Author Topic: U.S. Politics  (Read 645107 times)

0 Members and 80 Guests are viewing this topic.

Fenwyr

  • Shaun Ellis
  • *******
  • Posts: 5611
  • He's the greatest
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #1110 on: February 21, 2016, 02:14:54 PM »
And not for nothing, but the founding fathers were progressive liberals by today's standards, so think on that for a bit.

JFIF

  • Shaun Ellis
  • *******
  • Posts: 5867
  • Head Bent over, Raised Up Posterior
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #1111 on: February 21, 2016, 02:38:27 PM »
And not for nothing, but the founding fathers were progressive liberals by today's standards, so think on that for a bit.

They owned slaves.....so no.


Tommy

  • Mark Gastineau
  • *********
  • Posts: 15164
  • I don't get it
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #1112 on: February 21, 2016, 02:41:05 PM »

This would be as ignorant as me calling you 'a shill' for the republicans.  Nothing in life is that black and white, and you know it, so stop saying stupid excrement like this.  I am 'a shill' for my family, the people I care about, and what I believe, based on my decades of experience, is best for them.

You were gargling Scalia's balls for being an unbiased constitution worshiper.  I am calling bullshit on that.  I provided a ruling that had nothing to do with the constitution, and everything to do with republican money, and you keep ignoring it.  Show me who on the liberal side of the court is pushing a non-constitutional agenda.  Just give me one example for us to debate and I will at the very least respect your opinion.

When did I say Scalia was unbiased? I was making a general statement about how justices aren't supposed to be biased, yet every president appoints one that their party wants. It should be the one non partisan branch in the government. Like when Sotomayor was being nominated the left kept whining about how the court needs Hispanic perspective. Why? There shouldn't be any perspective outside of what's written in the constitution. There's a reason why lady justice is blindfolded.
"Wrong!"

Ignatius J Reilly

  • Guest
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #1113 on: February 21, 2016, 06:24:30 PM »

When did I say Scalia was unbiased? I was making a general statement about how justices aren't supposed to be biased, yet every president appoints one that their party wants. It should be the one non partisan branch in the government. Like when Sotomayor was being nominated the left kept whining about how the court needs Hispanic perspective. Why? There shouldn't be any perspective outside of what's written in the constitution. There's a reason why lady justice is blindfolded.

Like I said, it has always been partisan.  Marshall was the first judicial activist.

Ignatius J Reilly

  • Guest
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #1114 on: February 21, 2016, 06:26:48 PM »

You missed a spot.  Scalia preferred to skip the State of the Union address.  'He should do things like attend' those.  Obama met privately with the family to pay his respects.

'Let the other party look bad.'  This is my point.  Scalia was a pawn of the republican party.  All this crap about about he was adamant about preserving the constitution is utter nonsense.  Revisionist history would be a generous way of putting it.  The republican appointees to SCOTUS worship the bible, not the constitution.  Where in either document it tells them that corporations should be able to buy elections is beyond my understanding, as I am not an expert in either publication.

I'm certainly not supporting Scalia.  I don't recall anyone in here saying he was a great Justice.  I'm just saying that I expect the President to be better than that.  The "but he did" arguments don't work in that regard.  We've had the office dumbed down for a long time, but I'll always expect better.

Tommy

  • Mark Gastineau
  • *********
  • Posts: 15164
  • I don't get it
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #1115 on: February 21, 2016, 06:38:17 PM »

Like I said, it has always been partisan.  Marshall was the first judicial activist.

Of course it has, but I wish it weren't. Of course there's really no way for it not to be non-partisan.
"Wrong!"

Badger

  • Global Moderator
  • Joe Namath
  • *****
  • Posts: 51862
  • The only one who's not a piece of excrement
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #1116 on: February 21, 2016, 07:24:43 PM »

They owned slaves.....so no.

Yeah, but still.

Johnny English

  • Administrator
  • Don Maynard
  • *****
  • Posts: 35864
  • Effort. Technique. Violence.
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #1117 on: February 21, 2016, 08:19:26 PM »
Of course it has, but I wish it weren't. Of course there's really no way for it not to be non-partisan.

Sure there is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Appointments_Commission
A cross-dressing limey poofter

Ignatius J Reilly

  • Guest
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #1118 on: February 21, 2016, 08:20:33 PM »
Sure there is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Appointments_Commission

Are you saying none of them have any sort of political leaning in their judgment and legal interpretation?

Johnny English

  • Administrator
  • Don Maynard
  • *****
  • Posts: 35864
  • Effort. Technique. Violence.
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #1119 on: February 21, 2016, 08:24:51 PM »
Are you saying none of them have any sort of political leaning in their judgment and legal interpretation?

No, of course not. But they aren't placed in their jobs by people with a specific political agenda, so judicial appointments tend not to be made based on such criteria.

I actually don't think your system is too far off being a really good idea, I'd just make it a stipulation that the only representatives who get to vote on a Presidential appointment to SCOTUS are those of the opposing party to the President, with an impartial oversight committee that determines whether nominations and rejections are reasonable. That way you're pretty much guaranteed to get middle of the road appointments.
A cross-dressing limey poofter

Badger

  • Global Moderator
  • Joe Namath
  • *****
  • Posts: 51862
  • The only one who's not a piece of excrement
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #1120 on: February 24, 2016, 07:03:13 PM »
http://www.ktvu.com/news/96074190-story

Anti-gun CA state senator convicted of gun trafficking and racketeering

Badger

  • Global Moderator
  • Joe Namath
  • *****
  • Posts: 51862
  • The only one who's not a piece of excrement
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #1121 on: February 29, 2016, 09:58:26 PM »

Ignatius J Reilly

  • Guest
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #1122 on: February 29, 2016, 10:53:10 PM »
Still the best produced editorial show on TV.

Fenwyr

  • Shaun Ellis
  • *******
  • Posts: 5611
  • He's the greatest
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #1123 on: March 01, 2016, 10:10:08 AM »
Still the best produced editorial show on TV.

If it was on Comedy Central replacing the Colbert Report, and was satire, I would agree.

Coach K

  • Shaun Ellis
  • *******
  • Posts: 7129
Re: U.S. Politics
« Reply #1124 on: March 01, 2016, 10:22:33 AM »
They owned slaves.....so no.

a lot of people still would if it were legal......so possibly?

Tags: