Ruth Bader Ginsburg dies
- Hashi Lebwohl
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 19576
- Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm
- Gaius Octavius
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 3331
- Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 8:32 pm
If someone was an active member of Scientology (a cult that is known to imprison adult members who criticize their leader and use them as slave labor...right now, as I type this message) you would still support their confirmation for the Supreme Court as long as you believe they will vote the way you want them to, Hashi.
No one cares that Amy Coney Barrett is Catholic. We're voting for a Catholic to be president (Biden), for fuck's sake. We care that she's a member of a weird cult that sounds an awful like the Handsmaid's Tale book. There should be standards for people appointed to important positions within the government. That standard would exclude people who are members of weird little cults that require them to swear fealty to the cult. She has a questionable loyalty to the US government and the Constitution.
We don't appoint some white trash hillbilly who is part of the Aryan Brotherhood to important positions within the government, do we? At least I think we used to not do that.... Who knows with this moron in charge of the country.
No one cares that Amy Coney Barrett is Catholic. We're voting for a Catholic to be president (Biden), for fuck's sake. We care that she's a member of a weird cult that sounds an awful like the Handsmaid's Tale book. There should be standards for people appointed to important positions within the government. That standard would exclude people who are members of weird little cults that require them to swear fealty to the cult. She has a questionable loyalty to the US government and the Constitution.
We don't appoint some white trash hillbilly who is part of the Aryan Brotherhood to important positions within the government, do we? At least I think we used to not do that.... Who knows with this moron in charge of the country.
Last edited by Gaius Octavius on Thu Sep 24, 2020 7:22 pm, edited 2 times in total.
- Gaius Octavius
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 3331
- Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 8:32 pm
- sgt.null
- Jack of Odd Trades, Master of Fun
- Posts: 47250
- Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:53 am
- Location: Brazoria, Texas
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 6 times
Ur - your bigotry is showing again. Judge Barrett is not in a cult.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/inside-amy ... 1530833211
And you compare Catholics to aryans? You really are a Democrat. A hate filled grifter hoping government will give you free stuff.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/inside-amy ... 1530833211
And you compare Catholics to aryans? You really are a Democrat. A hate filled grifter hoping government will give you free stuff.
Lenin, Marx
Marx, Lennon
Good Dog...
Marx, Lennon
Good Dog...
- Gaius Octavius
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 3331
- Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 8:32 pm
- Hashi Lebwohl
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 19576
- Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm
- sgt.null
- Jack of Odd Trades, Master of Fun
- Posts: 47250
- Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:53 am
- Location: Brazoria, Texas
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 6 times
Biden believes in abortion. And I'm the bad catholic? I read your post. You brought up arayans. You truly are a Democrat. Having the ability to lie so blatantly.ur-Nanothnir wrote:You criticize Skyweir for not reading posts, yet you didn't read mine before you posted.
Nowhere do I say I am anti-Catholic. I am voting for a Catholic for president, and I myself am Catholic.
Lenin, Marx
Marx, Lennon
Good Dog...
Marx, Lennon
Good Dog...
- Savor Dam
- Will Be Herd!
- Posts: 6152
- Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 7:02 am
- Location: Pacific NorthWet
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 4 times
I feel moved to say that I am getting pretty tired of the habit of a few Tank contributors who hail from Texas to use the word "Democrat" as an overarching pejorative.
Y'all know who you are.
Y'all know who you are.
Love prevails.
~ Tracie Mckinney-Hammon
Change is not a process for the impatient.
~ Barbara Reinhold
A government which robs Peter to pay Paul, can always count on the support of Paul.
~ George Bernard Shaw
~ Tracie Mckinney-Hammon
Change is not a process for the impatient.
~ Barbara Reinhold
A government which robs Peter to pay Paul, can always count on the support of Paul.
~ George Bernard Shaw
- sgt.null
- Jack of Odd Trades, Master of Fun
- Posts: 47250
- Joined: Tue Jul 19, 2005 7:53 am
- Location: Brazoria, Texas
- Has thanked: 1 time
- Been thanked: 6 times
Well if the Democrats would stop rioting the party could reclaim...
No that doesn't work. While telling people who actually and historically had nothing to do with slavery or Indian massacres , Democrats have not attended to offering an apology for their role in all of it. Funny that Obama's apology tour never got around to that.
No that doesn't work. While telling people who actually and historically had nothing to do with slavery or Indian massacres , Democrats have not attended to offering an apology for their role in all of it. Funny that Obama's apology tour never got around to that.
Lenin, Marx
Marx, Lennon
Good Dog...
Marx, Lennon
Good Dog...
- Savor Dam
- Will Be Herd!
- Posts: 6152
- Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 7:02 am
- Location: Pacific NorthWet
- Has thanked: 2 times
- Been thanked: 4 times
The whiskers on those slavery and Native massacre anecdotes have grown rather long. How about something more contemporaneous?
Love prevails.
~ Tracie Mckinney-Hammon
Change is not a process for the impatient.
~ Barbara Reinhold
A government which robs Peter to pay Paul, can always count on the support of Paul.
~ George Bernard Shaw
~ Tracie Mckinney-Hammon
Change is not a process for the impatient.
~ Barbara Reinhold
A government which robs Peter to pay Paul, can always count on the support of Paul.
~ George Bernard Shaw
- Hashi Lebwohl
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 19576
- Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm
Apparently all threads become the same thread these days.
Are we all convinced that Barrett will be the nominee? If so, let's link her opinions delivered from the bench, which is all that will matter.
Incidentally, Pelosi said she had wanted to impeach Trump if he nominates someone. Really? Impeach a POTUS for actually following the Constitution and discharging his listed duty/responsibility? She won't have the votes to impeach over that.
Are we all convinced that Barrett will be the nominee? If so, let's link her opinions delivered from the bench, which is all that will matter.
Incidentally, Pelosi said she had wanted to impeach Trump if he nominates someone. Really? Impeach a POTUS for actually following the Constitution and discharging his listed duty/responsibility? She won't have the votes to impeach over that.
The Tank is gone and now so am I.
- Gaius Octavius
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 3331
- Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 8:32 pm
The death of RBG seems to be increasing enthusiasm among Democratic voters.
I don't like showcasing single polls because I am a big advocate of looking at polling averages for a more accurate picture of what's going on, but there was a Fox News poll that came out showing Biden +7 in PA and +5 in OH. Fox News has put out a lot of polls that were in line with polling averages and is considered a high quality (A-) pollster by FiveThirtyEight. When I see something like this from them, I pay attention, even if it's just a single poll.
The Ohio polling seems to indicate that Biden is making significant ground in that state, and since it is coming a week after RBG's death, I am guessing that that plays a significant part of it.
If Biden can maintain his momentum after the debates up to November 3, then I believe that a landslide victory is definitely a possible outcome since he is within the margin of error for polling in places like GA, IA, TX, NC, FL, etc. If he can edge out Donald Trump in those states like Trump did with Hillary in 2016, then Biden would end up with over 400 electoral votes.
If Trump suffered such a loss, I don't see how the GOP wouldn't want to cut ties with him.
I don't like showcasing single polls because I am a big advocate of looking at polling averages for a more accurate picture of what's going on, but there was a Fox News poll that came out showing Biden +7 in PA and +5 in OH. Fox News has put out a lot of polls that were in line with polling averages and is considered a high quality (A-) pollster by FiveThirtyEight. When I see something like this from them, I pay attention, even if it's just a single poll.
The Ohio polling seems to indicate that Biden is making significant ground in that state, and since it is coming a week after RBG's death, I am guessing that that plays a significant part of it.
If Biden can maintain his momentum after the debates up to November 3, then I believe that a landslide victory is definitely a possible outcome since he is within the margin of error for polling in places like GA, IA, TX, NC, FL, etc. If he can edge out Donald Trump in those states like Trump did with Hillary in 2016, then Biden would end up with over 400 electoral votes.
If Trump suffered such a loss, I don't see how the GOP wouldn't want to cut ties with him.
- peter
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 11563
- Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 10:08 am
- Location: Another time. Another place.
- Been thanked: 6 times
Would it be too much of an aside for someone to explain to me why the SCOTUS and appointments thereto are such a big deal in the US? The closest thing we have to it is, if I get this correctly, also termed the 'supreme court' (though we also have the Law Lords - not quite sure where they fit in), but nobody in the UK ever gives nominations to this body even the slightest attention; the importance of the body in the UK is clearly not as significant. What role does the SCOTUS play in the constitution of the US that makes it such an area of contention as to who gets on to it.
(Another, completely off topic question that has been interesting me; we have in the UK the 'civil service', the state employed body (completely unelected) that functions as 'the machinery of state' - ie the guys that actually do the stuff of running the country on the basis of what the currently incumbant administration instruct them to do. What is the US equivalent of this called? There must be something comparable - you couldn't replace every single functionary every time there was a change of Government.)
(Another, completely off topic question that has been interesting me; we have in the UK the 'civil service', the state employed body (completely unelected) that functions as 'the machinery of state' - ie the guys that actually do the stuff of running the country on the basis of what the currently incumbant administration instruct them to do. What is the US equivalent of this called? There must be something comparable - you couldn't replace every single functionary every time there was a change of Government.)
The truth is a Lion and does not need protection. Once free it will look after itself.
....and the glory of the world becomes less than it was....
'Have we not served you well'
'Of course - you know you have.'
'Then let it end.'
We are the Bloodguard
....and the glory of the world becomes less than it was....
'Have we not served you well'
'Of course - you know you have.'
'Then let it end.'
We are the Bloodguard
- TheFallen
- Master of Innominate Surquedry
- Posts: 3155
- Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2011 3:16 pm
- Location: Guildford, UK
- Has thanked: 1 time
My understanding - which will necessarily be limited - is that by being the highest appellate court in the land, the SCOTUS gets to provide the ultimate interpretation on federal and state laws, plus effectively the constitution itself.
We also have a supreme appellate court over here... the SCOTUK (aka the Law Lords if you'd rather). However, the powers of our supreme court are far FAR more limited because we abide by the concept of parliamentary sovereignty, and so our supreme court cannot overturn any primary legislation enacted by parliament.
Not so in the US, I believe... there the SCOTUS is a far more muscular and thus significant animal. Having the unilateral and ultimate right to interpret core legislation (including the Constitution, BoR and any subsequent amendments) - and thus effectively define what all these actually mean in practice - is a very powerful thing indeed.
Which goes to explain the good slug of extra gasoline thrown on the already raging fire, what with the death of RBG.
Don't forget that a US Supreme Court Justice - all of whom are solely and exclusively nominated for appointment by the sitting POTUS at the time of any vacancy occurring - has tenure for life (or until they choose to retire). So it is of course absolutely in both Pubs' and Dems' interests to "stack" the court with nominated justices that are known to lean in their desired direction whenever they get the rare opportunity to do so.
Separately...
It's still bizarre - but NB not inexplicable at all - that Trump made it to the White House in the first place. However, for more fervent Dem supporters, they still haven't got a clue (for that read "refuse to accept") why Hillary lost. Which is why you keep seeing specious bollocks spouted by the usual apologist zealots abrogating any Dem responsibility for 2016 and instead blaming evil fake news or something. To which I always reply "But for fuck's sake.... you managed to lose to Trump of all people! There's not enough fake news in the world to have caused that!" But the Biden campaign clearly displays to me that the Dems have learned precisely nothing from 2016. Anyhow...
I'm hoping that regardless of who wins in November, by 2024 the US realises that its by then 8 year flirtation with extremism and polarisation has been an utterly shit and societally-damaging idea
We also have a supreme appellate court over here... the SCOTUK (aka the Law Lords if you'd rather). However, the powers of our supreme court are far FAR more limited because we abide by the concept of parliamentary sovereignty, and so our supreme court cannot overturn any primary legislation enacted by parliament.
Not so in the US, I believe... there the SCOTUS is a far more muscular and thus significant animal. Having the unilateral and ultimate right to interpret core legislation (including the Constitution, BoR and any subsequent amendments) - and thus effectively define what all these actually mean in practice - is a very powerful thing indeed.
Which goes to explain the good slug of extra gasoline thrown on the already raging fire, what with the death of RBG.
Don't forget that a US Supreme Court Justice - all of whom are solely and exclusively nominated for appointment by the sitting POTUS at the time of any vacancy occurring - has tenure for life (or until they choose to retire). So it is of course absolutely in both Pubs' and Dems' interests to "stack" the court with nominated justices that are known to lean in their desired direction whenever they get the rare opportunity to do so.
Separately...
Oh I am sure you're absolutely right. If Trump loses in Nov (which I'm saying he's going to, despite Biden and the Dems' cackhanded and divisive campaign), the Pubs will drop him faster than a redhot potato. Let's face it, he's hardly been the Pubs' finest hour... and actually, taking a mid-term view, Trump being pushed offstage would be the best thing to happen for the Pubs in a long time.ur-Nanothnir wrote:If Trump suffered such a loss, I don't see how the GOP wouldn't want to cut ties with him.
It's still bizarre - but NB not inexplicable at all - that Trump made it to the White House in the first place. However, for more fervent Dem supporters, they still haven't got a clue (for that read "refuse to accept") why Hillary lost. Which is why you keep seeing specious bollocks spouted by the usual apologist zealots abrogating any Dem responsibility for 2016 and instead blaming evil fake news or something. To which I always reply "But for fuck's sake.... you managed to lose to Trump of all people! There's not enough fake news in the world to have caused that!" But the Biden campaign clearly displays to me that the Dems have learned precisely nothing from 2016. Anyhow...
I'm hoping that regardless of who wins in November, by 2024 the US realises that its by then 8 year flirtation with extremism and polarisation has been an utterly shit and societally-damaging idea
Newsflash: the word "irony" doesn't mean "a bit like iron"
Shockingly, some people have claimed that I'm egocentric... but hey, enough about them
"If you strike me down, I shall become far stronger than you can possibly imagine."
_______________________________________________
I occasionally post things here because I am invariably correct on all matters, a thing which is educational for others less fortunate.
Shockingly, some people have claimed that I'm egocentric... but hey, enough about them
"If you strike me down, I shall become far stronger than you can possibly imagine."
_______________________________________________
I occasionally post things here because I am invariably correct on all matters, a thing which is educational for others less fortunate.
- Gaius Octavius
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 3331
- Joined: Sun Jan 07, 2018 8:32 pm
The SCOTUS is a co-equal branch of the US government and has the power to decide if something conforms to the Constitution or not. The US Constitution was made to be interpreted differently via the "Elastic Clause." It is this interpretation that makes a justice's personal convictions a point of contention. Liberal justices interpret the Constitution in a liberal manner while conservative justices interpret it in a conservative manner.peter wrote:Would it be too much of an aside for someone to explain to me why the SCOTUS and appointments thereto are such a big deal in the US? The closest thing we have to it is, if I get this correctly, also termed the 'supreme court' (though we also have the Law Lords - not quite sure where they fit in), but nobody in the UK ever gives nominations to this body even the slightest attention; the importance of the body in the UK is clearly not as significant. What role does the SCOTUS play in the constitution of the US that makes it such an area of contention as to who gets on to it.
(Another, completely off topic question that has been interesting me; we have in the UK the 'civil service', the state employed body (completely unelected) that functions as 'the machinery of state' - ie the guys that actually do the stuff of running the country on the basis of what the currently incumbant administration instruct them to do. What is the US equivalent of this called? There must be something comparable - you couldn't replace every single functionary every time there was a change of Government.)
This can have implications on the legality of abortion, gay marriage, etc. The SCOTUS is what legalized gay marriage across the US five years ago, and a conservative majority on the SCOTUS could potentially walk back a previous ruling on abortion and gay marriage.
SCOTUS can also rule on a contested presidential election as well, which is part of Donald Trump's strategy regarding mail-in ballots. He wants the SCOTUS to invalidate the counting of ballots after the election because with how the mailing service is running right now, many ballots are likely to arrive after election day even if they are postmarked for Nov 3 (election day). More Biden voters than Trump voters plan to vote by mail, so the idea is that by invalidating mail-in ballots you are essentially burning Biden votes in order to rig the election in your favor.
In short, the SCOTUS is a big deal, although many on the left have usually not paid as much attention to it in the past. With the passing of RBG and a strong conservative majority imminent, they definitely are paying attention now.
- peter
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 11563
- Joined: Tue Aug 25, 2009 10:08 am
- Location: Another time. Another place.
- Been thanked: 6 times
Thanks guys - very helpful. Much clearer now as to how important this is.
The truth is a Lion and does not need protection. Once free it will look after itself.
....and the glory of the world becomes less than it was....
'Have we not served you well'
'Of course - you know you have.'
'Then let it end.'
We are the Bloodguard
....and the glory of the world becomes less than it was....
'Have we not served you well'
'Of course - you know you have.'
'Then let it end.'
We are the Bloodguard
- Hashi Lebwohl
- The Gap Into Spam
- Posts: 19576
- Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:38 pm
Biden will not get anywhere near 400 EV but he is definitely favored to win at this point in time. When Trump loses--as I expect will happen--Republicans will cut ties with him as a matter of course because he will become an ex-politician, living a life of luxurious retirement and being able to draw very lucrative speaking engagements.ur-Nanothnir wrote:If Trump suffered such a loss, I don't see how the GOP wouldn't want to cut ties with him.
It is interesting that Sarge notes that Democrats cannot legislate anything. As I was looking into the Senate, I became reminded that the House of Representatives and the Senate both came under Democrat control in the aftermath of the 1928 Crash, and kept their majority in both Houses until 1947, when Republicans held both for only 2 years, then another 4 years of Democrat control, 2 years of Republican control, and then Democrats controlled both Houses of Congress from 1955 until 1979--they had 26 years to remake the country in whatever image they wanted....but did not really do so. More recently, from 1987 - 1995 then again from 2007 until 2013 Democrats controlled all of Congress. All that time in power and they never managed to enact their vision for the United States--they could have had whatever immigration law they wanted, whatever health insurance reform/program they wanted, whatever gun control legislation they could get past the Courts, and so on.
Why do Democrats not go all in and pass the leglislation they say they want without any Republican input when they are in control of Congress? I know the answer, of course, but I am curious as ot other people's answers to that question.
The Tank is gone and now so am I.