Drunkard's Walk Forums
Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - Printable Version

+- Drunkard's Walk Forums (http://www.accessdenied-rms.net/forums)
+-- Forum: General (http://www.accessdenied-rms.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Politics and Other Fun (http://www.accessdenied-rms.net/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=17)
+--- Thread: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess (/showthread.php?tid=13944)

Pages: 1 2


Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - RMH999 - 09-18-2020

https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/18/politics/ruth-bader-ginsburg-dead/index.html

How soon before McConnell says, "That rule about not appoint Supreme Court Justices in an Election Year?  Yeah, that only applies to Black Democrat Presidents."


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - RMH999 - 09-18-2020

Never mind. He said he would last year (forgot about that...).

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/28/politics/mitch-mcconnell-supreme-court-2020/index.html


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - SilverFang01 - 09-18-2020

Mitch will move so fast he will travel back in time.


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - Labster - 09-18-2020

I think you’ve forgotten McConnell is a turtle.


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - Rajvik - 09-18-2020

there is no actual rule saying that the senate cannot interview during an election year, however it is at the discretion of the party that is in control of the senate whether or not to view a nominee to any vacant position. It was Judge Garland's bad luck that the Obama administration nominated him when the republicans controlled the senate.

I didnt agree with her politics, but like i said in the other thread, i respected the woman


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - Rajvik - 09-19-2020

i apologize for making a double post, but i felt this should be kept separate from my above statement as it is starting to get into the politics of the day versus the emotions of losing the good judge.

WHAT THE EVER LOVING FUCK ASSHOLES?

Now i don't know who the fuck Beau Willimon and Laura E. Bassett are, but apparently they are such brave liberal twitter warriors that they feel that promising to either shut down the country, or cause more, bigger riots, is the answer to the possibility of Trump and McConnel pushing another SCOTUS pick through in the remaining forty odd days before the election, or even as some on Discord are calling, "The Lame Duck" session of the Senate in the wake of the election.

Part of me would love to see Ginsburg's wishes respected and a new justice not named until either after the election, (should Trump and the republicans win) or else let Biden pick the replacement. Another part understands that this is not likely to happen as politics and power plays completely rule the day and while i believe the republicans could get a boost in their numbers by respecting the judges wishes, (you know, those middle of the road, not quite decided Democrats and independents) i can also see the reasoning of rebalancing the court closer to what it was meant to be, a check on power to require laws to adhere to the CONSTITUTION and not legislate from the bench.

Trump will probably name his nominee by monday, and McConnel will get the wheels moving, the election is in less than 50 days, you don't like who is in office and what they have done, vote them out. If you become a rioter you become part of the problem and deserve everything you get.


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - Star Ranger4 - 09-19-2020

We were discussing this, and *I* sat it is not possible. WHy? Because CONGRESS GOES ON RECESS at the start of October for the election.

There are enough hoops that have to be jumped through before that that there is no way the vote can be placed before the senate floor in general in that time.
And enough democrats still in key positions from when THEY controlled the senate that they can be sure.

Therefore, If I was McConnel I'd kind of smile and say "Well, your sure we're gonna win, right? why bother, it can happen after the election."

The only grounds that McConnell might do a 180 on is if they LOSE and are trying to ram through a lame duck's nomination, but the Dem's on the floor could fillibuster and kill it that way, as I don't think the rep's have enough votes to kill a fillibuster.


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - Dartz - 09-19-2020

I'm seeing people seriously saying the Court will be stacked with judges to make the most favourable rulings towards the maintenance of the current President, irrespective of what the actual vote is. The system will be buckled to breaking point to keep their man in the White House.

You've both sides expecting the other to steal the election from them. People are genuinely scared of this shit. Probably stirred up by the Russian bots, but also reflecting a real fear and sense of disenfranchisement and that the Other is turning the rules against them.

That's how Civil Wars start. When, no matter the result of an election, each side will be certain the other stole it from them.

It's crazy.

They're both two cheeks of the same arse anyway.


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - Labster - 09-19-2020

The thing is, that's the Republican party does.  They steal elections.  They've been running minority governments for the majority of this millennium, but have structured things so that they keep winning, even without the support of the majority of people.  Which they use as a justification for ignoring the will of the people even more.

What's different now is that Republicans -- not the party, but the individual members and voters of the party -- represent a clear and present threat to other Americans.  All of them that go around without wearing masks, demanding that schools reopen, operating unsafe workplaces are creating a circumstance where we all are more likely to die.  Individaul members of the Republican Party want nothing less than the mass death of Americans, and show it in their actions.

This would be all fine and well if they had their own country, and we could close the borders to them.  But we can't, because they seem to think that the entire country is theirs to do with as they want.  Like the wedding up in Millinocket, Maine -- people came in from out of town, none of the attendees ended up very sick, but by their negligent actions other people have died.  If they did that in their own country -- fine, just go be stupid together.  But because we have to live with this foreign culture in our midst, one that believes in anti-science and racism and celebrity cannibalism, we are all at risk.

And stacking the court is just one more step towards cementing the Republicans' apartheid government.


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - robkelk - 09-19-2020

(09-19-2020, 11:50 AM)Rajvik Wrote: Now i don't know who the fuck Beau Willimon and Laura E. Bassett are,
Beau Willimon has a Wikipedia page - it took me 5 seconds to find that out.

Laura E. Bassett ... there's a reporter and a lawyer who share that name.


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - Ankhani - 09-19-2020

Quote:...as I don't think the rep's have enough votes to kill a filibuster.

Just as a point of clarification, the rules surrounding the use of filibuster were changed during the Trump Admin., and now it only takes a simple majority to end one, when regarding presidential appointees. That will not stop them.


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - GethN7 - 09-19-2020

I was well aware there were a lot of people who waiting for Ginsberg to die for their own gain, and regardless of your politics, that's vile. Just because someone's life is a hindrance to what you want to do does not mean you are justified in wishing for their death. The fact she held on as long as did is a testament to her endurance, and now that's she's passed, my condolences to her family.


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - Rajvik - 09-19-2020

Geth, i won't say people weren't waiting for it to happen, quite frankly to say such would be a blatant lie. On the other hand, her age, coupled with the times she had gone into the hospital due to cancer concerns over the last decade were, in a way a statement that it was only a matter of time. She was asked during the Obama administration why she didn't go ahead and step down, knowing that with the senate in the hands of the democrats at the time, that she would be replaced by another liberal and she said that she had too many good years ahead of her to do her work. I feel that she fully believed that Hillary was going to win the presidency, and i think that if Hillary had, she would have stepped down probably last year, however, with Trump in the white house and the republicans not just controlling but getting a greater majority in 2018, she probably felt that she couldn't as she was sure they would put another constitutionalist on the court.

again i will say, as much as i disagreed with her politics, i did respect the woman.

Yes Dartz, this IS how Civil Wars start, in fact i will go as far as to say that when history looks back at this, they will probably point to the election of Trump much like they point to the election of Abraham Lincoln as the spark that actually started things. Funny thing is, its the Democrats doing it all over again.


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - classicdrogn - 09-20-2020

Pfft, outside of a few individuals, the Democrats as a group will never do more than march, chant and wave signs, and a few individuals do not a civil war make. In the wrong place one might see a building burned down or a couple of bodies, but the party of gun control doesn't have the means to rise in rebellion even if they had the will.


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - Rajvik - 09-20-2020

Drogn, you believe that, i look at Portland, Rochester, Seattle, Chicago and a half dozen other major American cities and disagree


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - robkelk - 09-20-2020

All of which were peaceful before the Nicknamer-in-Chief chose to interfere.


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - Rajvik - 09-20-2020

(09-20-2020, 11:02 AM)robkelk Wrote: All of which were peaceful before the Nicknamer-in-Chief chose to interfere.

thats horseshit and you know it rob, or should i dig up the "protest" where antifa was blocking a Portland intersection and assaulting peoples vehicles a couple of years ago. Portland has been violent since day fucking one of the "George Floyd Protests" and why pray tell me, should anyone allow vandals like this to burn police stations or courthouses,


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - classicdrogn - 09-20-2020

I look at those cities, and I see people chanting and waving signs, aside from a few individuals who get a wild hair up a fundamental aperture, and who promptly get denounced by the rest of the protesters while the trumpistas try to play it up like the Rodney King riots are being reenacted. They are the primary example I was drawing from.


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - robkelk - 09-20-2020

(09-20-2020, 11:58 AM)Rajvik Wrote:
(09-20-2020, 11:02 AM)robkelk Wrote: All of which were peaceful before the Nicknamer-in-Chief chose to interfere.

thats horseshit and you know it rob, or should i dig up the "protest" where antifa was blocking a Portland intersection and assaulting peoples vehicles a couple of years ago. Portland has been violent since day fucking one of the "George Floyd Protests" and why pray tell me, should anyone allow vandals like this to burn police stations or courthouses,

I think you need to, because I don't recall hearing anything of the sort in fact-checked news. Cite your sources.

Also:
(09-12-2020, 02:40 PM)Norgarth Wrote: [Image: BW6YM4T.jpg]



RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - Rajvik - 09-20-2020

here rob, is a compilation for you, mostly CNN and MSNBC claiming they are "Mostly peaceful" while you have blatant assaults, arson, and various other crimes happening in the background. now, are you gong to believe the liars at the news, or your own eyes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nTyCiZFztw


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - robkelk - 09-20-2020

Looks "mostly peaceful" to me. Even the guy flipping the bird on-camera was peaceful. The first clip even makes the same point that Norgarth did in the section that I quoted in the post that you replied to.

If that's all you've got, then you haven't got anything.


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - Rajvik - 09-20-2020

or like me you refuse to be convinced, so ta

that was sarcasm by the way

look what i posted there was just the easiest way of showing it, i don't want to start going deep on this because its going to eat into my writing time, kind of like me not doing a paper on the failure of socialism so that i can convince the lot of you that it is the wrong path. but quite frankly i can tell that as usual you don't want to be convinced. I take this stance because it could happen, worst possible case issue, when you have to be responsible you take that into account


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - Isodecan - 09-20-2020

Unless at least 4 Republicans decide that they are going to abide by their own precedent Trump is going to name another Supreme Court Justice.

That is a simple fact at this point. If Mitch is really feeling cunning he will push through a vote before the Senate goes on recess and allow the Senators to 'vote their conscience' letting Republican Senators who have been getting hammered for being lapdogs to Trump to vote against this to 'prove' their independence.

Then, after the Election is over Trump can put the same person through and get them approved on a party line vote during the Lame Duck Session.


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - Labster - 09-21-2020

^ This guy gets it. Pushing it into the lame duck session is what I would do in their shoes.

Buuuut, Trump. If he insists on getting the confirmation before the election -- as a way of ensuring that the court rules the "correct" way in any election challenges -- then all bets are off. And then if Trump starts attacking those in his own party for voting against him -- thus sinking their own reelection hopes -- then the calculus starts looking very different. And if he needs to win the election to avoid jail time, then this seems like a likely tactic.


RE: Ruth Bader Ginsburg passess - robkelk - 09-21-2020

(09-20-2020, 07:16 PM)Rajvik Wrote: ... i don't want to start going deep on this because its going to eat into my writing time, kind of like me not doing a paper on the failure of socialism so that i can convince the lot of you that it is the wrong path. ...

When did any of the Scandinavian countries fail? They think it's the right path, and so far it's worked for them.