Well, Republicans, you got your 30 silver coins. Congrats.
Well, Republicans, you got your 30 silver coins. Congrats.
I bet she said that while Obama was in office.
"Donald Trump will serve a second term as president of the United States.
It’s over."
Little Thethe Nov 19, 2020.
I'm not sure what we're both saying is all that far apart. You seem to be saying let him breeze through, I"m saying take your time, go through all the hoops, then if he checks out, which seems very likely, then approve him. The thing I'm not advising is to just fold (like the Dems often do) like Superman on laundry day. Find that happy medium.
Charles M. Blow @CharlesMBlow 8h8 hours ago
If DT can ban Muslims "until we figure out what the hell is going on," we can block justices "until we figure out what the hell is going on"
re: tax returns
russian interference
etc etc etc
The best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is to make sure he doesn’t get a gun.
Any specific objections to the pick?
I say fight them at every turn -- it is the only language they understand
(R) and their kind see compromise and conciliatory conversation as a weakness
The best way to stop a bad guy with a gun is to make sure he doesn’t get a gun.
DaneHill (02-01-2017)
Speaking of tactical, I am shocked that this worked for the Republicans. I thought blocking Garland was a huge mistake tactically and was sure it would just result in Hillary getting to appoint another justice even farther to the left. It's amazing that Donald freakin' Trump is what kept that from happening.
Oklahomahawk (02-01-2017)
DaneHill (02-01-2017), jpx7 (02-01-2017), Oklahomahawk (02-01-2017)
If Ginsburg had died in the last year of Bush's term, does anyone actually think that the Dems in control of the Senate would have let Bush get a third pick? I don't. I think they'd have pulled this exact same trick.
I agree that it's sad that we've come to this. That Supreme Court nominations have become such a political fight where every trick is fair game. However, I have to lay the blame at the feet of the Supreme Court. Gorsuch said something last night that I hope he believes and I wish more judges believed. He said that a judge that agrees with the results of every one of his decisions is likely a bad judge. This is because it's not the job of a judge to say what the law should be. It's the job of a judge to say what the law is.
A judge who rationally analyzes what the law demands will find that he doesn't always agree with the law. However, a good judge will not engage in legal acrobatics in an attempt to torture an interpretation into leading to a desired result. A good judge will follow the most rational interpretation of the law, not the one that leads them to the result they most want. There will of course be plenty of times where multiple interpretations can be equally valid but judges should be wary in those situations and constrain their decisions.
SCOTUS justices have for far too long let their decisions be shaped by their political leanings and not the law. The result has been a politicization of the branch intended to be insulated from politics. A justice's most important qualification should be their dedication to impartial application of the law but by clinging to political leanings the justices have made a candidate's ideology to be their most important qualification.
All of this leading to a situation where the parties pull every trick in the book has been inevitable. The Court has made their nominations a weapon and the parties of course were going to use it. So check your anger with the parties. They're just acting according to their nature. Turn your ire toward the justices who have made the Court a political creature. Ask yourself why you can't remember the last time one of the Court's four liberals broke rank on a major case. Ask why Kennedy and sometimes Roberts are the only justices people watch. That's the root of the problem.
BedellBrave (02-01-2017), Jaw (02-02-2017), sturg33 (02-01-2017)
First off, I don't "hate him"
Secondly, there was a nominee in place for over a year that never was given a hearing let alone an up down vote based solely on partisan politics
For that reason alone, I am opposed to Gorsuch.
Based on 250+ years of tradition it was not Trumps appointment to make
Last edited by 57Brave; 02-01-2017 at 09:26 AM.
BedellBrave (02-01-2017)
BedellBrave (02-01-2017)