The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: Dirty Bob on September 18, 2020, 09:35:08 PM
-
I feel truly sad to learn that Ruth Bader Ginsburg has passed away today. I never wished for her demise. She may have been on the other side of the political aisle, but I had respect for her knowledge and the tenacity of her arguments, her long service on the bench, as well as for her bravery in facing cancer.
I'm also sad for my country. I'm afraid this is going to unleash a ****storm as the election nears. Batten down the hatches and secure all loose objects belowdecks, we're headed into rough weather.
Please do us all a favor and show respect for Justice Ginsburg and her loved ones. Let's show we're a better group of people than those who oppose us.
In true sadness,
Dirty Bob
-
Many Republicans have now found that they painted themselves into a corner. With all of their ranting and grandstanding that trying to seat a new Justice in the 10 months prior to a national election is improper, they are now faced with the desire to do it within a few weeks.
Will Pres. Trump and the rest in D.C. have the will power to practice what they preached? If not, it will be a classic S**T Storm of final drive to the polls.
-
Mike.
Don't be a fool.
They have to have a full court before the election because the dems will try to overturn the vote based on mail in corruption, and mistakes.
-
Good point, Tom. A full court to handle the expected election blizzard of lawsuits.
I'll make the argument that there's a difference between an out going two term president and one who's standing for reelection.
-
From what I've seen, The only time that there's a problem with seating a SC Justice during a lame duck or election year is when the Senate is controlled by the opposite party than the president. Otherwise it's business as usual for the nomination and approval vote.
-
I am pretty sure even if trump were to nominate hrc or obuma, the dems would still fight it.
Even rbg said what they were doing to kavanaugh, was wrong.
If trump is smart he will select a women so they can not do the metoo crap. I would love to see Judge Roger T. Benitez. Aka saint benitez.
-
I cannot celebrate her passing, tough on their family, etc. I get that.
But when a SCOTUS justice speaks publicly and openly about using foreign law as a basis for her decisions on internal US cases, as she has done, , we are well rid of her from the bench.
My worry is that the Republicans will suddenly lose their testicles and/or spines, and roll over for the likes of Schumer and his ilk.
"May you live in interesting times."
-
PS: I just ran across this and in spite of my previous comment, I CANNOT stop laughing!
-
It is always hard for me to put daily life ahead of the reality, emotions and respect of a death. First, we need to let her body get cold and put in the ground. I am appalled, first by the media that feels they must push the questions and speculation of what the President and Senate will do, and second that our elected Republicans not only do not deflect the questions out of respect for the death, but spout off that they are going to ram a new Justice through in less than two months - 2/3 of the average time that confirmations take.
My personal feelings aside, I see that we have two choices:
1. We can ram a Justice through and face a very high probability of having a clean sweep by the Democrats in November, and then live with that most likely for eight years.
2. We can do what we demanded four years ago and improve our chances of holding both the Executive and Senate.
What Trump and McConnell do will not change how I vote. I will still go down my list of issues and their importance. However, I know that there are many who will change based on what happens in the coming weeks, and this situation changes the entire complexion of the campaigns.
-
I agree Mike!
Shoving a Justice onto the bench too fast could completely disenfranchise an entire voting block!
-
SO:
WWRBGS?
What would RBG say? Well what she said the last time a lame-duck president nominated a supreme court justice was that Presidents don't stop being President in their last year in office. It's their job to nominate and then the Senates job to consent, or not. RBG also said it creates a bad situation to have important issues come before an 8 man court.
-
Good point Alf, however, this election might just be too important to lose!
-
True Alf. She also said she did not want Trump appointing another one. She had hoped to hang on until he was gone.
That said, I trust your quote, because, unlike too many of us, she knew how much power there are in words, and how much weight the words of any Justice carry. The problem is that too many of us do not view it the way the Constitution is written - Equal for all and blind to special interests. Win or lose it is about the process and following the Constitution. Today many of us are clinging to those words to get our way, but four years ago we were pushing an different ideology.
-
WWRBGS ?
Over my dead body ?
-
She had hoped to hang on until he was gone.
I read an interesting analysis that RBG assumed - like most of the progs did - that Hillary would win and she (RBG) could retire quietly and Hillery would pick her replacement. When Trump won, well, everything went into a cocked hat for RBG at that point.
-
Obama asked her to retire, but ahe did not trust him to make a good selection.( what does that say about obama, nothing good)
-
Well, I’ve learned the Chuckles Baker, our RINO guvner doesn’t want Trump to seat a Justice so...
I’ve changed my opinion! FILL THAT SEAT, DONALD!
-
Well, I’ve learned the Chuckles Baker, our RINO guvner doesn’t want Trump to seat a Justice so...
I’ve changed my opinion! FILL THAT SEAT, DONALD!
its funny how you can know which way to vote on something simply by who is for itbor against it
-
its funny how you can know which way to vote on something simply by who is for itbor against it
Well, we have Ranked-Choice Voting for state and federal offices on the ballot this year! I know exactly how I’ll vote on that!
For President and Congress, it’s always real clear for me!
SMALL GOVERNMENT!
-
If the roles were reversed does anyone here honestly think the dems would not proceed with a nomination and a vote.
Of course they would.
Proceed with a replacement.
Take a script out of the dems playbook. Shuck an jive. Float a progressive and then reject them in a vote after the election.
-
Trump has no choice.
They will need a full court when the democrats challenge the Trump landslide.
And you KNOW they will, they haven't quit squealing over the last one. ;D
-
If the roles were reversed does anyone here honestly think the dems would not proceed with a nomination and a vote.
Of course they would.
Proceed with a replacement.
Take a script out of the dems playbook. Shuck an jive. Float a progressive and then reject them in a vote after the election.
We don't need to guess, they showed us four years ago.
-
She should have resigned when Obama was in office. I understand the reason she didn't was she didn't trust his choices and she had imagined Hillary would have won in 2016. Then too power corrupts and it is hard to let go.
Here's the answer when someone says we should wait until "the people" make their selection in November.
People, "the people," made their selection in 2016. They made their selection, like it or not, for a 4 year term. To deny the President his selection is to deny those people the full measure of their vote and selection.
"The people" in 2020 get to chose what type of government they want for 4 years STARTING at the end of January 2021. They don't get to cut short the value of the selection from 2016 just because they don't like it.
-
If the roles were reversed does anyone here honestly think the dems would not proceed with a nomination and a vote.
Of course they would.
Proceed with a replacement.
Take a script out of the dems playbook. Shuck an jive. Float a progressive and then reject them in a vote after the election.
And to add insult, wasn't it the dems that pushed only needing majority vote for SCotUS justice approval? ;D ;D ;D
-
And to add insult, wasn't it the dems that pushed only needing majority vote for SCotUS justice approval? ;D ;D ;D
Yes, and it was also the Dems that set it up that filibuster can't be used.
-
And now we take their, "good ideas", and shove them up their asses. ;D
Maybe we should explain it to them after we f$ck them with their own dick's. ;D
-
Yes, time to take it home....
-
And now we take their, "good ideas", and shove them up their asses. ;D
Maybe we should explain it to them after we f$ck them with their own dick's. ;D
+1
-
And now we take their, "good ideas", and shove them up their asses. ;D
Maybe we should explain it to them after we f$ck them with their own dick's. ;D
8) ;D
-
People, "the people," made their selection in 2016. They made their selection, like it or not, for a 4 year term. To deny the President his selection is to deny those people the full measure of their vote and selection.
"The people" in 2020 get to chose what type of government they want for 4 years STARTING at the end of January 2021. They don't get to cut short the value of the selection from 2016 just because they don't like it.
Very well said.
-
<snip>
They will need a full court when the democrats challenge the Trump landslide.
And you KNOW they will, they haven't quit squealing over the last one. ;D
The entire mail in vote effort is an effort to throw the election.
Period.
The Dems are counting on their good buddy Chief Justice Roberts to sell out the country one more time....
-
The entire mail in vote effort is an effort to throw the election.
Period.
The Dems are counting on their good buddy Chief Justice Roberts to sell out the country one more time....
Read the mainline papers - Even the Democrat mouthpieces, like the Washington Post, and you will read of problems with mail in ballots. Pennsylvania screwed up and sent 2,000 incorrect ballots for the primary. To make up for it, they did it to the tune of 40,000 last week. This time it was on an issue for one district that was sent to a different district. Several regions are already fighting, and going to Court, over the envelopes, "blind ballots", not being used.
I fear we are at a point that I am willing to say, "The people of the United States are too stupid to vote."
-
Poll King asked "Mail in voting Yes or No." It was 80% No.
I know they are accurate because when they asked if the Presidential debate changed your vote it was 98.8% no, 1.2 % yes. ;D
-
<snip>
I fear we are at a point that I am willing to say, "The people of the United States are too stupid to vote."
Only landowners...and get rid of that pesky 19th Amendment that allow people with capricious emotions to vote capriciously.
-
Tax paying, self supporting CITIZENS only.
And they don't elect Senators, those are supposed to be representing the interests of the state and it's industry, not sucking up to the herd like some congressman.
-
<snip>
The Dems are counting on their good buddy Chief Justice Roberts to sell out the country one more time....
It looks like John Roberts is coming through for his buds....
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-turns-away-pa-gop-effort-to-block-extended-period (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-turns-away-pa-gop-effort-to-block-extended-period)