«1345

Comments

  • Dang.  The battle is going to be epic.  Ginsburg is upping her infusion of dead babies that's for sure.
  • edited June 27
    Already?

    Was McConnell "trolling" Tool?

    "A spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said he
    saw no reason why a new justice couldn't be confirmed before the midterm
    elections in November."
  • nbody said:

    ...Was McConnell "trolling" Tool?


    "A spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said he
    saw no reason why a new justice couldn't be confirmed before the midterm
    elections in November."



    Oh, now we're supposed to respect the norms of the institution?
  • I am looking forward to it.
  • vwtool said:



    Oh, now we're supposed to respect the norms of the institution?


    You fuckers have no room to talk on that subject. It’s not the pot calling the kettle black, it’s the whole fucking foundry doing it.


  • President Obama allowing the GOP to block his pick for SCOTUS was one of the greatest blunders in political history.  It would be great to know if there was more to the story than just a belief that Hildebeast would win.
  • Did Kennedy time his retirement because of his health, or because he's hoping to affect the midterms?

    If Trump appoints another Gorsuch before the midterms, will he cause such a rending of cloth and gnashing of teeth among the Democrats that they yet again alienate middle-ground voters?

  • edited June 28
    vwtool said:

    Oh, now we're supposed to respect the norms of the institution?

    More crocodile tears for a tradition you never respected.
  • Excellent.  I can hear Lycoming T53s turbines firing up in the distance.
  • So does the "McConnell rule" apply now? Since we're close to the mid-terms, shouldn't we let the American people speak on this issue?
  • Speak how? The people don't have a vote on SCOTUS.
  • dgm said:

    Speak how? The people don't have a vote on SCOTUS.




    McConnell says they do.
  • vwtool said:

    So does the "McConnell rule" apply now?

    You mean the Biden rule.
  • edited June 28
    vwtool said:

    So does the "McConnell rule" apply now? Since we're close to the mid-terms, shouldn't we let the American people speak on this issue?

    Since the Biden rule and McConnell's application of it wasn't about mid-term elections, your question isn't apt.

    In 1992 and 2016, the sitting president was in the last year of a term and a presidential election was only months away.  The identity of the new president would influence the nomination profoundly.

    In a mid-term election, none of that is true.  The nominating agent will be the same after the election, and two thirds of the Senate isn't even up for election.


    The more important character in this chapter is Schumer.  It was Schumer's lack of foresight in throwing away the filibuster for the purpose of a futile fight to keep an outstanding jurist, Gorsuch, off the Sup Ct.  Now dems in the Senate can't stop confirmation.  Thanks, Chuck.
  • Just want to add... If Dems start bitching and griping about not being able to filibuster a Trump nomination, they can thank Harry Reid.
  • Seabird said:

    Just want to add... If Dems start bitching and griping about not being able to filibuster a Trump nomination, they can thank Harry Reid.

    You mean howling GOP obstructionism, but never mind. 
  • No, I meant exactly what I wrote. The GOP acted within the rules and procedures of the time. Obama’s attempt to pack the appellate and lower courts with liberal activists was dealt with appropriately. Reid took the nuclear option despite being warned of this very thing (by McConnell, no less) and now it’s about to blow up in the face of the Democratic Party. No one on the left can say they didn’t know or couldn’t have expected this. That’s the point I was trying to make.
  • Seabird said:

    That’s the point I was trying to make.




    And you did. No reasonable person could think that the Senate would forever keep a system in which one party gets their nominees through, but the other doesn't. Dems are like a Twilight zone episode in which they wish the Senate were more like the House; now they have it.
  • A link to a not very short list of potential Kennedy replacements:


    If Barrett and Kavanaugh are near the top of Trump's list, the only interesting things I've read about them are that Barrett Catholicism might indicate that she'd vote to reverse Roe v. Wade (and she clerked for Scalia), while Kavanaugh has  supported the 2nd Am (and clerked for Kennedy).

    Kavanaugh seems to have a strong record:
    In particular, Judge Kavanaugh has demonstrated a commitment to defending presidential authority, restraining the administrative state, safeguarding American sovereignty and security, and protecting religious liberty, the right to life, and the right to bear arms.  All the while, in his nearly 300 opinions, he has reflected his core philosophy of faithfully applying the text and original meaning of the Constitution and laws. His devotion to the Constitution and to his oath of office has led him to constantly refuse to invent new rights or to legislate from the bench.
    ...
     He voted to reject the blanket District of Columbia gun ban as unconstitutional, in the strongest Second Amendment opinion ever written by a federal court of appeals, subsequently cited in the Supreme Court.  



    I haven't found anything as specific about Amy Barrett's view of the 2nd Am.


  • I think it will be one of these:
    • Joan Larsen
    • Margaret Ryan
    • William Pryor
    • Brett Kavanaugh

    The order is random.

    If I were betting I would say it will be Margaret Ryan.

  • MC Escher said:

    imageIf I were betting I would say it will be Margaret Ryan.




    She'd be great.

  • I won't be the dick that posts what she looks like now.
  • He was great in Batman
  • 2.FOH. said:

    He was great in Batman




    Dude, Prince only did the soundtrack. He wasn’t actually *in* the movie.
  • Prince was a white woman?

    No way.
  • 2.FOH. said:

    Prince was a white woman?


    No way.


    Prince didn't ascribe to anything like race or gender.

    You need to get woke, bro.
  • My bad.

    Maybe I was thinking of Michael Jackson.
  • I remember when he was Black.
Sign In or Register to comment.