Supreme Court rules for Trump on travel ban

#226
#226
volfanjustin said:
He is also saying in 1992 they would have blocked a nominee if it came to that, but don't pay any attention to that.
Click to expand...

...and I'm also saying that they didn't reject the nomination of Clarence Thomas just a year earlier when they could have easily justified doing so. Thomas needed 7 Democratic votes - he got 11.

* You can't underscore how significant the confirmation of Thomas was in shaping the Supreme Court. He is very conservative and he was only 43 years old at the time. He could easily end up staying on the bench for 40 years. George H.W. Bush could have nominated someone else just as conservative as Thomas, but just as young? Doubtful.
 
Last edited:
#227
#227
Grand Vol said:
Basically what BB is saying is the DNC believes that since the GOP acted like children (and they did) in not giving Garland an up or down vote, the DNC has the honor of acting like children when they get into a position to do so.
Click to expand...

You nailed it. :good!:
 
#228
#228
BowlBrother85 said:
...and I'm also saying that they didn't reject the nomination of Clarence Thomas just a year earlier when they could have easily justified doing so. Thomas needed 7 Democratic votes - he got 11.

* You can't underscore how significant the confirmation of Thomas was in shaping the Supreme Court. He is very conservative and he was only 43 years old at the time. He could easily end up staying on the bench for 40 years. George H.W. Bush could have nominated someone else just as conservative as Thomas, but just as young? Doubtful.
Click to expand...

Can you please stay on topic? This has zero to do with them approving Thomas. This is about Biden's own words
 
#230
#230
volfanjustin said:
Can you please stay on topic? This has zero to do with them approving Thomas. This is about Biden's own words
Click to expand...

And how many times on VN since Trump took office, have conservatives said something to the effect of "You should judge actions, not words". Democrats did not end up blocking a George H.W. Bush nominee in 1992 or any other time for that matter.
 
#231
#231
BowlBrother85 said:
And how many times on VN since Trump took office, have conservatives said something to the effect of "You should judge actions, not words". Democrats did not end up blocking a George H.W. Bush nominee in 1992 or any other time for that matter.
Click to expand...

They intended to, the only reason they didn't was because there wasn't a nomination to block
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#233
#233
BowlBrother85 said:
And how many times on VN since Trump took office, have conservatives said something to the effect of "You should judge actions, not words". Democrats did not end up blocking a George H.W. Bush nominee in 1992 or any other time for that matter.
Click to expand...

You know...

The Republicans didn't block Clinton nominees either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#236
#236
Grand Vol said:
You know...

The Republicans didn't block Clinton nominees either.
Click to expand...

True. RBG was confirmed 96-4. However, very few Supreme Court nominees to get a vote (Robert Bork and his key role in Nixon's Saturday Night Massacre aside) have ever been as vulnerable as Thomas in 1991.
 
#237
#237
BowlBrother85 said:
Yes, I wasn't tying it to tie this case into yesterday's decision (like I said) but why pick now to do this? The Korematsu case was 74 years ago (he died in 2005). It seems the court was trying to convey a message by doing that.
Click to expand...

OK, got it. I've given up on trying to figure the twisted logic behind judicial minds. There's not a lot that has come from the SC in a long time that really seems to equate with reality - particularly when you start including the individual views. Our system of checks and balances certainly doesn't do much to check judicial overreach.
 
#238
#238
BowlBrother85 said:
Those are words Republicans love to cite... but it didn't actually lead to blocking a nominee. The Republicans set the precedent by actually doing it.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but I guess your brilliant strategists shouldn't have shown malevolent little Republican minds the the shining path. Joe has always had a problem with mouth control.
 
#239
#239
Grand Vol said:
Basically what BB is saying is the DNC believes that since the GOP acted like children (and they did) in not giving Garland an up or down vote, the DNC has the honor of acting like children when they get into a position to do so.
Click to expand...

Considering the last couple of mouth breathing partisan clowns the Dims put on the SC, they should forgo a few lifetimes of opportunity to pack a court. The whole process has become a scandal - nothing resembling finding the best minds - just ideological hacks.
 
#243
#243
the fact that this concern over who gets nominated next proves that the courts aren't what they should be. both sides.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#246
#246
AirVol said:
Get use to it.
Click to expand...

Already am and it's hilarious. Ever wonder why this country's most honorable and reputable republicans/conservatives want nothing to do with Trump?

You have know serving in the military as long as you did that most of our brass can't stand him either.
 
#248
#248
114VOL said:
Already am and it's hilarious. Ever wonder why this country's most honorable and reputable republicans/conservatives want nothing to do with Trump?

You have know serving in the military as long as you did that most of our brass can't stand him either.
Click to expand...

Wouldn’t know their thoughts on Trump, I retired Dec 2013. However, I do know some that disliked Obama. Matter of fact, when you retire you have an option to get a letter from the current president and/or a living former president. Not many wanted/got one from Obama.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#249
#249
114VOL said:
Already am and it's hilarious. Ever wonder why this country's most honorable and reputable republicans/conservatives want nothing to do with Trump?

You have know serving in the military as long as you did that most of our brass can't stand him either.
Click to expand...

honorable?



reputable?



seriously?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top