Does the GOP now "own" the Supreme Court?

[Kurmugeon]

Not a personal insult, I don't know you, just a snarky comment about changing parties. You brought up her qualifications, I brought up a disqualification. I know, you don't have to be a judge to become a justice, Barrett was selected for political reasons, not judicial acumen.

The selection of a Justice has nothing to do with me personally. Because I believe in the concept of a Republic, I am perfectly fine with that.

I didn't leave the Democratic Party, it left me. When I was young, and a near two decade member of the Democratic Party, it more or less supported common working class people, and it did not hold White-Males in hatred and utter contempt.

I am not a registered Republican even today. Though I usually vote for the lesser of evils, in the GOP candidate. As do MOST working Class White-Males. And every year, more and more Working White-Women.

Every Working Class White-Woman likely has a Father, Uncle, Brother, Husband, and Son or Nephew, who has be grossly discriminated against by the modern Democratic Party. Based solely on a superficial appearance similarity to someone who did something bad 150+ years ago. In other words, because of their Racial-Birth-Guilt.

I don't care if she has only 3 years as a judge, as I pointed out when I told how I evaluated her. I trust her because I closely observed her behavior during her testimony. I also trust her based on who her enemies have been demonstrated to be.

When I was at war, a whole bunch of the enemy absolutely hated me and they made great plans to see me dead. Most of my peers found that reason enough to trust and support me. One of them didn't. He threw a grenade into a huddle of our soldiers.

People are often defined in public personae, by who their enemies are. Almost no one is actually their public personae, but some people are more honest, and other much more dishonest, about who they really are, .... in the case of our new Justice, time will tell.

-

 

[SenorXm/Sirius]

If anyone here thing Clarence Thomas is impartial and votes for the 'interpretation of the Constitution' they've had their heads in the sand over the last decade or so..

 

[Kurmugeon]

You all believe Democrats eat children. That's some crazy ass shit, homey.

Argument over. You lose.

okay. Have a nice day.

-

 

[Craig234]

Yes, the plutocrats, and their party, the Republicans, now own the Supreme Court. That could last from months - if Democrats take strong action - to decades and indefinitely.

 

[Athanasius68]

100% of these "elections have consequences" arguments will vanish by magic if Democrats win next week.

One. Hundred. Percent.

Obama originated the quote. They vanished by magic in 2016.

One. Hundred. Percent.

 

[noonereal]

Does the GOP now "own" the Supreme Court?

GOP?????? No.

This court is a nut job right court.

 

[lemmiwinx]

Biden voters are actually Trump haters in disguise in case you didn't notice. People have enough venom in them to kill a regiment of able bodied soldiers.

 

[Kurmugeon]

Biden voters are actually Trump haters in disguise in case you didn't notice. People have enough venom in them to kill a regiment of able bodied soldiers.

Show me any Biden voter?

Come on Man!

Those are Harris voters...

-

 

[Captain Adverse]

The law is the law at the end of the day.

That said, where they have wiggle room, they make their own decisions, and some of those decisions will fall in the republican's favor.

A good idea I've heard that's going around is that congress passes a law limiting the type of cases the supreme court can hear.

The SC is too powerful, they're like the kings of old that we overthrew.


.

You really don't know how the Constitution works, do you?

The Congress cannot "pass a law" that limits the SCOTUS judicial authority.

Try reading Article III, Section 2

In order to "limit" the scope of the SCOTUS review, it would take a Constitutional Amendment.

 

[lemmiwinx]

Show me any Biden voter?

Come on Man!

Those are Harris voters...

-

A Biden voter by any other name is a Harris voter. She's just black enough to qualify as a minority even though her ancestors were slave owners.

 

[Kurmugeon]

A Biden voter by any other name is a Harris voter. She's just black enough to qualify as a minority even though her ancestors were slave owners.

But she has promised "The Loots", which to many, is all that matters.

The Harris plan for Slavery Reparations is to place involuntary 2nd mortgage liens on all White Americans houses, to collect enough to give each and every dark skin-tone person on American soil, even if they just arrived from Nigeria last week, a total of 2 Million dollar each. So, a family of four would receive 8 Million dollars.

Now, there are 5 times as many white people in American, than Blacks, who are 43 Million, or 14%, but, most common Americans file their "Taxes" by household jointly. There are only 120 Million white households in America. Run the math, and you get each White American Household paying an average $408K to Blacks.

I don't have an extra $408K, or anything even remotely close to it.

So, I won't be voting for Harris.


To be fair to Harris, her plan is allot less expensive than the Coalition of Black Mayors plan, which want 6.2 Quadrillion!

Mayors back reparations that could cost $6.2 quadrillion, or $151M per descendant

The nation’s mayors on Monday backed a national call for reparations to 41 million black people, a program that could cost taxpayers $6.2 quadrillion. The U.S. Conference of Mayors released a letter backing a Democratic plan to form a reparations commission to come up with a payment for slavery...

www.washingtonexaminer.com

Why is this important on a thread about the SCOTUS? Because Slavery Reparations is clearly Un-Constitutional!

By the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause!

By the right to not have unreasonable search and seizure!

By the right to not inherit legal Guilt.

By the right to not be convicted based on similar appearance to the actual criminals!

-

 

[weaver2]

Barrett's acceptance speech should be required reading

Why? It's a collection of vapid disclaimers.

 

[Cardinal]

Whether they vanish or not doesn't change the truth of the matter. In fact, with what the Dems are promising, it'll have more relevance than ever.

As long as you defend the decision to expand the courts on the basis that elections have consequences then that’s fine. And if you don’t, then that’s fine too.

 

[Cardinal]

The law is the law at the end of the day.

That said, where they have wiggle room, they make their own decisions, and some of those decisions will fall in the republican's favor.

A good idea I've heard that's going around is that congress passes a law limiting the type of cases the supreme court can hear.

The SC is too powerful, they're like the kings of old that we overthrew.

You have an inaccurate understanding of how checks and balances works. The means of the legislative and executive branches for checking the judiciary is through controlling the number of seats and who is appointed and confirmed, and of course through impeachment. They can’t control what kinds of cases reach them.

 

[Integrityrespec]

Mitch McConnell: Barrett a 'political asset' for Senate Republicans

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation to the Supreme Court will be a “political asset” for the Republican Party heading into the final week before Election Day. The Kentucky Republican appeared on Fox News hours after a close 52-48 vote that secured...

www.washingtonexaminer.com

At the least , Moscow Mitch seems to think so. He even called Barrett a political asset and I do not think he was thinking of her as a conservative, but as if she is now owned by the party that put her in power. Barely half of the nation thinks the SCOTUS is doing its job and I think as things come down, that number will dwindle. A majority of Americans wanted to wait until after the election to choose a new member of the court, nd now many people see Barrett as just what McConnell called her, but most usually don't call her an asset, but a tool. So it is my belief that the SCOTUS can no longer be trusted to be the impartial judge, but just another arm of the GOP. If the court now appoints trump president, it will be the beginning of the end of this country.

Malarky. They speak of justices by their philosophical belief. If they are appointed by a republican most likely can expect conservative views, or being a constitutionalist. If by a democrat it's expected they expect to be leaning more liberal in the way they "interpret" the law.

 

[Kurmugeon]

Why? It's a collection of vapid disclaimers.

Isn't most Politics?

There are very few truly NEW things under the sun.

Except for the word: "Tincly"

, which I think might actually be something new.

I means the feeling of your muscles all over your body being on the edge of cramping all over your body at the same time, in an extremely painful bout of cramps brought on by have diabetic Keto acidosis for enough days in a row for your blood ph level due to build up of lactic acid to be at near fatal levels.

It is very unpleasant. It can be brought on by metformin interactions with blood pressure meds.
-

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I don't think so. So far the only truly debauched by ideology SCJ is Thomas who is flat nuts....far nuttier then Scalia ever thought of being, he believes that all previous SC opinions should be subject to reversal. THAT is flat nuts.

Kavanaugh's opinion in the Wisconsin case is unsupportable and simply stupid beyond belief. However they can all of them at times lose sight of the forest for the trees and Kavanaugh might have had a brain fart.

We need to remember that these are lifetime appointments. That is a double edged sword. Yes, they are there for life. But they no longer owe anybody anything......ANYBODY.
Roberts: Will lean Right but throw the Left a few bones on occasion for "balance"
Thomas: Complete whack job. The more I see of him the more believable Anita Hill
Alito: Something like Roberts
Barrett: Who knows
Gorsuch: Not enough opinions offered to know. Could be lying in the weeds to disappoint the Right. Won't be the first time
Kavanaugh: Seems like he might have a screw loose. There might be something clunky rattling around in that brain of his

Kavanaugh's ethical lapses and fully wet-brained untreated and unrepentant alcoholism issues dwarf any of the (expired) sex charges that were leveled at him.
We are now going to be treated to some carbon copies of his ethical challenges in his next few upcoming opinions, which will also likely look and feel like bags of wet cement dropped from a helicopter.

 

[The AntiDonald]

Was the Warren Court owned by the Democrats? Why is this suddenly a problem when liberals become the minority? The court is the court and will change over time as administrations come and go. It's also ironic that Dems would be complaining about this when they want to make the court a permanent fixture of Democrat policy by expanding it.

It's actually very simple. The majority of Americans wan't liberal policies. The GOP have been ruling by minority for quite some time. That has to stop. As I recall, We The People, For the People, By The People. When the majority want conservative policies, we'll have to move that way.

 

[code1211]

Mitch McConnell: Barrett a 'political asset' for Senate Republicans

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said Amy Coney Barrett’s confirmation to the Supreme Court will be a “political asset” for the Republican Party heading into the final week before Election Day. The Kentucky Republican appeared on Fox News hours after a close 52-48 vote that secured...

www.washingtonexaminer.com

At the least , Moscow Mitch seems to think so. He even called Barrett a political asset and I do not think he was thinking of her as a conservative, but as if she is now owned by the party that put her in power. Barely half of the nation thinks the SCOTUS is doing its job and I think as things come down, that number will dwindle. A majority of Americans wanted to wait until after the election to choose a new member of the court, nd now many people see Barrett as just what McConnell called her, but most usually don't call her an asset, but a tool. So it is my belief that the SCOTUS can no longer be trusted to be the impartial judge, but just another arm of the GOP. If the court now appoints trump president, it will be the beginning of the end of this country.

It's astonishing to me that seeming illiterates who hate profoundly can read one thing and understand it to mean something that is not connected to it in any way whatever.

Still, it happens regularly.

So sad.

 

[KLATTU]

Yes, Indy, I even heard a news anchor or reporter say that the Court will now "lean toward the GOP," and I thought about how sad it is that that the function of issuing justice has now been pushed aside for the function of pushing a political agenda.

do you own a mirror?
^^^
{{did a liberal actually have the chutzpah to post this?}}

 

[CaughtInThe]

The GOP owns COVID.

 

[Emily L]

do you own a mirror?
^^^
{{did a liberal actually have the chutzpah to post this?}}

Klattu, I didn't mean that as an attack on the GOP--I meant that it's bad that the Supreme Court would be expected to be a function of ANY political party or philosophy. The Court should always be impartial. That's what I meant.

 

[jcgriff2]

Yes, Indy, I even heard a news anchor or reporter say that the Court will now "lean toward the GOP," and I thought about how sad it is that that the function of issuing justice has now been pushed aside for the function of pushing a political agenda.

Not necessarily. . .

If the " Court will now "lean toward the GOP," " -- that means that it must have leaned to the left before the latest confirmation, right ?? -- meaning that it leaned unfairly to the left before the latest confirmation. . . ? That was unfair.

Now the court is even once again.

 

[Emily L]

Not necessarily. . .

If the " Court will now "lean toward the GOP," " -- that means that it must have leaned to the left before the latest confirmation, right ?? -- meaning that it leaned unfairly to the left before the latest confirmation. . . ? That was unfair.

Now the court is even once again.

Yes, JC, turnabout is fair play, but I still hate to see it happen.

 

[jcgriff2]

The GOP owns COVID.

Total BS.

The Chinks own COVID-19.

It was a Wuhan, China, homebrew courtesy of the Chinese Communist Party to knock the US down a few notches in both economic and military areas.

The real question - was COVID-19 "released" accidentally or on purpose as a bio-weapon to severely decrease Trump's chances at re-election as the Chinese Communist Party wanted Trump out of office primarily due to the sanctions and Space Force?

Biden has said that he will un-do all that Trump has done and the sanctions will be at or near the top of the list to get rid of. The Communist Party of China wants US SpaceForce out because they do not have the money to counter/keep up with the new US Agency.

So, if Biden gets in, there goes the Chinese tariffs and US SpaceForce and our trade deficit with China goes back up a few hundred billion dollars, where they like it and we do not.