Sounds like trump is planning on nominating someone named Amy Coney Barrett to the supreme court.

[Thaluikhain]

Her interpretation of the constitution is the most ignorant and narrow that there is, in that she thinks that the law ONLY applies as it does at the time it was written, thus we would have to write a new constitution every few years under her beliefs for it to be able to keep up with everything that has come since.

Apart from everything else, I'm pretty sure a woman wouldn't be allowed to decide how to interpret the constitution when the constitution was written.

 

[dreng3]

Apart from everything else, I'm pretty sure a woman wouldn't be allowed to decide how to interpret the constitution when the constitution was written.

Being logically consistent isn't really part of the republican philosophy.

 

[Agema]

Being logically consistent isn't really part of the republican philosophy.

No, being logically consistent is not necessary for the Republican Party's public relations machine. There will be a great deal more logical consistency about ideology and intent, it's just they lie when they want to justify it to you.

 

[lil devils x]

Apart from everything else, I'm pretty sure a woman wouldn't be allowed to decide how to interpret the constitution when the constitution was written.

Yea, no kidding. She would see that as a "policy decision" left to the states, not a right..

 

[Seanchaidh]

Old adage

Which is to say, it's something that the corporate media likes to promote as an explanation for our politics.

 

[Trunkage]

No, being logically consistent is not necessary for the Republican Party's public relations machine. There will be a great deal more logical consistency about ideology and intent, it's just they lie when they want to justify it to you.

They lie because they know they shouldn't say the quiet part out loud. Well, til 2016

 

[Buyetyen]

They lie because they know they shouldn't say the quiet part out loud. Well, til 2016

More specifically, they lie because they can't really sell their ideas on the merits. Trump certainly didn't. Much like evangelical Christianity, conservatism can't make a sales pitch through love, compassion, acceptance or any of that hippy shit. They can only give you the hard sell based on fear, negativity, coercion and force.

 

[ObsidianJones]

So, I thought someone would talk about this, but I'll bring it up

Watch Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse school Amy Coney Barrett on dark money

"$250 million is a lot of money to spend if you’re not getting anything for it.”

www.motherjones.com

With no way to block the confirmation, Democrats instead have used the time to focus not so much on the nominee in front of them but on issues relevant to the process. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) took his full 30 minutes to provide a Schoolhouse Rock!–style tutorial on the dark money forces at work behind Barrett’s nomination—a process he called “The Scheme.” Citing the Washington Post, Whitehouse described a $250 million dark money operation designed to capture the courts and push cases to friendly judges in the hopes of favorable rulings. “Two hundred and fifty million dollars is a lot of money to spend if you’re not getting anything for it,” he said. “So that raises the question: What are they getting for it?”

To answer that question, Whitehouse provided charts and bullet points that would make Glenn Beck proud. One of his posters laid out the Republican Party’s own words explaining precisely what they want from judicial nominees: “A Republican president will appoint judges … who will reverse the long line of activist decisions—including Roe, Obergefell, & the Obamacare cases,” referring to the landmark abortion, same-sex marriage and health care cases. “That is their stated objective and plan,” Whitehouse said. “Why not take them at their word?”

The Republicans, Whitehouse noted, seem to be getting their money’s worth. Their judicial nominees have voted in at least 80 cases where “there is an identifiable Republican donor interest” and ruled in their favor, to the detriment of workers’ rights, women’s rights, voting rights, and the environment. Whitehouse, who is a former US Attorney, sounded like someone delivering a closing argument in the courtroom. He blamed the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United, which allowed unlimited money to flow into political campaigns, for the current situation.

Whitehouse drew arrows with sharpies and explained in remarkably clear terms how anonymous money has fueled conservative legal advocacy groups like the Federalist Society and the Judicial Crisis Network that have spent millions cultivating and promoting conservative, ideological candidates like Barrett for the federal bench. He even held up a copy of one of the ads that anonymous money had paid for in support of Barrett’s nomination that explicitly suggested she’d overturn the 1973 abortion rights decision Roe v. Wade.

At the heart of Whitehouse’s chart was Donors Trust, a shadowy foundation the senator described as an “identity scrubbing” operation that allows rich donors to hide their contributions to influence judicial nominations and weaken federal regulations. Donors Trust has funnelled millions of dollars over the years into groups working for a conservative takeover of the federal courts, without ever disclosing where the money came from.

So, conservatives. I know you feel this is your last grasp and you're trying to get whatever you can now. I get the sense of urgency. But you have to get that you're not only signing your death warrant politically for years to come... possibly forever, but you sealed it and hand delivered it to yourself.

I hope these last years are worth it. The most ironic thing I think is that the only thing that can save the Republican Party is voting Biden in.

 

[tstorm823]

So, conservatives. I know you feel this is your last grasp and you're trying to get whatever you can now. I get the sense of urgency. But you have to get that you're not only signing your death warrant politically for years to come... possibly forever, but you sealed it and hand delivered it to yourself.

I hope these last years are worth it. The most ironic thing I think is that the only thing that can save the Republican Party is voting Biden in.

You know what I have to say here. If groups pushing biased judges is enough to "sign a death warrent", how does the Democratic Party still exist?

 

[Seanchaidh]

You know what I have to say here. If groups pushing biased judges is enough to "sign a death warrent", how does the Democratic Party still exist?

"At least they're not the Republicans"

 

[crimson5pheonix]

 

[tstorm823]

"At least they're not the Republicans"

Well, I can't dispute that people think that.

 

[lil devils x]

Supreme court justices are not elected REPRESENTATIVES who have a duty to their constituents. Their "appointments" are for life.

A representative OTOH has a duty to their constituents to actually represent the will of the people. The way they have gotten moderate and conservative representatives to vote for more progressive's issues is by having their constituents pressure them to do so and or BRIBE THEM. Whatever it takes to get the job done though means getting the job done.

Blatant false equivelency.

Sounds like trump is planning on nominating someone named Amy Coney Barrett to the supreme court.

The party should absolutely cull its Joe Manchins. Probably should, yes. But if your evidentiary threshold for an ousting is a vote against the party line, then you'll not be left with many representatives-- not just in the US Democratic Party, but pretty much anywhere, including most...

forums.escapistmagazine.com

 

[Agema]

Push her left... into the path of a truck? It's probably more likely to work than shifting her ideology left.

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Supreme court justices are not elected REPRESENTATIVES who have a duty to their constituents. Their "appointments" are for life.

A representative OTOH has a duty to their constituents to actually represent the will of the people. The way they have gotten moderate and conservative representatives to vote for more progressive's issues is by having their constituents pressure them to do so and or BRIBE THEM. Whatever it takes to get the job done though means getting the job done.

Blatant false equivelency.

Sounds like trump is planning on nominating someone named Amy Coney Barrett to the supreme court.

The party should absolutely cull its Joe Manchins. Probably should, yes. But if your evidentiary threshold for an ousting is a vote against the party line, then you'll not be left with many representatives-- not just in the US Democratic Party, but pretty much anywhere, including most...

forums.escapistmagazine.com

 

[lil devils x]

So what you are saying is you completely missed the point?

No majority = no progressive bills passed at all. That is what you are pushing for isn't it?

 

[crimson5pheonix]

So what you are saying is you completely missed the point?

No majority = no progressive bills passed at all. That is what you are pushing for isn't it?

 

[Buyetyen]

So what you are saying is you completely missed the point?

No majority = no progressive bills passed at all. That is what you are pushing for isn't it?

I don't think he knows what he's pushing for, he just wants attention again.

 

[Avnger]

" Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt. "

 

[crimson5pheonix]

" Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt. "