Ginsberg Passes Away

[Paranoid Android]

Short list of RBG replacements has Amy Coney Barrett, a United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, as the possible top contender.

You know she has to be radical if the GOP nominates a women. Yeah it's a jab but I remember her being the top over when Kavanaugh was nominated.

I was gong to comment about her to you but didn't. My comment was that besides a strict Constitution that only of course uses that when its right wing, I would think Trump wants a William Barr on the seat.

[Captain N]

Was just looking at some stuff about Amy Coney Barrett. Apparently she used to belong to a religious group that involved actual handmaidens.

In September 2017, The New York Times reported that Barrett was a member of a small, tightly knit Charismatic Christian group called People of Praise;[72] its members swear a lifelong oath to one another and are assigned a personal advisor (a "head" or "handmaiden") who gives direction on important personal decisions. Barrett did not disclose religious affiliations in her confirmation process for the federal bench.

Why is the world being controlled by loons once only considered part of dystopian fiction?

[Sunseeker]

You might have missed when, in Obama's first two years, they passed the ACA.

Plus - the Democrats have learned from the 2010+ years, when they played nice, and had their balls shoved down their throats. I'm optimistic that if we hold the Senate and Biden wins, we'll pass sweeping legislation, and McConnell (as the Senate Minority Leader) will just get a memo.

(believe it or not, one of the biggest issues is going to be our esteemed colleague from West Virginia, who is a Republican in all but name)

A HEAVILY watered down ACA I might remind you. An ACA that was so heavily watered down because the Democrats refused to ram through what they wanted and insisted on getting Republican buy-in. An insistence I might remind you that almost led to the bills failure as they ran it right up to the next Congressional election cycle, an election cycle they then lost. An election they lost in part because people saw them as weak and unable to leverage their majority, in favor of compromising their positions with people who clearly weren't interested in working with them. A loss I might add that has emboldened Republicans for near on a decade to cockblock everything.

The Democrats failed to crush their enemies when they had the chance because they refuse to see them as just that, enemies. Enemies who will destroy everything you work for at the drop of a hat for no other reason than you wore a blue shirt.

And this isn't new. The Democrats have always been the compromise party. The difference is that Republicans used to be more about economic issues and America: World Police. Instead of having no policy platform and just trying to be the world's biggest douchebags.

So when all the "moderates" in this forum were crying foul at the actual leftwingers over "purity tests" it makes me FUCKING LAUGH to hear you all talk about how uncompromising the Democrats should be now. When y'll almost couldn't utter two words without "we need to cater to the middle".

Yes, I AM a bit salty. I get it, win first, THEN be an uncompromising dickwad. But that's not in the nature of the Democrats you keep electing. And as long as y'all keep electing milk-toast center-right corporate neo-liberals, it never will be.

[Paranoid Android]

Was just looking at some stuff about Amy Coney Barrett. Apparently she used to belong to a religious group that involved actual handmaidens.

In September 2017, The New York Times reported that Barrett was a member of a small, tightly knit Charismatic Christian group called People of Praise;[72] its members swear a lifelong oath to one another and are assigned a personal advisor (a "head" or "handmaiden") who gives direction on important personal decisions. Barrett did not disclose religious affiliations in her confirmation process for the federal bench.

Why is the world being controlled by loons once only considered part of dystopian fiction?

She is a Federalist list pick. Says it all.

[cubby]

You know she has to be radical if the GOP nominates a women. Yeah it's a jab but I remember her being the top over when Kavanaugh was nominated.

I was gong to comment about her to you but didn't. My comment was that besides a strict Constitution that only of course uses that when its right wing, I would think Trump wants a William Barr on the seat.

Agreed. But there is radical nuts like Tom Cotton and then there is radical nuts like, perhaps, Roberts. I don't want any Trump nominee to replace RBG, but if it has to be someone, Barrett might not be the worst choice.

- - - Updated - - -

Was just looking at some stuff about Amy Coney Barrett. Apparently she used to belong to a religious group that involved actual handmaidens.

In September 2017, The New York Times reported that Barrett was a member of a small, tightly knit Charismatic Christian group called People of Praise;[72] its members swear a lifelong oath to one another and are assigned a personal advisor (a "head" or "handmaiden") who gives direction on important personal decisions. Barrett did not disclose religious affiliations in her confirmation process for the federal bench.

Why is the world being controlled by loons once only considered part of dystopian fiction?

I'm not justifying anything about whatever that organization is, but from what's linked in your article, it's not The Handmaid's Tale handmaidens. It sounds like they used the word (poorly) like Master and Mistress - both mean the same thing, but one has denigrated to mean primarily other things. Let's just consider that this might be the case with that group.

[Captain N]

I'm not justifying anything about whatever that organization is, but from what's linked in your article, it's not The Handmaid's Tale handmaidens. It sounds like they used the word (poorly) like Master and Mistress - both mean the same thing, but one has denigrated to mean primarily other things. Let's just consider that this might be the case with that group.

While I'm sure that is the case, this woman is also a "Life begins at conception" person as well as a "Marriage is one man and one woman" and she's a fan of allowing felons to have their guns back. This is where she checks all the boxes with the evangelicals and the gun nuts.

[cubby]

While I'm sure that is the case, this woman is also a "Life begins at conception" person as well as a "Marriage is one man and one woman" and she's a fan of allowing felons to have their guns back. This is where she checks all the boxes with the evangelicals and the gun nuts.

You won't see me arguing in favor of her. We are on the same page for this discussion.

I'm just saying that of all the right-wing nut jobs, she might be a less-irrational version. For instance, the legal analysis and reasoning that allows felons to have their guns back, would also conclude with giving back felon's voting rights.

But yeah, still a conservative shit-show horror.

[Redwyrm]

Surprised "Judge" Jeanine Pirro isn't on the list (that I have seen). Might as well twist the knife, so to speak.

[GreenJesus]

How delusional are you? The democrats haven't moved anywhere, but Republicans have gone full Nazi though.

- - - Updated - - -



You think Kamala Harris is the most radical left senator? What fucking world do you live in?

- - - Updated - - -



And he failed with those economic issues when he drove the economy into the WORST recession since the Great Depression. Recording the worst GDP since they started growing it. His support for Blacks and Latinos hasn't moved.

lol "Democrats haven't moved anywhere". Imagine being this clueless. And america's economy hasn't been hit from corona as bad as other places like Europe if you look at GDP.

[nonameelf]

lol "Democrats haven't moved anywhere". Imagine being this clueless. And america's economy hasn't been hit from corona as bad as other places like Europe if you look at GDP.

You're right. Democrats have moved increasingly toward the right since the FDR days.

[Mihalik]

lol "Democrats haven't moved anywhere". Imagine being this clueless. And america's economy hasn't been hit from corona as bad as other places like Europe if you look at GDP.

Moving slightly left of Ronald Reagan isn't equivalent of actually going full Fascist.

The GOP is a fascist party, ideologically, politically and practically.

And if you support them.... Well... You are a fascist too.

You aren't dumb enough to claim ignorance. You just like the fascist shit.

- - - Updated - - -

But yeah, still a conservative shit-show horror.

Evangelicals watch the Handmaid's Tale not as a horror story about theocracy, extremism and oppression. They see a horror story about a bunch of liberals, gays and women trying to destroy a perfect America.

[postman1782]

lol "Democrats haven't moved anywhere". Imagine being this clueless. And america's economy hasn't been hit from corona as bad as other places like Europe if you look at GDP.

Yeah, I know you are pretty clueless.

[Xeones]

lol "Democrats haven't moved anywhere". Imagine being this clueless. And america's economy hasn't been hit from corona as bad as other places like Europe if you look at GDP.

The people trying to argue the democrats have moved to any substantial degree are the people trying to argue the right has stayed the same while the democrats became extreme when it's the opposite. There has not been a significant move within the democratic party despite giving lip service to the young people who don't actually show up to vote.

[Masark]

I'm not justifying anything about whatever that organization is, but from what's linked in your article, it's not The Handmaid's Tale handmaidens.

Yeah, they're not Handmaidens. They're Aunts.

[Themius]

A HEAVILY watered down ACA I might remind you. An ACA that was so heavily watered down because the Democrats refused to ram through what they wanted and insisted on getting Republican buy-in. An insistence I might remind you that almost led to the bills failure as they ran it right up to the next Congressional election cycle, an election cycle they then lost. An election they lost in part because people saw them as weak and unable to leverage their majority, in favor of compromising their positions with people who clearly weren't interested in working with them. A loss I might add that has emboldened Republicans for near on a decade to cockblock everything.

The Democrats failed to crush their enemies when they had the chance because they refuse to see them as just that, enemies. Enemies who will destroy everything you work for at the drop of a hat for no other reason than you wore a blue shirt.

And this isn't new. The Democrats have always been the compromise party. The difference is that Republicans used to be more about economic issues and America: World Police. Instead of having no policy platform and just trying to be the world's biggest douchebags.

So when all the "moderates" in this forum were crying foul at the actual leftwingers over "purity tests" it makes me FUCKING LAUGH to hear you all talk about how uncompromising the Democrats should be now. When y'll almost couldn't utter two words without "we need to cater to the middle".

Yes, I AM a bit salty. I get it, win first, THEN be an uncompromising dickwad. But that's not in the nature of the Democrats you keep electing. And as long as y'all keep electing milk-toast center-right corporate neo-liberals, it never will be.

Biden was just talking about how he believes he can work together with republicans..... like really?

[Sunseeker]

Biden was just talking about how he believes he can work together with republicans..... like really?

Of course he did. That's what the Democrats wanted, if threads on this board are any indication. Cater to the middle. Work on the soft Republicans, and fuck the left.

[fwc577]

If whatever Trump's SCOTUS pick goes through, I expect that if the Dems can wrestle back the Presidency and Senate, they do nothing short of going nuclear and killing the fillibuster. Adding Puerto Rico and DC as states (+4 Dem Senators). And expanding / stacking the Supreme Court to add +4 justices.

All of this needs to begin in the first week of Biden's presidency.

I will give him a week to begin this, because he also needs to replace Barr and begin a lot of legal prosecution of the criminals running this fucking government right now.

If none of this happens, well then, America is lost and I'm going to be looking into dual citizenship and moving to Canada as soon as the border re-opens because the world is trying to quarantine are plagued-asses.

[Draco-Onis]

Because it's not a fantasy. Roberts kept the ACA alive. Roberts ruled with other conservatives to release tax records. Roberts ruled with other conservatives to establish sexual orientation was a protected right.

I am not sure why people don't understand that Roberts is not a straight "conservative" - he's objectively proven that. Why do you refuse to see it?

He ruled against voting rights, for redistricting, and gave a technical win for the dreamers he is a straight conservative he throws liberals a bone to keep whatever prestige he thinks the court has. Again Roberts is just keeping the really crazy stuff away but he's voted with the conservative majority 99% of the time and leaves the door open for revision on the other stuff.

His game is clear as day I don't get how people are still buying this narrative.

[Collegeguy]

This is kind of Ginsburg's own fault. She could have retired when Obama had control of the senate and she was in her 80s with a worthwhile candidate.

[cubby]

Evangelicals watch the Handmaid's Tale not as a horror story about theocracy, extremism and oppression. They see a horror story about a bunch of liberals, gays and women trying to destroy a perfect America.

Praised Be.

- - - Updated - - -

Biden was just talking about how he believes he can work together with republicans..... like really?

I am hoping he's saying that as a tactic to bring over any undecideds, rather than actually meaning to do so.

- - - Updated - - -

He ruled against voting rights, for redistricting, and gave a technical win for the dreamers he is a straight conservative he throws liberals a bone to keep whatever prestige he thinks the court has. Again Roberts is just keeping the really crazy stuff away but he's voted with the conservative majority 99% of the time and leaves the door open for revision on the other stuff.

His game is clear as day I don't get how people are still buying this narrative.

There isn't a narrative. It's simply watching how he rules. Most times it's conservative, as you pointed out above (and even in your summary he did give dreamers a win, keep that in mind), but sometimes he goes the other way. That's my only point.