Yeah but there are great Human Interest stories being put out about the endearing relationship between Scalia and Ginsberg. It's so....so touching.I wonder whether we will hear such touching stories about Charles Manson when he dies. Charles Manson has left his hideous evil impact on our society, but the effect was rather limited. I suspect that the evil impact of Scalia's use of power, in his lifetime, has been (and will continue for a long time to come, to be) much greater (although much more subtle) than what Manson was able to pull off.What evil deeds did Scalia commit? His reactionary positions retarded the progresss and civilization of the United States and its people by decades. Lois
VYAZMA - 14 February 2016 01:20 PM Yeah but there are great Human Interest stories being put out about the endearing relationship between Scalia and Ginsberg. It’s so….so touching. I wonder whether we will hear such touching stories about Charles Manson when he dies. Charles Manson has left his hideous evil impact on our society, but the effect was rather limited. I suspect that the evil impact of Scalia’s use of power, in his lifetime, has been (and will continue for a long time to come, to be) much greater (although much more subtle) than what Manson was able to pull off. What evil deeds did Scalia commit?That depends on your political views. Scalia was the darling of the neo-cons who found his strict constructionist positions on controversial issues like same sex marriage, abortion and unlimited campaign contributions to be right in line with their political agenda. As a Progressive Democrat I found his decisions to be restrictive and narrow minded but not "evil" in the psychological sense, e.g. Sociopathy. And now that he is gone I personally hope that the Court swings a little more to the left. My main concern is overturning the Citizens United Decision that's fueling the Ultraconservative PACs that are backing the current Republican front runners, like Cruz and Rubio. Frankly, their agendas are scary, especially Cruz. It now remains to be seen who will win the fight for Scalia's seat. The Reps. are vowing to block the Prez. from nominating a candidate. This is going to be one hellova fight; one Obama must win IMO. https://news.vice.com/article/the-staunchly-conservative-life-and-rulings-of-justice-antonin-scalia Cap't Jack
The Reps. are vowing to block the Prez. from nominating a candidate. This is going to be one hellova fight; one Obama must win IMO. Cap't JackI wouldn't hold your breath VA. If some of you are certain that the Dems are going to win the election, then it's no big deal. Just wait for the next Pres. to appoint. But if you're not certain, then you have to fear Obama will pick some Conservative judge that the Senate will agree on. I can see Obama doing this too.
The Reps. are vowing to block the Prez. from nominating a candidate. This is going to be one hellova fight; one Obama must win IMO. Cap't JackI wouldn't hold your breath VA. If some of you are certain that the Dems are going to win the election, then it's no big deal. Just wait for the next Pres. to appoint. But if you're not certain, then you have to fear Obama will pick some Conservative judge that the Senate will agree on. I can see Obama doing this too. Obama is no ideologue. He is above all a pragmatist. But underlying that is a sense of idealism. He will most likely nominate persons for the SC, who are empathic but not necessarily liberally slanted. So, if approved, the SC would be ideologically more balanced than it has been. Since I am not assured that our next President will be a Democrat, I hope that an Obama nominee, is approved. If I knew that a Democrat would be the next President, I would say, sure, wait and stack the Court in favor of the progressive agenda, just as it has been stacked, until now in favor of the conservative agenda. Because if the next President is a Republican, the Court WILL be further stacked toward reactionary activist "conservatism".
Yeah but there are great Human Interest stories being put out about the endearing relationship between Scalia and Ginsberg. It's so....so touching.I wonder whether we will hear such touching stories about Charles Manson when he dies. Charles Manson has left his hideous evil impact on our society, but the effect was rather limited. I suspect that the evil impact of Scalia's use of power, in his lifetime, has been (and will continue for a long time to come, to be) much greater (although much more subtle) than what Manson was able to pull off.What evil deeds did Scalia commit? His reactionary positions retarded the progresss and civilization of the United States and its people by decades. Lois And his influence among the last generations of law students, will have an impact for many years to come. The evil that men do is not interred with their bones.
If I knew that a Democrat would be the next President, I would say, sure, wait and stack the Court in favor of the progressive agenda, just as it has been stacked, until now in favor of the conservative agenda. Because if the next President is a Republican, the Court WILL be further stacked toward reactionary activist "conservatism".He isn't gonna appoint anybody. This is do or die for the GOP. Or, actually, don't or die for the GOP. Let's not forget Ginsberg either. Her time is fast approaching. Either finally stepping down or stepping out. There's talk of the GOP losing face by stonewalling. That is the most hilarious thing I have heard. They have nothing to lose....it's an election year. They can play this to their benefit as much as any possible negative press. What percentage of the public is going to care if the Senate stonewalls this appointment? Not enough.
Obama will nominate someone within the next few weeks. The Republican Senate will obstruct, like the impacted colon they have become. They will do what hasn’t been done since the Civil War - prevent a nominee for SCOTUS from being appointed in an election year.
If the public doesn’t care about that, then they deserve their country returning to the glory days of the mid-1800’s.
The GOP plays their cards right they’ll make this a 6-3 court in no time. In their favor. Naturally.
The GOP plays their cards right they'll make this a 6-3 court in no time. In their favor. Naturally.In which case, AGW will continue on unabated. Roe v. Wade will be reversed. Voting rights will be undermined for minorities (and institutionalized racism will continue to be a natural part of the fabric of our society.) LGBT rights may be reversed. The power of corporations and wealthy entities to hold sway over our government will continue to increase. The power of unions will continue to be snuffed out. All sorts of right wing agendas of privatizing social support networks will be enacted and promoted. Carrying a gun may become as common as carrying a cell phone. etc. etc. etc. In short, America will be great again.
Well Tim, like you said in the other thread you started, who controls the narrative?
The Dems have spent too much political clout on issues that don’t pay big dividends.
And they have failed miserably at advancing progress in areas that would have big dividends.
Guess the question is do enough citizens out there care enough
to get out and oppose the take over in the only way we have VOTE.
Well Scalia never got to overturn Roe v. Wade, but he dearly wanted to. Now the reactionary activists on the Court will have to wait longer on that. But Scalia did get to be complicit along with his 4 other reactionary activist justices in reaching down to reverse a district court's decision not to stop the implementation of the EPA's Clean Power Plan. So Scalia got to be involved in possibly undermining the Paris Accords on addressing climate change. Now the Republican Congress will block any nominee to replace Scalia, in the hope that they can delay until they get a Republican President. Should that happen, they will not only regain their 5-4 advantage, they will also very likely get to replace other justices over the coming Presidential term, thus gaining a 6-3 or even 7-2 advantage (for many years to come). Robert's is a nice guy? I guess. Scalia was a nice guy? Many think so. But their use of power to make decisions that are bad for my country and for my planet-- that IMO is evil.Yes, of course. We need to unite as a party supporting Hilliary if that comes to fruition we will still nominate a right thinking new justice. Please! A rational thinking justice! We have enough of "right" thinking ones. Lois
Obama will nominate someone within the next few weeks. The Republican Senate will obstruct, like the impacted colon they have become. They will do what hasn't been done since the Civil War - prevent a nominee for SCOTUS from being appointed in an election year. If the public doesn't care about that, then they deserve their country returning to the glory days of the mid-1800's.Trouble is the public has no influence on who is nominated or approved. Yes. We can change the way we vote, but that's after the fact and will have little impact on a Supreme Court nomination. Lois
Obama will nominate someone within the next few weeks. The Republican Senate will obstruct, like the impacted colon they have become. They will do what hasn't been done since the Civil War - prevent a nominee for SCOTUS from being appointed in an election year. If the public doesn't care about that, then they deserve their country returning to the glory days of the mid-1800's.Trouble is the public has no influence on who is nominated or approved. Yes. We can change the way we vote, but that's after the fact and will have little impact on a Supreme Court nomination. Lois How we vote or don't vote will absolutely have an impact on who will be selected and approved to be SCOTUS justices. If you don't realize that, you haven't been paying attention.
Well Tim, like you said in the other thread you started, who controls the narrative? The Dems have spent too much political clout on issues that don't pay big dividends. And they have failed miserably at advancing progress in areas that would have big dividends.At some point, it becomes moot, as to whom you blame - the people controlling or failing to control the narrative or the people who are believing foolish narratives.
At some point, it becomes moot, as to whom you blame - the people controlling or failing to control the narrative or the people who are believing foolish narratives.That's why we have Trump and Bernie this cycle. People are starting to realize that it is all the same narrative. It does become moot. It's the same bullshit. From both sides. https://youtu.be/M3-s72NToTw Here's people who don't understand the narrative from either side.
At some point, it becomes moot, as to whom you blame - the people controlling or failing to control the narrative or the people who are believing foolish narratives.That's why we have Trump and Bernie this cycle. People are starting to realize that it is all the same narrative. It does become moot. It's the same bullshit. From both sides. https://youtu.be/M3-s72NToTw Here's people who don't understand the narrative from either side. That is excellent justification for being a disestablishmentarianist. But the bullshit is not the same from both sides. One side says that corporations are people and that they deserve the "free speech" to influence elections. It was Republican appointed justices who put that in play. The narrative that you have chosen (that both sides are equally bad) may result in revolutionary change (but probably not), or it may result in much worse entrenchment of the Republican narrative.
That is excellent justification for being a disestablishmentarianist. But the bullshit is not the same from both sides. One side says that corporations are people and that they deserve the "free speech" to influence elections. It was Republican appointed justices who put that in play.So before that ruling Corporations had no influence in elections? Democrats don't take corporate money? You're going to need something with more substance Tim. That's a wash right there.
Obama will nominate someone within the next few weeks. The Republican Senate will obstruct, like the impacted colon they have become. They will do what hasn't been done since the Civil War - prevent a nominee for SCOTUS from being appointed in an election year. If the public doesn't care about that, then they deserve their country returning to the glory days of the mid-1800's.Trouble is the public has no influence on who is nominated or approved. Yes. We can change the way we vote, but that's after the fact and will have little impact on a Supreme Court nomination. Lois How we vote or don't vote will absolutely have an impact on who will be selected and approved to be SCOTUS justices. If you don't realize that, you haven't been paying attention. How we vote will only affect the next presidency, not this one. Whoever Obama nominates will be voted on or rejected by the present Senate. Of course I'm in favor of a Democratic Senate and a Democratic President, but our votes have no impact on who sits on the Supreme Court this year. Meanwhile, several important issues are coming before the 8-member Court and the decisions will probably be split 4-4, which means the lower Courts' decisions will hold--at least until they're brought before the Supreme Court again, which could take years. One result will be that abortion clinics will completely disappear from several states.
He’ll pick someone the GOP can’t refuse…you watch. Mark my words.
We’ll get a real doozy in there.
Someone who thinks gays are OK, but Unions already have enough power.
Someone who thinks women don’t get paid equally, but School vouchers are ok for Religious indoctrination.
He’ll choke. Here we go with another one of his wilted Olive Branches.