like_that
Posts: 26,625
Jul 7, 2016 8:42am
Yeah I tried to read that twice and still didn't get it. Can we get a translation please?ernest_t_bass;1802633 wrote:Wat!?
SportsAndLady
Posts: 35,632
Jul 7, 2016 8:55am
Might be time for belly to hang up the Internet.
F
friendfromlowry
Posts: 6,239
Jul 7, 2016 9:35am
ernest_t_bass;1802633 wrote:Wat!?
like_that;1802634 wrote:Yeah I tried to read that twice and still didn't get it. Can we get a translation please?
You see, he was taking a Trump vs Hillary thread and making a plug for gun rights.SportsAndLady;1802635 wrote:Might be time for belly to hang up the Internet.
FatHobbit
Posts: 8,651
Jul 7, 2016 10:20am
FixedBelly35;1802628 wrote:My friend and former design engineer from the UK .. We talk on skype weekly, we have a project coming up with General Dynamics. He voted for the exit of the UK out of European control. It was worth it to lose some of his pension, interest on savings and what ever else to be free from socialistic government control. The next thing he wants is freedom to own and buy weapons to protect himself... They want what we have freedom ... Let's not lose what others want. Freedom
O-Trap
Posts: 14,994
Jul 7, 2016 11:09am
You're a fucking wizard.FatHobbit;1802649 wrote:Fixed
FatHobbit
Posts: 8,651
Jul 7, 2016 1:49pm
O-Trap;1802659 wrote:You're a fucking wizard.
Q
QuakerOats
Posts: 8,740
Jul 13, 2016 10:08am
Hard to believe that Ginsburg shot her mouth off ......................she should be resigning today.
Spock
Posts: 2,853
Jul 13, 2016 12:27pm
yes the supreme court members should not weighing in on this matter.QuakerOats;1803170 wrote:Hard to believe that Ginsburg shot her mouth off ......................she should be resigning today.
O-Trap
Posts: 14,994
Jul 13, 2016 12:52pm
Wait, it's hard to believe? She shoots off all the time.QuakerOats;1803170 wrote:Hard to believe that Ginsburg shot her mouth off ......................she should be resigning today.
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2014/10/01/justice-ginsburg-comments-on-abortion-law-stir-recusal-debate/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/feb/12/ruth-bader-ginsburg-americas-ready-for-gay-marriag/
http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/389176/re-justice-ginsburg-disqualifies-herself-ruling-texas-abortion-law-ed-whelan
http://news.yahoo.com/katie-couric-interviews-ruth-bader-ginsburg-185027624.html
I mean, if she hasn't resigned by this point, she's not going to.
Also, the actual comments she made about Trump are pretty timid. I know it's not the place for justices to comment on these sorts of things, but given her track record, this is a blip on the screen.
Q
QuakerOats
Posts: 8,740
Jul 13, 2016 2:10pm
Well hell no she is not going to resign. No liberal is ever held to account for their comments or deeds.
But had Alito said it about Clinton, all hell would have broken loose and the media would have gone ballistic.
The hypocrisy is immeasurable.
But had Alito said it about Clinton, all hell would have broken loose and the media would have gone ballistic.
The hypocrisy is immeasurable.
Q
QuakerOats
Posts: 8,740
Jul 14, 2016 10:24am
Spock;1803195 wrote:yes the supreme court members should not weighing in on this matter.
"Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg issues statement saying she 'regrets' comments she's made about presumptive Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, saying they were 'ill-advised,' adding, 'Judges should avoid commenting on a candidate for public office.'"
Spock
Posts: 2,853
Jul 14, 2016 11:24am
ill advised? Who in the hell would be advising a sitting supreme court justice to make bad decisions? She should be forced to step down.QuakerOats;1803257 wrote:"Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg issues statement saying she 'regrets' comments she's made about presumptive Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, saying they were 'ill-advised,' adding, 'Judges should avoid commenting on a candidate for public office.'"
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Jul 14, 2016 11:31am
I think she should step down. Not because I think she's a bad justice but she clearly just publicly admitted she has a bias against Trump and if he is elected that tarnishes the credibility of the court to interpret fairly the law.QuakerOats;1803257 wrote:"Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg issues statement saying she 'regrets' comments she's made about presumptive Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, saying they were 'ill-advised,' adding, 'Judges should avoid commenting on a candidate for public office.'"
Reality is, she won't step down. This will get swept under the rug.
majorspark
Posts: 5,122
Jul 14, 2016 12:40pm
Looks like Trump's VP pick is Mike Pence.
majorspark
Posts: 5,122
Jul 14, 2016 1:08pm
Its a big deal because she is leveling a personal attack against a candidate for POTUS during the campaign. Basically calling him a liar all this in the context of his opponent being exposed yet again for her severe lack of truthfulness. She could potentially rule on his executive orders or worse yet Trump v Clinton. Judges are supposed to be able to reign in their personal feelings and rule according to the letter of the law. This kind of public comment will call her impartiality into question in a decision directly or indirectly involving Trump.O-Trap;1803198 wrote:Also, the actual comments she made about Trump are pretty timid. I know it's not the place for justices to comment on these sorts of things, but given her track record, this is a blip on the screen.
iclfan2
Posts: 6,360
Jul 14, 2016 2:13pm
Color me unimpressed. Trump is an idiot. Please GOP, please pull off the coup.majorspark;1803274 wrote:Looks like Trump's VP pick is Mike Pence.
G
gut
Posts: 15,058
Jul 14, 2016 2:21pm
iclfan2;1803285 wrote:Color me unimpressed. Trump is an idiot. Please GOP, please pull off the coup.
Ehhh, Trump/Hillary is the BEST thing that could happen to the Libertarian party. I'm still holding out hope Gary Johnson can get to 15% in polling to get into the Presidential debates (and he is slowly inching toward that number, getting about 11% in the latest).
S
superman
Posts: 3,582
Jul 14, 2016 3:03pm
Gary Johnson had the chance to be great. He seems determined to screw it up.gut;1803287 wrote:Ehhh, Trump/Hillary is the BEST thing that could happen to the Libertarian party. I'm still holding out hope Gary Johnson can get to 15% in polling to get into the Presidential debates (and he is slowly inching toward that number, getting about 11% in the latest).
C
Con_Alma
Posts: 12,198
Jul 14, 2016 3:29pm
I'd vote for this man over Trump any day. If he's trying to draw his party back in to supporting him he made the right choice.majorspark;1803274 wrote:Looks like Trump's VP pick is Mike Pence.
majorspark
Posts: 5,122
Jul 14, 2016 3:35pm
Should tick up a bit more now that Bernie has sold his soul. Also since polls vary if its close which poll determines in or out? The hosting network?gut;1803287 wrote:Ehhh, Trump/Hillary is the BEST thing that could happen to the Libertarian party. I'm still holding out hope Gary Johnson can get to 15% in polling to get into the Presidential debates (and he is slowly inching toward that number, getting about 11% in the latest).
Q
QuakerOats
Posts: 8,740
Jul 14, 2016 4:03pm
Con_Alma;1803291 wrote:I'd vote for this man over Trump any day. If he's trying to draw his party back in to supporting him he made the right choice.
correct --- Pence is good.
G
gut
Posts: 15,058
Jul 14, 2016 4:10pm
It's the average of 5 polls selected, of course, by the Dem/Repub bipartisan election committee.majorspark;1803292 wrote:Should tick up a bit more now that Bernie has sold his soul. Also since polls vary if its close which poll determines in or out? The hosting network?
He's polling @21% on Independents, and maybe 25% on millennials. I don't think there should be any doubt if more people knew who he was he'd get that 15% threshold.
O-Trap
Posts: 14,994
Jul 14, 2016 5:37pm
I don't disagree with any of what you said. However, let me ask:majorspark;1803278 wrote:Its a big deal because she is leveling a personal attack against a candidate for POTUS during the campaign. Basically calling him a liar all this in the context of his opponent being exposed yet again for her severe lack of truthfulness. She could potentially rule on his executive orders or worse yet Trump v Clinton. Judges are supposed to be able to reign in their personal feelings and rule according to the letter of the law. This kind of public comment will call her impartiality into question in a decision directly or indirectly involving Trump.
- If she hadn't said this, would you have trusted her to impartially rule on any executive orders any more so?
- Did you think she was any more impartial prior to these comments?
Knowing her track record, both in how she votes and what she's said in the past, I thought it was already assumed that she thought this way prior to her actually saying it. I certainly would've guessed it.
majorspark
Posts: 5,122
Jul 14, 2016 8:55pm
No.O-Trap;1803299 wrote:- If she hadn't said this, would you have trusted her to impartially rule on any executive orders any more so?
No.O-Trap;1803299 wrote:- Did you think she was any more impartial prior to these comments?
You and I know the majority of judges at this level are in reality not always impartial. In order to maintain the faith of the masses in the judiciary however it is vitally important for judges to at least have the appearance of impropriety.O-Trap;1803299 wrote:Knowing her track record, both in how she votes and what she's said in the past, I thought it was already assumed that she thought this way prior to her actually saying it. I certainly would've guessed it.
O-Trap
Posts: 14,994
Jul 15, 2016 1:17pm
Doesn't this seem like the Emperor's New Clothes? Is it really that important that we keep the facade up?majorspark;1803309 wrote:In order to maintain the faith of the masses in the judiciary however it is vitally important for judges to at least have the appearance of impropriety.
What is the value in maintaining the faith of the masses in the impartiality of the judiciary if that impartiality doesn't actually exist? Is avoiding the appearance of impropriety actually better than making the public aware of that impropriety?