Splatting since '85
So...the Democrats have been talking for a while now about expanding the number of Justices on the Supreme Court so they can choose and pack it with liberal judges that will rule as the Democrats want.
Well...if the Supreme Court needs more Judges...perhaps the Republicans need to go ahead and expand the number of judges and fill it now.
Nobody's Perfect
That is one tactic the Democrats could use.
But remember, there is no set number of Chief Justices for the Supreme court. Throughout the history, there have been as few as 6 and as many as 11. 9 is just a number that was settled on but not set in stone.
Furthermore, this would not be an issue if back in 2016, that the senate Republicans hadn't closed ranks only to deny a valid candidate 9 months before the election, while now is 6 weeks before another election. With all the various seantors stating precident for allowing the people to choose the President & Justice, it would only be fair for the same to be applied now. But since Trump & the Republicans feel that they must grasp at every straw of power, do not expect things to go smoothly just because one side is challenging the impropriety of words/promises said, and the apparent fast track of the nomination.
Splatting since '85
Actually...every time the Senate and President were of the same party and a Supreme Court Judge needed to be replaced within the last year of that President they have gotten replaced...this is true for BOTH parties. This is nothing new nor is it just a Republican thing. And...it is not unusual when the Senate and President are of different parties for the Supreme Court Judge to be delayed or denied...again true of both parties. You act as if only the Republicans have done this. Wrong.Originally Posted by Nobody
This Democrat packing of the Supreme Court isn't a recent threat...I have been hearing rumblings of this for a few years.
I have mentioned it before...you need to get your head out of the sand and look around at the world and not just listen to what the media feeds you.
Last edited by wetwrks; 09-22-2020 at 09:45 PM.
Hebrews 13:8
The SCOTUS doesnt need more judges.
They just need judges that will judge by the rule of law and stop legislating from the bench IE Roe vs Wade.
Splatting since '85
Rule of law...they need to quit holding to revisionist history...and hold to the constitution and our constitutional rights.
Nobody's Perfect
Laws are made to be changed, to reflect the times we live in. It is not revisionist, to look back, change what is injust and to make sure that the problems or injust laws are removed. The original draft held no rights to slaves. Is that something that shouldn't have been abolished? Making sure that women can not have laws made to exclude them from owning property, or even to be considered property is wrong?
No, it is revisionist history because you see it from a bias. Laws are a living breathing concept that all citizens should follow.
You(and I) do not make that decision. We can petition our representatives, but the decision is up to the senators...
You do realize, that that law extends to your rights as well? Not the exact ruling, but as an extension of your and every citizens rights to personal protections of how to live their life with the choices they make. You wish to live your life the way you or how you wish to. That is fine, that is your right. Likewise it is a right to allow a women to live her life, and if that is to get a medical procedure, then so be it. That is her life & your views, your opinions and your wants should not interfer nor matter. Likewise that women criticising your choices on how to live.
The rights cut both ways. You can not hoist your views & not be held accountable yourself. Morality is another matter but does not play into the law.
Old School Airsmith
This is a moving goal post. R's said in 2016 many times that they're setting new precedent. They never once said they were denying the vote because Obama was a Dem. Graham literally says "use my words against me."
https://twitter.com/cspan/status/1307172635298725888
Registered User
Police should be licensed and when they F up they can have their licenses revoked. Too many departments hire their family members when theyre young and have no life experience to help with the situations they are placed in and react dangerously to these stressful environments.
lukescustoms.com
LOL
Nobody's Perfect
And the Taliban endorses Trump for president. Guess when you lie with dogs, you are going to get fleas...LOL
www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-campaign-taliban-2020-election-afghanistan
Specialized AGD Tech
You missed the point Doug. "Not a single person showed up". That is the point. You are a loser if you vote for these people.
Shi Tamajutsu Ka
In all the campaign rallies by Trump and Biden so far, the attendance numbers are something like:
Trump = 240,000+
Biden = 84
CT Co-ordinator, Paintball Marshals
Nobody's Perfect
That is because it wasn't a rally. Only a morom would continue to hold a rally, when the country is still in the middle of a pandemic. Trump needs to hear the sycophantic chants for his ego because of his narcissism.
Splatting since '85
And China endorses Biden. Trump has no issues hunting the Taliban down to the last person. Biden will roll over and sell us all out to China.
Shi Tamajutsu Ka
Even Putin has said that communism has much in common with the democratic party.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F9zzF0DxtL8
Nobody's Perfect
With so much chaos going on in this year alone, any media attention that overseas soldiers have gotten, is close to nil. Now, this is blatantly false. Trump has gone on to say, that the overseas soldiers will be home by the end of the year, but he failed to check with his Joint Chiefs of staff, as all accounts have reported that they were blindsided by this news. It would also be a "feather in his cap" to make the claim that the taliban were all defeated, thus allowing the troops toncome home. But his act of doing so would greatly destabilize those areas, much like Syria with ISIS, and the political ramifications of countries like Turkey playing big brother, like what has happened in Armenia & Azerbaijan.
China, i think, wants someone more stable in mentality. But anything to do with China is a harry situation, that i can not really begin to unfold.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
