Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 50 of 58 FirstFirst ... 404849505152 ... LastLast
Results 736 to 750 of 867

Thread: RBG Has Died

  1. #736
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    15,139
    The democrats don't get what they want because they didn't win the election.
    Bachelors III . . . In the Inn. . . Lanas Garage 4/18/75 . . . lpswitch with Snake, Hards and Mendy . . .B.D.W.B. . . Ambition: I want Dooleys Job . . . Saturday Night Live . . . Bathroom Brawls . . . Living at Snakes . . . WHERE IS MUSKY. - John Tortorella

  2. #737
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    39,336
    Quote Originally Posted by fingerbang View Post
    The democrats don't get what they want because they didn't win the election.
    Correct. And if the Democrats win this election theyíll get to do what they want. Something tells me you will no longer like using that logic however.

  3. #738
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    parts unknown
    Posts
    55,676

    RBG Has Died

    Quote Originally Posted by fingerbang View Post
    The democrats don't get what they want because they didn't win the election.
    why didnít Garland get a hearing/vote?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by ewing; 09-25-2020 at 06:58 AM.
    Rep Power: 0




    Quote Originally Posted by Raps08-09 Champ View Post
    My dick is named 'Ewing'.

  4. #739
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    16,498
    Quote Originally Posted by mngopher35 View Post
    It's more than an FU though, it is to be able to make actual changes they feel are needed for the country (in theory at least). We are long past the idea of working together with Trumpism I think many would argue for multiple reasons (the hypocrisy shown from many senators on this topic as an example but it's one of hundreds, we know it's play to win).

    The idea is moreso if they are going to play dirty to get what they want done then we will have to play dirty to get the changes we want done in return.

    I wouldn't say I support it necessarily especially depending on the extremes that would be needed but we have gotten to the point many would argue the ends justify the means. Especially when the means involve acting in a similar manner to "the other side" essentially (creating an even playing field for the two sports teams we have).
    That assumes everything SCOTUS has done with the current balance is bad for the country and everything SCOTUS would do if the balance shifted would be good for the country.......when all it's doing is further politicizing every damn decision made, making a clean sweep of government branches following tribalism more than good of the country.
    gotta love 'referential' treatment

  5. #740
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    7,407
    Quote Originally Posted by ewing View Post
    why didnít Garland get a hearing/vote?


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    The repubs controlled the Senate.

    But he shoukd have gotten a hearing.

  6. #741
    Join Date
    Mar 2018
    Posts
    7,407
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    Actually setting an 18 year limit on SC appointments is the compromise solution to end the partisan fights over the SC.

    Expanding the court if they win the Presidency and Senate is the F-you to Republicans option (of which I hope they do).
    If they do this, and I have no problem with it, it's a fairly good idea and somewhat of a compromise, but it should be grandfathered in and only apply to new appointments or those that have not yet served for 18 years.

    I don't know how many judges have been there for 18 years or more but it would cause issues for several to have to leave all at once.

    Let the oldtimers stay until they want to retire and the 18 year rule will work itself out.

  7. #742
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    50,874
    If either side expands the court, I really do like the idea that there should be a massive expansion to create multiple benches and increase the caseload they can take on. They reject most of the cases that get to them and the power they have in case law shouldnít be so limited.

    And yeah we need term limits across the board. House, Senate, SCOTUS, Appeals Circuit, etc

  8. #743
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Where the smog meets the shore
    Posts
    50,874
    Quote Originally Posted by fingerbang View Post
    The democrats don't get what they want because they didn't win the election.
    Funny because they won the WH in 2012 and still didnít get what they wanted.

  9. #744
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    right here
    Posts
    30,388
    Quote Originally Posted by valade16 View Post
    You're even more gullible than I thought if you believe that.
    why is this hard for you to believe.

    I knew there would be people trying to say this isn't real.




    Į\_(ツ)_/Į

    a person is smart. people are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals.
    #TrumpDerangementSyndrome


  10. #745
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    36,879
    Quote Originally Posted by ewing View Post
    why didnít Garland get a hearing/vote?
    I think the point is that the people chose not to populate the Senate with more Dems than Reps, so in that way the people chose that outcome.

  11. #746
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    8,908
    Quote Originally Posted by fingerbang View Post
    The democrats don't get what they want because they didn't win the election.
    Ewing absolutely owned you, and this is your rebuttal?

  12. #747
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    36,879
    Quote Originally Posted by GGGGG-Men View Post
    Funny because they won the WH in 2012 and still didnít get what they wanted.
    Turns out it takes the WH and the Senate.

  13. #748
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    16,498
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    Turns out it takes the WH and the Senate.
    which raises the question....why does the House seem to have such little actual power?
    gotta love 'referential' treatment

  14. #749
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    36,879
    Quote Originally Posted by SiteWolf View Post
    which raises the question....why does the House seem to have such little actual power?
    The House is the only body that can write laws.

  15. #750
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    39,336
    Quote Originally Posted by Scoots View Post
    I think the point is that the people chose not to populate the Senate with more Dems than Reps, so in that way the people chose that outcome.
    OK. So if the people choose a Democratic President and a Democratic Senate the people chose the outcome if they expand the court.

    It's the same logic.

Page 50 of 58 FirstFirst ... 404849505152 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •