Wow, the GOP can't stall replacement until after 1/21/17 and it likely will be a Dem POTUS then, anyhow. This is going to be disgusting, tedious and fun all at the same time.
Comments:
Sad for the family, but not for America.
The Supreme Court of Hell just got a new chief justice. Now Lucifer is no longer the most morally bankrupt piece of filth in Hell.
I rarely cheer someone's death, but this is a huge step for human rights in this country.
Tinfoil hat wearing conspiracy theorists go nuts in 3.....2......1.....GO!
Republicans are always shocked when they see one of their own die, they think they are immortal and more holy than God.
...and where was Dick Cheney when the "accident" occurred?
rstrong wrote:
Seth Milner wrote:Where did you locate those quotes? I researched each one and found no author of any of them. Vrede too attempts to flaunt "his" brilliance by posting none other than "his" own thoughts in an attempt to fool "his" friends into thinking "he's" done a mountain of research. fail.
Clue: The story has a comments section below.
But if your little fantasy works for you, enjoy.
Yahoo! calls them "Comments" below every article they publish and I even labeled them "Comments". Seth Milner's "research" is a hoot!
Why would a "narcissist" like me ever pretend that my own opinions were someone else's, Dr. Fail?
Seth Milner is a moron, again.
Now, as always, Seth Milner will prove that "he" has earned the quotes around 'he' that "he" is childishly copying by not having the balls to admit "his" obvious screw up.
Last edited by Vrede too on Sat Feb 13, 2016 8:44 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Vrede too wrote:Yahoo! calls them "Comments" below every article they publish and I even labeled them "Comments".
Seth Milner's "research" is a hoot! Why would a "narcissist" like me ever pretend that my own opinions were someone else's, Dr. Fail?
Seth Milner is a moron, again.
Now, as always, Seth Milner will prove that "he" has earned the quotes around 'he' that "he" is childishly copying by not having the balls to admit "his" obvious screw up.
What part of this did you miss?
rstrong wrote:
Clue: The story has a comments section below.
My bad. I failed to read the meanderings of the commenters; pro or con.
I goofed. I admitted it.
Don't take life too seriously; No one gets out alive
Vrede too wrote:Now, as always, Seth Milner will prove that "he" has earned the quotes around 'he' that "he" is childishly copying by not having the balls to admit "his" obvious screw up.
I have no clue why you put the quotes in, but I really don't care. I thought it was a childish little game you were playing to amuse yourself; so I started using them to keep you happy; I hate to see a grown "man" cry.
Don't take life too seriously; No one gets out alive
I had to check to see what whiny excuse making "he" would come up with this time.
Seth Milner wrote:
Vrede too wrote:... Now, as always, Seth Milner will prove that "he" has earned the quotes around 'he' that "he" is childishly copying by not having the balls to admit "his" obvious screw up.
What part of this did you miss?
rstrong wrote:
Clue: The story has a comments section below.
My bad. I failed to read the meanderings of the commenters; pro or con.
I goofed. I admitted it.
Reading them wouldn't have mattered, cretin. The comments turnover there is very rapid. You're a moron for not automatically knowing where they came from, for thinking that blaming not reading something that wasn't there anymore is a legit excuse and, as always, you don't have the balls to apologize for your idiotic attack on me. This is why you stupidly accuse rstrong and me of being the same, we're both smarter and more honorable than a rotting turnip like you.
Since I can anticipate your childish response don't get me wrong, I don't need or even want accountability or an apology from you. I prefer your whiny and nonsensical excuse making for your utter stupidity and your delicate ego inability to atone for wrongs. It's more fun pointing all this out than if you ever decided to display brains, balls, maturity and integrity.
Last edited by Vrede too on Sat Feb 13, 2016 9:46 pm, edited 2 times in total.
In this era of activist judges, Scalia's absence will reshape the Court whether the Senate confirms a replacement or not.
The immediate and easily foreseeable impact is staggering. Last week, the Supreme Court issued a stay delaying the implementation of Obama’s Clean Power Plan. The stay indicated that a majority of the justices foresee a reasonably high likelihood that they would ultimately strike down Obama’s plan, which could jeopardize the Paris climate agreement and leave greenhouse gasses unchecked. Without Scalia on the Court, the odds of this drop to virtually zero. The challenge is set to be decided by a D.C. Circuit panel composed of a majority of Democratic appointees, which will almost certainly uphold the regulations. If the plan is upheld, it would require a majority of the Court to strike it down. With the Court now tied 4-4, such a ruling now seems nearly impossible.
One nitpick: The subtitle.
"Activist judges" were a myth created by the Republican right to rally the inbreds. A term they made popular when Jeb! was milking Terri Schiavo's death for political points. The so-called "activist judges' weren't being "activist"; *THEY* were the ones sticking to existing rulings and law on the issue.
... The Reagan appointee had heard and potentially already cast votes in several high-profile cases that could decide issues from whether universities can continue to use affirmative action to if unions can collect fees from nonmembers to survive.
Scalia’s votes in those cases will be invalidated, sending the justices back to the drawing board to renegotiate those decisions. His death will likely also lead to 4-4 splits on some key issues, with the remaining four liberals and four conservatives facing off against each other....
Today should have been a day to let his family grieve, but Republicans politicized the news almost instantly -- saying the Senate should not confirm any nominee by President Obama. Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell said in a statement, "This vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president.”
Democratic Leader Harry Reid responded, "Failing to fill this vacancy would be a shameful abdication of one of the Senate's most essential Constitutional responsibilities."
And President Obama said in a short speech, "I will nominate a successor."
This could turn into a Constitutional crisis. Things are moving fast and conventional wisdom will unfortunately be formed quickly. Silence is not an option.
Please sign our emergency petition on this page.
PETITION TO ALL U.S. SENATORS:
"An Obama nomination for Supreme Court deserves an up or down vote. Republicans are free to vote yes or no, but should not obstruct our democracy from moving forward."
We have already reached out to top Senate offices and will send this petition to Senators. The media will surely report on this public outcry.
Today should have been a day for the Justice's family to grieve. But with the stakes so high for workers, women, minorities, and so many other people, we cannot be silent as Republicans try to steal a Supreme Court seat by obstructing our constitutional process.
rstrong wrote:"Activist judges" were a myth created by the Republican right to rally the inbreds. A term they made popular when Jeb! was milking Terri Schiavo's death for political points. The so-called "activist judges' weren't being "activist"; *THEY* were the ones sticking to existing rulings and law on the issue.
"Activist judges" has been around a lot longer than that. I've known of it since the courts did so much to end Jim Crow, but it may have been a civics and constitution-ignorant con whine for even longer.
Reid ain't got a hair on his ass if he does make it clear that that if the repugs refuse to confirm a new justice until they elect a regug president that we will have 8 justices for not just 11 months, but 59 months, or 105 months, or however long it takes
The dems need to play the same game, but I imagine that Obama will nominate a right winger, being that he is a closet repug
Trump: “We had the safest border in the history of our country - or at least recorded history. I guess maybe a thousand years ago it was even better.”
what good does it do to tell or explain anything to a repug
the set out to destroy Obama during his inauguration and have been steady at it since
I'll sign when the open letter from Senator Reid says something similar to, "if you believe the SC can operate with 8 justices and if you believe that tearing down a president is more important than your country, then we have no choice but to play the same game. If 11 months of an 8 man court works for you, then so should a 59 month, or a 105 month, or as long as it takes to get 60 dems in the senate and a dem pres.
Trump: “We had the safest border in the history of our country - or at least recorded history. I guess maybe a thousand years ago it was even better.”
I can dish it out, but I can't take it wrote:I had to check to see what whiny excuse making "he" would come up with this time. Yeah, we know you "had to".
you don't have the balls to apologize for your idiotic attack on me. "attack . . . "- - -
My bad. I failed to read the meanderings of the commentors; pro or con. I goofed. I admitted it.
This is why you stupidly accuse rstrong and me of being the same, we're both smarter and more honorable than a rotting turnip like you. Your thoughts are definite signs of narcissism and a bullying nature; thanks for the admission. Gosh, you're a swell guy!
Since I can anticipate your childish response don't get me wrong, I don't need or even want accountability or an apology from you. I prefer your whiny and nonsensical excuse making for your utter stupidity and your delicate ego inability to atone for wrongs. It's more fun pointing all this out than if you ever decided to display brains, balls, maturity and integrity. Aww gee, now you done went and hurt my feelings; shame on you.
Don't take life too seriously; No one gets out alive
billy.pilgrim wrote:what good does it do to tell or explain anything to a repug ...
None, it's like expecting Seth Milner to ever display brains, balls, maturity and integrity. However, the GOP can be made to believe that not confirming the moderate Obama will nominate can cost them the election.
billy.pilgrim wrote:what good does it do to tell or explain anything to a repug ...
None, it's like expecting Seth Milner to ever display brains, balls, maturity and integrity. However, the GOP can be made to believe that not confirming the moderate Obama will nominate can cost them the election.
Your whining about me again is noted, "Mr." Crybaby.
What with your whining about others and runaway attitude when the insults you sling are matched, tell us about your maturity and integrity. It's a known fact that when you get your shit slung back at you, like a little child with it's fingers in it's ears, you put them on ignore, then proclaim loudly that you don't "hear" what they're saying. Who do you think you're fooling?
Where you work y'all got any psycho-therapists that you could see? (emphasis on psycho)
Don't take life too seriously; No one gets out alive
If, as Christians believe, Jesus Christ someday reappears, strolling down from Bethany toward Jerusalem's Golden Gate, conservative Americans would probably hail him as a Republican, but on reflection, not really fit to serve on the Supreme Court.
He might not be enthusiastic enough about guns, his ideas on wealth redistribution are just plain socialism, he likely wouldn't be keen on injecting criminals with lethal chemicals, he'd no doubt urge clemency for all the millions of illegal immigrants doing America's scut work and, as a Jew, he might even have a compromise view of abortion....
So Obama, in the words of one analyst, can either try to find a justice "moderate enough" to appeal to enough Republicans to ensure Senate confirmation, or deliberately appoint a liberal, guaranteeing rejection, which can then be used to rouse progressive activists. Turn the appointment into a political weapon, in other words.
In any event, the politicization of the high court has reached completion in the past decade or so....
Sen. Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton's main rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, has come right out and said it: He would only nominate judges who would repeal the Citizens United decision.
Sen. Ted Cruz, the far-right Republican who once clerked for a Supreme Court justice, has made the same vow, just the other way around.
Incidentally, Scalia was nominated by Ronald Reagan in 1986, and Democrats and Republicans in the Senate joined to confirm him unanimously, 98-0.
Reagan also proceeded with a Supreme Court nomination during his last year in office, which Republicans are now saying Obama should not do.
He nominated Anthony Kennedy, who was also confirmed, unanimously.
But that was a long time ago, in an America far, far away.
).