Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Supreme Court, bastion of conservatism

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Bo Diddley View Post
    I wonder who ACB has sexually assaulted.
    I am just praying she's not another Alito. Another Sotomayer would have been ideal but we get this instead?


    I'm hoping Clarence Thomas gets a bad case of the gout soon...
    "I'm anti, can't no government handle a commando / Your man don't want it, Trump's a bitch! I'll make his whole brand go under,"

    Comment


    • https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/ar...-supreme-court
      “Every player dreams of being a Yankee, and if they don’t it’s because they never got the chance.” Aroldis Chapman

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Commando View Post
        I am just praying she's not another Alito. Another Sotomayer would have been ideal but we get this instead?


        I'm hoping Clarence Thomas gets a bad case of the gout soon...
        Racist

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Commando View Post
          I am just praying she's not another Alito. Another Sotomayer would have been ideal but we get this instead?


          I'm hoping Clarence Thomas gets a bad case of the gout soon...
          Is Clarence Thomas still alive? That guy single-handedly switched me from a Coke guy to a Pepsi guy.
          "The mind is not a boomerang. If you throw it too far it will not come back." ~ Tom McGuane

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Non Sequitur View Post
            Is Clarence Thomas still alive? That guy single-handedly switched me from a Coke guy to a Pepsi guy.
            And well.

            Not sure he has eight years in him though. He could easily be an RGB in reverse.
            τὸν ἥλιον ἀνατέλλοντα πλείονες ἢ δυόμενον προσκυνοῦσιν

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Non Sequitur View Post
              Is Clarence Thomas still alive? That guy single-handedly switched me from a Coke guy to a Pepsi guy.
              He made me more vigilant at inspecting any canned beverage.

              Comment


              • Interesting take. Thanks.

                Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
                "I think it was King Benjamin who said 'you sorry ass shitbags who have no skills that the market values also have an obligation to have the attitude that if one day you do in fact win the PowerBall Lottery that you will then impart of your substance to those without.'"
                - Goatnapper'96

                Comment


                • Originally posted by PaloAltoCougar View Post
                  When will karma step in for all the things McConnell and Graham pontificated about when they backburnered Garland? The evening of November 3 would be nice, but I'm not counting on it.
                  Garland deserved a vote. So does Barrett. While McConnell et al said really stupid things to justify their behavior toward Garland, Democrats are showing their share of hypocrisy in singing different tunes then and now. Democrats are in a more defensible position, but two wrongs don't make a right. The right thing, then and now, is to allow a Supreme Court nominee a vote on the floor.
                  sigpic
                  "Outlined against a blue, gray
                  October sky the Four Horsemen rode again"
                  Grantland Rice, 1924

                  Comment


                  • I like this nominee. Reaction from the left has been interesting. Seeing progressives on twitter blast her for working too much and neglecting her kids. Or that she is a mindless servant to her husband. Ha.

                    All these attacks seem pointless. Do they think they can convince republican senators not to vote for her?
                    "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
                    "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
                    "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by cowboy View Post
                      Garland deserved a vote. So does Barrett. While McConnell et al said really stupid things to justify their behavior toward Garland, Democrats are showing their share of hypocrisy in singing different tunes then and now. Democrats are in a more defensible position, but two wrongs don't make a right. The right thing, then and now, is to allow a Supreme Court nominee a vote on the floor.
                      I agree. I'm sure that even if the Repubs had allowed a Garland vote, the Dems would still be insisting that the current slot be filled after January 20.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
                        I like this nominee. Reaction from the left has been interesting. Seeing progressives on twitter blast her for working too much and neglecting her kids. Or that she is a mindless servant to her husband. Ha.

                        All these attacks seem pointless. Do they think they can convince republican senators not to vote for her?
                        I want Barrett confirmed before the election. And then Trump to get embarrassingly voted out of office by a number he can't dispute.

                        The "end of the world" shrieks by Dems about any GOP appointed SCOTUS pick is just as tiresome as Trump. The funny thing is, when was the last time a Dem appointed SCOTUS judge veered towards the center, let alone the right? But you know how many GOP appointed SCOTUS judges subsequently moved to the center or center left? O'conor, Kennedy, Souter, now Roberts.

                        The Dems deserve to beat Trump and the current iteration of the GOP. But in no way do I want a Dem filling a SCOTUS appointment the way they are right now.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by SeattleUte View Post
                          Think about it. This is like something out of Herodotus or a Greek tragedy. She lived over 87 years. 11 with pancreatic cancer. And fell six weeks short. She lived almost 4,500 weeks, and died six weeks too early. Maybe just 2 or three weeks too early. That would not have left enough time. She will be remembered primarily for that.

                          This observation is really smart, SU.
                          I hadn't thought of this scenario in quite this way, but - you're right - from Croesus to Antigone, timing is everything.
                          "More crazy people to Provo go than to any other town in the state."
                          -- Iron County Record. 23 August, 1912. (http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lc...23/ed-1/seq-4/)

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by cowboy View Post
                            Garland deserved a vote. So does Barrett. While McConnell et al said really stupid things to justify their behavior toward Garland, Democrats are showing their share of hypocrisy in singing different tunes then and now. Democrats are in a more defensible position, but two wrongs don't make a right. The right thing, then and now, is to allow a Supreme Court nominee a vote on the floor.
                            I agree with this and would go so far as to say that regardless of ideology (unless that ideology goes against the basic principles of the constitution), the only reason a senator should vote against a nominee is a lack of qualifications. The only one who falls into that category in recent history is Harriet Miers and she didn’t even make it close to a vote.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
                              I like this nominee. Reaction from the left has been interesting. Seeing progressives on twitter blast her for working too much and neglecting her kids. Or that she is a mindless servant to her husband. Ha.

                              All these attacks seem pointless. Do they think they can convince republican senators not to vote for her?
                              I’m just glad that the nominee is not Mike Lee.

                              Tender mercies.


                              Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
                              Nothing lasts, but nothing is lost.
                              --William Blake, via Shpongle

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
                                I like this nominee. Reaction from the left has been interesting. Seeing progressives on twitter blast her for working too much and neglecting her kids. Or that she is a mindless servant to her husband. Ha.

                                All these attacks seem pointless. Do they think they can convince republican senators not to vote for her?
                                I agree. She seems like a pretty amazing person. Will be pretty cool to have a working mom on the SC.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X