Justice Down! We have a Justice Down! RBG! Now with cancer

Page 10 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Blackjack200

Lifer
May 28, 2007
15,995
1,685
126
It’s the sensationalist nature of the reporting with no context as to the severity of her condition. Is this a routine scenario given her underlying medical history or something worst? The nature of the reporting is meant to create hysterics. I became aware of it because this thread shot right to the front page of the forum, which usually means she is sick again and I am sure for some the hope that it also means she passed away.

I for one hope she makes it to the end of Trump’s term, and put myself in her shoes as to the immense pressure she must feel just to stay alive. It’s absurd.

You don't have to feel bad for her, it's self inflicted. She assumed that Clinton was going to be elected in 2016 and she preferred he appointment to be filled by a white woman rather than a black man. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,325
28,579
136
You don't have to feel bad for her, it's self inflicted. She assumed that Clinton was going to be elected in 2016 and she preferred he appointment to be filled by a white woman rather than a black man. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
If she had retired during Obama's term we would have had two Garland vs. Gorsuch debacles instead of one. You have really turned into nothing more than an emotional shitposter. Sad.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,325
28,579
136
It’s the sensationalist nature of the reporting with no context as to the severity of her condition. Is this a routine scenario given her underlying medical history or something worst? The nature of the reporting is meant to create hysterics. I became aware of it because this thread shot right to the front page of the forum, which usually means she is sick again and I am sure for some the hope that it also means she passed away.

I for one hope she makes it to the end of Trump’s term, and put myself in her shoes as to the immense pressure she must feel just to stay alive. It’s absurd.
Can you provide an example? The only thing I have seen is the post that bumped this thread where the headline includes "possible infection." Doesn't seem all that sensationalist to me. Are you conflating the thread title here, which is clearly sensationalist but has nothing to do with the latest reports?
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,426
6,088
126
Why is the world run by these ancient geezers? All they've done for 80 years is F everything up.


Young people should rise up and take over. We are stronger than them. We can beat them up and take back the country. Physically.
I suppose you don't realize that there is no fool like an old fool because young fools like you abound.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pcgeek11

SMOGZINN

Lifer
Jun 17, 2005
14,202
4,401
136
It’s the sensationalist nature of the reporting with no context as to the severity of her condition. Is this a routine scenario given her underlying medical history or something worst? The nature of the reporting is meant to create hysterics. I became aware of it because this thread shot right to the front page of the forum, which usually means she is sick again and I am sure for some the hope that it also means she passed away.

I for one hope she makes it to the end of Trump’s term, and put myself in her shoes as to the immense pressure she must feel just to stay alive. It’s absurd.

She has become a celebrity, with all that entails. The news stories about her hospitalization is really no different than the reporting about Beyoncé or other popular celebrities.
Is it too much for who she is? Is it unwarranted media sensationalism? I really don't know. What I can say is that the media is going to sensationalize those they raise up to stars, and in this day and age of autotuned popstars, millionaire sports ball players, and celebrities that are famous mostly for having become famous, I am not going to complain about one of the greatest legal minds of our nation being given the star treatment. We need more stars of her caliber, not less. Love her or hate her she has certainly contributed more to this nation than a hundred Katy Perrys.

You don't have to feel bad for her, it's self inflicted. She assumed that Clinton was going to be elected in 2016 and she preferred he appointment to be filled by a white woman rather than a black man. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

She has stated a number of times that she has no intention of ever stepping down as long as she feels she is capable of doing the job. She says she fully intends to die with those robes on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dank69

HurleyBird

Platinum Member
Apr 22, 2003
2,684
1,268
136
Any justice getting replaced this late in the election cycle could be disastrous. I don't trust the Republicans not to cram a nomination in given the chance, and should they, I don't trust the Democrats not to pack the court in response if they win the presidency and the senate. That bleak future could lead to civil war or one party rule.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Starbuck1975

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,188
14,092
136
Any justice getting replaced this late in the election cycle could be disastrous. I don't trust the Republicans not to cram a nomination in given the chance, and should they, I don't trust the Democrats not to pack the court in response if they win the presidency and the senate. That bleak future could lead to civil war or one party rule.

I have no doubt that many dems would want to do so, but I wonder if they would have enough votes in the Senate to pull it off. Even if they win the Senate, they are unlikely to have more than a 1-2 seat margin. It only takes a couple of Joe Manchins to pour cold water on an idea like that.

I say this as someone who doesn't support packing the court but does support ending the filibuster, and wonders if there will be enough votes to do it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HurleyBird

HurleyBird

Platinum Member
Apr 22, 2003
2,684
1,268
136
I have no doubt that many dems would want to do so, but I wonder if they would have enough votes in the Senate to pull it off. Even if they win the Senate, they are unlikely to have more than a 1-2 seat margin. It only takes a couple of Joe Manchins to pour cold water on an idea like that.

That's true, and there's also a huge difference between, say, replacing a justice in the next few weeks vs. after a theoretical election that Trump has lost but prior to the new administration taking over. Still, I think appointing a new justice even in the first scenario is akin to playing with fire.
 

Blackjack200

Lifer
May 28, 2007
15,995
1,685
126
If she had retired during Obama's term we would have had two Garland vs. Gorsuch debacles instead of one. You have really turned into nothing more than an emotional shitposter. Sad.

McConnell didn't have control of the Senate until 2015.
 

Blackjack200

Lifer
May 28, 2007
15,995
1,685
126
She has stated a number of times that she has no intention of ever stepping down as long as she feels she is capable of doing the job. She says she fully intends to die with those robes on.

Great, good for her. Either way we don't need to feel bad for her.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,219
14,906
136
You don't have to feel bad for her, it's self inflicted. She assumed that Clinton was going to be elected in 2016 and she preferred he appointment to be filled by a white woman rather than a black man. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

You know this, of course, because of the tell all book she wrote where she said this, right?

You really have no clue as to how crazy you sound, do you?
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
Any justice getting replaced this late in the election cycle could be disastrous. I don't trust the Republicans not to cram a nomination in given the chance, and should they, I don't trust the Democrats not to pack the court in response if they win the presidency and the senate. That bleak future could lead to civil war or one party rule.
The only comfort I find in any scenario is that whenever one party opens a Pandora’s box in a stupor of power intoxication, it inevitably comes back to bite them.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
Can you provide an example? The only thing I have seen is the post that bumped this thread where the headline includes "possible infection." Doesn't seem all that sensationalist to me. Are you conflating the thread title here, which is clearly sensationalist but has nothing to do with the latest reports?
The sequence of discovery for me was that I saw the thread title hit the forum front page, which prompted me to do a news search, which of course exposed me to the worst sentiments of political discourse: those who perceive her as a deity and feel entitled to her seat, and those wishing for her demise salivating at the prospect of claiming it.
 

K1052

Elite Member
Aug 21, 2003
46,039
33,069
136
Trying to bury that woman before she's gone has been an unproductive pastime for a number of people, some of whom have themselves shuffled off to the great beyond.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
21,318
4,433
136
Of course they wouldn’t. So to be clear though we both admit that Republicans were lying when they said that adhering you precedent was the reason why they blocked Merrick Garland, right?



What does "adhering you precedent" mean?

As I stated above:

My opinion is it is fine to hold off a SCOTUS appointment during an election year regardless of whom is in, office Rep or Dem.

In other words if something happened to RBG and her seat became open leave it open until after the election.
Is that clear enough for you?
 

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
21,318
4,433
136
Why wouldn't they? R's have shown exactly how much they care about working together since the black guy was elected. Answer? Not at all. Precedents don't matter, lying doesn't matter, projection matters tho, so you've got that going for ya.


Do you have to use the word "black" in every response? :rolleyes:

The D's have also shown how much they care about working together also. Hey this coin has two sides! Not at all.
 

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
21,318
4,433
136
Of course you have an idea. You have a very recent history of the actions of the relevant people to make an informed, adult guess of exactly how they would act. You have current, public declarations of exactly how they would act.

You seem to "not know what the republicans will do," but claim to have a very clear understanding of what the democrats would do. Why is it that you hold such differences in the ability to form a reasonable prediction, considering that the very same pools of information exist, yet your guess here aligns squarely with party lines.

How baffling!


My other post:

OK, I don't know. However I don't think he would wait.
I don't think the dems would wait either if the roles were reversed, do you?
 

ch33zw1z

Lifer
Nov 4, 2004
37,765
18,045
146
Do you have to use the word "black" in every response? :rolleyes:

The D's have also shown how much they care about working together also. Hey this coin has two sides! Not at all.

What an odd response. In this thread, you were super concerned about false statements. And here, you make two obvious ones.

Your feels tho.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cytg111