-
Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
It's like someone said, "Well, it can't get any worse."
And the universe said "Challenge accepted! Death... find a soul to take and make its loss a deep and dark bottomless source of suck."
And death checked his list. "Crap. Do I have to? This has the potential to rip the fabric of every being."
The Universe responded, "Make it their darkest of dark times."
"But this is RUTH we're talking about!"
"It's always darkest before the dawn."
The world was a better place for her being in it.... the world is worse for its loss... and while we may suffer, she no longer is.... rest in peace... court is adjourned....
Ruth Bader Ginsburg 1933-2020...
-tg
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
Quote:
The world was a better place for her being in it.... the world is worse for its loss... and while we may suffer, she no longer is.... rest in peace... court is adjourned....
That's the only good thing about it, she will not have to endure any more pain or suffering. She has carried her load and enough extra for many others. RIP
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
My response when I heard this news was pretty much unprintable. That loss is going to hurt this country like few others.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
You just watch Trump take this opportunity to shoehorn one of this cronies into her seat. He's probably had one ready for this exact moment for at least a couple of years.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
He has too many. He presented a list months ago.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
It will be interesting to see whether The Turtle, AKA Mitch McConnell, actually admits that he lied when refusing to approve Obama's SCOTUS nominee when they try to get Trump's pick in before the election or whether he will pretend that his denial is plausible. I also wonder if Democrats will be able to delay it until after the election. Despite the blatant Republican dishonesty regarding when in a president's term they can appoint a new Justice, I'm not sure whether there are any means to do so.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
He pretty much admitted it a year back. This time around, he's made up some cover story about how the voters elected a Republican majority in the senate, and therefore he has to fulfill their wishes by pushing a nominee through.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
There is absolutely nothing that will keep a determined united republican Senate from appointing the next Supreme Court Justice. Nothing...it is well within their constitutional power. There is also no reason to believe they won't. The hypocrisy of when ten months out they denied Obama a pick is already on display. They will suffer any accusations of hypocrisy and the sting will be short lived in our twenty-four hours news cycle mentality
But maybe, just maybe, a republican or two (I'm not sure how many it would take - four?) will respect the idea of letting the next elected president submit someone. There is a real chance it will be Trump anyway. But I sincerely doubt that. In my opinion they will try to do it before the election. If that isn't feasible, it is too soon to know at this point, they will do it in the lame duck session.
Regardless...the next Supreme Court Justice will in all probability be appointed by Trump. It just makes me feel empty. I guess 40% or so of the US is elated. This is also a HUGE motivational event to get the republican voter out. The democrats are powerless concerning the next appointee.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
RIP RBG. She fought the good fight for civil rights all the way to the bitter end.
If the Republicans seat a replacement, and Democrats take back the white house and senate, it'll be high time for the party that represents a minority of the country to be relegated to minority power. The 'they go low, we go high' strategy has led to loss after loss after loss. They've been playing chess against an opponent that treats every pawn as a queen, while studiously following all the rules for their pieces, and making a 'bipartisan compromise' for Republicans to only play with 8 queens instead of 9. You can never win against an opponent who ignores the rules by sticking to them yourself, and I'm completely sick of Democrats doing just that.
So if they manage to confirm a right-wing lunatic like member of an extremist religious cult Amy Coney Barret (look up People of Praise), that better be it. I don't want to hear one word from Democrats about taking the high road and just letting them have all the power. Increase the size of the court to 13 members and appoint the 4 most liberal judges you can find, eliminate the filibuster, grant statehood to DC and PR making it nigh impossible for Republicans as they exist today to get back the Senate, and repeal the Reapportionment Act of 1929 to get rid of the ridiculous hard cap on House members which Republicans rely on to have any chance at controlling that chamber.
The Republicans have used every dirty trick in the book to cheat in elections and force the will of an increasingly small minority to control the majority. Democrats need to fight back for once if this nominee goes through. It's time for the Republicans to have only the power the size of their voter base ought to accord.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
Quote:
Originally Posted by
fafalone
RIP RBG. She fought the good fight for civil rights all the way to the bitter end.
If the Republicans seat a replacement, and Democrats take back the white house and senate, it'll be high time for the party that represents a minority of the country to be relegated to minority power. The 'they go low, we go high' strategy has led to loss after loss after loss. They've been playing chess against an opponent that treats every pawn as a queen, while studiously following all the rules for their pieces, and making a 'bipartisan compromise' for Republicans to only play with 8 queens instead of 9. You can never win against an opponent who ignores the rules by sticking to them yourself, and I'm completely sick of Democrats doing just that.
So if they manage to confirm a right-wing lunatic like member of an extremist religious cult Amy Coney Barret (look up People of Praise), that better be it. I don't want to hear one word from Democrats about taking the high road and just letting them have all the power. Increase the size of the court to 13 members and appoint the 4 most liberal judges you can find, eliminate the filibuster, grant statehood to DC and PR making it nigh impossible for Republicans as they exist today to get back the Senate, and repeal the Reapportionment Act of 1929 to get rid of the ridiculous hard cap on House members which Republicans rely on to have any chance at controlling that chamber.
The Republicans have used every dirty trick in the book to cheat in elections and force the will of an increasingly small minority to control the majority. Democrats need to fight back for once if this nominee goes through. It's time for the Republicans to have only the power the size of their voter base ought to accord.
I disagree with throwing away your principles to defeat someone that has none. To me at the end of the journey it is how you got there. The republican party is dying off on its own. The country is steadily becoming more diverse and progressive. The popular vote has been swinging progressive for decades. The republicans are clinging onto their last vestiges of power and are doing it by the means you described. They want to go back to some dreamy 1950's white man dominated world. Now is not the time to crawl into the gutter with them.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TysonLPrice
Now is not the time to crawl into the gutter with them.
You sound like someone who is confident that a Supreme Court stacked by Republicans won't really affect them directly.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jmcilhinney
You sound like someone who is confident that a Supreme Court stacked by Republicans won't really affect them directly.
I'm not sure what that means...what are you thinking?
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
Republicans? Oh, those people who support Biden?
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dilettante
Republicans? Oh, those people who support Biden?
When someone appears so disingenuous so often, I start to wonder whether I'm giving them too much credit. Biden is a bad candidate, no doubt, but it should tell you something about the Republican candidate that so many Republicans want to vote for the Democrat.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TysonLPrice
I'm not sure what that means...what are you thinking?
What I'm thinking is that Democrats should do anything and everything they can to prevent Republicans appointing any more SC justices whether you want to get your hands dirty or not. Maybe you figure it's no big deal because you're not gay and don't plan on having an abortion in the next few decades but there are people whose lives could be profoundly affected by the political leanings of those appointed so maybe you should get over your squeamishness and think of them.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jmcilhinney
What I'm thinking is that Democrats should do anything and everything they can to prevent Republicans appointing any more SC justices whether you want to get your hands dirty or not. Maybe you figure it's no big deal because you're not gay and don't plan on having an abortion in the next few decades but there are people whose lives could be profoundly affected by the political leanings of those appointed so maybe you should get over your squeamishness and think of them.
I don't equate principles and squeamishness that way and I don't believe I implied in anyway I don't see the seriousness of the republican's appointment. Those people that will be hurt should have been thought of before all those people voted that moron in. There is almost nothing that is going to stop the appointment.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TysonLPrice
Those people that will be hurt should have been thought of before all those people voted that moron in.
I agree, but the situation is what it is so maybe do what you can to avoid it becoming even worse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TysonLPrice
There is almost nothing that is going to stop the appointment.
Almost nothing is not nothing. Principles are great but if you are in a fight and your opponent is continually cheating then sticking stoically to your principles no matter what just makes you look foolish. It's generally the ones who will suffer least as a result of losing that fight who are most keen on sticking to their principles. I understand that everyone has a line they don't want to cross. Some people should reevaluate where that line is for them and some should realise that they may need to cross it anyway for the greater good. Recognise when the opponent has no line, you might need to be flexible.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jmcilhinney
I agree, but the situation is what it is so maybe do what you can to avoid it becoming even worse.
Almost nothing is not nothing. Principles are great but if you are in a fight and your opponent is continually cheating then sticking stoically to your principles no matter what just makes you look foolish. It's generally the ones who will suffer least as a result of losing that fight who are most keen on sticking to their principles. I understand that everyone has a line they don't want to cross. Some people should reevaluate where that line is for them and some should realise that they may need to cross it anyway for the greater good. Recognise when the opponent has no line, you might need to be flexible.
When I said "almost nothing" I was covering my bases...someone might kill four or five republican senators and that would stop it. Short of something like that the nomination is going through. Senator Romney just announced he is voting on it. If I was fighting off hoards of invading Huns I would consider taking off the gloves and being as deadly as them. I don't think I want to wrestle with republican pigs in the mud. You just get dirty and the pigs like it. I'll take the high road...we just have to suck this one up.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
I'm actually with Tyson that I don't think you need to give up your principles at a time like this but I didn't see anything that Fafalone suggested that would represent the Democrats doing that:-
Quote:
Increase the size of the court to 13 members and appoint the 4 most liberal judges you can find, eliminate the filibuster, grant statehood to DC and PR making it nigh impossible for Republicans as they exist today to get back the Senate, and repeal the Reapportionment Act of 1929 to get rid of the ridiculous hard cap on House members which Republicans rely on to have any chance at controlling that chamber.
I don't see anything underhanded in any of that. It's not a call to fight dirty, it's a call to be ruthless.
And I do believe the Dems are going to have to be ruthless. An unacceptable number of your institutions and mechanisms have been co-opted and twisted to serve partisan political ends. It's not exclusively the Reps that do it but it does feel like they do it a whole lot more and that's led to a system that currently skews to a (narrowly) minority party.
But I believe in PR so I reckon you could actually go a whole lot further than Faf has suggested.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
I caught a news report that gave a run down of the potential candidates - all women ... At first I thought maybe it was an attempt to fix the "Grab 'em" problem... then I realized it's an end run around the Democrats ... They will some how spin this into a case of "Democrats claim to be equal for all, but don't want another woman on the Court" kind of thing.
-tg
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
I think the Supreme Court needs to change. It started out as six, it's been 9 since 1869. A lot has changed in 150yrs. Not sure what the correct number is, 11, 13 or maybe 7. I'd really like to see them get rid of this life long term. In 1869 the average lifespan was @ 45, now it's around 78. Maybe even the way they are appointed. But with the state of politics I think the only changes you'll see are one beneficial to the party in power.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
In France we have about the same, we called it "conseil constitutionnel". There are 9 members with one only period of 9 years, they replace 3 members every 3 years. One is selected by the president of the senate, one by the president of the congress, one by the president of the republic. The assembly (congress + senate together have a veto right with 3/5 of the people who vote)
All former presidents have a life seat by right but almost none take it or keep it. Of course, there are replacement in case of death or resignation.
From what I have seen about them, they are pretty fair and not partisan even if they are from different "side".
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TysonLPrice
I don't think I want to wrestle with republican pigs in the mud. You just get dirty and the pigs like it. I'll take the high road...we just have to suck this one up.
It appears that Trump plans to stack the SC so that he can refuse to accept the result if he loses the election and have the SC install him as a the dictator he's always wanted to be. Still more concerned with what the pigs like?
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
Quote:
Originally Posted by
wes4dbt
I think the Supreme Court needs to change. It started out as six, it's been 9 since 1869. A lot has changed in 150yrs. Not sure what the correct number is, 11, 13 or maybe 7. I'd really like to see them get rid of this life long term. In 1869 the average lifespan was @ 45, now it's around 78. Maybe even the way they are appointed. But with the state of politics I think the only changes you'll see are one beneficial to the party in power.
" the average lifespan was @ 45". I think that is a little misleading in the context you present it. That average is probably true but based on a large number of people that didn't make it out of childhood or more in those days. Once you made it into your twenties you had a real good chance of living longer than 45.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jmcilhinney
It appears that Trump plans to stack the SC so that he can refuse to accept the result if he loses the election and have the SC install him as a the dictator he's always wanted to be. Still more concerned with what the pigs like?
I don't think that is applicable. All the legal pundits I have listened to think that in all probability the new member would recuse herself because Trump nominated her. That would leave the lower court ruling standing if there was a tie. The republicans act like they do because over the last few decades they have been losing their base. Their anachronistic platform is being left behind for a more progressive society. That is why they are using things like gerrymandering, stacking the courts, attempts at voter suppression, etc. to stay in power. Once all that fails they will be a shadow of what they are today. In a way Trump is speeding that along. The republican party isn't anything like it was four years ago. So when that happens I'll be proud I didn't get in the mud with them and took the high road.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TysonLPrice
So when that happens I'll be proud I didn't get in the mud with them and took the high road.
It's that smug attitude from Democrats that has allowed things to get as bad as they are in the first place.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jmcilhinney
It's that smug attitude from Democrats that has allowed things to get as bad as they are in the first place.
If being proud to have principles and scruples translates to smug in your book I guess I'm smug - and proud of it :p
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
Quote:
Originally Posted by
TysonLPrice
If being proud to have principles and scruples translates to smug in your book I guess I'm smug - and proud of it :p
Being more concerned about your own pride in your principles than people is smug in my book. If your principles aren't serving people then they're of no value. If Trump gets his way, you go and tell the people who suffer as a result how proud you are of your principles. I'm sure they'll be reassured.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jmcilhinney
It appears that Trump plans to stack the SC so that he can refuse to accept the result if he loses the election and have the SC install him as a the dictator he's always wanted to be. Still more concerned with what the pigs like?
Mmm, no.
More likely he'd prefer a court that would uphold a case against the unsecured mail-in ballots that Biden is counting on to stuff the ballot box with.
The end-around to shut Trump up would be easy:
Just require that people request a mail-in ballot which can be checked for a registered voter before a ballot gets mailed out. When the ballot comes in it can be verified as legitimate again. This is how absentee ballots work now.
As opposed to blindly mailing unrequested ballots out to as many randomly-generated names as possible, the Biden plan.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jmcilhinney
If Trump gets his way, you go and tell the people who suffer as a result how proud you are of your principles.
I think you have these candidates confused with each other.
Biden stands for more war, more austerity, more prisons, harsher crime penalties, more corporate protections and bailouts, and offshoring jobs and pollution to low wage and environmental standards countries. He has a record, and that is it.
It is obvious why people like Mitt Romney, Rick (Flint Lead Water) Snyder, Carly Fiorina, the military-industrial complex, Wall Street, etc. back Biden.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
Quote:
Originally Posted by
jmcilhinney
Being more concerned about your own pride in your principles than people is smug in my book. If your principles aren't serving people then they're of no value. If Trump gets his way, you go and tell the people who suffer as a result how proud you are of your principles. I'm sure they'll be reassured.
Quote:
Being more concerned about your own pride in your principles than people is smug in my book.
Wow...where did that come from? What did I post that makes you think I'm like that? I care very much about my society and mankind for that matter. I'm posting much like having a conversation, I'm not sure what makes you think I'm guilty of "Being more concerned about your own pride in your principles than people"
Quote:
If your principles aren't serving people then they're of no value
We disagree in tactics, you want to get in the mud as we have been saying, and I want to take the high road. Those of us that are taking the high road, and there are many as the post complained, will be proud when we can undo the damage Trump caused. There will be enormous value in that respect and will be an example for others going forward.
Quote:
If Trump gets his way, you go and tell the people who suffer as a result how proud you are of your principles. I'm sure they'll be reassured.
Sigh...we might as well give this up.
-
Re: Notorius R.B.G ... RIP
Quote:
It appears that Trump plans to stack the SC so that he can refuse to accept the result if he loses the election and have the SC install him as a the dictator he's always wanted to be. Still more concerned with what the pigs like?
When I first read that I thought it was hyperbolic but I'm increasingly convinced that's the plan. Over the last couple of days Trump has been pretty explicit about his intention. Assuming Trump loses the election the question won't be whether Trump adopts that tactic, it'll be whether the US systems are sufficient to prevent it working. I think they are but I'm no longer sure.
Quote:
All the legal pundits I have listened to think that in all probability the new member would recuse herself because Trump nominated her.
It's that "in all probability" bit that worries me. Over the last four years Trump has repeatedly demonstrated that he can coerce your institutions into falling in line.
