back into some context.

(http://i.postimg.cc/CLtqL6tt/Screen-Shot-2020-09-29-at-13-46-38.png)

Followed by this one a half hour later.

(http://i.postimg.cc/jdWG7Lg5/Screen-Shot-2020-09-29-at-13-54-36.png)

He was responding to a since-deleted tweet about White parents adopting Black children.  I can't find a copy of it at this time so don't know the full context of his replies.

The reference to bots likely due to misquotes around the net and other out of context copies with only the first in his series of tweets, much like you posted.

btw I am neither defending nor supporting the tweet.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on September 29, 2020, 05:26:10 AM
BC-

The idiot, after feeling the heat and pushbacks, tried to walk back what he said. There’s no silly misconception what the idiot said. A lot of people got immediate lifelong punishment simply for uttering the ‘n’ word.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: fathertime on September 29, 2020, 05:52:40 AM
LMAO! How the heck can anything be fake news when I posted what the idiot posted in his Twitter page (http://mobile.twitter.com/DrIbram/status/1309918635738173440)word for word, which you repeated?!?!

Saying somehow it isn’t important whether it is directed to ACB or not to dupe snowflakes at large doesn’t diminish what the idiot said. It is you who bit into this dandy hook, line and sinker!

I can’t believe liberals bow to idiots like Ibram these days.
You posted a partial quote and stated it was in reference to barrett, which I've shown you it wasn't necessarily.
     the Ibram character is an unknown, and doesn't represent a wide audience.   When barrett is getting grilled by democrats, if it is implied she is racist based on her adoption of the black children she will prevail and the democrats will look foolish.  I don't think the democrat senators will go there as it isn't appropriate in this case.  Her record should be reviewed.  Down the road,  I think she is going to make rulings that I may not agree with but from what I've seen she isn't extreme.

Fathertime! 
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on September 29, 2020, 06:02:45 AM
Quote
Some White colonizers ‘adopted’ Black children. They ‘civilized’ these ‘savage’ children in the ‘superior’ ways of White people, while using them as props in their lifelong pictures of denial, while cutting the biological parents of these children out of the picture of humanity.

The professor needs to present substance to support his statement:  facts about the historical context he raises and an analysis of its relevancy to the Barrett family.     

His words "superior" and "denial" are accusations of racism.  Racism was not a paramount social issue during the colonial period.  Slavery was, but that is not the racism of today's culture.   Think of Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hennings. 


The professor's statements remind me of the outlandish statements of David Duke. Also, the professor certainly was not considerate of the feelings of the Barrett children. 

BU should dismiss the professor.  However, he is probably tenured, so typical of liberal university professors these days.   Question:  why would parents pay $60,000/yr just in tuition to have a child educated by anarchists?

Regarding the Barrett family, it appears a happy one.  Supposedly the favorite sibling is not either of the two  children born in Haiti but the youngest, who has Down Syndrome.  Hopefully the press will not pursue this outlandish matter. 
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on September 29, 2020, 06:06:20 AM
You posted a partial quote and stated it was in reference to barrett, which I've shown you it wasn't necessarily.
     the Ibram character is an unknown, and doesn't represent a wide audience. 
When barrett is getting grilled by democrats, if it is implied she is racist based on her adoption of the black children she will prevail and the democrats will look foolish.  I don't think the democrat senators will go there as it isn't appropriate in this case.  Her record should be reviewed.  Down the road,  I think she is going to make rulings that I may not agree with but from what I've seen she isn't extreme.

Fathertime!

1. The post was in the context of a ACB discussion.
2. The idiot do in fact have a wide audience.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on September 29, 2020, 06:48:14 AM

BU should dismiss the professor.  However, he is probably tenured, so typical of liberal university professors these days.   Question:  why would parents pay $60,000/yr just in tuition to have a child educated by anarchists?


On top of this it is a privately funded catholic university. He doesn't have the cover of being a public funded institution
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on September 29, 2020, 06:56:00 AM
Dorsey, Twitter’s CEO, donated $10 million to this idiot’s cause, which in an indirect way benefits BU. So I highly doubt that buffoon would even get a slap in the wrist. This is just one example of the indoctrination and slow decay in our society at large.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on October 03, 2020, 10:27:57 AM
The Dem's have decided that it's far too dangerous with Covid and everything
to meet with the nominee and have hearings etc.

I agree with them. The nominee was vetted already recently and they should
just have an up or down vote right away, so that the Dem's can move on to
important things like not coming up with a covid stimulus or any other legislation.



Schumer call for Supreme Court nominee to self-isolate
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/schumer-call-supreme-court-nominee-isolate-delay-quick/story?id=73388981

The coronavirus infects the Supreme Court hearing as 2 Senate Judiciary Committee senators test positive for COVID-19 and Chuck Schumer calls for a halt
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/schumer-call-supreme-court-nominee-isolate-delay-quick/story?id=73388981
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: tfcrew on October 08, 2020, 04:03:11 PM
The Dem's have decided that it's far too dangerous with Covid and everything
to meet with the nominee and have hearings etc.
The coronavirus infects the Supreme Court hearing as 2 Senate Judiciary Committee senators test positive for COVID-19 and Chuck Schumer calls for a halt
(http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/sk100820dAPR20201008014504.jpg)
   
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: tfcrew on October 09, 2020, 08:24:02 AM
Quote
Someone might want to tell Kamala Harris that she needs to get her American history straight. She claimed that Abraham Lincoln said it would be wrong to fill the Supreme Court vacancy that opened up 27 days before the 1864 election. That is nonsense. Lincoln said no such thing. Furthermore, back then, Congress was in recess from July 4 until December 5, i.e., until after the election, so there would have been no point in nominating anyone to fill the vacancy before the election. Also, Lincoln submitted his nominee the day after Congress returned. He did not wait for the new Congress to take office (which, back then, did not happen until March).
Forum blog
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on October 09, 2020, 10:41:19 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2020/10/08/lincoln-supreme-court-kamala-harris/
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: tfcrew on October 09, 2020, 11:48:03 AM
Harris stated that it should be up to the voters to decide the next justice.
She must have written her own version of the Constitution (http://www.jfkassassinationforum.com/Smileys/DarkB/undecided.gif)
 In fact-----
Quote
Candidates are nominated (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_United_States#Juridical_powers) by the President of the United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/President_of_the_United_States) and must face a series of hearings in which both the nominee and other witnesses make statements and answer questions before the Senate Judiciary Committee (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate_Committee_on_the_Judiciary), which can vote to send the nomination to the full United States Senate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Senate).[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appointment_and_confirmation_to_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States#cite_note-:0-1) Confirmation (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advice_and_consent#United_States) by the Senate allows the President to formally appoint the candidate to the court.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appointment_and_confirmation_to_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States#cite_note-:0-1) The Constitution does not set any qualifications for service as a Justice, thus the President may nominate any individual to serve on the Court.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appointment_and_confirmation_to_the_Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
Harris' ideas are fundamentally existentially systemically [and other words she likes to use]------ DANGEROUS !!!
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: tfcrew on October 12, 2020, 11:10:48 AM
Pelosi warned  ... women will be forced to return to a time when simply "being a woman" made it obscenely difficult to receive adequate health services.
And then mugged real big for the cameras......

 
 (http://media1.tenor.com/images/6cc88953ff0095b19dbd5b0ddc30ee8c/tenor.gif?itemid=14451507)
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on October 12, 2020, 11:40:22 AM
And she has bounced back yet again - with one giant leap.

Let's see if McConnell and Trump are capable of acting with common decency, deliberation, and due diligence, or simply bow to desperation and hypocrisy.

Let's look at the other side of the coin for a minute. The Dem's have a bad
reputation on judges. Wouldn't this be a time for them to vote along with
Republicans? Like the GOP did for Ginsberg?

Would it be hypocritical of them wanting to nominate Garland before an election,
but not wanting to nominate Amy Barret?

Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: mhr7 on October 12, 2020, 12:18:07 PM
Would it be hypocritical of them wanting to nominate Garland before an election,
but not wanting to nominate Amy Barret?

No, not in the least. This is a completely different situation.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on October 12, 2020, 01:15:44 PM
No, not in the least. This is a completely different situation.

It's exactly the same except that the President and the Senate majority are from
the same party.

The Dem's always fight GOP nominations. The GOP used to vote for qualified
Dem nominations. Justice Ginsberg is an excellent example. Those days are
gone forever.

The Dem's never, ever, ever feel hypocritical no matter what they say or do.

Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: mhr7 on October 12, 2020, 01:23:59 PM
It's exactly the same except that the President and the Senate majority are from
the same party.

The Dem's always fight GOP nominations. The GOP used to vote for qualified
Dem nominations. Justice Ginsberg is an excellent example. Those days are
gone forever.

The Dem's never, ever, ever feel hypocritical no matter what they say or do.

The Repubs refused to consider Obama's choice 4 years ago because they said the next president should pick the candidate. What are they saying now? Who're the hypocrites?
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on October 12, 2020, 03:04:25 PM
The Repubs refused to consider Obama's choice 4 years ago because they said the next president should pick the candidate. What are they saying now? Who're the hypocrites?

This was discussed two weeks ago.  One huge difference.  Unlike 2016, in 2020 the nominating President and the confirming Senate are of the same political party - the typical situation for  election year appointees. 

Yes, a touch of hypocrisy, yet not as blatant as from your party on many issues during the intervening four years. 
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on October 12, 2020, 03:38:00 PM
Who're the hypocrites?

The Republicans are for sure, no argument from me.

Now the Democrats are as well..... but you argue it's totally different.

Let's look the other side.

The Dem's said "Do your jobs and vote for or against this nominee!"
Now they are like a virgin school girl saying "wait, wait, wait!!"
They are totally hypocrites saying that we should wait for
the election.

Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on October 12, 2020, 03:41:13 PM
If you want to watch the Senate side show judiciary committee question
the nominee you can watch it here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LY_DL5qvUmk&feature=youtu.be

Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: mhr7 on October 12, 2020, 07:11:25 PM
The Republicans are for sure, no argument from me.

Now the Democrats are as well..... but you argue it's totally different.

Let's look the other side.

The Dem's said "Do your jobs and vote for or against this nominee!"
Now they are like a virgin school girl saying "wait, wait, wait!!"
They are totally hypocrites saying that we should wait for
the election.

Hey, no means no.  ;)
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on October 12, 2020, 10:11:39 PM
Hey, no means no.  ;)

mhr7,

My question was if it was hypocritical for Republicans to change their
narrative, in your opinion was it hypocritical for the Democrats to do
the same?

In my opinion they've both been hypocritical in this example.

Udachi!

Bill
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: mhr7 on October 12, 2020, 10:19:41 PM
mhr7,

My question was if it was hypocritical for Republicans to change their
narrative, in your opinion was it hypocritical for the Democrats to do
the same?

In my opinion they've both been hypocritical in this example.

Udachi!

Bill

I understood the question and yes, I would agree with you. No sense of humor tonight about school girls sayng wait, wait?
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on October 12, 2020, 10:33:07 PM
I understood the question and yes, I would agree with you. No sense of humor tonight about school girls saying wait, wait?

I made a joke but then I didn't catch your joke which is my fault entirely.
Have a nice evening

Udachi!

Bill
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on October 13, 2020, 09:00:10 AM
Anyone watching the Coney Barrett confirmation hearings?

I didn't watch the earlier proceedings yesterday, but I'm finding the GOP members more aggressive than Dems.

Later, I'll rewind and watch yesterday's session.  So far, I can't say I don't like her, maybe she'll turn out to be more along the lines of Roberts.

Mike Lee is making a pontificating ass of himself.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on October 13, 2020, 10:37:19 AM
Anyone watching the Coney Barrett confirmation hearings?

I had a youtube link above for yesterdays hearings.


Mike Lee is making a pontificating ass of himself.

Senators do that a lot. I hate watching them
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: tfcrew on October 13, 2020, 01:07:55 PM
Anyone watching the Coney Barrett confirmation hearings?
Enough to see that the Democrats were asking questions and stating opinions that had nothing to do with the appointment of a justice...just political theatrics as usual.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on October 13, 2020, 07:19:37 PM
I've watched the senate confirmation hearing these last two days. More especially today, I've never laid witness to how overwhelmingly intelligent Amy Barrett really is. WOW. She had a blank note pad the entire time. She needed no note reference to anything or everything they threw at her. She was incredibly unflappable! She made Klobuchar looked like an 8th grader when she tried to challenge her.


LMAO! This woman is something else. Happy to have her as the 9th Justice of the SC.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: tfcrew on October 13, 2020, 07:21:47 PM

Mike Lee is making a pontificating ass of himself.
You mean something like James Comey? Start at 1:22 ...Makes a good point [pontificating or not]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QoTIbjBab2s

Why is abortion always the central theme of constant liberal groaning? It gets old.


Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: msmob on October 14, 2020, 04:26:09 AM
I have NO idea why banning abortion, completely, is still on some folks radar or a political agenda in the 21C
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on October 14, 2020, 06:01:48 AM
This was a puzzling moment when Judge Amy Coney Barrett could not clearly answer as to whether or not she knew Trump's efforts and many statements to nominate a Supreme Court Justice who would strike down ACA.

I can't imagine her being that isolated from the goings-on.  I'm not calling her a liar, but do find it hard to swallow.  To answer that she has seen and heard such statements would have been fine and totally understandable.  She must have been really shocked at all the tweet posters and other Trump and GOP statements to that effect.  Ditto regarding abortion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGX10CneMVU
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on October 14, 2020, 07:57:11 AM
ACB's intellect, integrity and sense of jurisprudence are overwhelming.  Plus she is a good person, a mother of seven.  Most important she has never assulted anyone sexually.  Thank you Sen. Hirono for probing this issue,  and demonstrating ACB's patience and
empathy for all questions, even stupid ones. 

In summary, ACB possesses the right stuff that has guided America since our beginning.  Even CNN said in normal times she would be confirmed by an overwhelming majority. 






Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: ML on October 14, 2020, 08:13:30 AM
  Most important she has never assulted anyone sexually.

How do you know this ?

Men rarely file complaints.

But then I am not sure what assulted is.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on October 14, 2020, 09:28:18 AM
How do you know this ?

ACB answered "no" to questions were about whether she had used her position of authority to receive sexual favors, or something like that.  I am sure google can find that part of the hearing. 

I found it absurd to ask the questions unless Sen. Hirono has some evidence she wants to release later to create a Kavanaugh-type controversy.  Remember how unstatesmanlike that became.       
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: tfcrew on October 14, 2020, 09:50:27 AM
(http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/lb201014c20201013091823.jpg)
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on October 14, 2020, 09:52:11 AM
This was a puzzling moment when Judge Amy Coney Barrett could not clearly answer as to whether or not she knew Trump's efforts and many statements to nominate a Supreme Court Justice who would strike down ACA.



I doubt she reads WA Post, NY Times, Trump's Twitter, and watches CNN. What is Trump's many efforts and where are Trump's many statements at regarding his sole purpose for nominating judges? His goal is to nominate Conservative justices which is not surprising. He did make a campaign promise to repeal and replace ACA. He's trying to keep his promise even right up to the end of his first term. The ACA battle was in court before Barrett was nominated.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on October 14, 2020, 10:35:33 AM
Billy,

I guess she reads or views no media at all since it's all over conservative news as well.

As smart as she is I can't see her voting for Trump unless she is really and truly in the dark.

Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on October 14, 2020, 10:42:14 AM
it's all over conservative news as well.



Where?
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on October 14, 2020, 11:03:44 AM
Billy,

I guess she reads or views no media at all since it's all over conservative news as well.

As smart as she is I can't see her voting for Trump unless she is really and truly in the dark.

Who said she voted for Trump? The women is a constitutional scholar and apparently one of the brightest legal minds on the subject in the country. She's tried and proven. Knowing the constitution and law as well as she does, it's obvious she couldn't vote for Biden so, you may be on to something there  ;D
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on October 14, 2020, 11:27:23 AM

I guess she reads or views no media at all since it's all over conservative news as well.


She is likely briefed by her staff on key developments,  Also, her husband is able to speak.  She has friends too, imagine that. 

Many ways to learn about the news.  In fact, given the bias of news sources such as CNN, it is perhaps better to obtain news from someone who can synthesize the issues and events. 

 

Quote
As smart as she is I can't see her voting for Trump unless she is really and truly in the dark.

So you think being smart and voting for Trump are mutually exclusive.  Your comment is right up there with Hillary's "basket of deplorables."   
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on October 14, 2020, 11:41:23 AM
Billy,

I guess she reads or views no media at all since it's all over conservative news as well.

As smart as she is I can't see her voting for Trump unless she is really and truly in the dark.

[Edit to add: I misunderstood who BC was referring to. I mistakenly thought
he was referencing Billy's wife when I made the comment below. However,
millions of intelligent Americans voted for Trump and against the Dem's
because of their antics and hypocrisy]

My wife can't vote but she is appalled at democrats and their years long
infatuation with the Russians stealing the Election from poor Hillary.

It was a hoax. Ask 1000 Russians and 998 of them believe it was a hoax.

Ask any Russian that you aren't married to if they think that Russian 
businessmen paid Bill Clinton $500K to listen to him speak or if it was
a bribe.

Then tell each of those Russians that say bribe THEY are the stupid
ones living in the dark.

Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: Confederate on October 14, 2020, 11:54:24 AM

She is likely briefed by her staff on key developments,  Also, her husband is able to speak.  She has friends too, imagine that. 

Many ways to learn about the news.  In fact, given the bias of news sources such as CNN, it is perhaps better to obtain news from someone who can synthesize the issues and events. 

 

So you think being smart and voting for Trump are mutually exclusive.  Your comment is right up there with Hillary's "basket of deplorables."   You wear your badge of elitist bigotry proudly.  Such an attitude prompts a very insidious  form of prejudice and racism, i. e., lowered expectations.

Which is probably why he's willing to take a knee to those who are felons and thugs.
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on October 14, 2020, 01:14:26 PM
(http://cdn.creators.com/218/288516/288516_image.jpg)
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on October 14, 2020, 03:30:48 PM
Which is probably why he's willing to take a knee to those who are felons and thugs.

BLM is not in Italy.  However, Europe has some radical parties, both on the left and right, particularly the right.  I could be wrong because I don't follow Euro politics.  Radical they may be, one must respect the fact these fringe parties have been duly elected as part of their national parliamentarian elections. 

EU members, correct me if I am wrong, but I like this aspect of your multi-party system.   
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on October 14, 2020, 03:54:31 PM
BLM is not in Italy.  However, Europe has some radical parties, both on the left and right, particularly the right.  I could be wrong because I don't follow Euro politics.  Radical they may be, one must respect the fact these fringe parties have been duly elected as part of their national parliamentarian elections. 

EU members, correct me if I am wrong, but I like this aspect of your multi-party system.

Mitt Romney would be considered a right wing extremist in most of Europe
at minimum he would be described as far right.

Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on October 14, 2020, 03:59:11 PM
Pea brain Mitch McConnell aka the Turtle decides to push the stimulus package
through before the Barrett vote. I mean what could go wrong??! Obviously he should
do the Barrett vote first and then make sure that anybody who voted against Barrett
had zero pork in the bill.

McConnell says he’ll try to move $500 billion stimulus
package before Barrett vote

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/mcconnell-says-will-try-to-move-500-billion-stimulus-package-before-barrett-vote-11602618987


Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: Confederate on October 14, 2020, 06:46:15 PM
Pea brain Mitch McConnell aka the Turtle decides to push the stimulus package
through before the Barrett vote. I mean what could go wrong??! Obviously he should
do the Barrett vote first and then make sure that anybody who voted against Barrett
had zero pork in the bill.

McConnell says he’ll try to move $500 billion stimulus
package before Barrett vote

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/mcconnell-says-will-try-to-move-500-billion-stimulus-package-before-barrett-vote-11602618987

2TallBill for Congress!
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on October 14, 2020, 09:51:03 PM

She is likely briefed by her staff on key developments,  Also, her husband is able to speak.  She has friends too, imagine that. 

Many ways to learn about the news.  In fact, given the bias of news sources such as CNN, it is perhaps better to obtain news from someone who can synthesize the issues and events.

And who/what source would they use? Where do you go for 'neutral' news? Heck, I'd be interested in sources you are confident in.  I'm all over the place, from CNN to Fox, to AlJazeera, to RT, even some of the more radical conservative radio shows.

What's your top 3 that you have confidence in and 'trust'.

 
Quote
So you think being smart and voting for Trump are mutually exclusive.  Your comment is right up there with Hillary's "basket of deplorables."

No, my statement was in the context of how a jurist would evaluate the choices, using the deliberation process she described in the hearing.  I'm sure she can smell BS a mile away after years on the bench.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: BC on October 14, 2020, 10:08:21 PM
BLM is not in Italy.  However, Europe has some radical parties, both on the left and right, particularly the right.  I could be wrong because I don't follow Euro politics.  Radical they may be, one must respect the fact these fringe parties have been duly elected as part of their national parliamentarian elections. 

EU members, correct me if I am wrong, but I like this aspect of your multi-party system.

Plenty of BLM protests here Gator, albeit not armed and for the most part non-violent.

Parliamentary based democracy is quite interesting.  I remember the entry point of the Green party in Germany a long while back which was a very 'radical' concept back then. They now enjoy a sizable number of seats in the Bundestag. What I see is that when even the most 'radical' parties today are given a seat, they finally get the gist of things.  Mainly that alone they can do nothing so have to talk and move towards other parties to have any say at all.  Does not mean they are powerless as they can make up a part of a majority coalition - or can be ostracized if they cannot find ways to work together with other parties.  IOW they gain a bit of humility along with accepting parliamentary rules and decorum.

I do find it much more conducive for productively working together with others and for achieving compromise than our de-facto two-party system.

(http://i.postimg.cc/DyM0kmGz/Screen-Shot-2020-10-15-at-07-02-03.png)
http://www.bundestag.de/en/parliament   (all in English BTW and worth a peek)

The more the merrier I say...

P.S.  One item you may find very interesting is that the election of top officials in parlament is via secret ballot and not roll-call voting.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on October 15, 2020, 06:03:08 AM
I'm all over the place, from CNN to Fox, to AlJazeera, to RT, even some of the more radical conservative radio shows.

What's your top 3 that you have confidence in and 'trust'. 

CNBC (business) is only news during the day.  For breaking  news, switch between Fox and CNN (50-50), simultaneously resolving differences as best as I can.  Sports or a good film with wifey always take precedent on  news shows.  If a news show, Fox's Laura Ingraham, "The Five", and Carlson (sometimes).   CNN"s GPS (Fareed).   

Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on October 15, 2020, 06:10:36 AM
Thanks for the parliamentarian explanation.  Much value in what you outline. 

I need to ponder about US parties if we had the same.  Quick reaction, dividing both parties by three. 

     -  Democrats would be split into three:  Moderates, Greenies and Socialists, with the latter two banding together for votes. 

     -  Republicans:  Libertarians, Religious, Tea Party, Business, Fiscal Conservatives.  I know, that's five.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: Faux Pas on October 15, 2020, 06:10:55 AM
And who/what source would they use? Where do you go for 'neutral' news? Heck, I'd be interested in sources you are confident in.  I'm all over the place, from CNN to Fox, to AlJazeera, to RT, even some of the more radical conservative radio shows.


None of those. Although there is likely a shed of truth in all of them but with spin in the direction that they want you to believe unquestioned. Do not think for yourself.  Unfortunately in this day and time "truth in journalism" is hard to find and even harder to recognize when you do see it. The world has been dumb downed with the help and assistance of the very media most trust to report the truth. If you want truth, you have to do the research to reach it. You also have to have the ability to think for ones self and separate the wheat from the chafe.

The most unvarnished source I have found is http://www.theepochtimes.com/ (http://www.theepochtimes.com/) but you have to handle it as you would any other source
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on October 16, 2020, 06:55:24 PM
Sen. Dianne Feinstein commended Lindsey Graham for how he chaired the Senate Judicial Committee's hearing of Judge Amy Coney Barrett.  The two even hugged, yet remain on polar opposite sides of our divided government.

One would think such bipartisan demeanor would be a welcomed example in Washington, DC.    Not true.  Many on the left are now calling for the the removal of Dianne Feinstein from the Committee because of her kind remarks to Graham.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: GQBlues on October 16, 2020, 08:33:56 PM
This was a puzzling moment when Judge Amy Coney Barrett could not clearly answer as to whether or not she knew Trump's efforts and many statements to nominate a Supreme Court Justice who would strike down ACA.

I can't imagine her being that isolated from the goings-on.  I'm not calling her a liar, but do find it hard to swallow.  To answer that she has seen and heard such statements would have been fine and totally understandable.  She must have been really shocked at all the tweet posters and other Trump and GOP statements to that effect.  Ditto regarding abortion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGX10CneMVU

Not sure what you found puzzling in her response within the context of Harris’ line of questioning. SCOTUS goes into session a week after election so the court will only be with 8 justices if ACB doesn’t get nominated. Trump’s nomination ‘could’ be construed that doing so was to help fulfill their intent to wipe up ACA, and he may have declared verbally or even openly but it doesn’t necessary mean ACB would’ve heard it or aware of it. She did previously testified that this matter, along with points surrounding R v W, that Trump never discussed any of it with her.

Many folks are either insulated from daily newscast especially anything political.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on October 16, 2020, 08:55:14 PM
Many on the left are now calling for the the removal of Dianne Feinstein from the Committee because of her kind remarks to Graham.



A second group has now called for Feinstein to step down because she called the hearings the best she's ever participated in. The next generation Democratic Party has no tolerance for civility.


http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/major-abortion-rights-group-calls-for-democrats-to-replace-feinstein-on-judiciary-committee/ar-BB1a71uu?ocid=msedgntp
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: Lonestar on October 17, 2020, 09:11:28 PM
RBG could have easily retired when Obama was President but stayed on way to long.  Democrats including RBG thought Hillary would win.  RBG did a lot of good but she hurt her cause by not retiring when 80 years old.

Clarence T. plans to retire if Trump get re-elected or in 4-8 years when a Republican replaces Biden.







Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: Gator on October 18, 2020, 05:36:57 AM
Suburban liberal women here in Florida are very much impressed with Amy Barrett, as they should be.
 
Too bad Trump can not answer questions in such a way.   Our government could benefit immensely from having 50,000 Amy's.   

She could swing some votes to Republicans. 
Title: Replacing RBG
Post by: 2tallbill on October 26, 2020, 11:13:45 AM
Amy Barrett should be confirmed today as a birthday present for Hillary Clinton.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: ML on October 26, 2020, 11:28:58 AM
Collins of Maine said she will vote against to be consistent with being against Garland in election year.

Murkowski of Alaska said she was against moving forward this close to election; but that ship has sailed, so she will vote for because the gal is very qualified.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: tfcrew on October 26, 2020, 04:52:04 PM
Collins of Maine said she will vote against to be consistent with being against Garland in election year.
I understand that Ms Collins is in danger of not being re-elected because she is a Republican.
 Seems to me she is the Democrat's best friend on that side of the isle--- in addition to Mitt Romney.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: tfcrew on October 26, 2020, 05:39:50 PM
Chuck Schumer said today "will go down as one of the darkest days" in Senate history, moments before the chamber voted 52-48 to confirm Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court.
Title: Re: Replacing RBG
Post by: BillyB on October 26, 2020, 06:48:19 PM



In 4 years, Trump got three SCOTUS in besides hundreds of other judges. Let's see if he can top that in his 2nd term.
Title: Republicans are sore losers
Post by: ML on October 26, 2020, 09:31:13 PM
Republicans are sore losers.  3 Republican Senators voted against Ruth.

Democrats are good sports.  All 47 Democrat Senators voted against Amy.
Title: Re: Republicans are sore losers
Post by: Gator on October 27, 2020, 05:10:32 AM
Republicans are sore losers.  3 Republican Senators voted against Ruth.

Actually only one, Susan Collins, who faces a strong challenge to her re-election. 

Collins explained her vote as being consistent with the Senate decision regarding Merrick Garland.  In 2018 Collins gave a very compelling explanation of her support of Kavanaugh. 

Democrat leaders said Republicans will pay (hint hint ....packing the court).   

Title: Re: Republicans are sore losers
Post by: 2tallbill on October 27, 2020, 05:48:46 AM
Actually only one, Susan Collins, who faces a strong challenge to her re-election. 

Collins explained her vote as being consistent with the Senate decision regarding Merrick Garland.  In 2018 Collins gave a very compelling explanation of her support of Kavanaugh. 

Democrat leaders said Republicans will pay (hint hint ....packing the court).

He said Ruth, as in RBG the Republicans voted for her even though
they knew that she was an ACLU liberal she was qualified. The Dem's
haven't been civil about the Supreme court since Robert Bork.

Title: Re: Republicans are sore losers
Post by: Faux Pas on October 27, 2020, 06:08:09 AM
Actually only one, Susan Collins, who faces a strong challenge to her re-election. 

Collins explained her vote as being consistent with the Senate decision regarding Merrick Garland.  In 2018 Collins gave a very compelling explanation of her support of Kavanaugh. 

Democrat leaders said Republicans will pay (hint hint ....packing the court).

In the face of this, her challenge at home Collins should be defeated as she's not doing her job and what she was elected to do. Collin's is attempting to pander to her radical left constituents by voting no on ACB. ACB's credentials are impeccable and an excellent choice for the USSC. She will add much needed balance to the court. She is by all accounts a disciplined constitutionalist which IMO is needed for every seat on the SC
Title: Re: Republicans are sore losers
Post by: Gator on October 27, 2020, 04:52:02 PM
He said Ruth, as in RBG the Republicans voted for her even though
they knew that she was an ACLU liberal she was qualified. The Dem's
haven't been civil about the Supreme court since Robert Bork.

ML did indeed.  I stand corrected.   That was a long time ago.

My mistake from quick reading.