ADVERTISEMENT

Nice article on Judge Amy Coney Barrett

That's not what you all said at the time. It's not about party, you said. It's because it's an election year. Now you are changing the rationale. That's the hypocrisy.
Agreed. FWIW, I think the Republicans should nominate someone. I am just frustrated with the hypocrisy and outright lies from the Republicans on their reasoning in 2016. I would have much more respect if they just came out and said that they lied and didn't give a shit.
 
i remember and agree. i was a poly sci major and went to college in the south. our school hosted david duke. bizarre to think about that today. that sentiment with perot represents what got trump elected imo. guess it's a bad recipe lol

Yeah as much as we hate politicians we need to recognize its a skill that needs honing.

My Perot lesson is that in general successful business minds made it with an entrepreneurial spirit...and that doesn't work in politics.

They have to be able to play well with others, to get along, to compromise, etc. A titan of industry doesn't have to play by those rules and a stereotype is they are deeply paranoid and extremely thin skinned.

That's an awful personality for politics.

Is it inefficient....hell yes but that's on purpose with a democracy whereas a dictatorship is extremely efficient, like a ceo or a coach.

It's the lesson of Perot that made me fear Trump (and those fears are playing out) or for guys like Andrew Yang or Mark Cuban.
 
No, I never thought you gave a s#$t but I do think you're full of it. You're the definition of a party lawyer.

As far as the rest of your post, thank you for making the point. The rules are the rules. When someone keeps changing them to suit their needs that's called corruption. Spinning it as some kind of self righteous justification is called hypocrisy.

Setting a precedent that rules can be changed on the whims of a party's desires is dangerous, which is what you just did.

So quit your bitching when someone gets into power that you don't like and pulls the same BS. You said the rules are there to be interpreted by who has the power.

Tit for tat.

As an aside I get a kick out of the projection posts. You do something immoral and then say 'umm they would do it to'. You sucker punch a guy in the face and then ask him to take the high road because you're no different than I am if you fight back.

There needs to be consequences for your recklessness, hopefully starting this election cycle but you'll probably cheat your way through that. That's kind of your brand.

Do you have a cogent argument about why we should delay confirming a new justice? So far alI I see from the Dems is deferent versions of McCONNELL! followed by we are going to burn the place when we win.
 
the next scotus judge will be chosen on 2, and only 2, factors.

1), will said judge back big oppressive govt over the citizenry on literally anything and everything?

2), will said judge back corporations and big money on literally anything and everything?

those are the litmus tests, and only litmus tests, big money and corporations will make when picking our next far beyond absurd powerful individual, non elected with zero accountability to anyone ever, for life.
 
Precedent.

It's not a difficult argument to make unless people are cool with changing rules as we go.

We're in this weird moral projection vortex where one person cheats and then tries to shame the other into not cheating because if they did then they are no better than the original cheater.

Then the original cheater walks away with the spoils.

It's Machavilliansm in action.
 
Do you have a cogent argument about why we should delay confirming a new justice? So far alI I see from the Dems is deferent versions of McCONNELL! followed by we are going to burn the place when we win.

Precedent (in case you missed UncleMark s post).

I'm hoping we don't burn it to the ground if we win, I'm hoping we change rules into our favor if we win.

That's a new change for me personally. I originally wanted to honor dumb things like traditions and the constitution with an agreed etiquette, like golfers tend to do with their sport.

We're not golfing with the Trumpicans, its no holds barred WWF. Why, because you have allowed (as a republican) to lead us into a WWF format.
 
Precedent (in case you missed UncleMark s post).

I'm hoping we don't burn it to the ground if we win, I'm hoping we change rules into our favor if we win.

That's a new change for me personally. I originally wanted to honor dumb things like traditions and the constitution with an agreed etiquette, like golfers tend to do with their sport.

We're not golfing with the Trumpicans, its no holds barred WWF. Why, because you have allowed (as a republican) to lead us into a WWF format.
then the economy will slip in four years or eight years or whatever or some dynamic guy everyone loves will declare himself a repub and win and we'll slide down a slippery slope of one-upmanship remembering what those F*ckers did when they were in charge. many already feel the parties are in a win at all costs competition with little regard to the wants of the public.

hopefully folks will feel trump was just a bad anomaly and try to restore some semblance of cooperation in the years to come
 
Precedent.
Precedent (in case you missed UncleMark s post).

I'm hoping we don't burn it to the ground if we win, I'm hoping we change rules into our favor if we win.

That's a new change for me personally. I originally wanted to honor dumb things like traditions and the constitution with an agreed etiquette, like golfers tend to do with their sport.

We're not golfing with the Trumpicans, its no holds barred WWF. Why, because you have allowed (as a republican) to lead us into a WWF format.

McConnell’s one off isn't precedent.
 
then the economy will slip in four years or eight years or whatever or some dynamic guy everyone loves will declare himself a repub and win and we'll slide down a slippery slope of one-upmanship remembering what those F*ckers did when they were in charge. many already feel the parties are in a win at all costs competition with little regard to the wants of the public.

hopefully folks will feel trump was just a bad anomaly and try to restore some semblance of cooperation in the years to come

the more things favor the working and middle class, the better the economy has always been and always will be, other than for the top 0.1%.

that will never change, regardless of how much Chicken Little propaganda is spewed by those representing the top 0.1%.
 
then the economy will slip in four years or eight years or whatever or some dynamic guy everyone loves will declare himself a repub and win and we'll slide down a slippery slope of one-upmanship remembering what those F*ckers did when they were in charge. many already feel the parties are in a win at all costs competition with little regard to the wants of the public.

hopefully folks will feel trump was just a bad anomaly and try to restore some semblance of cooperation in the years to come
Trump might be an anomaly, but the GOP broke the system, and they don't get to bitch about what the Dems do when they take over. It is what it is. It's not an ideal future we are looking at, but Mitch and his lackeys made it happen, so they can just sit the f*** down and shut the f*** up about it for a few years while the Dems get their revenge.

I hate that this is the country we live in now, but it is what it is, and Mitch is the one who made it happen.
 
McConnell’s one off isn't precedent.

It's not a one off, it's the game now.

This isn't a bad call by a ref that impacted one game.

This is a check that you get to cash twice that pays out for 30 to 50 years.

Again, you're argument is classic Machavillian.

Take complete advantage of the situation and then try to shame the loser into being the better person so there is no retribution.

"I mean I know it sucks that we played you out of a justice but that's not me. I was against it so that's why I'm for it. Be a good doggie and try to understand um-kay?"
 
Because McConnell codified hypocrisy. He didn't just say something hypocritical, he engaged the Senate into it.

Only McConnell is guilty of this? The whole f’n senate and house on both sides are guilty. Anyone that doesn’t see it are intentionally blind.
 
If the Ds were smart, they would use all their energy to attack the process. Go after Trump, McConnell and every GOP Senator. Do not attack the nominee and do not make it a referendum on abortion. 70% of Americans want some form of legal abortion available. That issue has already been decided.

The process is literally the constitutional described process you knob. It has worked this way for over 200 years and none of left had an issue with it whenever it was team D that ran the courts.

I also find it interesting that many on the left are suddenly worried that a group of 6 is going to take away (or give) certain "rights" without their input. Take abortion for example. A process that NEVER would have made it through congress suddenly became law because the right amount of 9 people snapped their fingers and made it that way.

Welcome to our world for the past 40 some odd years. Maybe with the right conservative mix, these issues can be resolved by the bodies that actually have to present themselves to voters every now and again.
 
The process is literally the constitutional described process you knob. It has worked this way for over 200 years and none of left had an issue with it whenever it was team D that ran the courts.

I also find it interesting that many on the left are suddenly worried that a group of 6 is going to take away (or give) certain "rights" without their input. Take abortion for example. A process that NEVER would have made it through congress suddenly became law because the right amount of 9 people snapped their fingers and made it that way.

Welcome to our world for the past 40 some odd years. Maybe with the right conservative mix, these issues can be resolved by the bodies that actually have to present themselves to voters every now and again.

You should look up national polling on abortion. Your position is severely in the minority. Take a look at the recent Irish referendum. Are you saying you want the courts to push minority views?
 
You should look up national polling on abortion. Your position is severely in the minority. Take a look at the recent Irish referendum. Are you saying you want the courts to push minority views?
Abortion in general is one thing; the timing of same is the issue. I still can’t get a grasp on where Biden is on late term abortions
 
Abortion in general is one thing; the timing of same is the issue. I still can’t get a grasp on where Biden is on late term abortions

I agree with you on late term. I’m in favor of limitations there for health of mother or child.

If people are serious about decreasing the number of abortions, those people should be championing sex ed, birth control and the morning after pill. My problem it that some on the pro life side are not advocating preventing pregnancies.
 
You should look up national polling on abortion. Your position is severely in the minority. Take a look at the recent Irish referendum. Are you saying you want the courts to push minority views?
Abortions are here to stay. The bigger issue is federal funding. My tax payer money going to some 16 year old girl getting an abortion without parental consent wouldn't sit real well with me.
 
After Trump nominates a woman to the Supreme Court, you will see which party is truly waging a “ War on Women “
 
Trump might be an anomaly, but the GOP broke the system, and they don't get to bitch about what the Dems do when they take over. It is what it is. It's not an ideal future we are looking at, but Mitch and his lackeys made it happen, so they can just sit the f*** down and shut the f*** up about it for a few years while the Dems get their revenge.

I hate that this is the country we live in now, but it is what it is, and Mitch is the one who made it happen.
Democrats' unprecedented filibusters of President Bush's judicial nominees wasn't a factor? Reid ending the filibuster for all but USSC judicial nominees wasn't a factor? Schumer leading a filibuster of Gorsuch wasn't a factor? Yes, there were actions and reactions by Republicans in this process too, but it can't be blamed on one person. It has been tit for tat for over 20 years now. If it doesn't stop, were does it lead? I don't think anywhere good.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hoopsdoc1978
Democrats' unprecedented filibusters of President Bush's judicial nominees wasn't a factor? Reid ending the filibuster for all but USSC judicial nominees wasn't a factor? Schumer leading a filibuster of Gorsuch wasn't a factor? Yes, there were actions and reactions by Republicans in this process too, but it can't be blamed on one person. It has been tit for tat for over 20 years now. If it doesn't stop, were does it lead? I don't think anywhere good.
20 years? Most of this can be traced back to Judge Bork
 
McConnell’s one off isn't precedent.
McConnell's blocking of the Garland nomination was not a one-of-a-kind event.


McConnell is using the bicameral system as his personal veto of everything proposed by the House of Representatives, regardless of the merits of the proposals, simply to advance his party.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UncleMark
McConnell's blocking of the Garland nomination was not a one-of-a-kind event.


McConnell is using the bicameral system as his personal veto of everything proposed by the House of Representatives, regardless of the merits of the proposals, simply to advance his party.

Shhhh, working in an election year certainly will not include passing legislation. Why would a legislative body do that?
 
Trump might be an anomaly, but the GOP broke the system, and they don't get to bitch about what the Dems do when they take over. It is what it is. It's not an ideal future we are looking at, but Mitch and his lackeys made it happen, so they can just sit the f*** down and shut the f*** up about it for a few years while the Dems get their revenge.

I hate that this is the country we live in now, but it is what it is, and Mitch is the one who made it happen.
Agreed, but I think Gingrich should get at least some of the credit/blame.

 
  • Like
Reactions: UncleMark
I know I am the minority on this, but the original Roe decision threaded the needle pretty well.
The issue is vagueness and state manipulation. Changing life-threatening to the amorphous word health. Moving penalties from criminal to civil. On and on. It’s a mess.
 
Gym-Photo-28.jpg
 
Abortions are here to stay. The bigger issue is federal funding. My tax payer money going to some 16 year old girl getting an abortion without parental consent wouldn't sit real well with me.

I can understand this position. My only counter is that it’s a dangerous precedent to allow taxpayers to pick and choose where their tax dollars go. Can I have my taxes not go to separating families at the border?
 
Trump might be an anomaly, but the GOP broke the system, and they don't get to bitch about what the Dems do when they take over. It is what it is. It's not an ideal future we are looking at, but Mitch and his lackeys made it happen, so they can just sit the f*** down and shut the f*** up about it for a few years while the Dems get their revenge.

I hate that this is the country we live in now, but it is what it is, and Mitch is the one who made it happen.

Lol. If superficial hypocrisy is breaking the system, then we have no system and never did. Mitch and his lackeys (whomever they are) are no different from Reid. I didn’t like what McConnell did to Garland, but he is exactly right now in proceeding. If the Dems want to use this single event to trash the Senate, they might have that opportunity. That’s how the cookie crumbles.
 
Last edited:
Liberals think people are identified by groups instead of individuality

Hmm, are you not identifying individual liberals as members of a group here? And are you not also identifying yourself as a member of the group "conservative" in doing so? So if only liberals assign groups, why did you assign all liberals to a group and why do you assign yourself to a group?
 
I know I am the minority on this, but the original Roe decision threaded the needle pretty well.

The Democrats have totally abandoned Roe v. Wade. Now the position is abortion at any time for any reason. New York doesn’t even require a doctor, maybe Virginia too. The New York abortion law is now the Democrats official position.
 
I can understand this position. My only counter is that it’s a dangerous precedent to allow taxpayers to pick and choose where their tax dollars go. Can I have my taxes not go to separating families at the border?
It was more a comment on the idea of teenage daughters having abortions without parental consent, which I believe, personally, is abhorrent. There are not many things that my kids could do to break me, but my daughter having an abortion without at least talking about it with me and her mother would.
 
Hmm, are you not identifying individual liberals as members of a group here? And are you not also identifying yourself as a member of the group "conservative" in doing so? So if only liberals assign groups, why did you assign all liberals to a group and why do you assign yourself to a group?

Yes. Liberalism is a collection of beliefs that is appropriate to talk about. It isn’t proper to say marv must believe such and such because he is a liberal. I try to avoid that B.S. I will say in response to your stated view that might be typical liberal.
 
It was more a comment on the idea of teenage daughters having abortions without parental consent, which I believe, personally, is abhorrent. There are not many things that my kids could do to break me, but my daughter having an abortion without at least talking about it with me and her mother would.

Thanks for the follow up and I can empathize with that point.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT