Amy Coney Barrett

[shoshin]

35 minutes ago, Taro T said:

 

Sadly, United States Senate is the 1 thing that might.  

 

(Though at this point, am expecting confirmation strictly on partisan lines, with the possible exception of Manchin voting to confirm.)

 

She's getting through. She should get through. 

 

Barrett is not the issue and never has been. The issue is that the Rs can't be trusted at their word. It's going to create a mess when the Dems have the house and senate and crank up the revenge. Yay 'merica. 

[Doc]

7 minutes ago, shoshin said:

She's getting through. She should get through. 

 

Barrett is not the issue and never has been. The issue is that the Rs can't be trusted at their word. It's going to create a mess when the Dems have the house and senate and crank up the revenge. Yay 'merica. 

 

LOL!  You reap what you sow.  Filthy Harry thought he was so smart doing what he did and it backfired on him big time.  Pull that ***** again and watch the same thing happen when the Senate flips after 2 years (assuming Biden wins and the Senate flips).

[RiotAct]

In her house, is science real?  Where does she stand on kindness and the illegality of humans?  I need to know.

[The Frankish Reich]

48 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

LOL!  You reap what you sow.  Filthy Harry thought he was so smart doing what he did and it backfired on him big time.  Pull that ***** again and watch the same thing happen when the Senate flips after 2 years (assuming Biden wins and the Senate flips).

Still true -- from Megan McArdle back during the Bush 43 days.

Jane's Law: The devotees of the party in power are smug and arrogant. The devotees of the party out of power are insane

[SoCal Deek]

1 hour ago, shoshin said:

 

She's getting through. She should get through. 

 

Barrett is not the issue and never has been. The issue is that the Rs can't be trusted at their word. It's going to create a mess when the Dems have the house and senate and crank up the revenge. Yay 'merica. 

What?  This is politics.  If you haven't figured it out by now....neither side can be 'trusted'.  But that's because they stopped trying to be trustworthy a long long time ago.

Edited October 15, 2020 by SoCal Deek

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

20 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said:

What?  This is politics.  If you haven't figured it out by now....neither side can be 'trusted'.  But that's because they stopped trying to be trustworthy a long long time ago.

 

...she is just a highly classified, brilliant, astute scholarly individual.......and a woeful display by alleged lawyers Booker, Feinstein, the painful Klobucher et al trying to bring her down....throw in the Hawaiian loon....good Lord......these questioning hacks?.....sad.....

[Orlando Buffalo]

3 hours ago, shoshin said:

 

She's getting through. She should get through. 

 

Barrett is not the issue and never has been. The issue is that the Rs can't be trusted at their word. It's going to create a mess when the Dems have the house and senate and crank up the revenge. Yay 'merica. 

I am curious what word they broke in this case? They have stated since the day RBG died they would vote for a replacement.

[Backintheday544]

11 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

I am curious what word they broke in this case? They have stated since the day RBG died they would vote for a replacement.

 

"I want you to use my words against me. If there's a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said, 'Let's let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination,' " he said in 2016 shortly after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. "And you could use my words against me and you'd be absolutely right."

[spartacus]

41 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said:

 

"I want you to use my words against me. If there's a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said, 'Let's let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination,' " he said in 2016 shortly after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. "And you could use my words against me and you'd be absolutely right."

unwillingness to consider a replacement is probably in direct reaction to how Scalia's seat became available

[Orlando Buffalo]

43 minutes ago, Backintheday544 said:

 

"I want you to use my words against me. If there's a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said, 'Let's let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination,' " he said in 2016 shortly after the death of Justice Antonin Scalia. "And you could use my words against me and you'd be absolutely right."

I was unaware of this quote- Graham is a moron for saying it, but your point is made.

[Backintheday544]

2 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

I was unaware of this quote- Graham is a moron for saying it, but your point is made.

 

Not a Graham fan...bit his decay has been epic...he's begging for money everywhere and broke the law asking for money yesterday!

[shoshin]

9 minutes ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

I was unaware of this quote- Graham is a moron for saying it, but your point is made.

 

Graham was not alone either. The premise of not holding hearings on Garland was that it was an election year--10 months before the election. That's the word they went back on. They all know what they did but they are acting expediently and coming up with new rationale because it's to their benefit. 

12 minutes ago, spartacus said:

unwillingness to consider a replacement is probably in direct reaction to how Scalia's seat became available

 

This is your Scalia was assassinated theory, I assume?

[leh-nerd skin-erd]

2 hours ago, Buffalo Timmy said:

I was unaware of this quote- Graham is a moron for saying it, but your point is made.

Before ceding the point, Graham also said that the abhorrent treatment of Brett Kavanaugh changed his mind on the notion of judicial appointments.  Nothing happens in a vacuum, each domino that falls potentially impacts another. 
 

Every rational American knows that this plays out exactly the way it played out regardless of which party is in power.  The plan to destroy Kavanaugh provides Senator Graham with more than enough ammunition to upgrade his previously stated position. 

[KD in CA]

 

5 hours ago, SoCal Deek said:

What?  This is politics.  If you haven't figured it out by now....neither side can be 'trusted'.  But that's because they stopped trying to be trustworthy a long long time ago.

 

Of course....which is why the old Biden quotes from the Bush era are relevant.  He was simply greasing to skids to do exactly what the GOP did to Garland several years later and what the Dems would have done the last two years if they had won the Senate last time around.

 

Both sides are equally corrupt and hypocritical, which is why the lack of term limits will eventually be the death of this country.

[Taro T]

1 hour ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Before ceding the point, Graham also said that the abhorrent treatment of Brett Kavanaugh changed his mind on the notion of judicial appointments.  Nothing happens in a vacuum, each domino that falls potentially impacts another. 
 

Every rational American knows that this plays out exactly the way it played out regardless of which party is in power.  The plan to destroy Kavanaugh provides Senator Graham with more than enough ammunition to upgrade his previously stated position. 

 

As soon as Reid nuked the filibuster for everything but SCOTUS nominations the ball was rolling down the hill.

 

Would be really interesting to know how things would've worked out had it been RBG retiring in '16 rather than Scalia dying then.  Expect the R's would've let Garland have a hearing but don't know that for certain.

 

But do know that each time 1 side ramps up the partisanship, the other runs ideas to up it another notch as soon as they can.  Don't know how to scale it back short of 1 side having a ridiculous majority of 60+ & going back to the old 60 vote filibuster so that if they lose a smidge, the other side can have a say.

[OldTimeAFLGuy]

6 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

Before ceding the point, Graham also said that the abhorrent treatment of Brett Kavanaugh changed his mind on the notion of judicial appointments.  Nothing happens in a vacuum, each domino that falls potentially impacts another. 
 

Every rational American knows that this plays out exactly the way it played out regardless of which party is in power.  The plan to destroy Kavanaugh provides Senator Graham with more than enough ammunition to upgrade his previously stated position. 

 

...which epitomizes just how dirty politics have become......sadly, Congressional Approval Rating of 17% is way......TOO HIGH......doing the people's business??.......

[BuffaloHokie13]

10 hours ago, shoshin said:

 

Graham was not alone either. The premise of not holding hearings on Garland was that it was an election year--10 months before the election. That's the word they went back on. They all know what they did but they are acting expediently and coming up with new rationale because it's to their benefit. 

 

This is your Scalia was assassinated theory, I assume?

Graham was wrong, but the point was more that despite electing a democrat as president in 2012, the senate went republican in 2014 'to put a check on the president' those circumstances are not replicated here.

Edited October 16, 2020 by BuffaloHokie13

[shoshin]

2 minutes ago, BuffaloHokie13 said:

Graham was wrong, but the point was more that despite electing a democrat as president in 2012, the senate went republican in 2014 'to put a check on the president' those circumstances are not replicated here.

 

That became after-the-fact rationale. That and Kavanaugh were later excuses for what's happening now. 

[BuffaloHokie13]

Just now, shoshin said:

 

That became after-the-fact rationale. That and Kavanaugh were later excuses for what's happening now. 

I believe it was within McConnell's full statement on the matter, but I could be mistaken. Neither one (Kavanaugh or Barrett) would've likely happened if the Democrats didn't change the rules, by the way. Simple majority vs 2/3 led to this. Regardless, I agree that the Democrats will seek revenge for the Republicans taking advantage of their own rule change.

[SoCal Deek]

All of this was set in motion when RBG selfishly decided to stay on the court instead of retiring when Obama was President. She was sure Hilary would win. She was wrong! The change you’re going to see will be that Justices will do more calculus as to when they retire. It’s not hard. If they care about more than their own ego they’ll retire while their ‘side’ holds the White House, and possibly the Senate, and preferably BEFORE an election year.