It was hypothetical before RBG passed. Now it is real. And they are politicians. Breaking promises is kinda what they do.
8 Likes
4 Likes
Here is hoping that the outrageous travesty of democracy that is Trump and McConnel installing another conservative justice will finally be met by a no-holds barred response by the democrats.
Do it McConnel, and we will Expand the Court, Grant Statehood to DC and PR: 4 more liberal Justices, and 4 more Democratic Senators. Its time to pound them back to the stone age and make sure they never terrorize the US again.
8 Likes
has already opted out of his “pledge” excusing it for . . . reasons.
any pledge of his is relatively meaningless without three other republicans doing the same because he’s no longer chair of the judiciary committee and he likely knew that would be the case when he said it.
8 Likes
The hypocrisy extends to other areas, too. Conservative and Libertarian politicians and pundits and news outlets recognise no “loyal opposition”, seeing only enemies. The moment a prominent member of that opposition is dead, though, the crocodile tears of “comity” and “non-partisanship” start flowing (along with damning with faint or non-existent praise).
For example, it would be absurd to imagine that a highly partisan Koch-funded outlet like Reason actually respected RBG. Everything Reason publishes directly or indirectly supports the sort of radical “free”-market and anti-statist (really anti-societal) positions that Ginsburg spent her time on the bench pushing back against. But I suppose there’s always going to be a market of suckers who fall for their BS (or that of Fox News, OAN, or the rest of the right-wing noise machine).
11 Likes
Nothing from Reason is nonpartisan. It was founded as a bullhorn for the Tea Party capital-L Libertarians, and has been managed as such ever since. Feel free to check it’s history and current management yourself.
If it seems nonpartisan compared to mainstream journalism, it is very much because it is downplaying the power and relevance of Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
13 Likes
not so much unpartisan as it is uninformative. the article seems written along the lines of “if you can’t say something good about someone, don’t say anything at all.” which, given the venue, doesn’t surprise me.
12 Likes
Mitch McConnell said in 2016:
“The American people may well elect a president who decides to nominate Judge Garland for Senate consideration,” he said. “The next president may also nominate someone very different. Either way, our view is this: Give the people a voice.”
Mitch McConnell in 2019:
“If an opening comes in the last year of President Trump’s term, and the primary process has started, we’ll wait until the next election,”
Mitch McConnell in 2020:
“If there’s a vacancy on the Supreme Court in 2020, I will proudly confirm President Trump’s nominee,” McConnell wrote. “Sure, the Left and their allies in the media will go crazy. The Democrats will raise MILLIONS to defeat me. That won’t stop us from putting another conservative Justice on the Supreme Court.”
The only difference here is that a White man is President. What a racist, hypocritical waste of space this man is.
17 Likes
The one hope is that enough republican senators are going to refuse to confirm to stop it. So far a couple have made statements to that effect. Consider all the promises trump made, and for his first 2 years little was passed even though republicans held both houses. The republicans do have difficulty getting everyone on the same page.
If they do confirm a candidate, the problem is it’s become a situation where he doesn’t nominate anyone on the moderate side, he’s got to go as far right as possible to swing the total balance of the court as far right as possible. This doesn’t lead to an effective government, as everyone’s too polarized to come to agreement.
It would become a situation where the side with a majority in scotus wins every case, despite merits, with vehement dissenting opinions from the other side. The court needs moderates who can go either way on decisions.
Only before the election, and only because they are extremely vulnerable to being defeated in their districts so they are trying to seem moderate.
Without at least four committing, and committing to not force someone through during the lame duck session (assuming D’s get a majority) it’s all meaningless.
11 Likes
Sure does! Also, my Spanish, while a bit rusty, and replete with horrible Mexican slang (I should say “foul” language), is at least a bit understandable.
Appreciate the suggestion.
any pledge of his is relatively meaningless without three other republicans doing the same because he’s no longer chair of the judiciary committee and he likely knew that would be the case when he said it.
Reading his Twitter feed, I’d guess they tell him which button to push and don’t bother discussing the issues with him at all.
1 Like
Mar 31, 2019
5 Likes
It is an article to announce her death, clean, and not full of bias. That was my point exactly as it was in contrast to the other articles I read on othe sites. This other article in Reason is the exact opposite of unbiased as it is beautifully written by one of her law clerks and includes an essay she wrote after WWII and the Nazis when she was 13:
One People—An Essay by Ruth Bader, Age 13 (June, 1946)
Bulletin of the East Midwood Jewish Center, Brooklyn NY (June 1, 1946)
The war has left a bloody trail and many deep wounds not too easily healed. Many people have been left with scars that take a long time to pass away. We must never forget the horrors which our brethren were subjected to in Bergen-Belsen and other Nazi concentration camps. Then, too, we must try hard to understand that for righteous people hate and prejudice are neither good occupations nor fit companions. As Rabbi Alfred Bettleheim once said: “Prejudice saves us a painful trouble, the trouble of thinking.”
In our beloved land families were not scattered, communities not erased nor our nation destroyed by the ravages of the World War. Yet, dare we be at ease? We are part of a world whose unity has been almost completely shattered. No one can feel free from danger and destruction until the many torn threads of civilization are bound together again. We cannot feel safe until every nation, regardless of weapons or power, will meet together in good faith, the people worthy of mutual association. There can be a happy world and there will be once again, when men and women create a strong bond towards one another, a bond unbreakable by a studied prejudice or a passing circumstance.
Then and only then shall we have a world whose structure is the Brotherhood and Sisterhood of men and women.
2 Likes
Now I understand. I think there just might be enough Reps that disslike Trump and have the principles necesary to not be complete hypocrites.
The issue with this is that when the constitution says rules, they mean rules of process and this has been exploited to actually direct/obstruct law instead of just process.
1 Like
Holy crap, Scoop indeed. She would be a terrible and destabilizing replacement.
Well, he can’t nominate himself, can he? She the obvious best second choice. Although she may be being saved to be appointed successor in 2024 or whenever he dies, so who knows?
1 Like
My Prediction:
A number of R senators in unsafe seats will announce publicly and loudly before the election that no, they certainly would not confirm any Trump justice before the election, The next president should make the appointment, people should have a choice, etc etc etc.
Night of the election: Polls close. 15 minutes later Mitch calls an emergency session (only republicans required to attend, just enough for e quorum. Perhaps only republicans even told about the session) Within 1/2 hour, they confirm a far-right justice, maybe not even someone we’ve heard of. All of those R’s who said they would wait, claim they only meant wait until after the election occurs, not until the next president is sworn in. Of course. And subsequently that same night file an emergency brief with the new supreme court to halt all ballot counting and declare trump the winner. Any ballots not counted and tallied up into the official results by 8pm (local time zone) to be considered invalid, and not counted. (Trump has insisted the results must be finalized on election night)
4 Likes
18 Likes
