Page 4 of 17 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 407

Thread: RBG is dead

  1. #76
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Portland
    Posts
    14,311
    Quote Originally Posted by stuckathuntermtn View Post
    Here comes theocracy
    Praise be!

  2. #77
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    1,859
    A supreme piece of shit
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_6263.JPG 
Views:	152 
Size:	580.4 KB 
ID:	340713

  3. #78
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Access to Granlibakken
    Posts
    8,079
    Name:  CEF44F71-59C4-4833-8ED6-4F9716441A61.jpeg
Views: 1353
Size:  61.8 KB
    ...

  4. #79
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    11,021
    thank you for your work in service of this nation Ruth.
    They got a name for the winners in the world

    http://procatinator.com/?cat=80

  5. #80
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    In the swamp
    Posts
    7,952

    RBG is dead

    Quote Originally Posted by CascadeLuke View Post
    A supreme piece of shit
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	IMG_6263.JPG 
Views:	152 
Size:	580.4 KB 
ID:	340713
    Sheís not even cold and that piece of shit comes out gleefully with that? Fuck everyone who keeps him in office.

    There needs to be some serious but peaceful protests in front of his office or house or whereeverthefuck this turtle lives.

  6. #81
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    1,859
    Scalia died on February 13, 2016. Roughly 8 months from the election and were at 46 days out now.

  7. #82
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    General Sherman's Favorite City
    Posts
    21,752
    Quote Originally Posted by jackstraw View Post
    How the fuck does some asshole from backwardass Kentucky have so much damn power over our lives! The fact that it's an unwritten rule to side with the senate majority leader is so fucked up. I don't care if she/he is Democrat or Republican...its just wrong.
    I’m honestly not talking politics at all, but the short answer is the same reason the Democrats could control the house for 50 years, elections matter, as well as the right to confirm Executive Branch nominations are Constitutionally vested in the upper house of Congress - none of this is party dependent.

    As far as siding with the SML, doesn’t sound like that is the case for at least 4 (R) Senators, which is a good sign for and will hopefully take the nonsense out of this until after the election. Not for political reasons, but for just sanity and equity reasons, both of which are very needed right now.
    I still call it The Jake.

  8. #83
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ventura Highway in the Sunshine
    Posts
    22,113
    A sad day for all, she was a lioness of the supreme court. All women should take some time to reflect on just how much she did for them, and men as well. Those of us married to strong, professional women have RBG to thank.

    Of course, Trump and Mc Turtle will quickly try to fill the vacancy to MAGA, just like 1950 when blacks and women had minimal power and options.

    If anybody votes for either of those two, they deserve a kick in the nuts or vag.

    Curious to see if any republicans have morals and a backbone. It appears four may, but that leaves a hell of a lot of them with empty souls. If this country wasn't fucked enough in the last three and a half year, the next few months are are going to be a real hard, dry fuck.

    I agree it is a constitutional right for Americans to be assholes...its just too bad that so many take the opportunity...
    iscariot

  9. #84
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    NCW
    Posts
    2,690

    RBG is dead

    Quote Originally Posted by SkiBall View Post
    A slim ray of hope:

    Sen. Susan Collins
    Sen. Chuck Grassley
    Sen. Lisa Murkowski
    Sen. Mitt Romney

    Have all committed to not voting on a New SCOTUS Justice until after 20 January 2021

    That leaves 49 Republican Senators, or less, standing alone.
    No majority, no new #SCOTUS
    Quote Originally Posted by jackattack View Post
    Wow, slim but Iíll take it.
    Well, spoken too soon I think.

    Romney hasnít said anything yet, though of all the republican senators to refuse I would expect him to.

    Grassley on the other hand
    Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) has said that, if he was still Judiciary Committee chair, he wouldnít hold a hearing on a nominee this year. But that statement is meaningless, because Graham has succeeded him as the committee chair. Grassley has not committed to vote against any nominee.
    And everyone knows Graham is a piece of shit.

  10. #85
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    13,515
    A powerhouse in the fabric of American history. RIP.

  11. #86
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    san diego
    Posts
    2,147
    Quote Originally Posted by Adolf Allerbush View Post
    Sad day.

    If it wasn't already locked in, this really locks in the christian fundamentalist vote for Trump.
    It may also bring out the hard core liberal vote for Biden. Especially once we see who Trump actually nominates. He's said his last two appointments have been a disappointment as they have not voted as conservatively as his base wanted. So it follows that he would nominate someone even more conservative. That could solidify his base before the election. But wouldn't those people vote for him anyways? I think a nutjob nominee could bring out a lot more people for Biden - just in time for the election. Because it will be very front and center and this will make it clear we're not just voting for president, we're voting for future supreme court appointments not to mention all the other federal judge appointments that will come up. Surely Trump's advisors would recognize this as a threat to his re-election. I think it actually puts him in a tough spot. But I see more downside to him for nominating someone the more his base will love that nominee. So maybe he does put it off. If he wins the election all of the appointments are his and he'll have free reign if the Senate stays in Republican control. As mentioned below, putting off the nomination and making it an election issue - "I'll nominate ___ if I win" will bring out his base. But it would also bring out the other side. If he wins re-election we're fucked no matter what.

    Quote Originally Posted by timeo View Post
    This will play out as follows: Trump will say that he won't nominate someone until 2021 to force the religious wackos to vote for him. When/if he then loses to Biden he will promptly nominate the worst possible candidate for the senate to ram thru. What a f'ing nightmare.

  12. #87
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Down In A Hole, Up in the Sky
    Posts
    28,063
    “BARR SC 2020”!!!!
    Forum Cross Pollinator

  13. #88
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    4,306
    Quote Originally Posted by rideit View Post
    I bet Benny chimes in to blame this on Obama for being rich.
    They will blame the corrupt DNC, and the notorious HRC.
    "We don't beat the reaper by living longer, we beat the reaper by living well and living fully." - Randy Pausch

  14. #89
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Posts
    1,859
    Time to tank the budget effort and shut the government down at the end of the month. Cause issue and delay - itís time to fight. We are headed to a stalemate on it anyhow.

  15. #90
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    314
    Is...is canada still accepting residency applications for in-demand workers?

  16. #91
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    4,306
    Quote Originally Posted by evdog View Post
    It may also bring out the hard core liberal vote for Biden. Especially once we see who Trump actually nominates. He's said his last two appointments have been a disappointment as they have not voted as conservatively as his base wanted. So it follows that he would nominate someone even more conservative. That could solidify his base before the election. But wouldn't those people vote for him anyways? I think a nutjob nominee could bring out a lot more people for Biden - just in time for the election. Because it will be very front and center and this will make it clear we're not just voting for president, we're voting for future supreme court appointments not to mention all the other federal judge appointments that will come up. Surely Trump's advisors would recognize this as a threat to his re-election. I think it actually puts him in a tough spot. But I see more downside to him for nominating someone the more his base will love that nominee. So maybe he does put it off. If he wins the election all of the appointments are his and he'll have free reign if the Senate stays in Republican control. As mentioned below, putting off the nomination and making it an election issue - "I'll nominate ___ if I win" will bring out his base. But it would also bring out the other side. If he wins re-election we're fucked no matter what.
    Trump isn't going to let McConnell choose the SCOTUS nominee this time around. Trump won't listen to his advisors. He will pick someone who will, in his warped, mob mentality mind, be loyal to him.
    "We don't beat the reaper by living longer, we beat the reaper by living well and living fully." - Randy Pausch

  17. #92
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Down In A Hole, Up in the Sky
    Posts
    28,063
    Quote Originally Posted by Toadman View Post
    Trump isn't going to let McConnell choose the SCOTUS nominee this time around. Trump won't listen to his advisors. He will pick someone who will, in his warped, mob mentality mind, be loyal to him.
    See above post #87
    Forum Cross Pollinator

  18. #93
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Bottom feeding
    Posts
    8,409
    Quote Originally Posted by CascadeLuke View Post
    Fucker had that queued up, ready to go.

    Party at the White House.

    Fuck all these fucking racist motherfuckers.
    Well maybe I'm the faggot America
    I'm not a part of a redneck agenda

  19. #94
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    truckee
    Posts
    14,563
    Quote Originally Posted by jackstraw View Post
    Horrible news. RIP

    It's not a done deal that he gets his nominee pushed through. There is hope. And if he does when Biden wins the election and Democrats take the Senate they add a member to the court.
    It would take 4 Republican no votes to deny Trump a nominee--Collins, Murkowski, Romney, Alexander were the 4 Jeff Toobin named.
    If the Dems take the Senate and the Senate manages to confirm a nominee in a lame duck session, Congress can pack the court. It can also limit the terms of all sitting and future justices. There is nothing in the Constitution to prevent either action.
    If the Republicans hold the Senate it is quite possible McConnell would refuse to confirm a Biden nominated justice for as long as the Republicans hold the Senate.


    The Democrats should make it clear that after the Merrit Garland fiasco, they will play as hard and as dirty as necessary to keep a reasonably balanced court--the prospect of court packing and term limits may give enough Republicans pause to vote against a Trump nominee--or make it clear to McConnell that they would do so. Especially any Senators who have lost their seats and have nothing to lose. The fear of civil disorder bordering on insurrection may change a few minds as well

    If Trump wins this is all moot.

  20. #95
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    truckee
    Posts
    14,563
    Quote Originally Posted by BmillsSkier View Post
    I’m honestly not talking politics at all, but the short answer is the same reason the Democrats could control the house for 50 years, elections matter, as well as the right to confirm Executive Branch nominations are Constitutionally vested in the upper house of Congress - none of this is party dependent.

    As far as siding with the SML, doesn’t sound like that is the case for at least 4 (R) Senators, which is a good sign for and will hopefully take the nonsense out of this until after the election. Not for political reasons, but for just sanity and equity reasons, both of which are very needed right now.
    How can someone who uses the abbreviation SML for Senate Majority Leader claim to not be talking politics. : )

  21. #96
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Presidio
    Posts
    1,438
    Quote Originally Posted by rideit View Post
    See above post #87
    He's 70...

  22. #97
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    A LSD Steakhouse somewhere in the Wasatch
    Posts
    11,834
    Quote Originally Posted by ml242 View Post
    thank you for your work in service of this nation Ruth.
    amen
    its pretty odd to see and hear all this "were fucked" talk
    when the tiny in stature hudge in cultural icon and respect justice spent her whole life
    fighting against inequalities of fuckages
    sack the fuck up and lead your life in a manner that would make the notorious one smile
    "When the child was a child it waited patiently for the first snow and it still does"- Van "The Man" Morrison
    "I find I have already had my reward, in the doing of the thing" - Buzz Holmstrom
    "THIS IS WHAT WE DO"-AML -ski on in eternal peace
    Yo poliassfuckers
    theres a special basement for your lame shit

  23. #98
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    4,239
    Quote Originally Posted by skifishbum View Post
    amen
    its pretty odd to see and hear all this "were fucked" talk
    when the tiny in stature hudge in cultural icon and respect justice spent her whole life
    fighting against inequalities of fuckages
    sack the fuck up and lead your life in a manner that would make the notorious one smile
    QFT. We're as fucked as we decide to be.

    RIP to one hell of a fighter.

  24. #99
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    I smell poutine!!!
    Posts
    12,045
    RIP Notorious RBG. Peace.

  25. #100
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Down In A Hole, Up in the Sky
    Posts
    28,063
    Quote Originally Posted by RockChalk View Post
    He's 70...
    Fair point.
    Ben Shapiro, SC ‘20!

    However, Trump doesn’t give a shit about anything or anyone beyond his immediate needs.
    I wouldn’t say the concept of ‘long term ramifications’ enters his feeble mind.
    Forum Cross Pollinator

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •