Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Political/Religious Topics' started by grizcty, Sep 18, 2020.
That’s an even better reason to get it done NOW.
I think most folks know what's at stake and the process will begin quickly. You'll see the same act from the 'weasel' senators that they won't vote until after the election. Doesn't mean that hearings won't be going on. It just means they're borderline liberal weasels and don't want to alienate votes based on actually taking a position. So they can wait until the election results happen and seats are 'safe.'
Once the election is past (but before the President is sworn in; whatever the results--hopefully sworn in again) I think there WILL be a vote and confirmation.
Most of us are most definitely 'locked and loaded' I think for whatever happens. And checking 6.
Aside from timing of her demise, she has had a good influence upon women's lives.
Just wondering about the possible advantage of waiting until after the election. Watching Newsmax, some have alluded to delaying it as being helpful in getting Trump reelected. One even pointed out that McConnell is NOT a friend of the president & questioned his motives for being in a hurry.
I can see that some fence sitters might be impressed if Trump were to delay his nomination in a show of respect for RBG. 'Course, the political maneuvering is way over my head. I'm too used to saying what I mean & not what I think others want to hear.
Well I think it all depends on when they spawn the civil war, before the election or after. (and the appointment and/or confirmation process is going to be the impetus) This is going to make the Kavanaugh confirmation look like a child's birthday party...
We're actually in the middle of it now; in the insurgency phases at least. And we all know what appeasement does.
It enables bad behavior by miscreants. Portland, Seattle, etc. are a good testament to this. Like it or not we're already IN the conflict so blackmail from leftists is obviously the wrong path.
Might as well get a decent justice out of the deal.
Ive been saying it for years and even during the 2016 election. One of the primary reasons I voted for Trump was for the SCOTUS pics because I knew we were going to have some openings. And the scotus pics were and are going to shape this country long after Trump or whoever won the election is done and out of office.
I was pretty happy with the first two but a hat trick is a nice bonus.
Biden has already flip flopped three times about the issue of an election year presidential nomination so he can't talk. As is the case with most of the dems crying about Trump doing. And probably the only reasons the replacement of Scalia was postponed until after the election during the Obama administration is because those cocky morons just SOOO SUUREEE Hilary was going to be a shoe in for the next 8 years. The gambled there and lost big...
Hopefully the "0ver our dead bodies" quote by that Reza Aslan character will become a self fulfilling prophesy !!!!
I’m one of them, supposedly.
All you old fogies on here probably think I’m a liberal millennial punk
Nah. You've been hanging with the "old fogies" long enough, I suspect we've worn off on you a bit.
Not till she votes in the next election.
During the 2016 election cycle she actively spoke out against Trump and was promoting killery klinton, she should have been removed from the bench immediately.
I have little doubt she didn't even stop in the judgement office, she went straight out and got on the bus to purgatory to meet her boss.
Harumph! Harumph! Harumph!
Senator Ed Markey of the Peoples Democratic Republic of Taxachusetts is already making threats about what will happen if Trump goes ahead and nominates a replacement for RBG. He seems to be forgetting three things:
1. The Jackoff Partei does not control the Senate or its order of business. The GOP does.
2. Unless the Jackoffs can offer greater incentives to at least four Republican senators to vote with them than McConnell can offer incentives or threats to vote with the Republicans, the Democrats can't stop the confirmation. Especially if the woman he intends to nominate according to the evening news report is at least as competent as Kavanaugh, and I believe all of Trump's shortlisted possibles meet that standard.
3. If it is a tie vote, meaning the Jackoffs have managed to subvert three Republican senators, the President of the Senate casts the tiebreaking vote. The President of the Senate is Vice President Pence, a Republican. Do you think he would vote against Trump's nominee?
I would submit we should not take counsel of our fears just yet. Let's see who Trump picks to replace Ginsberg, and what her qualifications are to sit on the Supreme Court. Once these are known, bombard your senators, even if they are worthless Democratic pieces of $hit like Upchuck Schumer and Sock Puppet Gillibrand, and let them know you want the nominee confirmed.
God damm all Democrats anyway.
Yep...So, what is the high crime or misdemeanor?
Being richer, smarter, better looking, and more American than she is. LOL!!!!
I am always reluctant to disparage any recently deceased person. Your comment has awakened my curiosity, so I am not trashing her, just asking for more information.
Could you cite the court cases for each of the statements you listed above, just one each. Not doubting that she was one of the key leaders in the women's movement AFTER she was put on the Court in 1993. But the key civil rights and equality acts at the federal level came long before her. The biggest case in history of women's pay was the ATT case where women made less than men, mostly because women by the masses were telephone operators at the time, and men were in the craft and engineering jobs which require degrees and work out in the weather 24/7. The Final Consent Decree after the DOJ sued them was 1974. She was not on the court until 1993, where she did rule in favor of women's rights without fail. My point is while she was an ACLU lawyer and a professor for many years, I am not aware of any actual legal cases where she was the lead attorney or on the lead team that won mayor victories for women. There may be dozens, I just am not aware of them.
I always admired her until she went on record making political comments about the Merrick Garland nomination and ruled in advance on her opinion of the law and trashed Trump as a candidate. When any judge tells the media how they view an issue that might come before their court, that is the ultimate lack of ethics. When any judge tells the media that this or that person should be rejected as a president, that is a new low and destroys any idea that the court is going to be fair. So, while she was 83 at the time and may have had dementia and other mental issues, she should have known better and not taken the opportunity to trash him. You will notice that few other justices have ever done that.https://www.huffpost.com/entry/ruth-bader-ginsburg-trump-new-zealand_n_5782f676e4b0344d514fdec4
The Equal Pay Act was signed by John Kennedy in 1963, the Civil Rights Act in 1964, and the Pregnancy Act in 1978. Those were all done by Congress and long before she was known in the movement. https://www.history.com/topics/womens-rights/equal-pay-act
It was Eleanor Roosevelt who was knows as the first lady of the women's movement who we owe the most thanks.
Anyway she showed her bias and made the court look just like another political body. There should never be a judge appointed that is just another yes man for this or that party. She made a lot of important rulings while on the court, but that bias lowers the esteem of the court.
So, if you could tip me off to the actual cases she won as lawyer I would be appreciative. As a student of history I just have no info about her successes before she was on the court. Thanks.
Pelosi's attitude is, "Just impeach the sonofabitch. We'll figure out the charges later."
Well the way they think- her and Adam "Levantry Beria" Schiff would say "Show me the man and I'll show you the crime."