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

  • #46
    Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

    Originally posted by SJHovey View Post
    I think there are two very real questions that Senate Democrats have to ask themselves. One, how many bullets do they think they have, and two, how many bullets do they think they need.

    Whoever replaces Scalia, it isn't likely to tilt the court more rightward than it already was. And even with a "conservative" majority on the court, progressives weren't exactly getting run over by decisions going against them. It was, at best for both sides, a mixed bag of results.

    Let's say they go to the mat to defeat this guy. Can they do it again to the replacement nominee? Do they think they get a better replacement nominee? What is the effect on the mid-terms if there is a huge battle on this?

    So assuming an all out war for this spot, now what happens when Kennedy or Ginsburg or someone goes down in a year or two? All appointments are important, but I'm not sure in the grand scheme that this one is more important than say Kennedy's replacement, or even more significant, Ginsburg's.

    Unless the Dems want to gamble, as the Senate Republicans did, and hope that Trump just blows up and gets ousted in the next year or two.
    From what I read this appointment is a set up for Kennedy. Trump went with one of Kennedy's clerks who has the chops for this seat so Kennedy will retire. Then he'll put the wack job on the Court with 51 Senate votes to permanently tilt the Court.

    And it will work.

    Originally posted by Kepler View Post
    That's simple. We have none, and we know it.

    We can't just destroy the government because we believe in it. The Republicans can risk destroying the government because it's in the way of their paymasters. The only parts they need to keep are the parts that keep the ever-growing poor from their throats -- the cops and the army. Everything else is overhead.
    And that's the big big big problem.
    **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


    • #47
      Originally posted by ScoobyDoo View Post
      From what I read this appointment is a set up for Kennedy. Trump went with one of Kennedy's clerks who has the chops for this seat so Kennedy will retire. Then he'll put the wack job on the Court with 51 Senate votes to permanently tilt the Court.

      And it will work.



      And that's the big big big problem.
      That theory makes sense, but for Supreme Court nominee you still need 60 votes in the senate.
      Originally posted by BobbyBrady
      Crosby probably wouldn't even be on BC's top two lines next year

      Comment


      • #48
        Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

        Originally posted by Drew S. View Post
        That theory makes sense, but for Supreme Court nominee you still need 60 votes in the senate.
        ROTFLMAO. Do you even pay attention? McConnell can change that at any time. If it truly sets the Court up to overturn Roe vs. Wade do you think for one ****ing second he will hesitate to do so?
        **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


        • #49
          Originally posted by Kepler View Post
          It's more that as people age they gradually lose their conceits, and the pompous "You NEED me on that wall!" drag act of the Brave But Alone Conservative Who Watched Too Much John Wayne is the biggest, gaudiest, more snowflakey conceit of all.
          Never mess with John Wayne. He was more American than the bald eagle!

          Going to an extreme here, but if Hill won and the Senate flipped, you'd be all over yourselves congratulating a left tilting jurist appointment. This thread would be a giant orgasm of hooray for Hollywood!

          Politics is ugly. That's why, I guess, the population of the cesspool that is Congress rarely changes.

          Scooby - if RvW is sent back to the states, how much actually changes? There is a majority of support for abortion, but a majority of support for restrictions. That's the likely outcome.
          Last edited by joecct; 02-01-2017, 09:54 AM.
          CCT '77 & '78
          4 kids
          5 grandsons (BCA 7/09, CJA 5/14, JDL 8/14, JFL 6/16, PJL 7/18)
          1 granddaughter (EML 4/18)

          ”Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
          - Benjamin Franklin

          Banned from the St. Lawrence University Facebook page - March 2016 (But I got better).

          I want to live forever. So far, so good.

          Comment


          • #50
            Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

            Originally posted by Kepler View Post
            Ah yes, the "I'm beating you for your own good" theory of child rearing. Beloved by conservatives everywhere. The pride of "brutal honesty."

            A parent can set boundaries, instill values, and not be a martinet. In fact teaching your children (especially your sons) that the only way to be adult is to be a disciplinarian dipsh-t is a very bad lesson.

            Looks good on you, though.
            No one needs to be beaten. Sometimes it's just a matter of saying "no" when something is demanded. Don't need to raise a bunch of narcissists now, do we? Who knows. They might grow up to become President.
            That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

            Comment


            • #51
              Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

              Originally posted by joecct View Post
              Never mess with John Wayne. He was more American than the bald eagle!

              Going to an extreme here, but if Hill won and the Senate flipped, you'd be all over yourselves congratulating a left tilting jurist appointment. This thread would be a giant orgasm of hooray for Hollywood!

              Politics is ugly. That's why, I guess, the population of the cesspool that is Congress rarely changes.
              As I've said a hundred times, I'm fine with the politics. We lost and you guys get your political choices because elections have consequences. You had to live with us for 8 years, now we have to live with you. Sucks but OK.

              But the process violations and the dictatorial personality, style and actions of Hair Fuhrer are a different story. That's something we should all be opposed to. The rules and the law are there to protect us all. You may laugh now because you have the ax, but do you trust us with it? America is more important than politics. Your side is losing sight of that because of temporary convenience and that is a huge mistake.

              John Wayne is great in Stagecoach and True Grit and Quiet Man and Liberty Valence. In most things he just mails it in like most actors. I'm OK with watching him for fun, but several generations of reactionary dingbats built their personalities around aping his characters because they superficially fit in with the reactionary mindset. That's as dumb as being an Elvis impersonator.
              Last edited by Kepler; 02-01-2017, 10:00 AM.
              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


              • #52
                Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

                Originally posted by joecct View Post
                Scooby - if RvW is sent back to the states, how much actually changes? There is a majority of support for abortion, but a majority of support for restrictions. That's the likely outcome.
                I guess you haven't read the stories from Texas on this topic that have occurred just in the last few years with it being legal in all 50 States. I guess your empathy for humanity and what those women have had to go through isn't on the same level as mine.

                But, hey, no harm no foul right? It'll just go to the States. The 13 year old girl that had to go to term with her rapists child doesn't need our protection.
                **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


                • #53
                  Originally posted by Kepler View Post
                  As I've said a hundred times, I'm fine with the politics. We lost and you guys get your political choices because elections have consequences. You had to live with us for 8 years, now we have to live with you. Sucks but OK.

                  But the process violations and the dictatorial personality, style and actions of Hair Fuhrer is a different story. That's something we should all be opposed to. The rules and the law are there to protect us all. You may laugh now because you have the ax, but do you trust us with it? America is more important than politics. Your side is losing sight of that and that is a huge mistake.
                  If POTUD goes off the statutes, he needs to be corrected/stopped. If you disagree on moral grounds, sorry. Tried that for 45 years - doesn't work.
                  CCT '77 & '78
                  4 kids
                  5 grandsons (BCA 7/09, CJA 5/14, JDL 8/14, JFL 6/16, PJL 7/18)
                  1 granddaughter (EML 4/18)

                  ”Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
                  - Benjamin Franklin

                  Banned from the St. Lawrence University Facebook page - March 2016 (But I got better).

                  I want to live forever. So far, so good.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by ScoobyDoo View Post
                    ROTFLMAO. Do you even pay attention? McConnell can change that at any time. If it truly sets the Court up to overturn Roe vs. Wade do you think for one ****ing second he will hesitate to do so?
                    It's obviously your right to fear the worst, but I don't think it will happen. Even if it did come to pass you're still not in that bad of shape. I don't think Kagan, Sotomayor, Breyer, Ginaburg, Roberts will let anything very extreme get through. I wouldn't be surprised if Gorsuch is more along the lines of Roberts than Scalia.
                    Originally posted by BobbyBrady
                    Crosby probably wouldn't even be on BC's top two lines next year

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by Drew S. View Post
                      It's obviously your right to fear the worst, but I don't think it will happen. Even if it did come to pass you're still not in that bad of shape. I don't think Kagan, Sotomayor, Breyer, Ginaburg, Roberts will let anything very extreme get through. I wouldn't be surprised if Gorsuch is more along the lines of Roberts than Scalia.
                      If the legislature passes a law that is bad but meets constitutional muster, it should be left alone. Roberts called PPACA a bad law but left it to the Congress to fix it. If Gorsuch subscribes to that, we're fine.
                      CCT '77 & '78
                      4 kids
                      5 grandsons (BCA 7/09, CJA 5/14, JDL 8/14, JFL 6/16, PJL 7/18)
                      1 granddaughter (EML 4/18)

                      ”Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
                      - Benjamin Franklin

                      Banned from the St. Lawrence University Facebook page - March 2016 (But I got better).

                      I want to live forever. So far, so good.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

                        Originally posted by SJHovey View Post
                        No one needs to be beaten. Sometimes it's just a matter of saying "no" when something is demanded. Don't need to raise a bunch of narcissists now, do we? Who knows. They might grow up to become President.
                        The self-image of the Strong Man Standing Against The Wind is quite narcissistic.

                        All good parents say no to their kids; all good parents are selectively dictatorial and not friends. The difference which the martinet builds his entire self-image around does not exist. It's just a lack of imagination to take the shortcut of dull-witted adamance instead of the much more difficult path of balancing a hundred different considerations.

                        There are plenty of ways of saying "this hurts me more than it does you" short of assault, and they all add up to a lazy parent passing that practice down to the next generation.
                        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


                        • #57
                          Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

                          Originally posted by joecct View Post
                          If the legislature passes a law that is bad but meets constitutional muster, it should be left alone. Roberts called PPACA a bad law but left it to the Congress to fix it. If Gorsuch subscribes to that, we're fine.
                          Since Roe v. Wade has already been subjected to the constitutional test, honor stare decisis and leave it alone?

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

                            Originally posted by Drew S. View Post
                            It's obviously your right to fear the worst, but I don't think it will happen. Even if it did come to pass you're still not in that bad of shape. I don't think Kagan, Sotomayor, Breyer, Ginaburg, Roberts will let anything very extreme get through. I wouldn't be surprised if Gorsuch is more along the lines of Roberts than Scalia.
                            Both Roberts and Scalia were consummate politicians, so I hope Gorsuch has some of those instincts but will use them for good as so far Roberts has and Scalia never did. Gorsuch appears to be principled, which is good as far as it goes (Stanley Fish wrote an excellent book about how limited principle is). I look forward to him disappointing conservatives when they go nuts and not being a rubber stamp like Thomas and Alito.
                            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


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by burd View Post
                              Since Roe v. Wade has already been subjected to the constitutional test, honor stare decisis and leave it alone?
                              Absolutely. I'd be surprised if Roberts voted to overturn it. Alito and Thomas definitely would.
                              Originally posted by BobbyBrady
                              Crosby probably wouldn't even be on BC's top two lines next year

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Re: Power of the SCOTUS IX: The outlook wasn’t brilliant for the SCOTUS nine that day

                                Originally posted by burd View Post
                                Since Roe v. Wade has already been subjected to the constitutional test, honor stare decisis and leave it alone?
                                I'm pretty sure the actual precedent now is Casey, which is how the rights have been gutted wherever the orcs could get away with it.
                                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

                                Working...
                                X