Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

    I heard Mitch McConnell on the drive home. He can go Fark himself. Ted Cruz may be more hated, Steve King more of a *******, but McConnell is the biggest farking hypocritical piece of crap to walk the face of this Earth.

    How he can say anything with a straight face is beyond me.

    Comment


    • Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

      Civil Rights Act Does Cover LGBT Rights In The Workplace

      eta: The vote was 8-3...and that court is not considered liberal.
      Last edited by Handyman; 04-04-2017, 09:29 PM.
      "It's as if the Drumpf Administration is made up of the worst and unfunny parts of the Cleveland Browns, Washington Generals, and the alien Mon-Stars from Space Jam."
      -aparch

      "Scenes in "Empire Strikes Back" that take place on the tundra planet Hoth were shot on the present-day site of Ralph Engelstad Arena."
      -INCH

      Of course I'm a fan of the Vikings. A sick and demented Masochist of a fan, but a fan none the less.
      -ScoobyDoo 12/17/2007

      Comment


      • Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

        Originally posted by Handyman View Post
        Civil Rights Act Does Cover LGBT Rights In The Workplace

        eta: The vote was 8-3...and that court is not considered liberal.
        I assume Kennedy will chew some scenery and come down in favor. Sweet issue for the Thumpers to fundraise on. So, everybody wins.
        Cornell University
        National Champion 1967, 1970
        ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
        Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020

        Comment


        • Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

          Mitch moving to go nuclear. Also heard Gorsuch is far right of Scalia by any measure.
          **NOTE: The misleading post above was brought to you by Reynold's Wrap and American Steeples, makers of Crosses.

          Originally Posted by dropthatpuck-Scooby's a lost cause.
          Originally Posted by First Time, Long Time-Always knew you were nothing but a troll.

          Comment


          • Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

            Originally posted by ScoobyDoo View Post
            Mitch moving to go nuclear. Also heard Gorsuch is far right of Scalia by any measure.
            The former is inevitable, let it happen.

            The latter I'd like to see some data. 538 graded Gorsuch as a virtual Scalia clone: the same results but without the ideological jibber-jabber.
            Cornell University
            National Champion 1967, 1970
            ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
            Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020

            Comment


            • Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

              Originally posted by Slap Shot View Post
              How much respect for the process was afforded Obama's nominee and how much did you protest the c-blocking the cowards in charge provided?

              Not saying I support what may happen with Gorsuch but one of the biggest problems we have with R's is they have the memory of a goldfish.
              The typical response is that Obama's nominee would have changed the ideology of the court. Trump's won't.

              Not saying if I agree with what either side did was right, but I'm sure that won't stop some from ripping me. Enjoy.

              Comment


              • Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

                Originally posted by Tiggsy View Post
                The typical response is that Obama's nominee would have changed the ideology of the court. Trump's won't.

                Not saying if I agree with what either side did was right, but I'm sure that won't stop some from ripping me. Enjoy.
                I think he's asking what your response would be.

                IMO, they should have brought Garland to the floor and voted him down. They were cowards and self-serving not to do that.

                I'm not all broken up about the end of 60. My instinct is that anti-democratic measures like the high cloture barrier tend to favor the forces of reaction. There are already many mechanisms in Congress for preventing anything from happening, which is why we have been largely unable to undo the terrible damage of 1981-82 that is still driving us towards fiscal Armageddon. Now, at least, the sides will be equal.
                Cornell University
                National Champion 1967, 1970
                ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
                Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020

                Comment


                • Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

                  anyone else somewhat hopeful regarding the Kushner vs Bannon fight?
                  There seems to be a small group of former NY Democrats gaining power in the west wing at the expense of the nationalists. Not that I have high hopes for president Kushner, but he has to be better than president Bannon.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Tiggsy View Post
                    The typical response is that Obama's nominee would have changed the ideology of the court. Trump's won't.
                    So? The seats aren't apportioned by ideology.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

                      Originally posted by BassAle View Post
                      anyone else somewhat hopeful regarding the Kushner vs Bannon fight?
                      There seems to be a small group of former NY Democrats gaining power in the west wing at the expense of the nationalists. Not that I have high hopes for president Kushner, but he has to be better than president Bannon.
                      President Kushner probably won't be much different from President Nixon or President Reagan or the other presidents who basically ran the White House as an adjunct department of the Orange County Chamber of Commerce. We'll wind up with the USG guaranteeing real estate speculation and maybe public flogging of troublesome tenants on the National Mall. But President Bannon probably wanted to nuke China and Japan and re-colonize Africa to restore white racial hegemony while criminalizing non-state media and making Breitbart into Voice of America, so this is an improvement.
                      Cornell University
                      National Champion 1967, 1970
                      ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
                      Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020

                      Comment


                      • Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

                        Originally posted by unofan View Post
                        So? The seats aren't apportioned by ideology.
                        It's easier for a politician to cast a yes vote when it maintains the status quo. So even if something isn't truly codified into law, it's not like a Democrat will have to fight tooth and nail to keep Trump from replace someone like Ginsburg or Sotomayor with Gorsuch.

                        If the ideology of the SCOTUS is going to change, they need a solid 12-year run of holding the office, and it has to be at the right time. This would have been one of those times, but things went awry with a bad candidate from one party and a worse winner from the other.
                        "The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." George Orwell, 1984

                        "One does not simply walk into Mordor. Its Black Gates are guarded by more than just Orcs. There is evil there that does not sleep, and the Great Eye is ever watchful. It is a barren wasteland, riddled with fire and ash and dust, the very air you breathe is a poisonous fume." Boromir

                        "Good news! We have a delivery." Professor Farnsworth

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by St. Clown View Post
                          It's easier for a politician to cast a yes vote when it maintains the status quo. So even if something isn't truly codified into law, it's not like a Democrat will have to fight tooth and nail to keep Trump from replace someone like Ginsburg or Sotomayor with Gorsuch.

                          If the ideology of the SCOTUS is going to change, they need a solid 12-year run of holding the office, and it has to be at the right time. This would have been one of those times, but things went awry with a bad candidate from one party and a worse winner from the other.
                          And the biggest hypocritical pos ever running the Senate. Don't ever let Turtle off the hook for the shiat he's pulled.

                          Comment


                          • Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

                            Originally posted by unofan View Post
                            And the biggest hypocritical pos ever running the Senate. Don't ever let Turtle off the hook for the shiat he's pulled.
                            How soon they forget. The prior two GOP SML were Bill Frist and Trent Lott. Both of them bigger POS than Mitch. I mean Trent Lott deserves to be on the American Political POS Rushmore.
                            Cornell University
                            National Champion 1967, 1970
                            ECAC Champion 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1973, 1980, 1986, 1996, 1997, 2003, 2005, 2010
                            Ivy League Champion 1966, 1967, 1968, 1969, 1970, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1977, 1978, 1983, 1984, 1985, 1996, 1997, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2012, 2014, 2018, 2019, 2020

                            Comment


                            • Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

                              I know many will blame Harry Reid and the Democrats for this but read the following and tell me it's wrong before you do.

                              In case anyone’s forgotten, there were, at the time, multiple vacancies on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, one of the nation’s most important benches, and President Obama nominated three qualified jurists, each of whom enjoyed majority support in the Senate.

                              Senate Republicans blocked the trio, filibustering each of the nominations.

                              GOP senators didn’t raise any specific objections to the jurists, but rather, said they didn’t want Obama to appoint anyone to the appellate court, ever. Republicans presented a demand never before heard in American history: the Senate must ignore the vacancies on one of the nation’s most important courts, indefinitely, because a minority of the chamber said so.

                              When Democrats noted how insane that was, GOP senators effectively dared the majority to do something about it. So, left with no choice, the Democratic majority turned to the “nuclear option” – a strategy Republican senators themselves crafted during the Bush/Cheney era.

                              GOP senators continue to characterize themselves as the victims of the events in 2013. That’s bonkers; they were the instigators of an ugly and unnecessary fight.
                              http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-s...d=sm_fb_maddow

                              And this, along with Merrick Garland are why we are here today.
                              **NOTE: The misleading post above was brought to you by Reynold's Wrap and American Steeples, makers of Crosses.

                              Originally Posted by dropthatpuck-Scooby's a lost cause.
                              Originally Posted by First Time, Long Time-Always knew you were nothing but a troll.

                              Comment


                              • Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

                                Dole and Lott have a joint editorial in today's WaPo decrying the filibuster, and they somehow don't mention Garland once. Farkers.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X