I don’t think there is time to fill Ginsberg seat on the Court.

SassyIrishLass

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
66,167
Reaction score
23,299
Points
2,250
The truth is, this is a crippling blow to the liberal long-term agenda. We all knew it was coming, and it could've been avoided if Ginsberg's ego hadn't kept her clinging to power long past her expiration date.
I never imagined Trump could possibly appoint three justices.

A fatal blow to the left
 

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
86,224
Reaction score
19,505
Points
2,180
Location
in between
Democrats will have the congress and white house at some point. Then they will expand the court and quickly appoint 2-4 judges. If not more. I hope they pack it with 6 or 8 more. The only way we get real changes to our system is when the white wing complains. So give them something to complain about.
Change has to occur among the people in order for change to occur in the political system.

The beginning of the end, of the McCarthy era witch hunts and persecution began when Joseph Welch, in a hearing, said "Have you no decency sir?".

Do you think those words would have any effect today?
 

miketx

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2015
Messages
84,173
Reaction score
22,911
Points
2,220
Kavanaugh showed that vetting is essential.
If by “vetting“ you mean beating the bushes for liars then democrats better get busy
If anyone would have been ambushed it would have been Gorsich. Hé was filling a stolen seat.

Yet, he went through relatively easy.
It was Kavanaugh who had ghosts in his closet

Kavanaugh didn't have any ghosts in his closet....they lied and committed slander and libel against him...protected by their positions in the Senate and by the press.....
She passed a lie detector test
Kavanaugh refused to take one
Fake news.
 

pknopp

Gold Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2019
Messages
20,023
Reaction score
3,473
Points
215
Democrats will have the congress and white house at some point. Then they will expand the court and quickly appoint 2-4 judges. If not more. I hope they pack it with 6 or 8 more. The only way we get real changes to our system is when the white wing complains. So give them something to complain about.
Change has to occur among the people in order for change to occur in the political system.

The beginning of the end, of the McCarthy era witch hunts and persecution began when Joseph Welch, in a hearing, said "Have you no decency sir?".

Do you think those words would have any effect today?
Not to very many.
 

miketx

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2015
Messages
84,173
Reaction score
22,911
Points
2,220
Democrats will have the congress and white house at some point. Then they will expand the court and quickly appoint 2-4 judges. If not more. I hope they pack it with 6 or 8 more. The only way we get real changes to our system is when the white wing complains. So give them something to complain about.
Change has to occur among the people in order for change to occur in the political system.

The beginning of the end, of the McCarthy era witch hunts and persecution began when Joseph Welch, in a hearing, said "Have you no decency sir?".

Do you think those words would have any effect today?
Democrat vermin like you have no idea of what decency is, all you know is lie, cheat, and destroy.
 

Orangecat

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Messages
1,443
Reaction score
1,767
Points
1,893
McConnell refused. A precedent he won't honor this time.
You seem very politically naive, tbh.
McConnell is a republican and works within the rules to further the republican agenda. If the people had given the democrats control of the senate before Garland's nomination, he would be a SCOTUS justice now.
Elections have consequences.
 

Orangecat

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Messages
1,443
Reaction score
1,767
Points
1,893
Shall we bet on it? I'm counting minimally SIX Republican Senators who won't go there.
What's your bet? I'm saying the new SCOTUS justice will be appointed and confirmed by Trump and the Senate. Probably not before the election, but by the new year.
 

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
86,224
Reaction score
19,505
Points
2,180
Location
in between
Democrats will have the congress and white house at some point. Then they will expand the court and quickly appoint 2-4 judges. If not more. I hope they pack it with 6 or 8 more. The only way we get real changes to our system is when the white wing complains. So give them something to complain about.
Change has to occur among the people in order for change to occur in the political system.

The beginning of the end, of the McCarthy era witch hunts and persecution began when Joseph Welch, in a hearing, said "Have you no decency sir?".

Do you think those words would have any effect today?
Democrat vermin like you have no idea of what decency is, all you know is lie, cheat, and destroy.
You are a stunning example of what you spew. Honestly it's people like you on both sides that created such a partisan mess. You have weaponized (thanks Gingrich) partisan politics into the art of warfare - using political identification to pit citizens against citizens. Your chief weapons are misinformation, conspiracy theory, and the construction of every conflict into us vs them, winners/losers and a scorched earth American political landscape.

Have you no decency?
 

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
86,224
Reaction score
19,505
Points
2,180
Location
in between
McConnell refused. A precedent he won't honor this time.
You seem very politically naive, tbh.
McConnell is a republican and works within the rules to further the republican agenda. If the people had given the democrats control of the senate before Garland's nomination, he would be a SCOTUS justice now.
Elections have consequences.
And remember that when what comes around goes around. McConnell did something unprecedented, for partisan purposes. Just like Reid's nuclear option. There are consequences.
 

Orangecat

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Messages
1,443
Reaction score
1,767
Points
1,893
Problem is once you set a precedent, unless someone decides to be the bigger person/party - what comes around will go around.
Indeed, and the left is reaping the crop they've sown when Harry Reid abolished the fillibuster for SCOTUS nominations. What comes around will go around.
 
Last edited:

Orangecat

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Messages
1,443
Reaction score
1,767
Points
1,893
er that when what comes around goes around. McConnell did something unprecedented, for partisan purposes. Just like Reid's nuclear option. There are consequences.
Perhaps it will, but, while you're bitterly threatening future revenge, I'm celebrating your chickens coming home to roost in the present.
Future battles will be fought in the future.
Today is a great day to be an American.
 

Mac-7

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2019
Messages
16,046
Reaction score
10,364
Points
1,215
A vote that may not get 10 democrats to join with the repubs
mcconnell needs at least 10 democrats
He doesn't need any democrats, thanks to Harry Reid.
He does not need 10

I was totally mistaken about that

but we are sure to lose some of the republican senators
 
Last edited:

DrLove

Gold Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2016
Messages
20,770
Reaction score
5,761
Points
290
Location
Central Oregon Coast
Shall we bet on it? I'm counting minimally SIX Republican Senators who won't go there.
What's your bet? I'm saying the new SCOTUS justice will be appointed and confirmed by Trump and the Senate. Probably not before the election, but by the new year.
There is NO WAY IN HELL Donald will get a SCOTUS pick after he loses this election. But we'll go with Win OR Lose - Before OR after the election. I say it won't happen - You say it will. Month off the board or $50 to the winners favorite charity. You choose.
 

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
86,224
Reaction score
19,505
Points
2,180
Location
in between
Problem is once you set a precedent, unless someone decides to be the bigger person/party - what comes around will go around.
Indeed, and the left is reaping what they've sown whe Harry Reid abolished the fillibuster for SCOTUS nominations. What comes around will go around.
Things don't happen in a vacuum. Prior to Reid's move there was a blocking of filling judicial vacancies - long a bipartisan process that recognized a president's right to fill vacancies. That blocking was not due to extreme ideological leanings of nominees, but partisan politics alone. Harry Reid's option was the only option to get some of those through. The numbers are damning for the Republicans hand in this. Question is...will the Dems do it when they are in power? Probably. That's the problem with precedents.

 

miketx

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2015
Messages
84,173
Reaction score
22,911
Points
2,220
The truth is, this is a crippling blow to the liberal long-term agenda. We all knew it was coming, and it could've been avoided if Ginsberg's ego hadn't kept her clinging to power long past her expiration date.
I never imagined Trump could possibly appoint three justices.

A fatal blow to the left
Can't wait until the shit stains start trying to burn things down here.
 

Orangecat

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Messages
1,443
Reaction score
1,767
Points
1,893
He does not need 10

I was totally mistaken about that

but we are sure to lose of of the republican senators
If the short term loss of the Senate is the price of a lifetime appointee to the SCOTUS that keeps the left from legislating from the bench, I'll take that trade.
As it stands, we do not know where the senate will be next year, so I'll fight one battle at a time. Take this SCOTUS victory and deal with the senate later.
 

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
86,224
Reaction score
19,505
Points
2,180
Location
in between
He does not need 10

I was totally mistaken about that

but we are sure to lose of of the republican senators
If the short term loss of the Senate is the price of a lifetime appointee to the SCOTUS that keeps the left from legislating from the bench, I'll take that trade.
As it stands, we do not know where the senate will be next year, so I'll fight one battle at a time. Take this SCOTUS victory and deal with the senate later.
But you are ok with the right legislating from the bench?
 

2aguy

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 19, 2014
Messages
83,593
Reaction score
22,180
Points
2,180
Problem is once you set a precedent, unless someone decides to be the bigger person/party - what comes around will go around.
Indeed, and the left is reaping what they've sown whe Harry Reid abolished the fillibuster for SCOTUS nominations. What comes around will go around.
Things don't happen in a vacuum. Prior to Reid's move there was a blocking of filling judicial vacancies - long a bipartisan process that recognized a president's right to fill vacancies. That blocking was not due to extreme ideological leanings of nominees, but partisan politics alone. Harry Reid's option was the only option to get some of those through. The numbers are damning for the Republicans hand in this. Question is...will the Dems do it when they are in power? Probably. That's the problem with precedents.


Bullshit.........the democrats started attacking judicial nominees with Bork.....and never looked back...you doofus.
 

Coyote

Varmint
Staff member
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
86,224
Reaction score
19,505
Points
2,180
Location
in between
Problem is once you set a precedent, unless someone decides to be the bigger person/party - what comes around will go around.
Indeed, and the left is reaping what they've sown whe Harry Reid abolished the fillibuster for SCOTUS nominations. What comes around will go around.
Things don't happen in a vacuum. Prior to Reid's move there was a blocking of filling judicial vacancies - long a bipartisan process that recognized a president's right to fill vacancies. That blocking was not due to extreme ideological leanings of nominees, but partisan politics alone. Harry Reid's option was the only option to get some of those through. The numbers are damning for the Republicans hand in this. Question is...will the Dems do it when they are in power? Probably. That's the problem with precedents.


Bullshit.........the democrats started attacking judicial nominees with Bork.....and never looked back...you doofus.

Nothing to do with what I just pointed out. Nice deflection.
 

Orangecat

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Messages
1,443
Reaction score
1,767
Points
1,893
Things don't happen in a vacuum. Prior to Reid's move there was a blocking of filling judicial vacancies - long a bipartisan process that recognized a president's right to fill vacancies.
That's called "balance of power" and is a central component of our government. Your approval isn't required, tbh.
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top