Ginsburg dead

[rmgill]

3 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

 

Yes, of course law should be made by parliaments or their analogues around the world. Equally there needs to be a balancing act where Judges who enact them are  impartial to popular politics.

Some judges are elected, above a certain level they're appointed. It depends on level and local, vs state vs federal. 

 

[R011]

Mind you, the idea that non-politically appointed judges are  politically neutral is a bit naïve.  Here, at least, they are generally consensus appointments recommended by the legal establishment which is decidedly progressive and activist.

[Jeff]

6 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

 

Yes, of course law should be made by parliaments or their analogues around the world. Equally there needs to be a balancing act where Judges who enact them are  impartial to popular politics. I have to question whether the US system is doing that, because every time a new judge is nominated, it turns into a bloody hockey match. We dont vote for new generals, we dont vote (usually) for senior police officers, I dont really see why the Judiciary should be any different. Or if we must have them subject to political authority, put them up for the vote as individuals, not as the personal selection of political parties to whom they might, if they lack the spine you talk of, feel beholden.

Im not suggesting the British system is perfect, far from it, that was why we developed (and rejected) the system the Americans picked up. OTOH, as you saw as recently as Bojo's attempt to prorogate parliament, it is demonstrably independent. It did the right thing. In fact we know it did, because the very next thing Johnson did was darkly talk about 'reforming it', which to my mind is an illustration of precisely why we need to keep the two systems as seperate as possible.

 

 

 

 

It's become a "bloody hockey match" because the Court has grabbed (with the acquiescence of the other two branches) far more power than they were intended to have by legislating from the bench. If you look at the votes on Justices for the last 30-40 years, you'll notice one thing. Republicans may hate the politics of the Dem nominees but they vote for them in far higher numbers than the Dems vote for Republican nominees. Those are the reasons the nominations have become bloody fights and it's all at the feet of the Left. The Right has never "Borked" one of theirs or led a "high-tech lynching" of one of theirs or accused one of theirs of running a rape gang in high school and college. Watch what they do to Barrett over the next month and find a corresponding example from the Right. You can't.

[Stargrunt6]

Remember, boys and girls, any group who isn't liberal is far-right:

http://feeds.christianitytoday.com/~r/christianitytoday/ctmag/~3/QxTaqXGpbcE/who-are-people-of-praise.html

[DKTanker]

1 hour ago, Jeff said:

Watch what they do to Barrett over the next month and find a corresponding example from the Right. You can't.

Last night Tucker Carlson showed part of an interview ACB gave.  During it she talked about one of their adoptions following the 2010 earthquake in Haiti.  She was pregnant with their fifth child when her husband, Jessie, called and said their was a baby available for adoption.  ACB said she had to think about it and took a stroll through a park on a bitter cold South Bend afternoon.  She sat on a bench to think and finally said to herself, "Life is hard, but it's short, and what's more important than raising children?"

This is the woman the Left is hell bent on destroying.

[Jeff]

9 minutes ago, DKTanker said:

Last night Tucker Carlson showed part of an interview ACB gave.  During it she talked about one of their adoptions following the 2010 earthquake in Haiti.  She was pregnant with their fifth child when her husband, Jessie, called and said their was a baby available for adoption.  ACB said she had to think about it and took a stroll through a park on a bitter cold South Bend afternoon.  She sat on a bench to think and finally said to herself, "Life is hard, but it's short, and what's more important than raising children?"

This is the woman the Left is hell bent on destroying.

She's a gender traitor, a colonialist child adopter and a religious nut.

[Ssnake]

 

Quote

We dont vote for new generals, we dont vote (usually) for senior police officers, I dont really see why the Judiciary should be any different.

You can sack a General, you can retire any public servant including senior police officers. Supreme Court judges are exempt from that rule, to guarantee their independence (once nominated and confirmed). It's not that hard to see and to understand. This is why ruling from the bench is, effectively, an immoral abuse of power. Any other branch of government can either be fired, or must compete for reelection. Obviosuly, you don't want to tempt judges bending their rulings for popularity, so they are exempt from that competition. But the unspoken part of this bargain is that they apply a maximum of restriction to activism.

[Stargrunt6]

If anything goves her "flip" potential, at least in some cases, it actually would be her Catholicism.  With no offense or criticism, I have found many devout Catholics to be fiscally liberal, and are for sure no friend to the death penalty. 

And they are very sensitive to issues of racial bias, many Catholic clergy and lay people were active in the Civil Rights movement.  

[Tim Sielbeck]

3 hours ago, Ssnake said:

 

You can sack a General, you can retire any public servant including senior police officers. Supreme Court judges are exempt from that rule, to guarantee their independence (once nominated and confirmed). It's not that hard to see and to understand. This is why ruling from the bench is, effectively, an immoral abuse of power. Any other branch of government can either be fired, or must compete for reelection. Obviosuly, you don't want to tempt judges bending their rulings for popularity, so they are exempt from that competition. But the unspoken part of this bargain is that they apply a maximum of restriction to activism.

SCOTUS justices can be impeached.

[R011]

So far, judges have only been impeached for actual misconduct.  I wonder if we'll see judging contrary to progressive ideology become impeachable.

[DKTanker]

1 hour ago, Tim Sielbeck said:

SCOTUS justices can be impeached.

But nobody is going to impeach them because of a ruling, that's precisely why they have lifetime appointments.

[R011]

10 minutes ago, DKTanker said:

But nobody is going to impeach them because of a ruling, that's precisely why they have lifetime appointments.

No one has - yet.

[nitflegal]

20 hours ago, Jeff said:

I feel terrible for all the Michigan Pfizer people who uprooted and moved to New London where their dollar didn't go nearly as far in home buying, only to have Pfizer move most everything to MA a few years later.

There is a reason that we all had Pfired and Pfucked T-shirts. . .

[Steven P Allen]

14 hours ago, DKTanker said:

 She sat on a bench to think and finally said to herself, "Life is hard, but it's short, and what's more important than raising children?"

 

This statement is enough to condemn in their eyes.  To them, literally everything is more important:  career, power, money, nightlife, convenience, bed-hopping, . . . .

[rmgill]

18 hours ago, Jeff said:

She's a gender traitor, a colonialist child adopter and a religious nut.

The comparisons to her being something out of the handmaids tale while being a sitting federal court judge is historically laughable. Do they even pay attention to the things they compare people to? 

[Stargrunt6]

18 minutes ago, rmgill said:

The comparisons to her being something out of the handmaids tale while being a sitting federal court judge is historically laughable. Do they even pay attention to the things they compare people to? 

She was part of a patriarchal sexist organization that accepts female lawyers as members.

[Rick]

21 hours ago, DKTanker said:

Last night Tucker Carlson showed part of an interview ACB gave.  During it she talked about one of their adoptions following the 2010 earthquake in Haiti.  She was pregnant with their fifth child when her husband, Jessie, called and said their was a baby available for adoption.  ACB said she had to think about it and took a stroll through a park on a bitter cold South Bend afternoon.  She sat on a bench to think and finally said to herself, "Life is hard, but it's short, and what's more important than raising children?"

This is the woman the Left is hell bent on destroying.

Wasn't there a few white Hollywood or singer types who adopted black kids? From what I remember they were glorified for doing this.

I suspect the evil left will flow with more rabid saliva when the judge states she and her husband(the traditional nuclear family) -- an unpardonable sin to them -- states they will raise the boys to be men and the girls to be women. 

[DKTanker]

10 hours ago, nitflegal said:

There is a reason that we all had Pfired and Pfucked T-shirts. . .

There are nine judges, no one of them makes a ruling on their own.  If for some reason you decide to impeach one you have to impeach the other four, or more, that ruled with them.  If they were in the minority and wrote a dissent, who cares?

[Jeff]

31 minutes ago, Rick said:

Wasn't there a few white Hollywood or singer types who adopted black kids? From what I remember they were glorified for doing this.

I suspect the evil left will flow with more rabid saliva when the judge states she and her husband(the traditional nuclear family) -- an unpardonable sin to them -- states they will raise the boys to be men and the girls to be women. 

Celebrity women accessorize with third world children when most normal people get a dog or a cat. They can't even commit to a monogamous relationship but they can drag the kid out from time to time to look virtuous before dumping them back on the underpaid au pair.

[R011]

1 hour ago, DKTanker said:

There are nine judges, no one of them makes a ruling on their own.  If for some reason you decide to impeach one you have to impeach the other four, or more, that ruled with them.  If they were in the minority and wrote a dissent, who cares?

Impeaching five or six counter-revolutionaries for crimes against the people is little harder than impeaching one and if you allow a single heretic to exist unmolested, she may infect others.

[Stargrunt6]

25 minutes ago, R011 said:

Impeaching five or six counter-revolutionaries for crimes against the people is little harder than impeaching one and if you allow a single heretic to exist unmolested, she may infect others.

You could always arrest them for tax evasion...

[DB]

A bit late to the funeral party, but it seems that people have forgotten this.

https://time.com/5461466/cindy-mccain-trump-john-mccain-funeral/

So, what was the point that was being made about Trump not paying his respects to McCain? I don't see that he was given a suitable opportunity.

 

Edited October 2, 2020 by DB

[Murph]

On 9/30/2020 at 5:13 PM, Jeff said:

Celebrity women accessorize with third world children when most normal people get a dog or a cat. They can't even commit to a monogamous relationship but they can drag the kid out from time to time to look virtuous before dumping them back on the underpaid au pair.

It is all about matching pairs with them.

[Stargrunt6]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poaZU9MZuQI&feature=youtu.be

 

[Jeff]

Quote

 

Democrats Hiss In Terror As ACB Pulls Out Crucifix