Senior U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia found dead at West Texas r

Mott the Hoople said:
Both good point and if a SCOTUS nominee isn't confirmed before the election that situation will only increase vote turn out and the conventional wisdom is that a large voter turnout put the GOP at a disadvantage. Even if the GOP nominates a establishment candidate they are really behind the electoral vote landscape.
Click to expand...

What information do you have that says that if the nominee isn't confirmed before the election that it's going to result in an increase in voter turn out??
 
christiefan915 said:
:rofl2: Isn't he cute?

Scalia keeled over and now they're all frantic. "The sky is falling, the sky is falling..."
Click to expand...

Really!!
Then let's see who started the threads:

Started by Christie
Senior U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia found dead at West Texas ranch

Started by Watermark
Scalia Dead :D

Started by Thing1
Scalia & Ginsburg show all of us how it's done

So let's hear again how "they're" all frantic. :D

Someone will have to bump this; because Christy is hiding behind her IA veil.
 
Thing1 said:
Don't forget about good ol' ticket splitters.

I think the GOP is winning this year regardless. Sanders is way too far left, and Hillary has such a low ceiling, especially w/ the legal stuff.

I really reject some of the arguments I've heard already that because it's Scalia, they need to hold out to appoint a conservative to "retain the balance." If the next President is a Republican & a 2-termer, it's not like they might not have an opportunity to replace a liberal or 2 on the court.
Click to expand...

A scary thought for conservatives is a SCOTUS stacked with liberals on the bench. It's hard to imagine what they'd conjure up out of 'the living document'.

But then, you have to wonder if a David Souter might take it upon himself to play the conservative just in the interest of fairness and/or to keep the court from becoming a liberal echo-chamber. Imagine how boring that would be if you were one of them.
 
Fat boy is with the man down under now!
It's going to be hillarious watching you dimwits holding out for another racist piece of shit.
 
christiefan915 said:
Judges aren't supposed to let partisanship overshadow their legal opinions. I remember how cons cried and moped when Roberts was the deciding vote on Obamacare, good times.
Click to expand...

yeah it just goes to show that conservatives are the principled ones, even to a fault. A liberal judge would never go against something they personally believed. EVER.
 
Patrick Bateman said:
yeah it just goes to show that conservatives are the principled ones, even to a fault. A liberal judge would never go against something they personally believed. EVER.
Click to expand...

'Fairness' is their only guiding principle. Which can be an elusive concept.

It's like they're not aware that they're supposed to rule according to what the constitution actually declares. It's up to the legislature to determine what is fair and what's not.
 
christiefan915 said:
You guys had the archconservative Scalia for 30 years so don't expect me to have any sympathy for you now. He was not a nice man and he didn't consider how every American would be affected by his opinions. Many times he played to a narrow segment of society and was nasty when outvoted. He had a temperament similar to Trump's.
Click to expand...

You betray yourself and all your liberal friends true intentions when you say things like this, and you don't even realize it.

HE'S NOT SUPPOSED TO consider your FUCKING feelings christie. THAT'S NOT HIS JOB. His job is to INTERPRET THE CONSTITUTION. Your fucking feelings or the feelings of ANY dumbfuck moronic americans means ABSOLUTELY DICK.

It blows my mind there are adults like you in the world. Completely blows my mind.
 
Darth Hussein Omar said:
'Fairness' is their only guiding principle. Which can be an elusive concept.

It's like they're not aware that they're supposed to rule according to what the constitution actually declares. It's up to the legislature to determine what is fair and what's not.
Click to expand...

It's elusive because they consider something as fair when it suits them and unfair when it doesn't.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
What information do you have that says that if the nominee isn't confirmed before the election that it's going to result in an increase in voter turn out??
Click to expand...
Good question. I don't. I'm assuming it will based on increased partisan interests butt I have no proof of that. I wouldn't expect it to be a dramatic increase.
 
Patrick Bateman said:
yeah it just goes to show that conservatives are the principled ones, even to a fault. A liberal judge would never go against something they personally believed. EVER.
Click to expand...
The only function of a Jurist is to know the law and to interpret its meaning. Time and time and time again Jurist have confounded political partisans by interpreting the law independently and not according to partisan interest or patronage. Which is how the system was intended to work.

It is when this happens that you hear partisans screaming "JUDICIAL ACTIVISM".
 
Mott the Hoople said:
The only function of a Jurist is to know the law and to interpret its meaning. Time and time and time again Jurist have confounded political partisans by interpreting the law independently and not according to partisan interest or patronage. Which is how the system was intended to work.

It is when this happens that you hear partisans screaming "JUDICIAL ACTIVISM".
Click to expand...

Someone should explain that to the Liberal partisans on the Court. They seem to find all sorts of things that simply aren't in the Constitution.
 
Patrick Bateman said:
You betray yourself and all your liberal friends true intentions when you say things like this, and you don't even realize it.

HE'S NOT SUPPOSED TO consider your FUCKING feelings christie. THAT'S NOT HIS JOB. His job is to INTERPRET THE CONSTITUTION. Your fucking feelings or the feelings of ANY dumbfuck moronic americans means ABSOLUTELY DICK.

It blows my mind there are adults like you in the world. Completely blows my mind.
Click to expand...
Yea well it's the other side of the aisle that I always hear cry babying about "Judicial Activism" whenever the courts make an independent decision they don't like. The reality is that a shift in the balance of power in the court would make a significant difference only in a handful of cases. It's not going to make a dramatic difference.

Life will go on much as it has before.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Yea well it's the other side of the aisle that I always hear cry babying about "Judicial Activism" whenever the courts make an independent decision they don't like. The reality is that a shift in the balance of power in the court would make a significant difference only in a handful of cases. It's not going to make a dramatic difference.

Life will go on much as it has before.
Click to expand...

The Liberal judicial activism that would occur would be on those handful of cases that would make a dramatic difference.
 
CFM said:
Someone should explain that to the Liberal partisans on the Court. They seem to find all sorts of things that simply aren't in the Constitution.
Click to expand...
You mean like prohibiting slavery? We all know how much that has bothered you. Fucking liberals just don't respect property.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
You mean like prohibiting slavery? We all know how much that has bothered you. Fucking liberals just don't respect property.
Click to expand...

Is that an issue they'll be hearing? I suspected a smartass answer and got one.

Since my family didn't come to the U.S. until 1905, how could something that occurred 40 years before that bother me retard?

You don't respect yourselves much less the U.S. Constitution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top