Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
lintlizard

Life and times; Notorious RBG and moving forward

47 posts in this topic

16 hours ago, lintlizard said:

Now we get to witness the hypocrisy of The Turtle in full effect.

 

Do you believe in her dying wish to let her seat stay open and  not be filled until after the election? 

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 2020 Shit Show has added another twist.  

Wait until after the election and let a newly elected president (whoever that is) nominate a replacement.  That is the right thing to do. There is a precedence for waiting.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, ilovewomen said:

Wait until after the election and let a newly elected president (whoever that is) nominate a replacement.  That is the right thing to do. There is a precedence for waiting.

Over our history there have been many occasions during an election year where a supreme court vacancy occurred every time the president has done his duty and sent a nomination to the Senate. It is then up to the Senate to do their job. When Harry Reid tampered with the filibuster rules this whole process became completely partisan leaving no need 4 compromise and intelligent thought thanks Harry

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, airamericavet65 said:

Over our history there have been many occasions during an election year where a supreme court vacancy occurred every time the president has done his duty and sent a nomination to the Senate. It is then up to the Senate to do their job. When Harry Reid tampered with the filibuster rules this whole process became completely partisan leaving no need 4 compromise and intelligent thought thanks Harry

McConnell set a precedent last election cycle whit 10 months left in Obama’s presidency and he said to let the newly elected president nominate a replacement for Scalia.

Then Graham said that even in a first term president that the next elected president should nominate a replacement. He also said to use his words against him.

 

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, ilovewomen said:

McConnell set a precedent last election cycle with 10 months left in Obama’s presidency

 

...and now the slimball is pushing for an appointment with 5 weeks until the election - the dude defines hypocrisy.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Precedent is not law, no need to follow precedent.

Rs control senate and president, unlike when the R senate didn't have hearings on a D nomination.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ilovewomen said:

The 2020 Shit Show has added another twist.  
 

RIP RBG.

Might as well get used to it.  Forecast is more shit/different year in 2021.  😂

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Merrick Garland?????? 

Senators and people of congress said something similar to Colorado's own. "I think we’re too close to the election. The president who is elected in November should be the one who makes this decision.”  Cory Gardner February 8th, 2016. 

But then again, as the Liar and Thief was enduring his process of impeachment. We all heard the same hypocrisies from politicians as they scaled back their positions levied against Clinton.

Hypocrisies exist amongst both parties. These need to be called out and applied equally.

 

 

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just politics.  Like chess, it is who can control the board. The president's job is to send in a name to the Senate. The Senate controls who gets approved to be a Supreme Court Judge.. The Senate controls the time frame. Those are the rules that have been in probably since the country was founded. It should come as no surprise to anyone, about how the game is played. They will never get changed by Congress. Just like Congress would never impose term limits on themselves.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Mr.Pink said:

 

I'm sure your parents or grandparents told you (and I'm sure you've heard this before), if you can't say anything nice, then don't say anything at all.

I find this post in bad taste.  You are celebrating the death of someone....disgusting.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/20/2020 at 7:38 AM, airamericavet65 said:

Over our history there have been many occasions during an election year where a supreme court vacancy occurred every time the president has done his duty and sent a nomination to the Senate. It is then up to the Senate to do their job. When Harry Reid tampered with the filibuster rules this whole process became completely partisan leaving no need 4 compromise and intelligent thought thanks Harry

Lincoln had a vacancy very close to the election, and he elected to wait until the results of the election.  Yes, he won, but he felt it was the honorable thing to do to wait.  

The hypocrisy of the right is insane on this matter - in 2016 they said 'no, let's wait for the election _10_ months away', as it benefitted them.

Now, with 2 months to go, they're doing the opposite.  Honestly, I don't care which way the precedent goes, but the hypocrisy is immoral.  And I'm not suggesting the left doesn't have hypocrisy - they absolutely do.

3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The republicans risk increasing voter turnout, increasing likelihood of losing senate and exec. Dems can go impeachment route to slow down possibility of confirming a justice nominee, and risk alienating voters. Lots of risk both sides. If dems take senate and exec and keep control of house they have options to counter the appointment of a trump justice - options like increase the number of justices and appoint who they want to get whatever sized majority they wish. The only real loser in any of this is our country, something neither party gives a hoot about. So cheer both sides on as we all lose.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/20/2020 at 0:47 AM, Kali Sensual Reiki said:

Do you believe in her dying wish to let her seat stay open and  not be filled until after the election? 

No.  She was outspoken enough that she would have publicly stated this long before her death.  This would not be a deathbed remark. 

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/20/2020 at 9:49 AM, ilovewomen said:

McConnell set a precedent last election cycle whit 10 months left in Obama’s presidency and he said to let the newly elected president nominate a replacement for Scalia.

Then Graham said that even in a first term president that the next elected president should nominate a replacement. He also said to use his words against him.

 

And they were both wrong!

The President should nominate and the Senate should vote.  If the vote fails to confirm, rinse & repeat.

4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

21 hours ago, Alex Majors said:

 We have a freedom of speach in this country. Everyone has that right, even her. 

I said she had the right to free speech. In fact a Supreme Court judge is the only judge who has the privledge show bias. The Federal Code of Conduct doe not apply to the Supreme Court.   Maybe I think judges shouldn't be vocal  because I grew up around a number of judges, who were reserved and never expressed their political views out in public.   I don't  think you would want your hobby related case to go before a judge who had been a big vocal opponent against the hobby?  Why does the Supreme Court get such a privledge when all the other judges have to follow a different set of rules. What is good for the goose, should be good for the gander.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/22/2020 at 7:11 AM, Bit Banger said:

No.  She was outspoken enough that she would have publicly stated this long before her death.  This would not be a deathbed remark. 

I agree! I felt the whole allegation was a lie and another attempt to derail the president.  I don’t care what side anyone is on. Everyone should know the truth.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's the thing.  The sitting president at the time of the vacancy should nominate and the senate as seated at the time the nomination  is sent before them should vote.  Which is also how it fucking should have been four years ago.  And the same Mitch the Bitch and side kick Lindsay refused to even hear the nomination.  Then swore future situations would be handled exactly the same - no new justice until after the election.  Lying snakes with no conscience or moral compass.  Anything to maintain power.  Exactly who we want running the country!  Sarcastically speaking, yet sadly true for many.

Once upon a time there was a political party calling itself the Republican Party.  I even voted for their candidates pretty much as often as the other guys.  But now that party has scraped up what little soul it had left and sold it to the devil.  It should by all rights be re-named to the Orange Party.  The Party has officially and "enthusiastically" endorsed Trump (their words, 2020 platform) and all of his attendant bull shit.  As such I will never again - federal, state, or local - vote for another of their candidates.  Period, end of story.  And there a couple I was going to this year.  Nope, never again not that we are likely to keep the right to vote past December anyway.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/22/2020 at 7:11 AM, Bit Banger said:

No.  She was outspoken enough that she would have publicly stated this long before her death.  This would not be a deathbed remark. 

So now let's call her grand daughter (who has the tapes) a liar when RBG has not even completed lying in state.  Is there no BS the President puts out that some of you will not believe?  And no depth too deep to sink to?  But this is just despicable.  And irrelevant, because she had no standing to say how it is done.  Acknowledge, respectfully move on but there is no excuse for the hate and vitriol toward a dead woman and her family.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a lighter note:

 

For a modern remake, I suggest Mitch as Curly, Lindsay as Larry and well, Moe is obvious, right?

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/22/2020 at 7:11 AM, Bit Banger said:

No.  She was outspoken enough that she would have publicly stated this long before her death.  This would not be a deathbed remark. 

 

17 hours ago, gr8owl said:

So now let's call her grand daughter (who has the tapes) a liar when RBG has not even completed lying in state.  Is there no BS the President puts out that some of you will not believe?  And no depth too deep to sink to?  But this is just despicable.  And irrelevant, because she had no standing to say how it is done.  Acknowledge, respectfully move on but there is no excuse for the hate and vitriol toward a dead woman and her family.

I was not aware that g’daughter had tapes. I intended “She was outspoken...” as a mark of respect.  RBG was a strong, independent woman, and as such earned my respect, even when I disagreed with her opinion.  You would not find me booing speakers at her services; show the occasion a little decorum.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/23/2020 at 5:38 AM, Alex Majors said:

 

 What is good for the goose, should be good for the gander.

So you believe McConnell should block any SCOTUS nominee at this time?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bit Banger said:

 

I was not aware that g’daughter had tapes. I intended “She was outspoken...” as a mark of respect.  RBG was a strong, independent woman, and as such earned my respect, even when I disagreed with her opinion.  You would not find me booing speakers at her services; show the occasion a little decorum.

Calling her family liars passes for respect now?  The only ones booed at the "laying in repose" were Trump and Melania, who richly deserve to be booed.  There have been no services yet.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 hours ago, Kali Sensual Reiki said:

I agree! I felt the whole allegation was a lie and another attempt to derail the president.  I don’t care what side anyone is on. Everyone should know the truth.

She championed the liberal side of issues - especially women's rights - for years.  OBVIOUSLY she would prefer a like minded successor and obviously that won't happen with a trump nominee.  Should never have been news worthy.  But to call her family liars and pretend it is just anti-Trump is really ludicrous. And sad.  As tp defending Trump and saying everyone should know the truth ....... hahahahahahahahahahahahha

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, oldguy47 said:

So you believe McConnell should block any SCOTUS nominee at this time?

What I was saying is the judges of this country should all be under one set of rules when I said what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Re-read what I wrote.

As far as McConnel is concerned, he is playing by the rules,  that apply to the Senate. It would be far from me to tell him what to do.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, gr8owl said:

Calling her family liars passes for respect now?  The only ones booed at the "laying in repose" were Trump and Melania, who richly deserve to be booed.  There have been no services yet.

Where did I call her family liars?  Are you trying to pick a fight?

On 9/19/2020 at 11:47 PM, Kali Sensual Reiki said:

Do you believe in her dying wish to let her seat stay open and  not be filled until after the election? 

I was responding to ^this^ post which asked for an opinion (“do you believe...”).  I expressed my opinion based on what I knew.

Regardless of whether the Trumps deserve to be booed and harassed, this was neither the time or place for such actions.

Edited by Bit Banger
1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Alex Majors said:

As far as McConnel is concerned, he is playing by the rules,  that apply to the Senate. It would be far from me to tell him what to do.

I agree that Sen. McConnell is playing by the Senate rules.  But IMHO there is a higher set of rules, our Constitution, which I feel he played fast & loose with for Judge Garland’s nomination.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Bit Banger said:

Where did I call her family liars?  Are you trying to pick a fight?

I was responding to ^this^ post which asked for an opinion (“do you believe...”).  I expressed my opinion based on what I knew.

Regardless of whether the Trumps deserve to be booed and harassed, this was neither the time or place for such actions.

The family stated that she said ............ no need to repeat.  Question was asked "do you believe she said?"  You answered no.  That is the very definition of calling them a liar.  And then you try the "yeah, but Hillary" defense by saying you sure would not boo trump at the "service".  Perhaps not but that has NOTHING to do with the reported statement.  And no I am not trying to pick a fight, I just have no remaining tolerance for bullshit and people trying to defend the indefensible crap the president does and says.  And HE started the "I don't believe she said that" crap.  It is obvious she would not want her successor picked by someone diametrically opposed to everything she stood for.  What she wanted is also totally irrelevant, should never have been a "thing" to begin with and never should have been taken as an opportunity by our dear pres to throw shade and disrespect at the family and throw meat to his base.  If calling all that bullshit is picking a fight, so be it.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0