RBG Politcal Discussion

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Romney just announced he’s a yes. What a hypocrite.

So they only have 2 defections right now. I can’t see where the other two would come from.

Say goodbye to Roe, and much more.

Romney has become a resistance hero because of his (rightful) critiques of Trump. But at the end of the day, he is a republican who votes with Trump 81% if the time. Utah is also a religious, anti-abortion state. Blocking a pro-life judge wouldn’t be smart politically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Why is abortion a litmus test, aren't their more important issues?

White male control over women is a feature not a bug.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Romney just announced he’s a yes. What a hypocrite.

So they only have 2 defections right now. I can’t see where the other two would come from.

Say goodbye to Roe, and much more.

Romney isn't a hypocrite. He wasn't a Senator in 2016. He is right to agree to vote on a nominee. The problem is that McConnell was 100% wrong in 2016.

No, he’s not right. The GOP is making up rules as they go along. It would’ve been one thing if they had agreed to vote on the nominee in 2016, but they didn’t, citing the fact that it was an election year. They even said they wouldn’t vote on a nominee if this exact situation came up in 2020. But now we’re in that situation, and they’re claiming the Dems are playing dirty tricks (per McConnell’s speech)?

The GOP rule is that they will do whatever is within their power to shape the courts to their own ideological preferences. Democrats should start realizing that is the rule, and follow it themselves. It means court packing is fine. It means adding DC and Puerto Rico as states is fine. It means refusing to confirm any judicial nominees by a republican president is fine.

Why stop there? How about secession and civil war? There’s stronger precedent for that than for court packing.

Because succession and civil war are not within the rules. All of the options I listed are completely legal if the Democrats win the Senate, House and Presidency. That's the McConnell rule. Precedent does not matter. Good faith does not matter. Compromise does not matter. Prior promises or statements do not matter. Anything legal is fair game.

But SCOTUS has been fabricating “the rules” for about 90 years now. Sorry you can have your activist, anti-democratic SCOTUS to dictate new laws to the country any more. Actually, now that the left has tread the path of SCOTUS issuing new laws via dictat, I bet the new conservative SCOTUS will do the same but from the right. Enjoy SCOTUS announcing an affirmative action ban, an abortion ban, gun regulation ban, gay marriage ban, religious freedom directives, a crackdown on biased social media, a ban on companies intimidating conservative employees, etc. All based on unwritten “penumbras” that SCOTUS will “discover” in the constitution. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, right?

You right-wing loonies don't know what you are talking about. The Supreme Court has been more regressive than the country as a whole for 215 of its 230 years, repeatedly twisting the Constitution against itself to maintain conservative white male establishment control over all American institutions. There was a 15-year period during the Warren Court when the Supreme reflected the stated values of the Constitution and temporarily reflected moderate public opinion.

[Anonymous]

There is nothing hypocritical in Romney’s stance. He wasn’t part of the shenanigans in 2016. If I were him I would just have said, “ I didn’t agree with the republicans then, and I don’t agree with the democrats now.”
I don’t fault him. He put himself out there during impeachment, but he is a conservative and this makes sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Romney just announced he’s a yes. What a hypocrite.

So they only have 2 defections right now. I can’t see where the other two would come from.

Say goodbye to Roe, and much more.

Romney isn't a hypocrite. He wasn't a Senator in 2016. He is right to agree to vote on a nominee. The problem is that McConnell was 100% wrong in 2016.

No, he’s not right. The GOP is making up rules as they go along. It would’ve been one thing if they had agreed to vote on the nominee in 2016, but they didn’t, citing the fact that it was an election year. They even said they wouldn’t vote on a nominee if this exact situation came up in 2020. But now we’re in that situation, and they’re claiming the Dems are playing dirty tricks (per McConnell’s speech)?

The GOP rule is that they will do whatever is within their power to shape the courts to their own ideological preferences. Democrats should start realizing that is the rule, and follow it themselves. It means court packing is fine. It means adding DC and Puerto Rico as states is fine. It means refusing to confirm any judicial nominees by a republican president is fine.

Why stop there? How about secession and civil war? There’s stronger precedent for that than for court packing.

Because succession and civil war are not within the rules. All of the options I listed are completely legal if the Democrats win the Senate, House and Presidency. That's the McConnell rule. Precedent does not matter. Good faith does not matter. Compromise does not matter. Prior promises or statements do not matter. Anything legal is fair game.

But SCOTUS has been fabricating “the rules” for about 90 years now. Sorry you can have your activist, anti-democratic SCOTUS to dictate new laws to the country any more. Actually, now that the left has tread the path of SCOTUS issuing new laws via dictat, I bet the new conservative SCOTUS will do the same but from the right. Enjoy SCOTUS announcing an affirmative action ban, an abortion ban, gun regulation ban, gay marriage ban, religious freedom directives, a crackdown on biased social media, a ban on companies intimidating conservative employees, etc. All based on unwritten “penumbras” that SCOTUS will “discover” in the constitution. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, right?

What planet do you live on? SCOTUS has been majority GOP since 1969.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Romney just announced he’s a yes. What a hypocrite.

So they only have 2 defections right now. I can’t see where the other two would come from.

Say goodbye to Roe, and much more.

Romney isn't a hypocrite. He wasn't a Senator in 2016. He is right to agree to vote on a nominee. The problem is that McConnell was 100% wrong in 2016.

No, he’s not right. The GOP is making up rules as they go along. It would’ve been one thing if they had agreed to vote on the nominee in 2016, but they didn’t, citing the fact that it was an election year. They even said they wouldn’t vote on a nominee if this exact situation came up in 2020. But now we’re in that situation, and they’re claiming the Dems are playing dirty tricks (per McConnell’s speech)?

The GOP rule is that they will do whatever is within their power to shape the courts to their own ideological preferences. Democrats should start realizing that is the rule, and follow it themselves. It means court packing is fine. It means adding DC and Puerto Rico as states is fine. It means refusing to confirm any judicial nominees by a republican president is fine.

Why stop there? How about secession and civil war? There’s stronger precedent for that than for court packing.

Because succession and civil war are not within the rules. All of the options I listed are completely legal if the Democrats win the Senate, House and Presidency. That's the McConnell rule. Precedent does not matter. Good faith does not matter. Compromise does not matter. Prior promises or statements do not matter. Anything legal is fair game.

But SCOTUS has been fabricating “the rules” for about 90 years now. Sorry you can have your activist, anti-democratic SCOTUS to dictate new laws to the country any more. Actually, now that the left has tread the path of SCOTUS issuing new laws via dictat, I bet the new conservative SCOTUS will do the same but from the right. Enjoy SCOTUS announcing an affirmative action ban, an abortion ban, gun regulation ban, gay marriage ban, religious freedom directives, a crackdown on biased social media, a ban on companies intimidating conservative employees, etc. All based on unwritten “penumbras” that SCOTUS will “discover” in the constitution. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, right?

What planet do you live on? SCOTUS has been majority GOP since 1969.

LOL. Yes Justice Berger was such a conservative when he drafted Roe v. Wade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is nothing hypocritical in Romney’s stance. He wasn’t part of the shenanigans in 2016. If I were him I would just have said, “ I didn’t agree with the republicans then, and I don’t agree with the democrats now.”
I don’t fault him. He put himself out there during impeachment, but he is a conservative and this makes sense.

You keep saying that, but you are totally missing the point. The point is not and never was what the exact rule change is. The point that one should never ever force a rule change just because it advantages your side. Rule changes should ALWAYS be bipartisan. Romney sounds sometimes like he might believe that, but his actions show he does not. So REAL new rule is the McConnell rule, the majority makes the rules and the minority just obstructs.

[Anonymous]

*Blackmun

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

But SCOTUS has been fabricating “the rules” for about 90 years now. Sorry you can have your activist, anti-democratic SCOTUS to dictate new laws to the country any more. Actually, now that the left has tread the path of SCOTUS issuing new laws via dictat, I bet the new conservative SCOTUS will do the same but from the right. Enjoy SCOTUS announcing an affirmative action ban, an abortion ban, gun regulation ban, gay marriage ban, religious freedom directives, a crackdown on biased social media, a ban on companies intimidating conservative employees, etc. All based on unwritten “penumbras” that SCOTUS will “discover” in the constitution. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, right?

What planet do you live on? SCOTUS has been majority GOP since 1969.

Yes. Super liberal decisions like Citizens United, letting Exxon off the hook, and banning sodomy. And since you said the last 90 years, legalizing the wrong internment of American citizens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is abortion a litmus test, aren't their more important issues?

White male control over women is a feature not a bug.

Yes the republicans will appoint white woman to control other white women . Better get your white women house in order.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Romney just announced he’s a yes. What a hypocrite.

So they only have 2 defections right now. I can’t see where the other two would come from.

Say goodbye to Roe, and much more.

Romney isn't a hypocrite. He wasn't a Senator in 2016. He is right to agree to vote on a nominee. The problem is that McConnell was 100% wrong in 2016.

No, he’s not right. The GOP is making up rules as they go along. It would’ve been one thing if they had agreed to vote on the nominee in 2016, but they didn’t, citing the fact that it was an election year. They even said they wouldn’t vote on a nominee if this exact situation came up in 2020. But now we’re in that situation, and they’re claiming the Dems are playing dirty tricks (per McConnell’s speech)?

The GOP rule is that they will do whatever is within their power to shape the courts to their own ideological preferences. Democrats should start realizing that is the rule, and follow it themselves. It means court packing is fine. It means adding DC and Puerto Rico as states is fine. It means refusing to confirm any judicial nominees by a republican president is fine.

Why stop there? How about secession and civil war? There’s stronger precedent for that than for court packing.

Because succession and civil war are not within the rules. All of the options I listed are completely legal if the Democrats win the Senate, House and Presidency. That's the McConnell rule. Precedent does not matter. Good faith does not matter. Compromise does not matter. Prior promises or statements do not matter. Anything legal is fair game.

But SCOTUS has been fabricating “the rules” for about 90 years now. Sorry you can have your activist, anti-democratic SCOTUS to dictate new laws to the country any more. Actually, now that the left has tread the path of SCOTUS issuing new laws via dictat, I bet the new conservative SCOTUS will do the same but from the right. Enjoy SCOTUS announcing an affirmative action ban, an abortion ban, gun regulation ban, gay marriage ban, religious freedom directives, a crackdown on biased social media, a ban on companies intimidating conservative employees, etc. All based on unwritten “penumbras” that SCOTUS will “discover” in the constitution. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, right?

What planet do you live on? SCOTUS has been majority GOP since 1969.

LOL. Yes Justice Berger was such a conservative when he drafted Roe v. Wade.

Burger did not draft Roe. You really need to work on your history. You're making yourself look really stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Romney just announced he’s a yes. What a hypocrite.

So they only have 2 defections right now. I can’t see where the other two would come from.

Say goodbye to Roe, and much more.

Romney isn't a hypocrite. He wasn't a Senator in 2016. He is right to agree to vote on a nominee. The problem is that McConnell was 100% wrong in 2016.

No, he’s not right. The GOP is making up rules as they go along. It would’ve been one thing if they had agreed to vote on the nominee in 2016, but they didn’t, citing the fact that it was an election year. They even said they wouldn’t vote on a nominee if this exact situation came up in 2020. But now we’re in that situation, and they’re claiming the Dems are playing dirty tricks (per McConnell’s speech)?

The GOP rule is that they will do whatever is within their power to shape the courts to their own ideological preferences. Democrats should start realizing that is the rule, and follow it themselves. It means court packing is fine. It means adding DC and Puerto Rico as states is fine. It means refusing to confirm any judicial nominees by a republican president is fine.

Why stop there? How about secession and civil war? There’s stronger precedent for that than for court packing.

Because succession and civil war are not within the rules. All of the options I listed are completely legal if the Democrats win the Senate, House and Presidency. That's the McConnell rule. Precedent does not matter. Good faith does not matter. Compromise does not matter. Prior promises or statements do not matter. Anything legal is fair game.

But SCOTUS has been fabricating “the rules” for about 90 years now. Sorry you can have your activist, anti-democratic SCOTUS to dictate new laws to the country any more. Actually, now that the left has tread the path of SCOTUS issuing new laws via dictat, I bet the new conservative SCOTUS will do the same but from the right. Enjoy SCOTUS announcing an affirmative action ban, an abortion ban, gun regulation ban, gay marriage ban, religious freedom directives, a crackdown on biased social media, a ban on companies intimidating conservative employees, etc. All based on unwritten “penumbras” that SCOTUS will “discover” in the constitution. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, right?

You right-wing loonies don't know what you are talking about. The Supreme Court has been more regressive than the country as a whole for 215 of its 230 years, repeatedly twisting the Constitution against itself to maintain conservative white male establishment control over all American institutions. There was a 15-year period during the Warren Court when the Supreme reflected the stated values of the Constitution and temporarily reflected moderate public opinion.

???

“Substantive due process” (a 100% fabricated concept) has been the law of the land since the 1960s.

And SCOTUS’s absurd interpretation of the constitution’s commerce clause has been the law of the land since the 1940s.

[Anonymous]

The Supreme Court is totally and shamelessly political. The only people who do not know this are Democratic Senators and the media.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Romney just announced he’s a yes. What a hypocrite.

So they only have 2 defections right now. I can’t see where the other two would come from.

Say goodbye to Roe, and much more.

Romney isn't a hypocrite. He wasn't a Senator in 2016. He is right to agree to vote on a nominee. The problem is that McConnell was 100% wrong in 2016.

No, he’s not right. The GOP is making up rules as they go along. It would’ve been one thing if they had agreed to vote on the nominee in 2016, but they didn’t, citing the fact that it was an election year. They even said they wouldn’t vote on a nominee if this exact situation came up in 2020. But now we’re in that situation, and they’re claiming the Dems are playing dirty tricks (per McConnell’s speech)?

The GOP rule is that they will do whatever is within their power to shape the courts to their own ideological preferences. Democrats should start realizing that is the rule, and follow it themselves. It means court packing is fine. It means adding DC and Puerto Rico as states is fine. It means refusing to confirm any judicial nominees by a republican president is fine.

Why stop there? How about secession and civil war? There’s stronger precedent for that than for court packing.

Because succession and civil war are not within the rules. All of the options I listed are completely legal if the Democrats win the Senate, House and Presidency. That's the McConnell rule. Precedent does not matter. Good faith does not matter. Compromise does not matter. Prior promises or statements do not matter. Anything legal is fair game.

But SCOTUS has been fabricating “the rules” for about 90 years now. Sorry you can have your activist, anti-democratic SCOTUS to dictate new laws to the country any more. Actually, now that the left has tread the path of SCOTUS issuing new laws via dictat, I bet the new conservative SCOTUS will do the same but from the right. Enjoy SCOTUS announcing an affirmative action ban, an abortion ban, gun regulation ban, gay marriage ban, religious freedom directives, a crackdown on biased social media, a ban on companies intimidating conservative employees, etc. All based on unwritten “penumbras” that SCOTUS will “discover” in the constitution. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, right?

What planet do you live on? SCOTUS has been majority GOP since 1969.

LOL. Yes Justice Berger was such a conservative when he drafted Roe v. Wade.

Burger did not draft Roe. You really need to work on your history. You're making yourself look really stupid.

Blackmun wrote it and Burger joined. Two “republicans” according to your feeble mind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Supreme Court is totally and shamelessly political. The only people who do not know this are Democratic Senators and the media.

Of course they know it. But they claim that when SCOTUS rules their way it isn’t “political.” Instead, they view their own political views as the ONLY acceptable views. That’s why it’s not “political.” It’s like being in communist China: there is only one acceptable way to think.