Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia Dies - Page 5 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind
Click Here to Login
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 02-14-2016, 10:25 AM   #61
ONE
love, blood, life
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Leicester, UK
Posts: 12,387
Local Time: 12:19 AM
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia Dies

The justice will be replacing Scalia... it most definitely will be a moderate and still considered a huge swing for the courts in favor of a more liberal look. I'm sure Obama will be looking for someone that will get through, not the anti-Scalia that is Sotomayor.

Edit: somehow I double posted 39 minutes apart
__________________

__________________
LuckyNumber7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2016, 11:02 AM   #62
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,297
Local Time: 12:19 AM
Rubio has already been asked why he would refuse to appoint somebody like Sri Srivanasan - a DC circuit court of appeals justice that he previously voted to appoint and that cruised through the nomination process with a 97-0 vote.

I honestly hope the Republicans act like the jackasses they are and then Hillary sticks them with somebody like Pam Karlan in 2017.
__________________

__________________
anitram is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2016, 12:07 PM   #63
Blue Crack Distributor
 
corianderstem's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 63,731
Local Time: 09:19 PM
I hold no illusions that if Notorious RBG passed away tomorrow (in an opposite world where there's a Republican in the WH and dems control the senate), the same thing would be happening with the roles reversed, including all the rejoicing and tsk tsking on social media.

Would the dems be so quick to be all "LOL NOPE DON'T EVEN TRY" if they were in the Reps position right now, with a Republican in office? I don't know. I'm sure they wouldn't be quick to approve the POTUS's nominee, but I am skeptical that if the congress roles were reversed, they'd be making such statements hours after the justice's death about how they weren't even going to bother voting on a nominee.

That was really wordy, but I hope it made sense. I just rolled out of bed and am not even halfway through my coffee.
__________________
corianderstem is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2016, 12:13 PM   #64
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 11:19 PM
Just like being a libertarian, you're only a constitutionalist when the simpleton literalist view benefits you.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2016, 12:22 PM   #65
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Standing on the shore, facing east.
Posts: 18,894
Local Time: 12:19 AM
I wouldn't want the Senate to block Bush's nominee because it was his lame duck year. I would want the Senate to block Bush's nominee because Bush's nominee sucks.
__________________
PhilsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2016, 12:28 PM   #66
ONE
love, blood, life
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Leicester, UK
Posts: 12,387
Local Time: 12:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BVS View Post
Just like being a libertarian, you're only a constitutionalist when the simpleton literalist view benefits you.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference

Constitutionalism is bullshit and a dumb way to live by. Much like religion. Don't think for yourself, just cite what the bible/constitution says. It was made by someone way smarter than us. It is holy.
__________________
LuckyNumber7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2016, 12:55 PM   #67
Blue Crack Addict
 
PhilsFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Standing on the shore, facing east.
Posts: 18,894
Local Time: 12:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irvine511 View Post
Is this one of the times when you decide not to believe in the Constitution even though you say you believe in the Constitution?
Elizabeth Warren basically said just that.
__________________
PhilsFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2016, 01:42 PM   #68
Rock n' Roll Doggie
FOB
 
trojanchick99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Los Feliz, CA (between Hollywood and Downtown LA)
Posts: 8,091
Local Time: 09:19 PM
This is exposing the vast hypocrisy of the right wing. Bonus points for bringing the Republican Messiah Reagan into this.

Sent from my SM-G920V using U2 Interference mobile app
__________________
trojanchick99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2016, 02:03 PM   #69
Blue Crack Distributor
 
Headache in a Suitcase's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Stateless
Posts: 56,464
Local Time: 12:19 AM
It's hypocrisy at the absolute highest level.

We can't make common sense changes to our gun laws because the constitution says so, but we can have the Supreme Court sit with a vacant seat for a year cause fuck the constitution, that's why.
__________________
Headache in a Suitcase is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2016, 02:25 PM   #70
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,499
Local Time: 12:19 AM
Cafeteria constitutionalists.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2016, 02:38 PM   #71
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 09:19 PM
In May 1969 there was an opening on the Supreme Court it was not filled until June 1970. The Democrats Senate rejected the first two nominees by President Nixon and finally approved the 3rd.
__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2016, 03:19 PM   #72
Blue Crack Distributor
 
bono_212's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 81,105
Local Time: 09:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axver View Post
As I understood it, a president is only truly a lame duck between the election and inauguration of a new president. Some people may apply the term earlier, but that seems to usually be motivated by political purposes. Until the first Tuesday in November, the president of the US is the president of the US and has been elected to do a job. After this point there is a transition, but until then, they should make the calls they are there to make.
I started to add this to my post, then opted not to, because some people use the term to refer to the entire last year, basically once the election cycle really gets going, but yeah, to my knowledge, the term really just refers to the transfer period after November.

Anyways, I think I clearly answered the original question, and to anyone suggesting I'm ducking it, sorry I didn't answer the way you wanted me to. We can't all be hypocrites.
__________________
bono_212 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2016, 04:04 PM   #73
ONE
love, blood, life
 
LuckyNumber7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Leicester, UK
Posts: 12,387
Local Time: 12:19 AM
I've never heard anyone call the final year of a presidency a lame duck presidency until was it... Rubio? last night.
__________________
LuckyNumber7 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2016, 04:08 PM   #74
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,697
Local Time: 11:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by trojanchick99 View Post
This is exposing the vast hypocrisy of the right wing. Bonus points for bringing the Republican Messiah Reagan into this.

Sent from my SM-G920V using U2 Interference mobile app

This is really just the icing on the cake, this whole election has been pointing out the hypocrisy of the right. I mean supporting the Tea Party claiming "small" government and needing Christian values and then supporting Trump who's neither has been extremely telling. It really was about race.


Sent from my iPhone using U2 Interference
__________________
BVS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2016, 05:04 PM   #75
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 09:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7 View Post
The justice will be replacing Scalia... it most definitely will be a moderate and still considered a huge swing for the courts in favor of a more liberal look. I'm sure Obama will be looking for someone that will get through, not the anti-Scalia that is Sotomayor.
That sounds reasonable, like when they replaced Thurgood Marshall, the most liberal court member, George HW Bush would choose a moderate. Right?
Because they would not want to upset the balance on the court too much.
__________________

__________________
deep is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com