Scalia dead

[pcgeek11]

Can u imagine how bad off we would be if bush did anything else while in office? 😉

Beside the point.

The Dems all have their panties in a wad over the Repubs calling to block any appointment.

They are hypocritical as they have done the exact same thing.
Watch the video and read the news article I linked above.

 

[JEDI]

Dead men have no say in SCOTUS rulings. They have to be alive when the ruling is issued, as it should be.

then I say WHEEEEEEEEEEE!
yeah, we lost the Texas abortion case.
even w/o Scalia, the best we can hope for is a 4-4 tie.

but at 4-4 tie, then that means the texas abortion law wont be the law of the land.
it'll only affect the backwards incestuous Southern states.
it wont affect the other circuit courts!

yes repubs, please delay so that a Dem can put in a VERY liberal supreme court justice and REVERSE that abomination of a law!

 

[Jhhnn]

Beside the point.

The Dems all have their panties in a wad over the Repubs calling to block any appointment.

They are hypocritical as they have done the exact same thing.
Watch the video and read the news article I linked above.

It's one thing to oppose a nominee on the basis of extreme ideology and entirely another to assume that a nominee is that before they're even named.

It's easier, I'm sure, when you consider anybody to the left of Dick Cheney to be an extreme ideologue.

 

[Jhhnn]

then I say WHEEEEEEEEEEE!
yeah, we lost the Texas abortion case.
even w/o Scalia, the best we can hope for is a 4-4 tie.

but at 4-4 tie, then that means the texas abortion law wont be the law of the land.
it'll only affect the backwards incestuous Southern states.
it wont affect the other circuit courts!

yes repubs, please delay so that a Dem can put in a VERY liberal supreme court justice and REVERSE that abomination of a law!

That may not be true at all considering that Kennedy wrote a plurality opinion in PP vs Casey.

We'll see, huh?

 

[JEDI]

what is the ideology of the remaining scj?

the 3 ladies + breyer are liberal.
Roberts, alito + pubic hair Thomas are conservative. (a black republican? WTF?!)
kennedy is a centrist?

so 4 vs 3 + 1 unknown.

with another liberal justice, it'll be who the F cares about Kennedy?
5 v whatever.

go go ream the repubs for the next 40years!
sane gun control here we come!

 

[werepossum]

You mean in a well regulated militia, providing for the security of (not from, as right wingers seem to think) a free state?

lol Hey, some people find a boot on the neck to be comforting. It's been that way since antiquity, when some people would present themselves to local strong and wealthy men with a symbolic noose around the neck and penny in hand to gain a full belly and protection against the terror and uncertainty of being a free creature. On the other hand, the whole push of Western liberalism has been to remove that boot, a big part of that being the right to bear arms on one's own account rather than for king or country, and it's sad to see that movement devolve into a scramble back into thrall, even if it does now come with more free stuff.

I think it means our founding fathers were not as anti-regulations as the crew that claims to be strict constructionists.

It's amusing that you used "think" in conjunction with that interpretation. If you were an engineer, you'd know what it meant.

There should be a term limit on future Justices. It is a solution that is not partisan, and is not disrespectful to the court.

Agreed. I don't think anyone should "serve" at anything elected or appointed for more than twelve years. People grow out of touch.

 

[Indus]

Beside the point.

The Dems all have their panties in a wad over the Repubs calling to block any appointment.

They are hypocritical as they have done the exact same thing.
Watch the video and read the news article I linked above.

If they pursue the "long game" of blocking a nominee, you'll be hearing talk of senate impeachments for failure to do their sworn duty before long, which will of course play right into the Democrats hands as Independent voters turn their backs on what the Republican party has become.

It's akin to the shut down the government again.

As someone said.. "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

Be careful what you wish for. I don't envy the GOP one bit.

 

[Brainonska511]

how many former prez became supreme court justices?

Only one: William Howard Taft, who served as Chief Justice from 1921-1930

 

[michal1980]

what is the ideology of the remaining scj?

the 3 ladies + breyer are liberal.
Roberts, alito + pubic hair Thomas are conservative. (a black republican? WTF?!)
kennedy is a centrist?

so 4 vs 3 + 1 unknown.

with another liberal justice, it'll be who the F cares about Kennedy?
5 v whatever.

go go ream the repubs for the next 40years!
sane gun control here we come!

republicans cant be black, you heard it hear folks. Black people got on your democratic plantation where you belong.

 

[michal1980]

If they pursue the "long game" of blocking a nominee, you'll be hearing talk of senate impeachments for failure to do their sworn duty before long, which will of course play right into the Democrats hands as Independent voters turn their backs on what the Republican party has become.

It's akin to the shut down the government again.

As someone said.. "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

Be careful what you wish for. I don't envy the GOP one bit.

how is it the same as shutting down the government?

Do you really think the voters that elected republican senators, want those senators to approve some left wing anti-gunner, pro-baby murdering justice to the court?

 

[nickqt]

how is it the same as shutting down the government?

Do you really think the voters that elected republican senators, want those senators to approve some left wing anti-gunner, pro-baby murdering justice to the court?

Why don't you tell us more about the Obama/Jade Helm/Agenda 21 conspiracy to murder Scalia, dumbfuck.

 

[Greenman]

Roberts, alito + pubic hair Thomas are conservative. (a black republican? WTF?!)

I just wanted to preserve this bit of racism, I may even make it my sig.

 

[CaptainGoodnight]

If they pursue the "long game" of blocking a nominee, you'll be hearing talk of senate impeachments for failure to do their sworn duty before long, which will of course play right into the Democrats hands as Independent voters turn their backs on what the Republican party has become.

It's akin to the shut down the government again.

As someone said.. "Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."

Be careful what you wish for. I don't envy the GOP one bit.

Wait, you're reading the Constitution to *require* that the Senate go along? That's absurd.

The Constitution sets the conditions under which this happens politically. Do pay attention. Also, don't forget that the Executive and Legislature are Co-Equal branches. It is well in their right. All of those things are within the Senate's purview. You may disagree, but not unconstitutional, or even wrong.

 

[Balt]

Drudge is basically reporting that Scalia was murdered. I'm sure his followers are rational enough to realize that's nonsense, though. 🙄

 

[CaptainGoodnight]

Drudge is basically reporting that Scalia was murdered. I'm sure his followers are rational enough to realize that's nonsense, though. 🙄

Well, Drudge is the vox news of the right.

edit: Also kinda funny, there is a topic at the top of forum where people believe that US Republicans wanted to delay prisoner exchanges. :eyes roll:

 

[Sonikku]

Drudge is basically reporting that Scalia was murdered. I'm sure his followers are rational enough to realize that's nonsense, though. 🙄

Is it nonsense though, Balt?

photoshopped pic removed

Is it? :hmm:

 

[JSt0rm]

Is it nonsense though, Balt?

photoshopped pic removed

Is it? :hmm:

Amazing. 😀

 

[Bitek]

Clearly all good Christians see that this was God's hand at work.

Scalia was about to be a crucial vote in blocking Obama's clean energy regulations, endangering all of God's Creation. For this, and his other acts of contempt towards his fellow men, God has struck him down, shielding his flock.

It is sadness for the family, but we must accept the wisdom and judgement of the Lord.

 

[Jaskalas]

Drudge is basically reporting that Scalia was murdered. I'm sure his followers are rational enough to realize that's nonsense, though. 🙄

Who would be so careful as to stage it as a natural death, and be foolish enough to leave a pillow? Still more likely he placed it there himself, innocently or not (death throes).

Drudge's headline does indeed imply this, with great emphasis... though he is literally just relaying a "fact" from the article from, what I presume to be, the main witness.

Yet innocent as that potential fact may be... we all know that between truthers, birthers, and all other sorted cuckoo birds that a great deal of unstable minds may be easily tipped by this.

 

[nickqt]

Well, Drudge is the vox news of the right.

edit: Also kinda funny, there is a topic at the top of forum where people believe that US Republicans wanted to delay prisoner exchanges. :eyes roll:

No doubt. St. Reagan went out of his way to get prisoners from Iran. All he had to do was sell them missiles.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

what does "well regulated militia" even mean?

A bunch of middle aged guys that marched around the town common (in New England states that's a common grazing area). They'd set up targets and shoot at them there too. They'd have a secret meet up place too so they could show up as a force if Indians, Bandits or British mercenary's came to town.
I imagine it was a social club for fat successful guys to shoot muskets and drink and brag. Regular guys didn't have much free time.

 

[pcgeek11]

It's one thing to oppose a nominee on the basis of extreme ideology and entirely another to assume that a nominee is that before they're even named.

It's easier, I'm sure, when you consider anybody to the left of Dick Cheney to be an extreme ideologue.

Read my links above. The Democrats do exactly the same thing.

Hear it for your self:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkRZVE3aDm8

http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/14/f...-blocking-all-bush-supreme-court-nominations/

“This Week,” Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer decried the intent of many Senate Republicans to prevent President Barack Obama from appointing the successor to deceased Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.

But less than a decade ago, Schumer advocated doing the same exact thing if any additional Supreme Court vacancies opened under former President George W. Bush.

When George W. Bush was still president, Schumer advocated almost the exact same approach McConnell is planning to pursue. During a speech at a convention of the American Constitution Society in July 2007, Schumer said if any new Supreme Court vacancies opened up, Democrats should not allow Bush the chance to fill it “except in extraordinary circumstances.”

“We should reverse the presumption of confirmation,” Schumer said, according to Politico. “The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. We cannot afford to see Justice Stevens replaced by another Roberts, or Justice Ginsburg by another Alito.” During the same speech, Schumer lamented that he hadn’t managed to block Bush’s prior Supreme Court nominations.

Notably, when he made his remarks in 2007, Bush had about seven more months remaining in his presidential term than Obama has remaining in his.

Much like Republicans today, Schumer’s sentiment was clearly based on a fear that another Bush appointment would radically shift the overall makeup of the Court’s ideology.

 

[pcgeek11]

Its actually amazing how well the California dems in office have counterbalanced themselves and now we have a very well functioning gov in cali.

Now that IS funny.

 

[pcgeek11]

I want him to nominate Palin, forcing the GOP to block it and thus divorce themselves from her forever.

I'm all for that part. Can we include the Trump too?

 

[DrDoug]

Read my links above. The Democrats do exactly the same thing.

Hear it for your self:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkRZVE3aDm8

http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/14/f...-blocking-all-bush-supreme-court-nominations/

Lets see what Sen. Mitch McConnell said about blocking USSC nominees for political expediency:

"A pattern emerges running from Rutledge and Tancy through Brandeis and Parker up to and including Haynsworth and Carswell in which the Senate has employed deception to achieve its partisan goals. This deception has been to ostensibly object to a nominee's fitness while in fact the opposition is born of political expedience."

"In summary, the inconsistent and sometimes unfair behavior of the Senate in the past and in the recent examples which follow do not lead one to be overly optimistic about its prospects for rendering equitable judgments about Supreme Court nominees in the future." Link (.pdf!)

It's a real interesting read because it seems that Mitch was against playing politics with USSC nominees before he was for it.

Now Mitch is embracing what he once sought to stop. Funny that...