|
I do look forward to soon to come liberal version of Becket Fund for Religious Liberty. 5-4 liberal court gonna turn out some interesting assholes being dicks just to get before the court.
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 02:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 16:15 |
|
|
You know what's going to happen right. The senate relents and confirms a 60 year old moderate. Cruz wins and two left justices leave the court. the end.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 02:06
|
|
|
euphronius posted:You know what's going to happen right. The senate relents and confirms a 60 year old moderate. Cruz wins and two left justices leave the court. the end. Put down the bottle. That chat is for Uspol! Come on, Nino just croaked! A little optimism won't kill you! Do justice upon someone tomorrow, you'll feel better.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 04:07
|
|
|
They shouldn't need a great reason to overturn Shelby when the reasoning for the decision was as weak as it was ( the VRA is old) overwhelming reauthorized in 2006
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 11:37
|
|
|
quote:edit: oh wait I read what you wrote wrong, and now I don't know what you're talking about but that's hilarious and Scalia continues to surprise with his treasure chest of crazy tl;dr : he got an important point of fact incredibly wrong when referring to a decision that he himself wrote. quote:"This is not the first time EPA has sought to convert the Clean Air Act into a mandate for cost-effective regulation. Whitman v. American Trucking Assns., Inc., 531 U. S. 457 (2001), confronted EPA's contention that it could consider costs in setting [National Ambient Air Quality Standards]," Scalia wrote in his dissent, which was joined by Justice Clarence Thomas.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 11:40
|
|
|
It (sorta) begins, O'Connor calls for the GOP to do its drat job and that Obama should name a replacement: http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/17/politics/sandra-day-oconnor-obama-scalia-replacement/index.html My favorite part is at the end though. A Soggy Diaper Full Of Wet Farts posted:Rival GOP candidate Ted Cruz said nominating someone now wouldn't "be fair to the nominee." With any luck someone will attack him on this since Kennedy was absolutely a lame duck appointment as is anyone appointed in a President's 2nd term really. Though nobody in the GOP will do so but it'd be great to see Kaisch or someone who knows they can't win just go full nuclear on Cruz in a debate.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 18:56
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:It (sorta) begins, O'Connor calls for the GOP to do its drat job and that Obama should name a replacement: I'd like to see the Senate GOP start firebombing Cruz but they'd have to come around to the concept of a work ethic first.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
Any nominee would just be unfairly politicized -guy who intends to unfairly politicize any nominee
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 19:46
|
|
|
Kazak_Hstan posted:Any nominee would just be unfairly politicized Seems like he knows what he’s talking about.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 19:48
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:I'd like to see the Senate GOP start firebombing Cruz but they'd have to come around to the concept of a work ethic first. I was delighted when Trump birthered Cruz and the entire GOP senate minus Mike Lee, Only Friend, went "hmm, that is a reasonable point and questions should be asked about his eligibility".
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:It (sorta) begins, O'Connor calls for the GOP to do its drat job and that Obama should name a replacement: A president's second term isn't entirely lame duck, though. The lame duck period is only while they're still in office (from November-January) after their successor has been elected. Obama won't be a lame duck president until November.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
I hate that people forgot what lame duck meant. Obama isn't a lame duck until the second Wednesday of this coming November. I've seen people calling him a lame deck since the 2010 elections.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 20:08
|
|
|
No you see Obama has been a lame duck since Mitch McConnell said his goal was to make Obama a one term president
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 20:09
|
|
|
Lame duck can reasonably apply to a president in his last two years in office facing opposition party control of Congress.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
whydirt posted:Lame duck can reasonably apply to a president in his last two years in office facing opposition party control of Congress. No it can't, because that's not what it loving means.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
Rygar201 posted:No it can't, because that's not what it loving means. Yeah that was just what they called it during the back half of W's last term
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
H.P. Hovercraft posted:Yeah that was just what they called it during the back half of W's last term Anyone who called everything after 2006 W's lame duck term is just as wrong as anyone saying that Obama is currently a lame duck. Though they are less wrong in that they didn't pretend W couldn't name Supreme Court Justices because that's no fair and their mommy said so.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 22:21
|
|
|
It's almost like words can change meaning over time based on usage and context!
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 22:59
|
|
|
whydirt posted:It's almost like words can change meaning over time based on usage and context! Yeah but this hasn't, it's a political effort. It's mis using a defined term to try and frame events. I'm all about evolving language, but this ain't it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 23:39
|
|
|
Rygar201 posted:Yeah but this hasn't, it's a political effort. It's mis using a defined term to try and frame events. Typical point of view from the Democrat party
|
|
#
?
Feb 18, 2016 23:44
|
|
|
Rygar201 posted:I hate that people forgot what lame duck meant. Obama isn't a lame duck until the second Wednesday of this coming November. I've seen people calling him a lame deck since the 2010 elections. Lame Duck can also mean that the person cannot serve another term, thus any American president who wins a 2nd term (after ratification of the 22nd of course) can be called a lame duck. Nevertheless it is absurd to suggest that the president loses any constitutional power because of any lame duck status no matter how one defines it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:09
|
|
|
Words no longer have meaning
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:22
|
|
|
DOOP posted:Words no longer have meaning  More or less. It is a nice distraction from discussing whether or not obstructing the President by outright refusing to even consider an appointment is a good or bad thing though, so I expect a lot of Republicans to try and divert the discussion into "well but what really IS a lame duck and those other times don't count because X was different."
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:46
|
|
|
Does this artist read the forums or something because I'm pretty sure they're using fishmech as the model for that kid.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 00:52
|
|
|
FAUXTON posted:Does this artist read the forums or something because I'm pretty sure they're using fishmech as the model for that kid. Everyone knows he's the smartest kid in america though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
I agree with the poster saying lame duck is being misused on purpose.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 01:09
|
|
|
So what does lame duck mean in politics? I thought it was just general slang.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 01:21
|
|
|
Macaroni Surprise posted:So what does lame duck mean in politics? I thought it was just general slang. So Obama will be one in mid-November. EDIT: Wikipedia says the term can be used before the replacement is elected but it's "especially" used for politicians in that situation. TheOneAndOnlyT fucked around with this message at 01:29 on Feb 19, 2016 |
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 01:24
|
|
|
Macaroni Surprise posted:So what does lame duck mean in politics? I thought it was just general slang. A politician who has lost political power because they will no longer be in office, either because of term limits or a failed reelection bid. In US parlance it's generally the period between the election and inauguration, though an uncommon but not rare usage would peg it when the president has completely lost influence with Congress and they're content to wait him out
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 01:29
|
|
|
Macaroni Surprise posted:So what does lame duck mean in politics? I thought it was just general slang. Historically the inauguration was March 4 which lead to very long lame duck period and that was subsequently changed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 01:44
|
|
|
I mean I'm not as smart as the Senate democrats but I would be pointing out loudly how the GOPs stance is radically anti democratic by attempting to nullify the results of the 2012 election. Elections have consequences.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 01:52
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Elections have consequences. But tantrums do not.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 01:56
|
|
|
NewMars posted:Everyone knows he's the smartest kid in america though. Realtalk question, why is fischmech's catchphrase/description "The smartest kid in America"?
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 02:07
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Yeah, it's just like when Alito and Thomas get all expense paid trips to Koch sucking conferences!! i'd like to buy the world --a koch
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 02:09
|
|
|
euphronius posted:I mean I'm not as smart as the Senate democrats but I would be pointing out loudly how the GOPs stance is radically anti democratic by attempting to nullify the results of the 2012 election. I mean, they are. They'll be doing it much more once there's a nominee though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 02:13
|
|
|
I've just been reading the nyt and haven't seen that quote. But that's probably on me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 02:14
|
|
|
euphronius posted:I mean I'm not as smart as the Senate democrats but I would be pointing out loudly how the GOPs stance is radically anti democratic by attempting to nullify the results of the 2012 election. The 2014 midterms brought us a GOP majority in the senate. Will of the people!! (Not a conservative, you just have a bad argument).
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
euphronius posted:I've just been reading the nyt and haven't seen that quote. quote:In response, Warren had this to say: “Sen. McConnell is right that the American people should have a voice in the selection of the next Supreme Court justice. In fact, they did — when President Obama won the 2012 election by five million votes.” That's the one I know I saw, I think others are out there as well.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 02:22
|
|
|
The Mandingo posted:The 2014 midterms brought us a GOP majority in the senate. Will of the people!! (Not a conservative, you just have a bad argument). That's fine if they don't confirm someone. They're not even going to have hearings at this point.
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 02:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 9, 2024 16:15 |
|
|
SgtScruffy posted:Realtalk question, why is fischmech's catchphrase/description "The smartest kid in America"? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 19, 2016 02:25
|
|