Do we still need a SCOTUS?

nat4900

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2015
Messages
42,021
Reaction score
5,960
Points
1,870
Apparently, based on what pissed off conservative lawmakers in the Senate, we don't need a Supreme Court any longer. Many of them have vowed that ANY nominee by the soon to be president, Clinton, will NOT be entertained for confirmation.....keeping the present SCOTUS in a virtual 4 to 4 tie.

Of course, we all know that at least 2 liberal judges in the Court, are too old to serve many more years, and conservatives hope that the Court will boil down to a 4 to 2 right wing majority after these latter two Justices retire or die.

So, I ask, is this the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next that our Founders dreamed about and we have witnessed for over two centuries?
 

owebo

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2016
Messages
18,638
Reaction score
2,010
Points
260
Location
Washigton, DC
The SCOTUS is the only way we can undo the damage you fascist democrats inflict upon America....

I am fine with it but I would put in place a more effective power structure directly linked to we the people. Perhaps a better impeachment process so we can remove the fascist,liberal judges when they abuse the constitution....
 

Ricky LIbtardo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2016
Messages
6,683
Reaction score
11,289
Points
2,265
Apparently, based on what pissed off conservative lawmakers in the Senate, we don't need a Supreme Court any longer. Many of them have vowed that ANY nominee by the soon to be president, Clinton, will NOT be entertained for confirmation.....keeping the present SCOTUS in a virtual 4 to 4 tie.

Of course, we all know that at least 2 liberal judges in the Court, are too old to serve many more years, and conservatives hope that the Court will boil down to a 4 to 2 right wing majority after these latter two Justices retire or die.

So, I ask, is this the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next that our Founders dreamed about and we have witnessed for over two centuries?

Elections have consequences. Where did I hear that before.

There is nothing Democrats can do to force a vote on judges. Thank you founding fathers, much smarter than today's idiot left.
 

Billy_Kinetta

Paladin of the Lost Hour
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 4, 2013
Messages
50,956
Reaction score
18,979
Points
2,280
Apparently, based on what pissed off conservative lawmakers in the Senate, we don't need a Supreme Court any longer. Many of them have vowed that ANY nominee by the soon to be president, Clinton, will NOT be entertained for confirmation.....keeping the present SCOTUS in a virtual 4 to 4 tie.

Of course, we all know that at least 2 liberal judges in the Court, are too old to serve many more years, and conservatives hope that the Court will boil down to a 4 to 2 right wing majority after these latter two Justices retire or die.

So, I ask, is this the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next that our Founders dreamed about and we have witnessed for over two centuries?
Nope, these are the checks and balances portion of our program.

Against a slow invasion of imported voters directed by a Marxist political party determined to bury the Constitution? I have no problem with the Senate sitting on its hands for as long as necessary.
 

percysunshine

Gold Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2011
Messages
29,325
Reaction score
5,834
Points
280
Location
Sty
.
I think we should be like Venezuela, and ignore the courts. We could move straight to Socialism, not pass 'Go' and not collect $200.
 

boedicca

Uppity Water Nymph
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
56,117
Reaction score
18,558
Points
2,250
Location
The Land of Funk
As the SCOTUS is supposed to interpret the Law, and you Progs have destroyed The Rule of Law:

The SCOTUS no longer serves any purpose in Your System of Elite Power and Bureaucratic Whim...other than to perform a Kabuki Theater to provide a fake veneer of legitimacy for the actions of the Gangsta Government.
 
Last edited:

Wry Catcher

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2009
Messages
51,323
Reaction score
6,454
Points
1,860
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
Apparently, based on what pissed off conservative lawmakers in the Senate, we don't need a Supreme Court any longer. Many of them have vowed that ANY nominee by the soon to be president, Clinton, will NOT be entertained for confirmation.....keeping the present SCOTUS in a virtual 4 to 4 tie.

Of course, we all know that at least 2 liberal judges in the Court, are too old to serve many more years, and conservatives hope that the Court will boil down to a 4 to 2 right wing majority after these latter two Justices retire or die.

So, I ask, is this the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next that our Founders dreamed about and we have witnessed for over two centuries?
There is no peace in The District, and the first shot of the war between the two dominant parties was fired by Newt Gingrich. Power tends to corrupt, and Gingrich was and remains both an enemy of the people and one of the most corrupt Pols in my lifetime (sorry Delay, you are as corrupt but were not the archetype Gingrich was).

He has infected a whole new generation of Republicans who seek power for themselves and the benefits it provides for them and those who provide them the resources to win elections. The people are to be used by them and their interests ignored (We've got ours, fuck the rest of you is what they believe, what they do).

McConnell is the personification of what is wrong with The District, he claims to be a conservative but is nothing more than an ideologue whose ideal form of government is a single party system, allowing for no debate and no dissent. "Country First"? Hell no, and he well understands some of the people all of the time are fools.

Ryan is no peacemaker, his ambition is similar to that of McConnell, but less forthright. He hides behind Christian ethics and the word of Jesus, but holds similar disdain for The People as does McConnell. I'd like to see Charlie Rose moderate a debate between Ryan and Pope Francis.

There will be no peaceful transition, Trump has made that clear. Win or lose Trump will a poor winner, or an evil loser.
 

Wry Catcher

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2009
Messages
51,323
Reaction score
6,454
Points
1,860
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
Apparently, based on what pissed off conservative lawmakers in the Senate, we don't need a Supreme Court any longer. Many of them have vowed that ANY nominee by the soon to be president, Clinton, will NOT be entertained for confirmation.....keeping the present SCOTUS in a virtual 4 to 4 tie.

Of course, we all know that at least 2 liberal judges in the Court, are too old to serve many more years, and conservatives hope that the Court will boil down to a 4 to 2 right wing majority after these latter two Justices retire or die.

So, I ask, is this the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next that our Founders dreamed about and we have witnessed for over two centuries?

Elections have consequences. Where did I hear that before.

There is nothing Democrats can do to force a vote on judges. Thank you founding fathers, much smarter than today's idiot left.
You should read the Constitution.
 

Wry Catcher

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2009
Messages
51,323
Reaction score
6,454
Points
1,860
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
Apparently, based on what pissed off conservative lawmakers in the Senate, we don't need a Supreme Court any longer. Many of them have vowed that ANY nominee by the soon to be president, Clinton, will NOT be entertained for confirmation.....keeping the present SCOTUS in a virtual 4 to 4 tie.

Of course, we all know that at least 2 liberal judges in the Court, are too old to serve many more years, and conservatives hope that the Court will boil down to a 4 to 2 right wing majority after these latter two Justices retire or die.

So, I ask, is this the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next that our Founders dreamed about and we have witnessed for over two centuries?
Nope, these are the checks and balances portion of our program.

Against a slow invasion of imported voters directed by a Marxist political party determined to bury the Constitution? I have no problem with the Senate sitting on its hands for as long as necessary.
The RED SCARE - how prosaic. As a hate and fear form of rhetoric, it fails the test of reality. Only biddable people believe Marxism is alive and prospering in our nation or in any parts of the developed world. It seems the crazy new right membership on this message board are easily lead, proved by the echo chamber who echo the same ignorance as B-K on a plethora of issues, and in particular his claim of Marxism in America.

Yes Virginia, Lincoln was spot on, some people can be fooled all of the time.
 

WillHaftawaite

Diamond Member
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
63,246
Reaction score
21,381
Points
2,250
Apparently, based on what pissed off conservative lawmakers in the Senate, we don't need a Supreme Court any longer. Many of them have vowed that ANY nominee by the soon to be president, Clinton, will NOT be entertained for confirmation.....keeping the present SCOTUS in a virtual 4 to 4 tie.

Of course, we all know that at least 2 liberal judges in the Court, are too old to serve many more years, and conservatives hope that the Court will boil down to a 4 to 2 right wing majority after these latter two Justices retire or die.

So, I ask, is this the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next that our Founders dreamed about and we have witnessed for over two centuries?
Nope, these are the checks and balances portion of our program.

Against a slow invasion of imported voters directed by a Marxist political party determined to bury the Constitution? I have no problem with the Senate sitting on its hands for as long as necessary.
The RED SCARE - how prosaic. As a hate and fear form of rhetoric, it fails the test of reality. Only biddable people believe Marxism is alive and prospering in our nation or in any parts of the developed world. It seems the crazy new right membership on this message board are easily lead, proved by the echo chamber who echo the same ignorance as B-K on a plethora of issues, and in particular his claim of Marxism in America.

Yes Virginia, Lincoln was spot on, some people can be fooled all of the time.
 

Skull Pilot

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2007
Messages
45,446
Reaction score
6,143
Points
1,830
Apparently, based on what pissed off conservative lawmakers in the Senate, we don't need a Supreme Court any longer. Many of them have vowed that ANY nominee by the soon to be president, Clinton, will NOT be entertained for confirmation.....keeping the present SCOTUS in a virtual 4 to 4 tie.

Of course, we all know that at least 2 liberal judges in the Court, are too old to serve many more years, and conservatives hope that the Court will boil down to a 4 to 2 right wing majority after these latter two Justices retire or die.

So, I ask, is this the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next that our Founders dreamed about and we have witnessed for over two centuries?
We still have 8 justices and protocols for the court to operate with 8 justices so no need to get your granny panties in a giant wad
 
OP
nat4900

nat4900

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2015
Messages
42,021
Reaction score
5,960
Points
1,870
Elections have consequences. Where did I hear that before.

There is nothing Democrats can do to force a vote on judges. Thank you founding fathers, much smarter than today's idiot left.

Actually a simple majority in the Senate (with the VP vote) can force a vote on justices.....But, rather than explaining how to you, Ricky, I'll let you seek out some education all by yourself. LOL
 

Wry Catcher

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2009
Messages
51,323
Reaction score
6,454
Points
1,860
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
Apparently, based on what pissed off conservative lawmakers in the Senate, we don't need a Supreme Court any longer. Many of them have vowed that ANY nominee by the soon to be president, Clinton, will NOT be entertained for confirmation.....keeping the present SCOTUS in a virtual 4 to 4 tie.

Of course, we all know that at least 2 liberal judges in the Court, are too old to serve many more years, and conservatives hope that the Court will boil down to a 4 to 2 right wing majority after these latter two Justices retire or die.

So, I ask, is this the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next that our Founders dreamed about and we have witnessed for over two centuries?
Nope, these are the checks and balances portion of our program.

Against a slow invasion of imported voters directed by a Marxist political party determined to bury the Constitution? I have no problem with the Senate sitting on its hands for as long as necessary.
The RED SCARE - how prosaic. As a hate and fear form of rhetoric, it fails the test of reality. Only biddable people believe Marxism is alive and prospering in our nation or in any parts of the developed world. It seems the crazy new right membership on this message board are easily lead, proved by the echo chamber who echo the same ignorance as B-K on a plethora of issues, and in particular his claim of Marxism in America.

Yes Virginia, Lincoln was spot on, some people can be fooled all of the time.
Another stupid post by another fool.
 

Wry Catcher

Diamond Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2009
Messages
51,323
Reaction score
6,454
Points
1,860
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
Elections have consequences. Where did I hear that before.

There is nothing Democrats can do to force a vote on judges. Thank you founding fathers, much smarter than today's idiot left.

Actually a simple majority in the Senate (with the VP vote) can force a vote on justices.....But, rather than explaining how to you, Ricky, I'll let you seek out some education all by yourself. LOL
He might be willfully ignorant, than again it might not be willful.
 
OP
nat4900

nat4900

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2015
Messages
42,021
Reaction score
5,960
Points
1,870
I have no problem with the Senate sitting on its hands for as long as necessary.

Should we also pay those guys in the Senate just to sit on their hands...Should we "reward" them for doing nothing.....I thought you nitwits were against rewarding lazy, do-nothing citizens.....LOL
 

yiostheoy

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2016
Messages
20,876
Reaction score
1,932
Points
290
Apparently, based on what pissed off conservative lawmakers in the Senate, we don't need a Supreme Court any longer. Many of them have vowed that ANY nominee by the soon to be president, Clinton, will NOT be entertained for confirmation.....keeping the present SCOTUS in a virtual 4 to 4 tie.

Of course, we all know that at least 2 liberal judges in the Court, are too old to serve many more years, and conservatives hope that the Court will boil down to a 4 to 2 right wing majority after these latter two Justices retire or die.

So, I ask, is this the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next that our Founders dreamed about and we have witnessed for over two centuries?
Your logic is fractured on this, unfortunately.

The current 8 person Court will soon trickle down to a 7 person court as Ginsberg waxes old and more feeble.

Then with 7 there will be 2 swing voters (Kennedy and Roberts), 2 strict constructionists (Thomas and Alito), and the rest (3) activist communists.

7 would be a very good Court with this current composition.

I am guessing that Hillary will unable to appoint ANY justices in the next 2 years at least, and probably not for the next 4 years in total.

With 4 communists already on the Court (Breyer, Kagan, Sotomayor, and Ginsberg) the U.S. Senate cannot afford to ratify ANY of Hillary's nominations -- not now -- not ever.

Scalia's untimely early death has changed everything.
 

Ricky LIbtardo

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2016
Messages
6,683
Reaction score
11,289
Points
2,265
Elections have consequences. Where did I hear that before.

There is nothing Democrats can do to force a vote on judges. Thank you founding fathers, much smarter than today's idiot left.

Actually a simple majority in the Senate (with the VP vote) can force a vote on justices.....But, rather than explaining how to you, Ricky, I'll let you seek out some education all by yourself. LOL
He might be willfully ignorant, than again it might not be willful.

I would suggest before you call someone willfully ignorant you willfully go to school and learn the difference between "then" and "than".
 

WillHaftawaite

Diamond Member
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
63,246
Reaction score
21,381
Points
2,250
Apparently, based on what pissed off conservative lawmakers in the Senate, we don't need a Supreme Court any longer. Many of them have vowed that ANY nominee by the soon to be president, Clinton, will NOT be entertained for confirmation.....keeping the present SCOTUS in a virtual 4 to 4 tie.

Of course, we all know that at least 2 liberal judges in the Court, are too old to serve many more years, and conservatives hope that the Court will boil down to a 4 to 2 right wing majority after these latter two Justices retire or die.

So, I ask, is this the peaceful transfer of power from one administration to the next that our Founders dreamed about and we have witnessed for over two centuries?
Nope, these are the checks and balances portion of our program.

Against a slow invasion of imported voters directed by a Marxist political party determined to bury the Constitution? I have no problem with the Senate sitting on its hands for as long as necessary.
The RED SCARE - how prosaic. As a hate and fear form of rhetoric, it fails the test of reality. Only biddable people believe Marxism is alive and prospering in our nation or in any parts of the developed world. It seems the crazy new right membership on this message board are easily lead, proved by the echo chamber who echo the same ignorance as B-K on a plethora of issues, and in particular his claim of Marxism in America.

Yes Virginia, Lincoln was spot on, some people can be fooled all of the time.
Another stupid post by another fool.
just like in the cartoon, if you see a fool, or a clown, you're looking in a mirror
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top