DEMOCRATS SHOULD PACK THE COURT. — REPUBLICANS DID IT FIRST

blackascoal said:
... and I do indeed. I’m here for the comedy and I like seeing you on stage. :)

That being said, I would rather engage in honest, civil and respectful political discourse with anyone capable of serious conversation, irrespective of who and/or what they are. There is no intellectual argument for racism, so if I’m talking to a racist, it’s all about the comedy..
Click to expand...

Why is racism funny, or "comedy"? Why is one better, or worse than another?
 
DEMOCRATS SHOULD PACK THE SUPREME COURT, REPUBLICANS DID IT FIRST
— HARVARD POLITICAL REVIEW
Click to expand...
how in the hell is nominating a replacement for Ginsburg "packing"? *packing* is increasing the # of jurors
The Harvard Review has gone willfully stupid
 
Hawkeye10 said:
SCOTUS just allowed a fraudulent election, and they are not good enough for you, not sheep enough for you?
Click to expand...
SCOTUS rejecting Texas et all Vs. Pennsylvania for STANDING was a terrible refusal
to use their Original Jurisdiction on the state attorney generals suit against PA's Sec. of State.

just hearing that would have ended all legal doubt - or could have led to making states conform to the Constitution's election power delegation to/by state legislatures
 
10 years of FUBAR

Libya's Legacy of Obama’s ‘Worst Mistake’
There’s a problem with the American way of war.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/04/obamas-worst-mistake-libya/478461/
It was a cheap war for the United States at just $1.1 billion.
But these days, it seems, a billion dollars buys you a shit show. Libya could end up looking like,
in the words of British special envoy Jonathan Powell, “Somalia on the Mediterranean.”
 
anatta said:
SCOTUS rejecting Texas et all Vs. Pennsylvania for STANDING was a terrible refusal
to use their Original Jurisdiction on the state attorney generals suit against PA's Sec. of State.

just hearing that would have ended all legal doubt - or could have led to making states conform to the Constitution's election power delegation to/by state legislatures
Click to expand...

SCOTUS has long been a low quality court....I have talked quite a bit about this at JPP but this is not new....I started to not trust them way back onto the 80's.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
SCOTUS has long been a low quality court....I have talked quite a bit about this at JPP but this is not new....I started to not trust them way back onto the 80's.
Click to expand...
Roberts is the un-artful dodger.
Another institutionalist hack more concerned with his bailiwick then responsiveness to the people
 
anatta said:
Roberts is the un-artful dodger.
Another institutionalist hack more concerned with his bailiwick then responsiveness to the people
Click to expand...

Allowing DUI roadblocks, Asset forfeiture with no due process at all, allowing employers to credit report at will and allowing employers to drug test at will was were I began to conclude that the Supreme Court would not protect me.

As for SCOTUS allowing a fraudulent election I was saying as early as last summer that it was highly unlikely that they would measure up, and of course they did not.

I have also been saying that the bench is full of inferior people, which happened because the other two branches willed it to happen.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
Allowing DUI roadblocks, Asset forfeiture with no due process at all, allowing employers to credit report at will and allowing employers to drug test at will was were I began to conclude that the Supreme Court would not protect me.
Click to expand...
yep. internal possession charges/sanctions came from employer drug tests
 
anatta said:
yep. internal possession charges/sanctions came from employer drug tests
Click to expand...

It is highly likely that it was watching how easy it was to remove freedoms from the citizens in the 80's was where the idea was birthed that the Left should go full on authoritarian as they have done. From there things got worse, for instance legislatures writing very vague laws on purpose so that DA's would have max latitude and so that people would not know what is a crime so they might be on their best behavior, a whole slate of full on DA abuse methods that spread through America mostly unchallenged, Treating kids as adults, using the mental health system to lock people away forever and so on and so on.

SCOTUS could have done something, that is what SCOTUS was for...but they rarely cared.
 
blackascoal said:
An ass-licking moron like you talking about sheep. :rofl2: Hilarious.
Click to expand...

Thanks, you beat me to it. The truth is, there is not enough proof on the planet to convince the Cult that their #MalignantMessiah is gone. Not even SCOTUS with a solid RW majority, three of whom were appointed by the Cult leader.

It's okay. We'll be happy to allow them to enjoy a better life under President Biden than what we were not enjoying under #TRE45ON. In a bit less than four years, they'll have another shot at it. Meanwhile, let's balance the courts with more left-leaning judges.
 
blackascoal said:
REPUBLICANS HAVE LAUNCED AN ALL OUT OBVIOUS ATTACK ON THE RIGHT TO VOTE, ESPECIALLY FOR NON WHITE AMERICANS. GIVEN THAT THE RIGHT TO VOTE MUST BE PROTECTED BY THE SUPREME COURT, WHICH REPUBLICANS HAVE ALREADY PACKED, IT IS TIME FOR DEMOCRATS TO RESPOND AND PROTECT THE RIGHT TO VOTE. AFTER TRUMP’S LOSS IN THE 2020 ELECTION AND GIVEN THAT REPUBLICANS HAVEN’T WON THE POPULAR VOTE IN OBER 30 YEARS .. AND GIVEN THE DECLINING NUMBER OF AMERICANS THAT IDENTIFY AS REPUBLICANS THROUGH MANY DYING OUT AND THEIR OWN IGNORANCE, THEY KNOW THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN STAY COMPETITIVE INTO THE FUTURE IS TO LIMIT ACCESS TO VOTING BY NONWHITE AMERICANS, WHOSE VOTE THEY ALMOST NEVER WIN.

DEMOCRATS CAN INCREASE THE NUMBERS ON THE COURT ABSOLUTELY. THE ONLY THING THAT STOPS THEM IS TIMIDITY AND A FALSE BELIEF IN BIPERTISANSHIP THAT REPUBLICANS HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO INTEREST IN.

DEMOCRATS SHOULD PACK THE SUPREME COURT, REPUBLICANS DID IT FIRST
— HARVARD POLITICAL REVIEW

WITH THE PASSING OF JUSTICE RUTH BADER GINSBURG LAST YEAR AND THE SUCCESSFUL RUSH BY REPUBLICANS TO CONFIRM CONSERVATIVE AMY BARRETT AS A REPLACEMENT, THE IDEA OF COURT PACKING, INCREASING THE NUMBER OF JUSTICES FROM 9, HAS BEEN INCREASINGLY DISCUSSED AMONG LIBERAL AND DEMOCRATIC CIRCLES. REPUBLICANS LIKE TED CRUZ HAVE ASSAILED DEMOCRATS FOR THESE PROPOSALS, DEEMING THEM ATTACKS OM THE INTEGRITY OF OUR NATION. SUCH CRITIQUES IGNORE THE WAYS THAT REPUBLICANS LAWMAKERS HAVE ALREADY VIOLATED THE EXISTING CONVENTIONS REGARDING FEDERAL APPOINTMENTS., MANY OF WHICH THEY THEMSELVES SET. ACCORDINGLY DEMOCRATS DESIRES TO REFORM THE COURT SHOULD BE VIEWED AS A DEFENSIVE RESPONSE TO PRESERVE THE FAIRNESS OF THE COURT RATHER THAN AN OFFENSIVE ATTEMPT TO CORRUPT IT.

harvardpolitics.com
Click to expand...

:laugh:

:magagrin:
 
blackascoal said:
REPUBLICANS HAVE LAUNCED AN ALL OUT OBVIOUS ATTACK ON THE RIGHT TO VOTE, ESPECIALLY FOR NON WHITE AMERICANS. GIVEN THAT THE RIGHT TO VOTE MUST BE PROTECTED BY THE SUPREME COURT, WHICH REPUBLICANS HAVE ALREADY PACKED, IT IS TIME FOR DEMOCRATS TO RESPOND AND PROTECT THE RIGHT TO VOTE. AFTER TRUMP’S LOSS IN THE 2020 ELECTION AND GIVEN THAT REPUBLICANS HAVEN’T WON THE POPULAR VOTE IN OBER 30 YEARS .. AND GIVEN THE DECLINING NUMBER OF AMERICANS THAT IDENTIFY AS REPUBLICANS THROUGH MANY DYING OUT AND THEIR OWN IGNORANCE, THEY KNOW THE ONLY WAY THEY CAN STAY COMPETITIVE INTO THE FUTURE IS TO LIMIT ACCESS TO VOTING BY NONWHITE AMERICANS, WHOSE VOTE THEY ALMOST NEVER WIN.

DEMOCRATS CAN INCREASE THE NUMBERS ON THE COURT ABSOLUTELY. THE ONLY THING THAT STOPS THEM IS TIMIDITY AND A FALSE BELIEF IN BIPERTISANSHIP THAT REPUBLICANS HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO INTEREST IN.

DEMOCRATS SHOULD PACK THE SUPREME COURT, REPUBLICANS DID IT FIRST
— HARVARD POLITICAL REVIEW

WITH THE PASSING OF JUSTICE RUTH BADER GINSBURG LAST YEAR AND THE SUCCESSFUL RUSH BY REPUBLICANS TO CONFIRM CONSERVATIVE AMY BARRETT AS A REPLACEMENT, THE IDEA OF COURT PACKING, INCREASING THE NUMBER OF JUSTICES FROM 9, HAS BEEN INCREASINGLY DISCUSSED AMONG LIBERAL AND DEMOCRATIC CIRCLES. REPUBLICANS LIKE TED CRUZ HAVE ASSAILED DEMOCRATS FOR THESE PROPOSALS, DEEMING THEM ATTACKS OM THE INTEGRITY OF OUR NATION. SUCH CRITIQUES IGNORE THE WAYS THAT REPUBLICANS LAWMAKERS HAVE ALREADY VIOLATED THE EXISTING CONVENTIONS REGARDING FEDERAL APPOINTMENTS., MANY OF WHICH THEY THEMSELVES SET. ACCORDINGLY DEMOCRATS DESIRES TO REFORM THE COURT SHOULD BE VIEWED AS A DEFENSIVE RESPONSE TO PRESERVE THE FAIRNESS OF THE COURT RATHER THAN AN OFFENSIVE ATTEMPT TO CORRUPT IT.

harvardpolitics.com
Click to expand...





racist? what are you talking about?


I am sure the democrats will do the same as the republicants.
 
RB 60 said:
Why is racism funny, or "comedy"? Why is one better, or worse than another?
Click to expand...

Racism isn’t funny, but if I’m talking to a racist, that conversation can only be about the comedy given that they would be incapable in engaging is serious conversation. Racism requires the ignorance of the believer.
 
Winston Smith said:
Well, he's a socialist. They're best known for killing large numbers of people, whether happy, angry, or manic.
Click to expand...

You are obviously a right wing Republican, today best known for climbing up the walls of the Capitol trying to kill Mike Pence to destroy democracy, supporting the lies of THE worst president in American history, and believing that Hilary Clinton eats children and Jewish laser beams from outer space cause wildfires in California ... while socialism keeps your parents and millions of American seniors alive.

:corn: Next
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top