Hearing

[Deleted User 310]

[Sparko]

Ah, the “I have black friends/children” defense against racism.

Illy: meet Mr. Hook, Ms. Line and Dr. Sinker

Ms. Barrett was nominated not in spite of being a racist but because of it

Not everybody is a racist. Liberals need to cut this shit out. There's a reason that Trump, despite all the crap he does, still is in this race. And it's not because of dog whistles - it's because people who aren't racist are sick of liberals calling everybody racists.

It's such an obstacle to the fight against actual racists.

He is also a Misogynist and a rapist. But yes, he is a racist and people who want cover to vote for him don't get any. He is fascist and all that comes with that authoritarian white nationalist movement.

[Sparko]

And Illy, anyone who posts a video of Ted Cruz has a screw loose. I won't hit on it.

[Deleted User 310]

And Illy, anyone who posts a video of Ted Cruz has a screw loose. I won't hit on it.

I don't blame you for that.

Sad to think he is 100x better than Trump.

[Deleted User 289]

Back to the hearings- ACB doesn’t have a firm grasp on what’s in the First Amendment. One of the few questions she was not cowardly enough to avoid, thereby demonstrating her behavior incompetence.

She also ruled that the use of a racial epithet does not constitute a hostile work environment. Fun times ahead.

I don't get it. I'm a fucking moron. She's an intelligent woman.
She's probably going to be a Supreme Court Justice and she really didn't know what is in the First Amendment - and I do? Inexcusable.

[Deleted User 310]

[sdoyel]

Lindsey Graham can fuck off.

[Deleted User 289]

Ah, the “I have black friends/children” defense against racism.

Illy: meet Mr. Hook, Ms. Line and Dr. Sinker

Ms. Barrett was nominated not in spite of being a racist but because of it

Not everybody is a racist. Liberals need to cut this shit out. There's a reason that Trump, despite all the crap he does, still is in this race. And it's not because of dog whistles - it's because people who aren't racist are sick of liberals calling everybody racists.

It's such an obstacle to the fight against actual racists.

I completely understand and respect your feelings but.....

Do you really think Trump is still in the race because people who aren't racist are sick of liberals calling everyone racist? Come on! I have to figure the majority of Trump voters are too dumb to know what Liberals do/say (and don't do/say) and most really don't care.

The 10% who aren't too dumb and actually do care - I have found some/many/most of them to be more upset about Liberals calling Conservatives racist than they are about the FACT that some Conservatives actually are racist.

I am astonished at how many people are blatantly racist and don't care what other's think about them.
Happened the other day at Navy Pier. A woman said we really need to do something about all the Black people in this city. HUH? I had no idea where that came from - out of the blue.
I figured she must have been referring to what we were witnessing. I told her the woman who was shot was Hispanic and eyewitnesses are saying it was another Hispanic who shot her.
Then she went on a tangent about how all the Blacks are in our neighborhood spending their stimulus money and that she was very upset at dinner the night before because "The Blacks" "invaded" the restaurant she was at and it ruined her meal for her.
Here I am a complete stranger and she had no problem being blatantly racist.
I mentioned several weeks ago that I witnessed a white business owner tell a guy who was "anti-cop/s" that he hopes a group of Black guys rape his girlfriend. He used other words than just Black and guys.
It's all around me and I am extremely confident the majority of the people who I have come across who are racist - are Conservatives.
All that being said, of course not every Conservative is racist - just as not every Liberal isn't racist.

[Cascadia]

Lindsey Graham can fuck off.

Complete twat. And proud of it.

[sdoyel]

He ain’t wrong.

[twocoach]

Numerous cases of ACB conveniently leaving out meetings with various group in her Senate paperwork. They just discovered seven more events she "forgot to mention", including one with Notre Dame law school's anti-abortion group.

[jfish26]

Numerous cases of ACB conveniently leaving out meetings with various group in her Senate paperwork. They just discovered seven more events she "forgot to mention", including one with Notre Dame law school's anti-abortion group.

In a functioning democracy, her refusal to answer basic questions and her slippery disclosures would be an impediment to her confirmation.

[ousdahl]

In the long term, at least, I think much of the politicizing of the courts could be done away with by increasing the supermajority, not doing away with it.

Why not just require like a 90% majority, as has been satisfied by so many other confirmations.

If you reduce it to a simple majority, of course these things are gonna be decided down party lines.

Thanks, Mitch.

[zsn]

Actually I like your idea. I think terms for all appointments should be tied to how many votes they get. Every vote above 50 gets a two-year term. If the vote is 55-45 that person gets a 10-year term. 61 votes gets life time appointments.

[ousdahl]

That’s still too partisan, though I like your graduated approach.

How about every vote over 50 gets a year.

If you squeak by on partisan lines and only get confirm with 51 votes, you only get a year (or maybe have to be re-confirmed?)

You pass unanimously, it’s a 49 year appointment, cuz apparently everyone thinks you’re a justice so great you rise above the partisan shenanigans.

That’s effectively a life appointment, cuz it’s not like hand out these gigs fresh outta law school.

[zsn]

But it has to be a$$hole-proofed. The likes of Cruz, Paul, and their ilk would vote no just to mess with the system. So allow for 5 a$$holes.......3 people voted against RGB for crying out loud!

Good academic discussion but would never happen because it makes too much sense

Win the WH and Senate and expand the SCOTUS with six justices: Barack and Michelle Obama, AOC (a giant middle finger to Mitch and other enablers), Adam Schiff, Daniel Goldman (House Impeachment Counsel) and Leticia James (NY AG) or Eric Holder

[twocoach]

But it has to be a$$hole-proofed. The likes of Cruz, Paul, and their ilk would vote no just to mess with the system. So allow for 5 a$$holes.......3 people voted against RGB for crying out loud!

Good academic discussion but would never happen because it makes too much sense

Win the WH and Senate and expand the SCOTUS with six justices: Barack and Michelle Obama, AOC (a giant middle finger to Mitch and other enablers), Adam Schiff, Daniel Goldman (House Impeachment Counsel) and Leticia James (NY AG) or Eric Holder

I'd prefer actual judges be appointed to the Supreme Court. Winning back the WH and Senate is enough of an F-U to the GOP for me. Dems don't need to be screw things up trying to be equally petty and childish.

[zsn]

I disagree. The newly rigged court will rule that every legislation passed by the Dem majority is unconstitutional and nullify everything for generations. Everything short of Brown v BoE is likely to be overturned.

Just remember that the court majority believes that folks yelling n-er, f-g, and other epithets at a workplace is A-ok

BTW, everyone I named except AOC has more legal experience and more qualified than ACB

[jfish26]

But it has to be a$$hole-proofed. The likes of Cruz, Paul, and their ilk would vote no just to mess with the system. So allow for 5 a$$holes.......3 people voted against RGB for crying out loud!

Good academic discussion but would never happen because it makes too much sense

Win the WH and Senate and expand the SCOTUS with six justices: Barack and Michelle Obama, AOC (a giant middle finger to Mitch and other enablers), Adam Schiff, Daniel Goldman (House Impeachment Counsel) and Leticia James (NY AG) or Eric Holder

I'd prefer actual judges be appointed to the Supreme Court. Winning back the WH and Senate is enough of an F-U to the GOP for me. Dems don't need to be screw things up trying to be equally petty and childish.

I'm sure there are a million things this would break (and, it would require an amendment to the Constitution), but I briefly wondered last night about whether two elected justice seats should be added. So, you'd have nine appointed, permanent justices, and two seats that are elected on (say) staggered ten-year terms.

So there's at least some meaningful component that is at least somewhat representative of the will of the people.

[twocoach]

But it has to be a$$hole-proofed. The likes of Cruz, Paul, and their ilk would vote no just to mess with the system. So allow for 5 a$$holes.......3 people voted against RGB for crying out loud!

Good academic discussion but would never happen because it makes too much sense

Win the WH and Senate and expand the SCOTUS with six justices: Barack and Michelle Obama, AOC (a giant middle finger to Mitch and other enablers), Adam Schiff, Daniel Goldman (House Impeachment Counsel) and Leticia James (NY AG) or Eric Holder

I'd prefer actual judges be appointed to the Supreme Court. Winning back the WH and Senate is enough of an F-U to the GOP for me. Dems don't need to be screw things up trying to be equally petty and childish.

I'm sure there are a million things this would break (and, it would require an amendment to the Constitution), but I briefly wondered last night about whether two elected justice seats should be added. So, you'd have nine appointed, permanent justices, and two seats that are elected on (say) staggered ten-year terms.

So there's at least some meaningful component that is at least somewhat representative of the will of the people.

I had the exact same conversation with my wife. I would have zero problem with two Supreme Court seats being added. More than that would make me uncomfortable.