Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[lineygoblue]

Late last night the Supreme Court (5-4 decision) granted an injunction against Cuomo for limiting attendance at religious services. Probably the first meaningful decision including Barrett (The opinion is unsigned but everyone believes it was written by her). Roberts sided with the liberals but mainly because Cuomo had already relaxed the restrictions while this was making its way up the courts. It's an injunction preventing them from being put back in place.

The ruling doesn't mean that you can't have ANY restrictions; just that the specific ones here (only 10 people) went too far in violating the 1st Amendment.

A lot of people are pointing out the sniping back and forth between Gorsuch and Roberts in their individual opinions though.

And, as I stated before, Roberts is more comfortable voting with the liberal faction. So, in spite of all the hate spewed by the left against Barrett and Kavanaugh in the confirmation hearings, the "conservative majority" is hanging by a thread at 5-4, and not 6-3.

And the biggest problem Gorsuch had with Roberts was that Roberts had no problem with bars and clubs being open, but Roberts was siding with Cuomo's position that bars and clubs being open was fine, but worship services were not. Again, Roberts is NOT a conservative. He is a "conservative" that sits to the left of Susan Collins and Mitt Romney.

If Alito and Thomas retire during the next four years as expected, the libs will have their majority, without having to 'pack' the court. Even if the R's control the Senate, they've never stood in the way of a Dem President's USSC nominee.

[CGVT]

Even if the R's control the Senate, they've never stood in the way of a Dem President's USSC nominee.

What????

Obama-middle-finger-725x375.jpg

[lineygoblue]

What????

Go back and see the Senate votes on Kagan, Sotomoyor, Breyer, Ginsberg, .. in fact all of the liberals on the Court, and all liberals confirmed since the 70's. Make note of the affirmative R votes in each case.

Then reconsider your "what".

Good pic of Obama. He flipped off America for 8 years and smirked while he got away with it. Good choice.

Yes, Merrick Garland never got a hearing. Wah wah. Shumer would have done the same thing, and please say he wouldn't have.

[iam416]

Even if the R's control the Senate, they've never stood in the way of a Dem President's USSC nominee.

Yeah, I mean that's demonstrably true. I mean, FFS, Sotamayor was confirmed 68-31. Kagan got through 63-37. And those, I think, are the closest votes for D-nominated judges.

Meanwhile, The Rs had to eliminate the filibuster for Supreme Court judges to get GORSUCH through. JFC. And, of course, the absolute travesty of the Kav hearings. Hopefully the Rs will adopt the Smear Campaign/Vote against anything nominated approach fo the Ds if an when there is a vacancy. Turn about is fair play.

The only the Mitch did was put off Garland until the election. Unfortunately for the Ds, PDJT won. Thank god.

[CGVT]

Yes, Merrick Garland never got a hearing

So your statement was bullshit.

Got it.

[lineygoblue]

My statement was spot on. When confirmation votes have come up on E.V.E.R.Y Dem nominated liberal justice since the 1970's, they have been confirmed with the help of R Senator votes.

AND, that tradition will continue when Joe/Kamala nominates justices.

Every liberal justice on the USSC got there with R senators voting for them. Dems can't make the same claim in the reverse.

Mitch McConnell rolled the dice with the Garland nomination and lucked out. At the time, Hillary was leading in the polls by nearly double digits, and his move could only have served as a delay, had she won. He instead rolled a seven on the come out, and looked like a genius.

And please, .. tell me that Schumer wouldn't have done that had he been Senate Majority leader. Please?

[Whitley]

My statement was spot on. When confirmation votes have come up on E.V.E.R.Y Dem nominated liberal justice in MY LIFETIME, they have been confirmed with the help of R Senator votes.

Mitch McConnell rolled the dice with the Garland nomination and lucked out. At the time, Hillary was leading in the polls by nearly double digits, and his move could only have served as a delay, had she won. He instead rolled a seven on the come out, and looked like a genius.

And please, .. tell me that Schumer wouldn't have done that had he been Senate Majority leader. Please?

Schumer doesn't have the balls to do something like that. He brings a white flag to a gun fight gets shot up and says there was nothing we could do.

[CGVT]

Spin it any way you want. Your statement was false. Period.

[iam416]

My statement was spot on. When confirmation votes have come up on E.V.E.R.Y Dem nominated liberal justice in MY LIFETIME, they have been confirmed with the help of R Senator votes.

AND, that tradition will continue when Joe/Kamala nominates justices.

Mitch McConnell rolled the dice with the Garland nomination and lucked out. At the time, Hillary was leading in the polls by nearly double digits, and his move could only have served as a delay, had she won. He instead rolled a seven on the come out, and looked like a genius.

And please, .. tell me that Schumer wouldn't have done that had he been Senate Majority leader. Please?

Correct, though I’m not sure the Rs will continue to play nice. Hope not.

[lineygoblue]

Spin it any way you want. Your statement was false. Period.

Wrong again. You like being wrong, don't you?

I've proven my statement to be correct.

You choose to call it bullshit, and claim its false.

I can tell you the sky is blue, but if you insist that its red, I can't do anything about that.

[Whitley]

Correct, though I’m not sure the Rs will continue to play nice. Hope not.

I am sure Biden administration will bend over backwards to try and give Republicans something.

[Mike]

That would be cool.

[iam416]

Heh. It’s funny how different our perspectives are, Whitley.

[CGVT]

Wrong again. You like being wrong, don't you?

I've proven my statement to be correct.

You choose to call it bullshit, and claim its false.

I can tell you the sky is blue, but if you insist that its red, I can't do anything about that.

Ha! You like being full of shit don't you

You said, "Even if the R's control the Senate, they've never stood in the way of a Dem President's USSC nominee".

Then you said "Yes, Merrick Garland never got a hearing

Well, why the fuck was that.

Oh yeah, the R controlled Senate did not let it come to a vote.

I'm not sure how you can spin that shit and say the R controlled Senate never stood in the way of a Dem President's USSC nominee.

Jesus. Not allowing it to come to a vote is pretty much the definition of standing in the way of a nominee.

The only way to say otherwise is with some extreme spin that any rational thinking person would call bullshit.

I call bullshit.

[Whitley]

Heh. It’s funny how different our perspectives are, Whitley.

I have heard this story. Back in 2008, Republicans thought the Bush tax cuts were done for when Obama came into office. Biden goes and talks to McConnell saying nah...we are going to keep 92% of those cuts which stunned Republicans. I remember the attempted Grand Bargain. Biden is on record of trying to cut Social Security several times during his tenure in the Senate.

This is what is going to happen on Dem side of things (as of right now). The Senate is going to stay in GOP (thanks Dems for running crap candidates again). McConnell is going to not doing anything unless it overwhelming is in GOP interests.

Biden will try to do the reach across the aisle thing (that is his MO and who he is). Republicans will bitch slap him. He will try some more (like Obama did) and get slapped around some more.

There will be some weak tea EOs.

Harris will run in 2024 and the MSM will back her full tilt. Anyone running against her will be called racist and woman hating. She will run against a Trumpian republican and big shock she will lose. Dems will blame the progressive wing for the loss.

There will be a progressive wave coming but it will not be until 2028 or 2032.