he calls Gisbert a ing basket case and says her old senile mind is shot
Damn what an epic obliteration
He has also caught up with Shillary in 3 swing states
I also called Trump/Christie ticket months ago btw. Will bump when official
So calling Justice Ginsberg names is an obliteration?
Winning arguments has become so easy now, I guess. No need to worry about substance -- just throw around a couple of insults (regardless of their factual foundation) and you can declare yourself not just a winner but a winner in such grand terms that you've actually obliterated someone, and all without need of even indulging the substance of her argument.
Do you have an opinion on a supreme court justice involving herself in a presidential election? It is rather unprecedented.
yeah, that was odd. has that happened in the past with little notice? i don't recall.
For hater it is.
When one is a poster child for low skills at critical thinking and the Donning Kruger effect, that is all such people really have.
Sad.
I agree with most of your post, but in this particular case, trump won the minute Ginsburg decided to comment on him as a candidate. The Supreme Court isn't supposed to be weighing in on political races, this is the latest case of trump baiting someone into doing something out of character and stooping to his level.
Meh.
My take mirrors almost exactly this guy:
http://blog.cons utioncenter.org/2...t-on-politics/
In short: fully within her rights to comment, but a bit unwise. A broach of decorum.
Far less inappropriate that implying someones heritage makes them unfit to adjudicate a lawsuit.
"Supreme Court isn't supposed to be weighing in on political races"
The extreme rigthwingnut SCOTUS has weighed HEAVILY on political races, by gutting the VRA, "corporations are people", "money is speech", etc.
Agreed, the Supreme Court conservatives taking obvious partisan stances on rulings such as bush v gore was completely outside the realm of what the Supreme Court is supposed to do. That doesn't excuse Ginsburg for engaging in partisan politics herself."Supreme Court isn't supposed to be weighing in on political races"
The extreme rigthwingnut SCOTUS has weighed HEAVILY on political races, by gutting the VRA, "corporations are people", "money is speech", etc.
so rightwingnut VRWC tool judges can screw with politics, but leftwing judges need to STFU?
I do. But that wasn't the point of the OP.
And in a world where Bush v. Gore still exists, I'm not sure her "involvement" in a presidential election is "unprecedented."
Last edited by FromWayDowntown; 07-13-2016 at 11:13 AM.
Boo is the king of straw man arguments. I didn't say Ginsburg broke any laws or regulations by commenting on trump, I'm saying she did something improper and out of character and that it's another examples of trump baiting another politician into hurting his/herself, the same way he baited Jeb/Rubio/etc.
I think Christie wants AG more than VP. Gingrich would be his best bet as running mate imo.
Damn what an epic obliteration
He has also caught up with Shillary in 3 swing states
I also called Trump/Christie ticket months ago btw. Will bump when official
The lady's character is just fine, and her brain isn't shot, as Trash says.
Like all serious people, she's horrified by Trash and the 10Ms supporting him.
If Trash brings a case before her, she can recuse herself (something the Repug judges don't do).
“However valid her comments may have been, though, and however in keeping with her known political bent, they were still much, much better left unsaid by a member of the Supreme Court,” The Washington Post’s editorial board said Tuesday. “Politicization, real or perceived, undermines public faith in the impartiality of the courts.”
The board noted the Code of Conduct for U.S. judges says that a “judge should not . . . publicly endorse or oppose a candidate for public office.”
The New York Times also chimed in: “Washington is more than partisan enough without the spectacle of a Supreme Court justice flinging herself into the mosh pit."
Maybe she thinks she's above the Code of Conduct for US judges.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016...-comments.html
I'm quite sure she doesn't believe that.
She clearly shouldn't have said what she said and she's being rightly criticized for having inserted herself into the political discourse in this manner. Still, it's not as though her opinion in this regard would be surprising to anyone who is remotely aware of the Supreme Court (nor, for that matter, would an opinion by Justice Alito or Justice Thomas hoping against the election of Hillary Clinton).
For whatever it's worth, any actual violation of that Code is the violation of an aspirational set of thoughts about judicial behavior that carries no mandatory penalties for its violation -- saying someone "should" do something is quite different than saying someone "must" do it.
Nevertheless, I'm sure also that those who disagree with her jurisprudence will (or already have chosen to) see this as a justification for urging her impeachment or removal otherwise from the Supreme Court.
Last edited by FromWayDowntown; 07-13-2016 at 12:12 PM.
But ginrich looks like a damn leprechaun
At least Christie althou looks like a gay hippo has some kind of human resemblance
She got demolished. Lets move on
I guess.
Is her commentary anything other than a breech of decorum?
How exactly has my being a Democrat affected my opinion in this case?
I am perfectly willing to hold Democrats feet to the fire when they do something stupid/wrong, so your criticism really is more your assuming that other people think like you do, a very human thing to do, but in this case, leads to you conclude something that is a bit stupid.
Do not confuse my overall exasperation with the continual failures of conservatives and conservative policy with an unwillingness to criticize my own party.
I await your complete inability to back up your bull with anything that approaches reason.
Last edited by RandomGuy; 07-13-2016 at 01:16 PM.
Scalia and his rightwingnut buddies diddled around in politics, under false pretenses, by ELECTING dubya and head, but RBG can't express an opinion about Trash?
http://blog.cons utioncenter.org/2...t-on-politics/It should be said quickly in response that the reality is that the code of judicial ethics has never been understood by most members of the Supreme Court as actually binding on them. Over the years, most Justices have voluntarily sought to observe the ethical norms, but they have drawn the line at having those enforced against them. They have done so as a matter of principle: the Founders intended the Supreme Court to be truly independent. The Cons ution provides the only form of punishment if they stray too far from what the political branches of the government want or believe to be proper: the congressional power of impeachment.
SCOTUS is above the specific ethical rules applied to federal judges, in line with the general spirit of the cons ution in setting up a co-equal branch of government.
Christie looks like someone you'd read about in a Michael Lewis book for the way he would berate interns and make them go on 7 cheeseburger runs everyday because he wanted to be considered the biggest asshole in the fixed income department at Solomon Brothers. He does nothing to appeal to rust belt voters in battleground states.But ginrich looks like a damn leprechaun
At least Christie althou looks like a gay hippo has some kind of human resemblance
Gingrich meanwhile isn't considered an establishment shill but is credible enough to not be considered a loon. He's also an expert at condescendingly getting under people's skin the way Trump is
People parrot Trump's ing and moaning about political correctness. Someone gives their honest opinion about Trump's candidacy (and it's truthful lol) and mental midgets go to pieces over it. The guy running for the highest office in the land can hide behind the politically incorrect shield when he goes after war vets, "stupid" leaders, Mexican judges and disabled people but then whines like a and plays victim when he's criticized by a judge.
She got demolished. Lets move on
LOL hater
It takes a special kind of intellect to think that Trump has the intellectual chops to take out any SCOTUS justice.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
