Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Champion Of Gender Equality, Dies At 87


Vambo

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, calfoxwc said:

"When there is a vacancy on the Supreme Court, the president is to nominate someone, the Senate is to consider that nomination, and either they disapprove of that nominee or that nominee is elevated to the Supreme Court," Obama said in February 2016, just days after Scalia's death.

"Historically, this has not been viewed as a question," he continued. "There's no unwritten law that says that it can only be done on off-years. That's not in the constitutional text."

 

And I'll quote Cal

Forget him - wait and get a pro-Constitutionalist

during the next rep president era. Let the people decide

what kind of Justice replaces Scalia.

 

 

What happened to "let the people decide" Cal?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, MLD Woody said:

What happened to "let the people decide" Cal?

It never went anywhere.

Obamao was a lame duck. with a REPUBLICAN SENATE. Justice Scalia died in 2016.

So, the people decided to not let obamao lame duck a nominee into the Supreme Court.

Now, we have a REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT with a REPUBLICAN SENATE.

Therefore, the people HAVE DECIDED.

and Pres Trump is NOT A LAME DUCK president.

lame duck

[ˈˌlām ˈdək]

NOUN
  1. NORTH AMERICAN
    an official (especially the president) in the final period of office, after the election of a successor.
    "as a lame duck, the president had nothing to lose by approving the deal" ·
    • an ineffectual or unsuccessful person or thing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From Washington Examiner:

Marquette University released the survey results on Saturday that showed 67% of adults believed the Senate should hold a hearing if a vacancy occurred during 2020’s race, with only 32% opposition — and similar strong numbers across Republicans, Democrats, and independents, who supported holding confirmation hearings at 68-31%, 63-37%, and 71-28% respectively. The poll was completed three days before the death of Ginsburg, the 87-year-old liberal icon who was nominated by President Bill Clinton and confirmed in 1993. Ginsburg earned praise from Democrats and Republicans upon news of her death.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MLD Woody said:

Your delusions and mental gymnastics are equal parts hilarious and disturbing

get counseling, woodpecker. You are disturbed you betcha.

Read and STFU.

https://www.theblaze.com/news/democrats-media-grossly-misrepresent-the-mcconnell-rule-so-what-exactly-is-it

Democrats, media grossly misrepresent the 'McConnell Rule.' Here's why it doesn't apply now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, MLD Woody said:

It's revisionist history to try and not seem incredibly hypocritical. 

Anyone that doesn't have their head up the ass of a political party can see that

Elections have consequences. That's why you people , the Democrats since you are now a Biden guy, forced through Obamacare without waiting for the next election to see if the House and Senate would flip.

Maybe you complained loudly about that if so I don't remember it.

WSS

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, MLD Woody said:

It's revisionist history to try and not seem incredibly hypocritical. 

Anyone that doesn't have their head up the ass of a political party can see that

"scary female people"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Westside Steve said:

Elections have consequences. That's why you people , the Democrats since you are now a Biden guy, forced through Obamacare without waiting for the next election to see if the House and Senate would flip.

Maybe you complained loudly about that if so I don't remember it.

WSS

 

Sigh

Sure, I've somehow become a democrat these last four years and I guess you've become an idiot. If Trump has one of those two effects on people I'll take mine. 

 

But you'll just continue living in your own fantasy land so what's the point? Too many posters here just choose to ignore reality. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, calfoxwc said:

"scary female people"

Imagine accurately calling out a republican presidential candidate as a con man during the primaries, and then, because you have no spine or value system, completely and irrationally slobbering over him for four years....

Imagine calling out that con then being it's biggest sucker

 

 

How sad

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MLD Woody said:

Sigh

Sure, I've somehow become a democrat these last four years and I guess you've become an idiot. If Trump has one of those two effects on people I'll take mine. 

 

But you'll just continue living in your own fantasy land so what's the point? Too many posters here just choose to ignore reality. 

Sorry Woodrow. You staked your claim; told us you're voting for Joe Biden.

But, to coin a phrase, that's typical Woody. Bitching when you were called a liberal even though you said you were a Bernie Sanders supporter (the most liberal candidate in decades.)

If the shoe fits just man up and wear it.

WSS

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MLD Woody said:

Imagine accurately calling out a republican presidential candidate as a con man during the primaries, and then, because you have no spine or value system, completely and irrationally slobbering over him for four years....

Imagine calling out that con then being it's biggest sucker

 

 

How sad

i need a girlfriend gifs | WiffleGif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MLD Woody said:

Sigh

Sure, I've somehow become a democrat these last four years and I guess you've become an idiot. If Trump has one of those two effects on people I'll take mine. 

 

But you'll just continue living in your own fantasy land so what's the point? Too many posters here just choose to ignore reality. 

In 2016, Ginsburg said Senate should hold SCOTUS confirmation hearing during election year

Ginsburg remarked in 2016 that 'nothing in the Constitution' precludes 11th hour nomination.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/flashback-in-2016-ginsburg-senate-election-year-vacancy

 

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, MLD Woody said:

Imagine accurately calling out a republican presidential candidate as a con man during the primaries, and then, because you have no spine or value system, completely and irrationally slobbering over him for four years....

Imagine calling out that con then being it's biggest sucker

 

 

How sad

How you liberals love to form a false premise and use it to sit in judgement.   Cal may have called him out, but didn't come to support him because he had no spine. The only irrationality here is your irrational hatred for Trump.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Westside Steve said:

Sorry Woodrow. You staked your claim; told us you're voting for Joe Biden.

But, to coin a phrase, that's typical Woody. Bitching when you were called a liberal even though you said you were a Bernie Sanders supporter (the most liberal candidate in decades.)

If the shoe fits just man up and wear it.

WSS

 

I'll have to reach out to the Dems and let them know my registration must have not gone through...

Maybe they have Hoorta's too?

 

Or maybe you can't paint people into neat little boxes just because half of this board never leaves their Trump box and it makes it easier for you

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, MLD Woody said:

 

I'll have to reach out to the Dems and let them know my registration must have not gone through...

Maybe they have Hoorta's too?

 

Or maybe you can't paint people into neat little boxes just because half of this board never leaves their Trump box and it makes it easier for you

Exactly, because it's true. You're the kind of guy that would jerk off to pictures of Brad Pitt and then get mad if somebody says you're queer.

If you were voting libertarian Green Party socialist or Whig you might be able to pretend that you had an independent streak

But...

WSS

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way I know everybody likes to feel that they're strong and independent thinkers. But when you cast your vote you're casting your vote to have that particular political party whichever one it is implement their policies and directions and serve their base. No matter how hard you pretend it's otherwise. You're embarrassed and now you're mad.

Spin it however you see fit but the fact remains.

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Westside Steve said:

Exactly, because it's true. You're the kind of guy that would jerk off to pictures of Brad Pitt and then get mad if somebody says you're queer.

If you were voting libertarian Green Party socialist or Whig you might be able to pretend that you had an independent streak

But...

WSS

 

10 hours ago, Westside Steve said:

By the way I know everybody likes to feel that they're strong and independent thinkers. But when you cast your vote you're casting your vote to have that particular political party whichever one it is implement their policies and directions and serve their base. No matter how hard you pretend it's otherwise. You're embarrassed and now you're mad.

Spin it however you see fit but the fact remains.

WSS

Oh boy you're doing the thing where you put thoughts and words into the other person's mouth. You're just incapable of getting through a back and forth without doing that, huh?

What constitutes a "streak" to you? I'll have voted 3rd party then Dem. Oh no. 

 

There are differing levels of "independent" thinkers.

 

The guys that called out Trump for what he is, then proceeded to defend him at every turn because he was their party's pick, aren't exactly up there on the "independent thinker" charts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, MLD Woody said:

 

Oh boy you're doing the thing where you put thoughts and words into the other person's mouth. You're just incapable of getting through a back and forth without doing that, huh?

 actually I'm incapable of pretending I accept your bullshit.

What constitutes a "streak" to you? I'll have voted 3rd party then Dem. Oh no. 

 I defended you when you were accused of being a Hillary lover.

 

There are differing levels of "independent" thinkers.

Uh Maybe. I would put you on the lowest rung of that ladder if there are rungs.

The guys that called out Trump for what he is, then proceeded to defend him at every turn because he was their party's pick, aren't exactly up there on the "independent thinker" charts. 

 thank you for agreeing with me.

 I support Trump because I support most of the stated directional policies. Many of the things I don't like about him I bitch about. Many things I defend him for are bulshit that those on the left have made up, and or things I don't care about. But even though I'm not 100% in lockstep doesn't mean I throw a fit if somebody calls me a Republican or a trump supporter. Vote for Gary Johnson again and I will apologize for calling you a Democrat. 

I prefer to vote for policy rather than personality. And in this race personality is kind of a wash.

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, to clarify for Hoorta and little woodpecker -

I did not like Trump - wasn't my kind of celebrity. Usually, I don't like celebrities - with a few exceptions, like a few country music stars. and a few actors with the courage to be conservatives. etc.

   But WHEN HE RAN FOR PRESIDENT - I still wasn't a fan. Until I started sincerely LISTENING to him, and I realized he was saying great things I have been wishing a president would finally stand up and say, for years. Then, I decided he was genuinely serious, and I was all in, as long as he kept those promises. He DID, and kept more promises than he even MADE. lol

   That is reality.

I just sincerely and strongly DOUBT that someone is a "republican" and "voted for Trump" when they are all in on the green new deal,

bigger government, socialsim, pro-illegal immigration, pro-liberal extremist, usually pro-abortion, pro=Paris Accord,

etc. etc. etc.

    I just don't buy it. I do know, that is the past, it was proven that a mode of manipulation of the left, was to call in to radio shows, and say you are a republican but diss the republican nominee running for president to be more effective at persuading.

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, DieHardBrownsFan said:

119670844_10159883715116336_5681566068703881383_n.png?_nc_cat=1&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=4ayxZdwXvWEAX9iqsul&_nc_ht=scontent-ort2-2.xx&oh=b566ba6dedddc376db3a52b9e498a079&oe=5F8DFF37

EXACTLY.

   btw, this "can't have a litmus test" is crap. You think obaMao didn't have a litmus test on his picks? hell yes he did.

but the left demands "no litmus" test on their candidates. But you let a conservative originalist be appointed.

all "litmus test" hell breaks loose.

hell with that crap.

https://www.theblaze.com/op-ed/ready-horowitz-no-more-stealth-nominees-use-the-conservative-litmus-test-on-scotus-candidates

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...