ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 28th June 2018, 12:34 PM   #321
Babbylonian
Penultimate Amazing
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 11,348
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
But can I ask, if Republicans were pushing their representatives, YES pushing them, to add more justices (because we really do need more, don't we!) and the President and Senate agreed that it was a good idea to pack the court, then wouldn't we now be talking about a tyrannous power grab?
Given that the current occupant of the Oval Office couldn't even manage a plurality of votes, I'd say yes.

A plurality of Americans support the right to have an abortion. At least a plurality of Americans support same-sex marriage. A majority of Americans support the idea of federally funding healthcare.

The current government simply does not represent the opinions and attitudes of the majority - or even a plurality - of the population.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 12:41 PM   #322
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 23,863
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
Sure I do, in general.

But I have big objections to packing the court with people like Trump and people who will take loyalty pledges to Trump.


Highlighted because it's apparent people want to read any anti-trump sentiment into an anti-republican sentiment. You people need to start realizing that being Anti-Trump is being PRO-American, not Anti-Republican.
I don't care whether it is anti-Trump or anti-Republican or if there is any meaningful distinction. And I am not interested whether you are pro- or anti-American.

Advocating packing the court is a dumb strategy for going after Trump, isn't it? Why? Because you have no power to pack the court while Trump is president.

You people need to understand that if you call for the tearing up the rule book to get to Trump, then you are tearing up the constraints that can be used against you by Trump!

Or perhaps you can explain how packing the court is going to thwart Trump.
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 12:46 PM   #323
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 23,863
Originally Posted by Babbylonian View Post
Given that the current occupant of the Oval Office couldn't even manage a plurality of votes, I'd say yes.

A plurality of Americans support the right to have an abortion. At least a plurality of Americans support same-sex marriage. A majority of Americans support the idea of federally funding healthcare.

The current government simply does not represent the opinions and attitudes of the majority - or even a plurality - of the population.
The only relevant bit there is that you agree that packing the court would be an exercise in tyranny. Now, would you support it if the Democrats held executive and legislative power?
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 12:48 PM   #324
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
I don't care whether it is anti-Trump or anti-Republican or if there is any meaningful distinction. And I am not interested whether you are pro- or anti-American.

Advocating packing the court is a dumb strategy for going after Trump, isn't it? Why? Because you have no power to pack the court while Trump is president.

You people need to understand that if you call for the tearing up the rule book to get to Trump, then you are tearing up the constraints that can be used against you by Trump!

Or perhaps you can explain how packing the court is going to thwart Trump.
I thought you were talking in generalities. I oppose packing the court, with the caveat that if it's the only way to stop trump from packing it with his own people (loyal to him, not America, and loyal to money, not America) then I'll support it.

I hardly know enough to comment on whether or not that specific tactic can work or is desirable. I'm all ears.
NoahFence is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 12:49 PM   #325
autumn1971
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,457
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Narrator: they aren't.
You are correct. If democracy was being defended in the US there would be blood in the streets and a massive campaign of internal terrorism.

I hope it need not get there, but I have no illusions that it will be a short and easy defense. It will be lost for every resistance fighter in their lifetime. It will require the crippling of America's economy by massive destruction of transportation capabilities and production capabilities. It will not be a matter of a bunch of honest people with rifles, it will be a matter of civilian casualties mounting until internal control collapses.

Then, when Europe and Canada offer aid, even the Trump supporters might realize that "socialist Europe" is a better rebuilder than whoever Putin or Kim have appointed as their heirs apparent.

Or, you know, republicans in state legislatures stop their insane power-grab and accept that democracy isn't a contest for ultimate power, but a social contract with built in compromises.
__________________
'A knave; a rascal; an eater of broken meats; a base, proud, shallow, beggardly, three-suited, hundred-pound, filthy, worsted-stocking knave; a lily-livered, action-taking knave, a whoreson, glass-gazing, superservicable, finical rogue;... the son and heir of a mongral bitch: one whom I will beat into clamorous whining, if thou deniest the least syllable of thy addition."'
-The Bard
autumn1971 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 12:50 PM   #326
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 41,151
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
Sure I do, in general.

But I have big objections to packing the court with people like Trump and people who will take loyalty pledges to Trump.
Nobody on Trump's list of potential nominees is like Trump. And Gorsuch didn't take any loyalty pledge, why would you expect any other nominee to do so?

Quote:
Highlighted because it's apparent people want to read any anti-trump sentiment into an anti-republican sentiment.
You're right, this post isn't anti-Republican. It's anti-reality.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 12:51 PM   #327
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 69,917
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
Let's agree that it was. What are you advocating as a response? A call to pack the court? Who has the power to do that right now?
Let's agree that it was NOT OK.

Garland was a moderate. Gorsuch is extreme right.

The court is currently packed. I'm calling to put it back in neutral.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 12:54 PM   #328
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 69,917
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
Do you have no objections, in principle, to packing the Court?
Can't speak for Noah, but I object to the tyranny by the minority and that's what McConnell's move enabled.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 28th June 2018 at 01:11 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 12:54 PM   #329
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 41,151
Originally Posted by autumn1971 View Post
You are correct. If democracy was being defended in the US there would be blood in the streets and a massive campaign of internal terrorism.

I hope it need not get there, but I have no illusions that it will be a short and easy defense. It will be lost for every resistance fighter in their lifetime. It will require the crippling of America's economy by massive destruction of transportation capabilities and production capabilities. It will not be a matter of a bunch of honest people with rifles, it will be a matter of civilian casualties mounting until internal control collapses.

Then, when Europe and Canada offer aid, even the Trump supporters might realize that "socialist Europe" is a better rebuilder than whoever Putin or Kim have appointed as their heirs apparent.

Or, you know, republicans in state legislatures stop their insane power-grab and accept that democracy isn't a contest for ultimate power, but a social contract with built in compromises.
The message from the left: give us political power, or we start killing people until everything collapses.

I just can't imagine why the left isn't universally liked.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 12:55 PM   #330
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Nobody on Trump's list of potential nominees is like Trump. And Gorsuch didn't take any loyalty pledge, why would you expect any other nominee to do so?



You're right, this post isn't anti-Republican. It's anti-reality.
From the folks who gave you "there's no evidence of Russian involvement or Coordination with the Trump campaign"

NoahFence is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 12:56 PM   #331
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 69,917
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
What? No! The EC is NOT gerrymandering. Can we at least use the words correctly instead of how they line up with our feelings?
Yes use words correctly, the EC is built-in gerrymandering.

It's not about my feelings. I can say with certainly that if the situation were reversed the alt-right and the right wing would be feeling quite angry about it.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 12:57 PM   #332
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 69,917
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
Huh? Are you arguing she should have gerrymandered instead?
Oh. I shall re-check my grammar, thanks.

Fixed one, the other was OK.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 28th June 2018 at 12:59 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 12:59 PM   #333
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
 
Hellbound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not in Hell, but I can see it from here on a clear day...
Posts: 12,755
Sorry, but no. The Electoral college is not gerrymandering.

You may claim it's unfairly weighed, or not representative, or a number of other failings, but gerrymandering has a specific meaning.

No one's been redrawing state lines.
Hellbound is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 12:59 PM   #334
NoahFence
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Patriot Nation
Posts: 22,131
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
The message from the left: give us political power, or we start killing people until everything collapses.

I just can't imagine why the left isn't universally liked.
That's the one simple thing you people can't see. Why?

This whole fiasco of the last few years is because of the PERSONAL power your boy trump wants. This is not a political issue, this is a matter of national security. Stop looking at trump as anything political. It was and is an attack on our country.

Sure, there are evil righties who are taking advantage of the situation like McConnell, but at the most basic level, this isn't politics. It's security.

And now to bring it back on the topic, if you don't think Trump is going to run his picks by Putin you're sadly mistaken.
NoahFence is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:00 PM   #335
The Big Dog
Penultimate Amazing
 
The Big Dog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 27,288
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
The message from the left: give us political power, or we start killing people until everything collapses.

I just can't imagine why the left isn't universally liked.
In order to save American Democracy, we had to destroy it.

-Leftists learning that right leaning SCOTUS Justice Kennedy who wrote Citizen's United was retiring.
__________________
CCP human rights abuse deniers are the fundamental equivalent of holocaust deniers.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:01 PM   #336
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 41,151
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
From the folks who gave you "there's no evidence of Russian involvement or Coordination with the Trump campaign"

You can't address the substance of my post, so you engage in ad hominem.

indeed.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:02 PM   #337
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 23,863
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
I thought you were talking in generalities.
I was, but then you offered the exception, so I responded to that.

Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
I oppose packing the court, with the caveat that if it's the only way to stop trump from packing it with his own people (loyal to him, not America, and loyal to money, not America) then I'll support it.

I hardly know enough to comment on whether or not that specific tactic can work or is desirable. I'm all ears.
"packing the court" does not refer to replacing a retiring judge with a judge to your liking. It refers to increasing the numbers of judges to overwhelm the votes of the present judges.

As the President, with the "advice and consent" of the Senate are the people who decide the judges, packing the court to thwart Trump, as a strategy is a non-starter.
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:02 PM   #338
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,836
Originally Posted by Hellbound View Post
Sorry, but no. The Electoral college is not gerrymandering.

You may claim it's unfairly weighed, or not representative, or a number of other failings, but gerrymandering has a specific meaning.

No one's been redrawing state lines.

Look up why Dakota became two states.

ETA: Oh, funny. I went to look it up for you and found it in the wikipedia article on gerrymandering: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering
__________________
REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.

Last edited by RecoveringYuppy; 28th June 2018 at 01:04 PM.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:03 PM   #339
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 69,917
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
I don't care whether it is anti-Trump or anti-Republican or if there is any meaningful distinction. And I am not interested whether you are pro- or anti-American.

Advocating packing the court is a dumb strategy for going after Trump, isn't it? Why? Because you have no power to pack the court while Trump is president.

You people need to understand that if you call for the tearing up the rule book to get to Trump, then you are tearing up the constraints that can be used against you by Trump!

Or perhaps you can explain how packing the court is going to thwart Trump.
First off, don't lecture the left about tearing up any rule book. The right wing threw the book out sometime during the 1980s.

But that aside, this isn't about going after Trump. Where did you get that idea? Trump is not picking these justices, the Federalist Society is. And that means the Kochs and the Mercers are picking the judges.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:03 PM   #340
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,554
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
There is no constitutional crisis here regarding the Supreme Court. There's just a lot of liberal butt hurt.
Sure there was, the constitution did not give congress the authority to simply ignore the presidents nominee like that. But they took it and got away with it. So the new standard is that congress can simply ignore all the presidents nominees. A proper republican standard that.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:04 PM   #341
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 41,151
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
That's the one simple thing you people can't see. Why?

This whole fiasco of the last few years is because of the PERSONAL power your boy trump wants. This is not a political issue, this is a matter of national security.
Trump has no more power than any other president. The last year and a half have not actually been much of a disaster, no matter how much you freak out about it. And the fact that Garland didn't get confirmed and now Trump gets to pick a replacement for Kennedy is indeed a political issue, not a national security issue.

Quote:
And now to bring it back on the topic, if you don't think Trump is going to run his picks by Putin you're sadly mistaken.
Wow. Trump broke you. He totally broke you.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:05 PM   #342
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,554
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
I always wondered what the leftist version of the birtherism nonsense would look like. Now I know.
Clearly all the guilty pleas given to Muler are really from being framed! None of them did anything that they plead guilty to and if they did it was totally legal.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:05 PM   #343
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 41,151
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Sure there was, the constitution did not give congress the authority to simply ignore the presidents nominee like that.
Actually, it did.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:06 PM   #344
Hellbound
Merchant of Doom
 
Hellbound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Not in Hell, but I can see it from here on a clear day...
Posts: 12,755
Originally Posted by RecoveringYuppy View Post
Look up why Dakota became two states.
It became two states when it was admitted to the union. No one has been redrawing lines.

Gerrymandering is specifically the rezoning and redrawing of district boundaries to gain an advantage in elections. That's not what happened when the Dakotas were created, nor what's happening with the EC now.

That's not to say everything is fine and nothing is wrong, but terms should be used accurately.
Hellbound is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:06 PM   #345
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,554
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
A Supreme Court justice is retiring, as often happens, and will be replaced by another justice nominated by the president and approved by the Senate. This is the normal way of things, is it not?
Not anymore see Mcconnell about that. The people should have a say first!
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:07 PM   #346
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,554
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Mueller does not indict, the Grand Jury does.

It's the evidence that will matter, not the action taken or not taken based on the evidence. We know the corrupt GOP controlled House might ignore evidence of serious wrong-doing. But the public will see the evidence. It won't be possible to suppress it.
They have already discredited it. No one who supports trump will care what comes out, they gave up on facts and truth a long time ago.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:07 PM   #347
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 41,151
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Clearly all the guilty pleas given to Muler are really from being framed!
Which guilty plea has anything to do with alleged collusion between Trump and Russia?
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:08 PM   #348
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 23,863
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Let's agree that it was NOT OK.
My response was to whether or not it was a dangerous move. But yeah, let's agree it was NOT OK!

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Garland was a moderate. Gorsuch is extreme right.
That's irrelevant!

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
The court is currently packed. I'm calling to put it back in neutral.
Huh? Again, you shouldn't equivocate on these terms. Court packing has a specific meaning (as does Gerrymandering). You know what the meaning of court packing is because you were calling for more judges. This is a truly stupidly dangerous tactic especially given who is in power now and who, presumably, has the power to pack the court.

Either you are against abuse of power or you are not. You are in favour of it in order to compensate (and then some) for abuses you perceive to have happened.
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:09 PM   #349
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 69,917
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
I thought you were talking in generalities. I oppose packing the court, with the caveat that if it's the only way to stop trump from packing it with his own people (loyal to him, not America, and loyal to money, not America) then I'll support it.

I hardly know enough to comment on whether or not that specific tactic can work or is desirable. I'm all ears.
Gorsuch might feel some loyalty to Trump for the appointment. Who knows what was said when Trump interviewed him. But in general Gorsuch and probably the next appointment are not Trump crony-picks.

Like GW couldn't get Harriet Myers appointed, Trump can't get an idiot like Giuliani on the bench and Trump doesn't want the embarrassment of defeat. Trump will want accolades for his pick and that means another judge from the Federalist list.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:10 PM   #350
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,554
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Actually, it did.
How does putting your fingers in your ears and shouting "I CAN'T HEAR YOU" equate to advice and consent? I get it they can do no wrongs, blacks shouldn't vote and concentration camps for kids is the american way.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:12 PM   #351
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 44,554
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Gorsuch might feel some loyalty to Trump for the appointment. Who knows what was said when Trump interviewed him. But in general Gorsuch and probably the next appointment are not Trump crony-picks.

Like GW couldn't get Harriet Myers appointed, Trump can't get an idiot like Giuliani on the bench and Trump doesn't want the embarrassment of defeat. Trump will want accolades for his pick and that means another judge from the Federalist list.
Of course he could, there is no way that republicans are going to let any nominee he put forward get blocked. It could mean no new judge before the election and that would be criminal.
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:12 PM   #352
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 41,151
Originally Posted by Hellbound View Post
That's not to say everything is fine and nothing is wrong, but terms should be used accurately.
Nonsense. Words should be used in whatever manner is expedient at the moment, regardless of any prior usage. That's the Humpty Dumpty theory of language.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:13 PM   #353
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 69,917
Originally Posted by Hellbound View Post
Sorry, but no. The Electoral college is not gerrymandering.

You may claim it's unfairly weighed, or not representative, or a number of other failings, but gerrymandering has a specific meaning.

No one's been redrawing state lines.
They drew the lines back when the states were established. Where is it required that one has to continually redraw the boundaries in order to be gerrymandering?

From RecoveringYuppy's Wiki link:
Quote:
The practice of gerrymandering the borders of new states continued past the Civil War and into the late 19th century. The Republican Party used its control of Congress to secure the admission of more states in territories friendly to their party—the admission of Dakota Territory as two states instead of one being a notable example. By the rules for representation in the Electoral College, each new state carried at least three electoral votes regardless of its population.[100]
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 28th June 2018 at 01:18 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:14 PM   #354
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 41,151
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
How does putting your fingers in your ears and shouting "I CAN'T HEAR YOU" equate to advice and consent?
It's a refusal of consent.

Quote:
I get it they can do no wrongs, blacks shouldn't vote and concentration camps for kids is the american way.
Narrator: he doesn't get it.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:14 PM   #355
RecoveringYuppy
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 7,836
Originally Posted by Hellbound View Post
It became two states when it was admitted to the union. No one has been redrawing lines.
Re-read my post. I added a link you apparently didn't see. The lines were redrawn when it was admitted. It cited as an example of gerrymandering at the gerrymandering article at wikipedia.
__________________
REJ (Robert E Jones) posting anonymously under my real name for 30 years.

Make a fire for a man and you keep him warm for a day. Set him on fire and you keep him warm for the rest of his life.
RecoveringYuppy is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:20 PM   #356
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 23,863
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
But that aside, this isn't about going after Trump. Where did you get that idea? Trump is not picking these justices, the Federalist Society is. And that means the Kochs and the Mercers are picking the judges.
In the very same posts I was replying to. Do keep up!

Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
Sure I do, in general.

But I have big objections to packing the court with people like Trump and people who will take loyalty pledges to Trump.


Highlighted because it's apparent people want to read any anti-trump sentiment into an anti-republican sentiment. You people need to start realizing that being Anti-Trump is being PRO-American, not Anti-Republican.
Originally Posted by NoahFence View Post
I thought you were talking in generalities. I oppose packing the court, with the caveat that if it's the only way to stop trump from packing it with his own people (loyal to him, not America, and loyal to money, not America) then I'll support it.

I hardly know enough to comment on whether or not that specific tactic can work or is desirable. I'm all ears.
For Noah, who I was responding to, it is all about Trump.

And, Jesus *********** Christ, yes Trump is appointing the justices whether he is being advised by the Federalists or the Kochs or whoever, and that is because he is clueless about these things and others.
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:20 PM   #357
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 69,917
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
Nonsense. Words should be used in whatever manner is expedient at the moment, regardless of any prior usage. That's the Humpty Dumpty theory of language.
See post #346.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:20 PM   #358
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 30,104
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Sure there was, the constitution did not give congress the authority to simply ignore the presidents nominee like that.
Where "ignore like that" means "not actually ignore". The Senate Majority Leader advised the President that the Senate was not going to confirm his nominee.*

Constitutional authority exercised. Constitutional requirement satisfied.

---
*This advice was consistent with the Senate's own rules of procedure, for which there is no higher authority than the Senate itself.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:21 PM   #359
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 30,104
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
Clearly all the guilty pleas given to Muler are really from being framed! None of them did anything that they plead guilty to and if they did it was totally legal.
Did any of them plead guilty to Russian collusion?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th June 2018, 01:23 PM   #360
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 69,917
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
In the very same posts I was replying to. Do keep up!

For Noah, who I was responding to, it is all about Trump.

And, Jesus *********** Christ, yes Trump is appointing the justices whether he is being advised by the Federalists or the Kochs or whoever, and that is because he is clueless about these things and others.
Yes I saw Noah's posts after I posted mine.

So does this mean you agree Gorsuch and Trump's next appointment are bad for the SCOTUS?
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:18 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.