Ginsburg's last wish was to 'not be replaced until a new president is installed': report

[Aunt Antifa]

Which, as I stated, makes you a religious bigot and means you are attempting unconstitutional Religious Tests for federal office.

You’re free to keep saying a wrong thing over and over. Everyone needs a hobby.

 

[TurtleDude]

calling someone a rapist who is not a rapist is very much slander and libel and whatever other else you want to call it.

what you are saying is not true. you know it is not true and yet here you are lying about it.

i thought leftists hated lies yet the lie so much it isn't funny.

the entire leftist philosophy is based on lies: their elites aren't about equality for everyone. Its all about pandering to the stupidity of the average envious sheep, so the elites can be wealthy and powerful.

 

[TurtleDude]

Which, as I stated, makes you a religious bigot and means you are attempting unconstitutional Religious Tests for federal office.

Lefties are as religious as the most devout Catholic or Baptist. They worship big brother and governmental power and see any God before their state as heresy.

 

[Gondwanaland]

You’re free to keep saying a wrong thing over and over. Everyone needs a hobby.

I'm sorry you dont like being called what you are.

 

[Jack Hays]

Do you think budgets should be balanced at the cost of the people?

Sometimes I think people don't understand what government is supposed to achieve.

There is no need to run deficits in good economic times with no war. And ultimately, excessive public debt hurts the people.

 

[ludin]

the entire leftist philosophy is based on lies: their elites aren't about equality for everyone. Its all about pandering to the stupidity of the average envious sheep, so the elites can be wealthy and powerful.

I find it so interesting the come on here and are just morally outraged at lies but have 0 issue in all the lies they tell on here.
only a leftist can get so two faced and think they get away with it.

 

[Dans La Lune]

Lefties are as religious as the most devout Catholic or Baptist. They worship big brother and governmental power and see any God before their state as heresy.

Not long ago I posted a thread about how conservatives truly want to be ruled by a dictator (big brother / government power incarnate; sometimes even God). To my surprise, several conservatives chimed in and said YES they would -- as long as it's someone like Trump.

So please, spare me.

 

[foolardi]

You’re free to keep saying a wrong thing over and over. Everyone needs a hobby.

Unlike the saying ... " She said the first thing that came into her head. "
Her head being ... - The Thing - a horror classic.
Tink Nancy Pelosi.Or worse ... Hillary Clinton as :
- The BRAIN that wouldn't DIE! - { 1962 }
Which Matt Drudge who made a sneak visit to Alex Jones in Austin Tx.
years ago wouldn't stop talking about.That Hillary would be President even if
it's only her head in a jar atop an Oval Office desk.

 

[foolardi]

Not long ago I posted a thread about how conservatives truly want to be ruled by a dictator (big brother / government power incarnate; sometimes even God). To my surprise, several conservatives chimed in and said YES they would -- as long as it's someone like Trump.

So please, spare me.

I tink it would be extremely important to cite names.Who were those
several Conservatives.It's the Conservatives who are holding this Republic
together.The Republican Party is the Freedom Party.
They believe in our Constitution.In Fair and balanced policy.Like the Reagan years.
The Dems have been ever escalating into pure Power.Today's Democrat has virtually
nothing in common to the J.F.K. Blue Collar hardhats or Kitchen Table concerns.
The Dems are making a play for Total Control.They have no need for accuracy in
reporting or what concerns those in our Heartland find important.
Just the way they can Control and manipulate our Major Metropolis like
New York City,Chicago,Atlanta,Philly,Detroit,Boston,Balimore or L.A.
Plus many other urban hubs.We have more than enough firsthand data to
make it clear that the Democrat Party is a Virtual disaster for America.
Instead of Making America Great they are Making America dependent.
On Their Way or the Highway.
That is no way to rule.Maybe with an old-fashioned Dentist like in a
W.C.Fields short.

 

[trouble13]

I think you are right. She should have retired when she was 83 and Obama was in office. But.

I really don't think if you retired at 83 anyone would call you a slacker.

As Henry Kissinger once said ‘power is an aphrodisiac’. And that is why we have a congress and senate filled with these old dinosaurs. That is why we have two men in their mid-seventies vying to be president.

I dont fault her for not stepping down. If my opinions mattered as much as her I would probably find it difficult letting go too.
She knew the risks and made a calculation.
I have mixed feelings about it being a lifetime appointment. I think the country would better off with a mandatory retirement age. Something like 75.

 

[cabse5]

The entire idea is idiotic. It's Trump's job to nominate a replacement. There's nothing sacred about a seat. It's about who's in power these days. **** the Democrats whining and crying, the objective is to destroy them and their agenda.

Politics is the 'science' of how things appear to be not the science of how things are.

 

[cabse5]

I want a court free from people who insist their faith guides their constitutional decision making. And conservatives agree with me cause I’m guessing a Muslim who is just a regular ass Muslim wouldn’t get a single GOP vote, let alone a nutjob along the lines of Coney Bitchface.

Would you include the faith of climate change catastrophe caused by man as a faith to be avoided by the courts?

 

[Aunt Antifa]

Would you include the faith of climate change catastrophe caused by man as a faith to be avoided by the courts?

That’s based on science. The Bible is not.

 

[Aunt Antifa]

Unlike the saying ... " She said the first thing that came into her head. "
Her head being ... - The Thing - a horror classic.
Tink Nancy Pelosi.Or worse ... Hillary Clinton as :
- The BRAIN that wouldn't DIE! - { 1962 }
Which Matt Drudge who made a sneak visit to Alex Jones in Austin Tx.
years ago wouldn't stop talking about.That Hillary would be President even if
it's only her head in a jar atop an Oval Office desk.

Is this code?

 

[goldkam]

I think Trump cares more about the condition of the US than the legacy of Ginsburg.

You missed my point. This is not just about a legacy, it is about precedent and the standards set by the Republican Party.

Do you not agree that Mitch McConnell blocked President Barack Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland to the court on the grounds that it was an election year?

But this seems to be a common theme in the Presidency of Donald Trump......this double standard is there for everyone to see. One rule for Republicans, one rule for everyone else. The only defense I have for Mitch McConnell is he probably should be in an aged cared facility being cared for, so he may have unknowingly forgotten what he said four years ago.

 

[goldkam]

I presume you would be upset if he was not polite in discussing the subject of Ginsburg. That being the case you'd be upset if he was polite or rude which essentially means the argument is fallacious and hypocritical.

Also, the Biden Rule was used in 2016 and now. The rule is that if the President is at odds with the Senate during an election year you let the people decide who they want to fill the seat. Democrats have said this is the rule they play by since Biden first introduced it in the early 90s. Schumer has said he follows the same rule while he is the Senate majority leader. What happened in 2016 was of their own creation. Also, the last time an opposing Senate confirmed a justice in an election year was in the late 1800s. When the Senate and President are from the same party there has always been nominations and confirmations pushed through the Senate.

I don't think you making presumptions is accurate nor a representation of my views on this issue. The arguments I am making are valid and based on facts, which indicate inconsistencies with how this matter is being addressed.

So you disagree that Mitch McConnell set a precedent in 2016 by blocking Obama's nominations on the grounds of an election year? So 2020 isn't an election year?

In regards to the ramifications of this. If Donald Trump has no concerns about winning this upcoming and if he is so confident, why won't he select the judge after he is elected by the people? The judge, which would be conservative, would therefore represent and mirror the views of the nation. The judge would be mandated by the people.

Once again, Mitch McConnell is getting to that age that he really should be in an aged care home receiving ongoing care. I understand he probably forgot what he said in 2016, I mean he probably forgot what he did yesterday and forgot that he is setting a double standard that could have ramifications for decades to come.

 

[GummyVitamins]

You missed my point. This is not just about a legacy, it is about precedent and the standards set by the Republican Party.

Do you not agree that Mitch McConnell blocked President Barack Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland to the court on the grounds that it was an election year?

But this seems to be a common theme in the Presidency of Donald Trump......this double standard is there for everyone to see. One rule for Republicans, one rule for everyone else. The only defense I have for Mitch McConnell is he probably should be in an aged cared facility being cared for, so he may have unknowingly forgotten what he said four years ago.

The precedent is that since 1888 no judge has been confirmed by the Senate when nominated by an opposing president.

And whether you consider it the Thurmond Rule or the Biden Rule, there has been decades of leading Senators stating they would have done the same exact thing Republicans did in 2016. Biden and Schumer have both proudly said as much.

The reason for the differentiation is because the Senate is supposed to provide oversight of the nominees. When the opposing party has the Senate in an election year it is common to wait until the electorate votes in a new President to move forward.

People keep doing a bait and switch on this because they don't understand the history.

 

[mrdeltoid]

Ginsburg's last wish was to 'not be replaced until a new president is installed': report

The late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg told her granddaughter that her dying wish was not to be replaced until a new president is sworn into office, NPR reports.

www.foxnews.com

.

Fat chance, Mitch McConnell will show his hypocrisy and Lindsey Graham will show himself to be a liar,

lol. There was a republican senate majority and a democrat was in the white house in 2016. There weren't enough votes, and "Lord Garland" would NOT have been confirmed. There is precedent for this as there were 19 election year nominations, when the same party was the senate majority, and POTUS. They were confirmed 17 out of the 19 times. Of the 11 times the POTUS was not the same party as the senate majority, and there was a SCJ nominated, only 2 were confirmed. So unless the same party controlled the senate and WH in 2016, sorry. Apples and oranges. Trump is POTUS until January. The constitution states he shall make the nomination, and the senate shall advise and consent. (paraphrased). Deal with it.

 

[TurtleDude]

Not long ago I posted a thread about how conservatives truly want to be ruled by a dictator (big brother / government power incarnate; sometimes even God). To my surprise, several conservatives chimed in and said YES they would -- as long as it's someone like Trump.

So please, spare me.

yeah that means something-it really does. I call BS and I know that its the left that almost always want governments to rule

 

[Excon]

'until a new president is installed'

Installed?

Interesting choice of words.

A President is elected, not installed.

 

[TurtleDude]

'until a new president is installed'

Installed?

Interesting choice of words.

A President is elected, not installed.

good catch there, Excon.

 

[Linc]

It's called Gerrymandering https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerrymandering

The 5-4 court said it was legal. What do you think a 6-3 court will say? Leftists don’t all vote for Democrats, but all rightists vote Republican.

 

[Dans La Lune]

yeah that means something-it really does. I call BS and I know that its the left that almost always want governments to rule

I believe my thread is called, 'What people don't understand about Trump support...' and it's on the General Politics section.

By the way, define government.

The difference between progressives and conservatives is that conservatives see government as a hindrance to their goals -- despite always sucking on the government teat when it suits them. Progressives see government as a collection of citizens organized to solve problems too big for citizens to handle individually. We want to improve government and have it serve the people. Conservatives want government to fail, to serve their special interests, and to deny rights to people outside their base of power. Conservatives seek to rot government from within.

 

[MovingPictures]

Usually, justices step down under an administration they feel comfortable replacing them, so it's very rare as a problem. What happened in St Scalia and RGB's case is that they died in office, which is something that typically is not how vacancies arise.

No political party has EVER hoarded court seats for themselves. It hasn't happened., so don't try and pretend it has and that what the Republicans did was anything other than a power grab then and now.

 

[Linc]

So the Democrat hypocrites get a pass? Why is that?

Did you see the latest Lincoln Project with the GOP Apartheid Senators?

Rigging implies some wrongdoing or something nefarious or underhanded. Gerrymandering is a political process carried out by the majority in each state. Both parties engage in it.

Not according to recent Pennsylvania and North Carolina cases.