BREAKING: Ruth Bader Ginsburg hospitalized

[Theopolis Q. Hossenffer]

No worries. I was good with your quote - especially "the 60 votes were there for a reason."

It's going to get cold, they should sell some long-sleeved versions.
View attachment 820981

RBG is barely cold.

 

[georges]

Well, if you're going to make a post about the dangers of extreme partisanship using that as an example and leave out all those background details, you're either being ignorant or disingenuous. I don't give a **** about your feelings.

Extreme partisanship? We have seen extreme bias from the Democrats during the Kavanaugh hearing where Sheila Jackson Lee, an Obama minion who used doxxing to slander Kavanaugh and result she got four years of jail.Like they says in the USA"Play stupid games and win stupid prizes"
Even a former Obama official, Neal Katyal calls Amy Coney Barrett ‘Lovely’
https://dailycaller.com/2020/09/28/...spid=1blus6RRWRCNbZkcwqXgl.MUHmrT93o82LUCQ98u
Even the Democrat Impeachment Witness, Noah Feldman qualifies Judge Amy Coney Barrett as ‘Brilliant’ ‘ and that she deserves a seat on Supreme Court
https://dailycaller.com/2020/09/26/...spid=j_5z96hABw6NaQndGN0.CgyN_KTn8SfO9KKReODj
A new Poll shows Americans favor confirming Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Cour
https://thepoliticalinsider.com/new...265680b20e543dc2a6473c7b9fa19141&source=TPICI
So Amy Coney Barrett isn't that bad and people trust her.
Who are the Democrats to judge her when a lot of them don't even have the half of qualifications that she has?? The Democrats's strategy is simple slandering and lying on someone with fabricated bs.
Here are the attacks Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett has already faced from Democrats
https://dailycaller.com/2020/09/26/amy-coney-barrett-supreme-court-attacks-democrats-media/
Also a liberal Author was hit with backlash after suggesting Amy Coney Barrett adopted Haitian ******** to shield herself from racism
https://thepoliticalinsider.com/lib...265680b20e543dc2a6473c7b9fa19141&source=TPICI
I am well accustomed with Democrat tactics over the years, slandering and manipulating evidence is their speciality. Remember that elections have consequences and the way, Democrats disrespect authority figures is not really playing in their favor..

 

[gmase]

You are correct, she is lovely, she is qualified, and she should be given a vote.

The issue at hand is Mitch's hypocrisy. You have to admit he took a 180 from 2016.

 

[Theopolis Q. Hossenffer]

As i said in an earlier post you can never be sure what a Supreme Court Justice will do. Look at how pissed some of the Donald's people are at his newest choices and the Chief Justice. How dare they vote with the Law!.. A life time appointment deems to really relieve the pressure. Of course some do vote as expected but....you never really know. Just have to make the best of Justice Barrett.. I just wonder why they are having the farce of a series of hearings. Just vote her in and be done with it.

 

[Theopolis Q. Hossenffer]

You are correct, she is lovely, she is qualified, and she should be given a vote.

The issue at hand is Mitch's hypocrisy. You have to admit he took a 180 from 2016.

His only plan there that I saw was to help erase the legacy of the (insert derogatory description here) President to keep him from having a success in anything.

 

[georges]

As i said in an earlier post you can never be sure what a Supreme Court Justice will do. Look at how pissed some of the Donald's people are at his newest choices and the Chief Justice. How dare they vote with the Law!.. A life time appointment deems to really relieve the pressure. Of course some do vote as expected but....you never really know. Just have to make the best of Justice Barrett.. I just wonder why they are having the farce of a series of hearings. Just vote her in and be done with it.

Perhaps to make sur that she is fit for the job as much as was Kavanaugh. Also interestingly enough a BU professor was ripped after he implied that Amy Coney Barrett is a ‘white colonizer’. But it is so predictable that you can expect these low level accusation from some people
https://nypost.com/2020/09/28/bu-professor-suggests-amy-coney-barrett-is-a-white-colonizer/

Worse than that a news agency such as Reuters set up Amy Coney Barrett as an extremist, linking her to a group ex-Member called a 'Cult'
https://www.westernjournal.com/reut...f_campaign=dailypm&ff_content=western-journal
Were is the mainstream media objectivity and honesty here? I wonder

Even today after Barrett's nomination, the more than beyond desperate Senate dems use hardball tactics to fight GOP's SCOTUS push
https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/s...=DM148096_09222020&s=acs&dkt_nbr=01010247c0h9
Garland wasn't appointed as Scotus because he belang to the Democratic party and was an Obama nominee, so what? A republican president has and had the whole right to refuse to appoint an Obama nominee as a Scotus Justice whether you like it or not. Mc Connell has made his choices and you can't blame him for that.

As Gowdy hammered Biden – "If You Don’t Want Trump Picking Supreme Court Justices, Win An Election"
https://thepoliticalinsider.com/gow...265680b20e543dc2a6473c7b9fa19141&source=TPICI
Which underlines waht I said before the winner of an election nominates who he finds the most qualified as SCOTUS

I remember how much slander, insults and false accusations Justice Kavanaugh has been a victim of, but those tactics were the deliberate result from the radical Democrat bias and I expect more bias coming from Democrats with whatever tactic is good for roadblocking or stonewalling any Republican Scotus nominee.

 

[gmase]

Garland wasn't appointed as Scotus because he belang to the Democratic party and was an Obama nominee, so what? A republican president has and had the whole right to refuse to appoint an Obama nominee as a Scotus Justice whether you like it or not.

A very true statement. I don't think anyone seriously expected Trump to continue with Garland's appointment.

Mc Connell has made his choices and you can't blame him for that.

Yes we can. There's not much - if anything - we can procedurally do about it, but we can certainly blame him for being a hypocrite. He's not the only hypocrite. Everyone knows Schumer would have done - and would do - the exact same thing. If Schumer was Senate Majority Leader he would be punting this to January and citing McConnell's precedent. And the right would be outraged.

 

[gmase]

What does the outbreak of COVID among Republican Senators mean for ACB's nomination? Lee and Tillis are on the Judiciary Committee.

 

[Theopolis Q. Hossenffer]

And then there is this thought:

https://www.chicagotribune.com/colu...0200930-av42a36zxzhezejgvfytjm3oni-story.html

 

[gmase]

And then there is this thought:
https://www.chicagotribune.com/colu...0200930-av42a36zxzhezejgvfytjm3oni-story.html

I used that argument the other day in real life. There is an ebb and flow between conservatism and liberalism. Most of the progress on civil rights has come during 'liberal' periods.

 

[Theopolis Q. Hossenffer]

Every time I start to listen to some of the more "Conservative" folks I remember the old ditty that circulated in 1964 when Barry Goldwater ran for Pres.
I just remembered it was a song by The Chad Mitchell Trio(Folk music for the uninitiated)

https://genius.com/The-chad-mitchell-trio-barrys-boys-lyrics

 

[gmase]

Mitch is upset about Biden dodging the court packing question.
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate...ve-a-straight-answer-on-packing-supreme-court

This comes on the heels of the SCOTUS nominee actively dodging questions (a move used by both conservative and liberal nominees). Biden has already said he's not a fan of court packing.

 

[mongo18]

I think if the SC goes the way republicans want it to, there will be broad support for packing it, or some other kind of extraordinary measure to restore balance. Can't just have a supreme court ruling against the will of the people for lifelong appointments.

That said, I would really like Biden to come up with an answer to the question, rather than keep dodging it. Doesn't have to be a hard yes or a hard no. I did like the sound of his 18 year appointment idea.

 

[gmase]

SCOTUS agrees on something 7-1 (with Thomas dissenting without opinion):
https://thehill.com/regulation/cour...ssues-rare-ruling-against-protections-for-law

There still is hope.

 

[Theopolis Q. Hossenffer]

SCOTUS agrees on something 7-1 (with Thomas dissenting without opinion):
https://thehill.com/regulation/cour...ssues-rare-ruling-against-protections-for-law

There still is hope.

As I have said before, although the Supremes come in looking like Lions, sometimes they act like lambs. You never know hat one of them will say. Never. A life time appointment with no oversite can either make a person or break a person.

 

[gmase]

SCOTUS upholds throwing out a Kansas law championed by a Trump ally:
https://in.reuters.com/article/us-u...evive-kansas-voting-restriction-idUSKBN28O1Y7

It's pretty bad when you allegedly hold the court majority and still cannot win.