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.
Tags Amy Coney Barrett , obituaries , Ruth Bader Ginsburg , Supreme Court issues , Supreme Court justices

Reply
Old 19th September 2020, 06:26 PM   #241
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 28,033
Originally Posted by Sherkeu View Post
I think if that actually happened, ....
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

If that actually happened! I love it!
__________________
"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 19th September 2020, 06:30 PM   #242
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,748
Oh no you see that's different because when Mitch McConnell refused to hold a vote on Obama's nomination there was a runner a runner on 3rd and the moon was waxing and the Sparrows hadn't returned to Capistrano yet...
__________________
- I don't know how to convince you that facts exist
- I don't know how to convince you that you should care about other people
JoeMorgue 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 19th September 2020, 06:38 PM   #243
Sherkeu
Graduate Poster
 
Sherkeu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Disneyland
Posts: 1,787
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha!

If that actually happened! I love it!

I do not understand the joke or why laughing at my post is something you felt you had to post in so many letters.

I have a weird sense of humor, but this is weird even to me.
I really tried to 'get it' even if you meant it in a mean snarky way (which I am sure you did) but I still do not.

Help an aspie out here.
Sherkeu 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 19th September 2020, 07:37 PM   #244
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,748
Trump leads crowd in "Fill that Seat" chant at N.C. Rally.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...carolina-rally
__________________
- I don't know how to convince you that facts exist
- I don't know how to convince you that you should care about other people
JoeMorgue 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 19th September 2020, 07:50 PM   #245
Upchurch
Papa Funkosophy
 
Upchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 32,182
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Trump leads crowd in "Fill that Seat" chant at N.C. Rally.

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaig...carolina-rally
Classy, as always.



No, wait. Too many letters. Lose the "Cl".
__________________
"There is nothing more deceptive than an obvious fact." -- Sherlock Holmes.
"Itís easier to fool people than to convince them that they have been fooled." -- Mark Twain, maybe.
Upchurch 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 19th September 2020, 08:08 PM   #246
Minoosh
Penultimate Amazing
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 11,538
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
Well, that's exactly the thing. The pro-choicers are motivated/activated regardless of what Trump and McConnell accomplish. If Trump and McConnell confirm a Justice before the election, reluctant Trump supporters can sit back. Some Republicans are already saying another conservative on the court is "worth" losing the Senate and the Presidency. They see a Mission: Accomplished.
That's an interesting tradeoff to consider.

I keep getting the feeling that abortion is a stalking horse - a proxy for some other reason that is more prosaic than saving all the little babies - like making sure the rich get richer? But I don't know what that would be.

People, don't get all triggered by Trump's BS. If we stopped being triggered, I don't think he'd know what to do with himself.

Susan Collins apparently made her bed with the Kavanaugh confirmation. Now she may be trying a Hail Mary pass to save her Senate seat, and when she loses, she'll renege on what she just said.
Minoosh 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 19th September 2020, 08:10 PM   #247
Delvo
Дэлво Δελϝο דֶלְבֹֿ देल्वो
 
Delvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: North Tonawanda, NY
Posts: 8,882
A few proposed methods I just ran across for Democrats to block any appointments until after the new Senate is seated...

1. Something I didn't quite follow about demanding "unanimous consent" on Senate bills so nothing can get passed with the current total of only 99 Senators... This sounds like it depends too much on the Republicans agreeing to unanimity, which I don't believe they would, regardless of whether there's some obscure rule telling them they must.

2. There are other bills coming up, like on raising the debt ceiling, that don't really pass unless they're passed by both houses; Democrats can hold those hostage because they have the other house. This one has the nifty advantage of being out of the Evil Turtle's hands. But it depends on the Democrats actually playing to win, which they never do.

3. Impeachments: This would take automatic priority over anything else in the Senate (a rule the Evil Turtle actually followed), and there's no limit on how many times a President can be impeached or for how many things, and we know they barely scratched the surface with that lame sleepwalk they put on last time. So it definitely could be done and couldn't be stopped... unless the Evil Turtle just starts putting non-impeachment business on the Senate schedule ahead of impeachment anyway regardless of not being allowed to. The other problem, again, is that it depends on Democrats playing to win. To be more specific, it depends on another impeachment (or series of them) actually being done now by the very same Democrats who diligently went out of their way to make that last one as fake and unimpeachy as possible.

4. Threaten to expand the court and make their first new nomination Hillary: Again, the Republicans wouldn't be able to stop the threat from being carried out if the Congressional elections go the way they they're going, since the number of SC seats is just a statute, and the idea of putting her in there would add some extra incentive for them. However, it depends on Republicans being moved by a threat of future action by an "opposition" that they already know always rolls over for them. This one has the advantage of being something with which they can neutralize a new Republican appointment even after it happens, whether they threatened to do so ahead of time or not.

Last edited by Delvo; 19th September 2020 at 08:13 PM.
Delvo 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 19th September 2020, 08:14 PM   #248
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 57,433
Originally Posted by Delvo View Post
4. Threaten to expand the court and make their first new nomination Hillary
Or Obama. The Republicans might drop dead from the mere suggestion. They like Obama as much as Skeletor likes He-Man, and react about as intelligently and effectively to everything he ever does.
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey 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 19th September 2020, 08:14 PM   #249
Minoosh
Penultimate Amazing
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 11,538
Originally Posted by Resume View Post
I fully remember what you said in 2016 concerning the SC vacancy. You said "Let's let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination. And you can use my words against me, and you'd be absolutely right."

So I am, and I am.
I imagine the Democrat trying to snag Graham's seat will as well.

Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
She'll fold if push comes to shove. Nobody is falling for her "I'm oh so concerned... lookit how concerned I am... I am just so concerned guyz like totally for realzies you wouldn't believe how concerned I am... oh whoopsie daisy looks like I voted for it anyway tee hee hee." routine anymore.

As someone once put it doesn't matter how long she looks at the menu, she's gonna order what Mitch McConnell is having.
What's in it for her, I wonder? When she gets booted out over confirming Kavanaugh, will she think it's all been worthwhile?
Minoosh 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 19th September 2020, 08:20 PM   #250
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,748
Expanding the court sounds like a great idea in that alternative fantasy universe we don't live in where if the Dems take the Presidency/Senate in 2020 the Republicans will never take it again.

I don't want a SCOTUS arms race with each party adding members every time they are in a position of power until SCOTUS is a de-facto Legislative sized Branch.

I'm halfway at the point that if Trump manages to push through a nomination before the election, and the Democrats take either the Presidency or the Senate, and Trump doesn't declare himself God-king for life I say we slip the hint to Thomas and Roberts that if they step down we'll promise to replace them with moderate liberals. They wait and we'll clone Marx himself and put him on the bench just out of spite when they die/retire.
__________________
- I don't know how to convince you that facts exist
- I don't know how to convince you that you should care about other people
JoeMorgue 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 19th September 2020, 08:21 PM   #251
Venom
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 4,583
I quite like the prospect of Hillary Clinton in the SC hanging over their heads.

Do something about it!

Obama I think would make a fine Supreme Court justice. He actually has credentials. He probably would be a bit more disinhibited as a judge.
Venom 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 19th September 2020, 08:24 PM   #252
turingtest
Mistral, mistral wind...
 
turingtest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Embedded, reporting from Mississippi
Posts: 4,208
Originally Posted by Sherkeu View Post
I think if that actually happened, it would be the first time, right?

Has there been a sitting president who has delayed nominating a candidate until after an election?
I'm not talking about confirmation which depends on procedure and votes in the Senate, but just a Presidential nominee.
Voluntarily? No- the whole issue here is that there was a nomination denied, of Obama's by McConnell in 2016, on precisely the ground that McConnell is deciding is irrelevant today. Just for one example, here's McConnell on Meet The Press, Mar 20, 2016*-

Quote:
The principle involved here, Chuck, when an election is underway, as Joe Biden was talking in 1992, an election's underway, the American people are about to weigh in on who is going to be the president. And that's the person, whoever that may be, who ought to be making this appointment.
That's just about as plain a statement of principle as you can expect; and McConnell's waffling now is about as plain an example of hypocrisy as anyone should need. Bottom line is that there's no need to rush the nomination to get it done before the election- there was a whole year between the death of Scalia in 2016 and his replacement by Trump after his election, and 8 Justices are as full a Court for their decisions process as 9 would be; if Trump is re-elected, then he can go ahead and nominate without having lost anything but a little time. If, OTOH, Biden wins, but McConnell has rammed through Trump's appointee, well...surely you can see the problem?

(The reference to 1992 by McConnell is sort of interesting too. That year, we had Bush (the elder), an incumbent, running against Clinton (the...taller?)- pretty much the same situation, incumbent vs challenger, we have today. There were no SC seats up for nomination that year, but Biden's hypothetical position then was the same as McConnell's in 2016. And McConnell today is reversing that position based, in part, on the fact that Trump is an incumbent, though not (yet) a lame duck- a distinction he didn't seem to think important enough to mention for Bush's case. IOW, he's making it up as he goes along- his qualifications and hair-splitting are more out of necessity than principle.)

*Sorry, it's a transcript of an entire MTP show, so it's pretty long, and no way I can see to link directly to the McConnell quote; you'll have to scroll about 2/3 of the way down to see it.
__________________
I'm tired of the bombs, tired of the bullets, tired of the crazies on TV;
I'm the aviator, a dream's a dream whatever it seems
Deep Purple- "The Aviator"

Life was a short shelf that came with bookends- Stephen King
turingtest 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 19th September 2020, 08:25 PM   #253
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,748
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
What's in it for her, I wonder? When she gets booted out over confirming Kavanaugh, will she think it's all been worthwhile?
//This is gonna be hard to put into exact words//

I don't think her brow-furrowing routine is a lie or an act exactly. What Susan Collins is is cargo-cult honest. She goes through the motions of being honest, of putting thought into things, of listening to the sides, but that's it. She treats honesty and intellectual rigor as something she can just hit the surface level "checks in the box" with but it doesn't go any deeper than that. The puppet theater of honesty and her decision making process are just totally disconnected from each other outside of... like the ritual of it I guess you could say.

She thinks "Thinking really hard on the issue... and then doing what I was going to do from the beginning" is the same thing as "Thinking really hard on the issue and then coming to a decision."
__________________
- I don't know how to convince you that facts exist
- I don't know how to convince you that you should care about other people

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 19th September 2020 at 08:36 PM.
JoeMorgue 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 19th September 2020, 08:31 PM   #254
Regnad Kcin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Regnad Kcin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 10,037
"I believe that the president should next week nominee a successor to the court, and I think it is critical that the Senate takes up and confirms that successor before Election Day. This nomination is why Donald Trump was elected."
Ted Cruz, yesterday.

And I’m certain as God doesn’t make little green apples Senator Cruz voiced the exact same sentiment with regard to the rationale behind the people electing President Obama as well as the Senate’s subsequent duty. I’m just too lazy to look it up right at the moment.
__________________
My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.

Last edited by Regnad Kcin; 19th September 2020 at 08:32 PM.
Regnad Kcin 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 19th September 2020, 08:32 PM   #255
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,748
Again at this point I almost think Republicans have embraced hypocrisy as a deliberate affect both for distraction and trolling the lib purposes.

Cruz and McConnell are being so obvious and blatant about it I can't imagine they are doing it for any reason beyond counting on being called out for it.

McConnell probably has a tape of some liberal screaming "Oh my God you're such a hypocrite!" that he has to play to achieve orgasm at this point.
__________________
- I don't know how to convince you that facts exist
- I don't know how to convince you that you should care about other people

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 19th September 2020 at 08:34 PM.
JoeMorgue 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 19th September 2020, 08:33 PM   #256
Delvo
Дэлво Δελϝο דֶלְבֹֿ देल्वो
 
Delvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: North Tonawanda, NY
Posts: 8,882
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
I don't want a SCOTUS arms race with each party adding members every time they are in a position of power until SCOTUS is a de-facto Legislative sized Branch.
They've changed the size before and that reaction didn't happen, not did the Republicans add any the last time they had Congress, and are just as likely to do it next time whether Democrats did it or not. And even if that kind of cascade reaction might somehow start this time, at least back & forth is better than stuck the Republicans' way for decades based on nothing but the illegitimate shenanigans the Republicans used to get us to this point and Democrats' unwillingness to ever muster a response to anything that's done to them. (And isn't it funny how this kind of fear-based thinking is only ever applied as a reason why Democrats can't/shouldn't do something, never the Republicans?)
Delvo 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 19th September 2020, 08:35 PM   #257
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 13,966
Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
That's an interesting tradeoff to consider.

I keep getting the feeling that abortion is a stalking horse - a proxy for some other reason that is more prosaic than saving all the little babies - like making sure the rich get richer? But I don't know what that would be.
Yeah, everybody's concerned about abortion, but if you have this kind of conservative majority on the court, key provisions of the ACA get ruled unconstitutional. They'll probably also find ways to invalidate a real universal health-care system and overrule a Democratic President's executive orders.

This country's institutions suck on a DNA level. We have a highly undemocratic, unrepresentative Senate, and a President who won election with the second most votes (and an assist from the FBI and Russia). People craving legitimacy turn to a court of elite judges -- who Americans consistently rank as more trustworthy than their elected leaders. People are socialized into this nonsense and it's just pathetic and embarrassing.
__________________
April 13th, 2018:
Ranb: I can't think of anything useful you contributed to a thread in the last few years.
Cain 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 19th September 2020, 08:40 PM   #258
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,748
Originally Posted by Delvo View Post
They've changed the size before and that reaction didn't happen.
Oh come on it was 1869 and it's been the same ever since. That's a little old to be citing as precedent in this context. Roosevelt himself couldn't push through more justices in one of the most powerful Democratic administrations in history.

Quote:
And isn't it funny how this kind of fear-based thinking is only ever applied as a reason why Democrats can't/shouldn't do something, never the Republicans?
Well... yeah because the Republicans are going to do stupid, petty, spiteful crap to get back at the Democrats and the Democrats aren't going to do the same in kind.
__________________
- I don't know how to convince you that facts exist
- I don't know how to convince you that you should care about other people
JoeMorgue 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 19th September 2020, 08:43 PM   #259
Elagabalus
Philosopher
 
Elagabalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 6,507
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Oh come on it was 1869 and it's been the same ever since. That's a little old to be citing as precedent in this context. Roosevelt himself couldn't push through more justices in one of the most powerful Democratic administrations in history.



Well... yeah because the Republicans are going to do stupid, petty, spiteful crap to get back at the Democrats and the Democrats aren't going to do the same in kind.
They are now.
Elagabalus 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 19th September 2020, 08:45 PM   #260
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,748
Originally Posted by Elagabalus View Post
They are now.
No they won't.

If the Dems win in November the absolute last thing they are going to be doing is worrying about fixing stuff so everything doesn't go to Hell the next the Republicans get power.

Everytime the Dems get power they act like they are going to keep forever, or at least plan like it.
__________________
- I don't know how to convince you that facts exist
- I don't know how to convince you that you should care about other people
JoeMorgue 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 19th September 2020, 08:47 PM   #261
Delvo
Дэлво Δελϝο דֶלְבֹֿ देल्वो
 
Delvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: North Tonawanda, NY
Posts: 8,882
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Well... yeah because the Republicans are going to do stupid, petty, spiteful crap to get back at the Democrats and the Democrats aren't going to do the same in kind.
That would explain the predictions that they won't, but not the arguments that they shouldn't.
Delvo 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 19th September 2020, 08:47 PM   #262
Elagabalus
Philosopher
 
Elagabalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 6,507
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
No they won't.

If the Dems win in November the absolute last thing they are going to be doing is worrying about fixing stuff so everything doesn't go to Hell the next the Republicans get power.

Everytime the Dems get power they act like they are going to keep forever, or at least plan like it.
If you say so.
Elagabalus 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 19th September 2020, 08:49 PM   #263
Regnad Kcin
Penultimate Amazing
 
Regnad Kcin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: New York
Posts: 10,037
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Lindsey Graham tweets

I fully understand where President @realDonaldTrump is coming from.
Does this guy enjoy being a twat?
__________________
My heros are Alex Zanardi and Evelyn Glennie.
Regnad Kcin 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 19th September 2020, 08:59 PM   #264
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,748
It's overshadowed largely by the more practical real world issues, but one interesting piece of trivia caught my eye.

Despite the small size of the court (Usually 9, ranged from 5-10 prior to the late 19th century) and the generally long tenures of people on it, almost every President has gotten to nominate at least one SCOTUS judge.

Williams Henry Harrison and Zachary Taylor didn't for obvious reasons, although of note both of their successors did during the timeframe that would have been during their terms had they lived. Andrew Johnson also failed to get a chance to nominate a SCOTUS member after he took office following the assassination of Lincoln.

George W. Bush, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and James Monroe all went their entire first terms without nominating one, but did so in their second (and later in FDR's case, ironically becoming the President to nominate the most SCOTUS judges) terms.

Jimmy Carter is the only President as of this moment to complete his full term as President and not nominate any SCOTUS judges.
__________________
- I don't know how to convince you that facts exist
- I don't know how to convince you that you should care about other people

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 19th September 2020 at 09:00 PM.
JoeMorgue 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 19th September 2020, 09:03 PM   #265
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 15,405
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Collins has declared whoever is elected in Nov. should nominate next SC judge.
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
She'll fold if push comes to shove. Nobody is falling for her "I'm oh so concerned... lookit how concerned I am... I am just so concerned guyz like totally for realzies you wouldn't believe how concerned I am... oh whoopsie daisy looks like I voted for it anyway tee hee hee." routine anymore.

As someone once put it doesn't matter how long she looks at the menu, she's gonna order what Mitch McConnell is having.
She is what we refer to in these parts as a "chocolate soldier".
__________________
"Woke" is a pejorative term used by racists, homophobes and misogynists to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass.

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !

Last edited by smartcooky; 19th September 2020 at 09:07 PM.
smartcooky 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 19th September 2020, 09:04 PM   #266
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 15,125
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Expanding the court sounds like a great idea in that alternative fantasy universe we don't live in where if the Dems take the Presidency/Senate in 2020 the Republicans will never take it again.
Appointing everybody solves that.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
My authority is total - Trump
varwoche 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 19th September 2020, 09:10 PM   #267
rdwight
Muse
 
rdwight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 690
I don't get the confusion. Republicans HAD the power to stop the nomination, and used bs to justify it. Democrats don't. It's that simple. And I don't think for one second that the Democrats wouldn't block this nomination if they had the power, despite what happened in 2016. Remove that whole situation, and there is 0% chance they wouldn't use the power they have to stop this given the makeup of the Supreme Court moving forward.

If voters really hate the selection, the house and senate, not to mention the presidency will look alot different because of it. If there is not an overwhelming change, maybe the country agrees with the actions taken. Might hate the idea, but if it happens some here might have to accept it.
rdwight 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 19th September 2020, 09:10 PM   #268
Mumbles
Philosopher
 
Mumbles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 8,048
They are who we thought they were

Originally Posted by Minoosh View Post
That's an interesting tradeoff to consider.

I keep getting the feeling that abortion is a stalking horse - a proxy for some other reason that is more prosaic than saving all the little babies - like making sure the rich get richer? But I don't know what that would be.
Well, when you look back at it, the so-called Moral Majority was formed by the likes of segregationists Jerry Falwell (who was angry about school desegregation, including Bob Jones University's loss of tax-exempt status) and Ronald Reagan (who wanted to restrict black people from living in suburbs - sound like anyone you know?). It was Paul Weyrich that came up with anti-abortionism as a more palatable alternative to, you know, racial hatred, since one could in theory frame it as "saving the babies", while white supremacism is just hate for profit, the end. You can read about it here, or just research it for yourself.
Mumbles 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 19th September 2020, 09:19 PM   #269
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 83,597
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
No they won't.

If the Dems win in November the absolute last thing they are going to be doing is worrying about fixing stuff so everything doesn't go to Hell the next the Republicans get power.

Everytime the Dems get power they act like they are going to keep forever, or at least plan like it.
So much pessimism. It's depressing.

Fortunately I'm a tad more optimistic. Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

McConnell threatened if the Democrats pulled the nuclear option on federal judge appointments, making them simple majority approval, they'd be sorry.

Well the Democrats didn't and look what happened. McConnell did it anyway laughing all the way to the bank, filling up those federal judgeships as fast as he could with a bare majority while the GOP owned the Senate and POTUS.

Biden doesn't need to be afraid of expanding the SCOTUS, starting with a threat to do so.
__________________
ORANGE MAN BAD? Why yes, yes he is.

Privatize the profits and socialize the losses. It's the American way. That's how Mnuchin got rich. Worse, he did it on the backs of elderly people who had been conned into reverse mortgages. Mnuchin paid zero, took on the debt then taxpayers bailed him out.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 19th September 2020 at 09:21 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 19th September 2020, 09:20 PM   #270
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 15,405
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Oh come on it was 1869
In 1869 there were about 37 states, 7 territories and a population of about 35 million. The US is long overdue for an increase in the number SCOTUS judges.
__________________
"Woke" is a pejorative term used by racists, homophobes and misogynists to describe people who possess a fully functional moral compass.

If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list. This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky 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 19th September 2020, 09:22 PM   #271
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 28,033
Originally Posted by Sherkeu View Post
I do not understand the joke or why laughing at my post is something you felt you had to post in so many letters.

I have a weird sense of humor, but this is weird even to me.
I really tried to 'get it' even if you meant it in a mean snarky way (which I am sure you did) but I still do not.

Help an aspie out here.
Sorry, I was laughing because the thought that the Republicans might decide that it would only be fair for whoever wins the election in November to choose the candidate rather than who is currently president - given that the Republicans have the presidency - is crazily unlikely.

If that happened... with that being the Republicans thinking, "yeah it is only fair...." is like thinking a man-eating shark might stop to consider the feelings of the family of the surfer he is gnawing on.

It ain't gonna happen.
__________________
"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 19th September 2020, 09:34 PM   #272
Delvo
Дэлво Δελϝο דֶלְבֹֿ देल्वो
 
Delvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: North Tonawanda, NY
Posts: 8,882
Originally Posted by rdwight View Post
If voters really hate the selection, the house and senate, not to mention the presidency will look alot different because of it. If there is not an overwhelming change, maybe the country agrees with the actions taken.
Not at all.

For one thing, our Federal elections don't express the will of the people, or really even try. The system is inherently rigged toward Republicans, not just in the Presidential Electoral College but also in the fact that the Senate has two per state no matter how few people live in that state. Most people can think one way and elections can still turn out another way as long as the latter is the Republican way.

Secondly, the way voter response to things getting worse works is not "well this party did this awful thing so now I'll vote for the other party for the rest of my life". It's "well, we tried them and they just kept making it worse, so let's try the others... well, they just kept making it worse, so let's go back to trying the first one... well, they just kept making it worse, so let's switch back to the others... well, they just kept making it worse, so let's switch back to where we started..." And the switches back & forth can happen at a higher frequency than the frequency of elections; pretty much whenever either party makes any move on any issue. So no matter how much the people might hate what the Republicans are about to do to the Supreme court or even just the fact that what they've already done was criminally illegitimate, the Democrats will come along and piss them off again too in some other way, so there won't be much incentive to stick with the Democrats just because they weren't the cause of one of the steps a few rounds ago in the neverending "they both just keep making the country worse anyway" cycle. The only way for a serious change to come from elections is for there to be a party that quits participating in that cycle for multiple whole rounds in a row, not just from any one single horrifying issue.

Last edited by Delvo; 19th September 2020 at 09:38 PM.
Delvo 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 20th September 2020, 12:09 AM   #273
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 25,381
David Souter retired in 2009, ensuring that Obama would pick his replacement. He was replaced by Sonia Sotomayor.
John Paul Stevens, another liberal justice, retired in 2010. He was replaced by Elena Kagan.

Ruth could have retired at the time and ensured that her replacement would be a liberal, but she chose not to. She chose to roll the dice and she lost, thus leaving the choice of her replacement to Donald J. Trump and a Senate controlled by Republicans.

If Roe is overturned, it will be her fault for not retiring when she had a chance.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow 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 20th September 2020, 12:17 AM   #274
Elagabalus
Philosopher
 
Elagabalus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 6,507
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
David Souter retired in 2009, ensuring that Obama would pick his replacement. He was replaced by Sonia Sotomayor.
John Paul Stevens, another liberal justice, retired in 2010. He was replaced by Elena Kagan.

Ruth could have retired at the time and ensured that her replacement would be a liberal, but she chose not to. She chose to roll the dice and she lost, thus leaving the choice of her replacement to Donald J. Trump and a Senate controlled by Republicans.

If Roe is overturned, it will be her fault for not retiring when she had a chance.
The milk has been spilled. Got anything else to work with?
Elagabalus 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 20th September 2020, 12:19 AM   #275
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 16,021
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
David Souter retired in 2009, ensuring that Obama would pick his replacement. He was replaced by Sonia Sotomayor.
John Paul Stevens, another liberal justice, retired in 2010. He was replaced by Elena Kagan.

Ruth could have retired at the time and ensured that her replacement would be a liberal, but she chose not to. She chose to roll the dice and she lost, thus leaving the choice of her replacement to Donald J. Trump and a Senate controlled by Republicans.

If Roe is overturned, it will be her fault for not retiring when she had a chance.
Yes, it will be. However, as almost everyone else in the country, she likely expected Clinton to win. The polls were in her favor and she wasn't ready to give up a career she loved yet. Sadly, for her (and the country) it turned out the polls were wrong. I wouldn't judge her too harshly for that.
Stacyhs 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 20th September 2020, 12:45 AM   #276
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 28,033
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
If Roe is overturned, it will be her fault for not retiring when she had a chance.
I don't think it will be her fault, if you are looking for a single place to put the blame.
Presumably the fault would be the Supreme Court justices who overturn it, plus the people who put them there - Trump, the Republican Party and the American electorate.
__________________
"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 20th September 2020, 12:53 AM   #277
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 28,033
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Yes, it will be. However, as almost everyone else in the country, she likely expected Clinton to win. The polls were in her favor and she wasn't ready to give up a career she loved yet. Sadly, for her (and the country) it turned out the polls were wrong. I wouldn't judge her too harshly for that.
I think people are saying she should have retired back in 2012 or 2013 when the Democrats had the presidency and the Senate.

In those days, who knew it would be Clinton vs Trump? Absolutely nobody. If she had waited until the 2016 election then we know what would have happened. McConnell would have just blocked her successor.

That said, the lesson the Democrats should take from this in the future is that if they control the presidency and the Senate to clear out the Supreme court of anyone over 70 who wants their place to be taken by a progressive/liberal. Stephen Breyer should retire. Of course, it is up to him if he wants to step down. Justices can act independently of the party who appointed them, and in an ideal world that's what would always happen.
__________________
"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 20th September 2020, 12:59 AM   #278
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 16,021
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
I think people are saying she should have retired back in 2012 or 2013 when the Democrats had the presidency and the Senate.

In those days, who knew it would be Clinton vs Trump? Absolutely nobody. If she had waited until the 2016 election then we know what would have happened. McConnell would have just blocked her successor.

That said, the lesson the Democrats should take from this in the future is that if they control the presidency and the Senate to clear out the Supreme court of anyone over 70 who wants their place to be taken by a progressive/liberal. Stephen Breyer should retire. Of course, it is up to him if he wants to step down. Justices can act independently of the party who appointed them, and in an ideal world that's what would always happen.

Yes, you're right. Doh.
Stacyhs 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 20th September 2020, 01:00 AM   #279
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 13,966
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
I don't think it will be her fault, if you are looking for a single place to put the blame.
Presumably the fault would be the Supreme Court justices who overturn it, plus the people who put them there - Trump, the Republican Party and the American electorate.
She ****** up. Obama's people urged her to retire, but she said "no!"

She's had a string of illnesses and knew(?) about the cancer's reoccurrence back in February. If she had stepped down then, it would have given Trump plenty of time to replace her. It's just bad faith all around.

Anyway, if the Republicans fail to seat someone, and Trump loses the election, it's entirely possible Thomas could soon croak. Biden could then replace Ginsburg, Thomas, and probably Breyer as well.
__________________
April 13th, 2018:
Ranb: I can't think of anything useful you contributed to a thread in the last few years.
Cain 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 20th September 2020, 01:03 AM   #280
Stacyhs
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: United States
Posts: 16,021
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
She ****** up. Obama's people urged her to retire, but she said "no!"

She's had a string of illnesses and knew(?) about the cancer's reoccurrence back in February. If she had stepped down then, it would have given Trump plenty of time to replace her. It's just bad faith all around.

Anyway, if the Republicans fail to seat someone, and Trump loses the election, it's entirely possible Thomas could soon croak. Biden could then replace Ginsburg, Thomas, and probably Breyer as well.
You tease, you.
Stacyhs 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 08:31 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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.