Author Topic: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings-Congrats Justice Kavanaugh  (Read 78382 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings
« Reply #45 on: June 27, 2018, 08:05:31 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 38883
  • Tommy Points: 6281
I agree with the latter, but not the former. The GOP has been decidedly more cutthroat and partisan for at least the past 20 years.

In fact, I'd say democrats focus on none of those 5 things as much. They:

1) Focus more (than the GOP) on policy, albeit plenty of identity politics as well.

2) Get creamed at the state level, because it *hasn't* been the party strategy

3) Never manage to make an effective pro-military argument

4) Have never obstructed at any level approaching the current state. Simple filibustering of the past doesn't even rate on this scale.

5) Bernie vs Hillary is a classic example, but democrats repeatedly throw their own under the bus for the moral/ ideological high ground

Both parties are really messed up, but there's also no real equivalency here. It scares me that so many people can't see the difference and want to lump a little with a lot.
I just don't agree with almost any of this.

Can you give any specifics? You're entitled to your opinion (and I'm sure there is some gray area), but simply saying "they do it too" seems conveniently simplistic to me.

We just experienced Hillary making an uninspiring run based on policy, undermined by a rift within the party (or conversely, Bernie was undermined).

GOP strategists are specifically behind the state of state legislatures - obviously democrats do try to win elections, but it's actual top-down strategy from only one side or a while now.

The GOP is universally accepted as the pro-military party, even though they won't fund the VA and marched us into Iraq.

The obstruction of Garland was unprecedented. Period. No equal.

GOP stated strategy was to obstruct Obama into a single term. Democrats have never done this.

I'm not trying to make a sweeping moral judgement here, but isn't the above basically factual?
I would say almost everything you said here is pretty factual.

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings
« Reply #46 on: June 27, 2018, 08:09:39 PM »

Offline arctic 3.0

  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2423
  • Tommy Points: 388
Putting all the civil rights issues aside for a moment, what the GOP has done in the past 2 years with the Supreme Court is a completely unprecedented party-first power play. There is nothing remotely similar to:

1) Refusing to vote on a nomination for 10 months.. and the appointee was a left-CENTRIST (leave it to liberals to compromise upfront and get screwed).

2) Make rule changes specifically so they could force through subsequent appointees without a filibuster and unbalance the court as much as possible as quickly as possible.

The GOP is not playing at democracy, they are running a slow moving coup to install a conservative America, and fueling it on the backs of culture war.

The truth
The bottom line is that the GOP has a playbook for "winning" at American politics. I consider it dirty politics, anti-democratic, and in some cases downright unconstitutional. Their base considers it smart, tough and justified.

1) Stoke your base in red states with cultural issues. Abortion, Supreme Court, immigration. You can win elections and lose the popular vote by taking advantage of the electoral college. Cast all democrats as elitists and wannabe socialists.

2) Pour money into winning state seats, so that you can gerrymander districts. Now The House has more GOP seats than expected - electoral strategy all over again.

3) Take ownership of patriotism - military, MAGA etc when you have no particular moral authority or stronger record here. Example: funding for the VA.

4) Exploit every loophole in a partisan manner. Anything Obama touches is automatically rejected. Refuse to confirm Garland. If you can vote to change a rule in your favor, do it that way.

5) Unity. No matter if it's a child molester, a philanderer, a liar, an ex-Democrat, always act as a blockade and keep your own people in office.
More truth

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings
« Reply #47 on: June 27, 2018, 08:11:05 PM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • Dennis Johnson
  • ******************
  • Posts: 18038
  • Tommy Points: 1191
Quote
donít think so. I think heíll select somebody qualified.

I changed my mind I think it will be Hardiman.

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings
« Reply #48 on: June 27, 2018, 08:11:39 PM »

Offline More Banners

  • Ray Allen
  • ***
  • Posts: 3845
  • Tommy Points: 257
The partisanship really kicked up later in the 90's. Even the 2000 pres election was a fight for the center...Bush's compassionate conservatism vs Gore's practical idealism. And it was close.

Somewhere, things just went farther and farther, more and more extreme partisanship on cable news, rather than just leaning. Perhaps it's all falling over. They serve their viewers.  Meanwhile, Facebook's algorithms fed us more extreme versions of whatever our disposition was, just like TV. In Moscow, the Russians figures it's in their best interests for us to argue among ourselves and sought to exacerbate existing political divisions even more than we were doing to ourselves.

 Now, rather than appealing to moderates, and consequently getting moderate government including the courts, its more of a stall-till-you-can-win strategy. Shut down the government. Don't bother passing a real budget. Don't hold hearings.  Blame the other party when things don't function.

It's interesting. Is this how democracies come undone?  I'm not sure there's a clear path back to compromise politics and moderation.

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings
« Reply #49 on: June 27, 2018, 08:15:25 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 39566
  • Tommy Points: -27314
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
I agree with the latter, but not the former. The GOP has been decidedly more cutthroat and partisan for at least the past 20 years.

In fact, I'd say democrats focus on none of those 5 things as much. They:

1) Focus more (than the GOP) on policy, albeit plenty of identity politics as well.

2) Get creamed at the state level, because it *hasn't* been the party strategy

3) Never manage to make an effective pro-military argument

4) Have never obstructed at any level approaching the current state. Simple filibustering of the past doesn't even rate on this scale.

5) Bernie vs Hillary is a classic example, but democrats repeatedly throw their own under the bus for the moral/ ideological high ground

Both parties are really messed up, but there's also no real equivalency here. It scares me that so many people can't see the difference and want to lump a little with a lot.
I just don't agree with almost any of this.

Can you give any specifics? You're entitled to your opinion (and I'm sure there is some gray area), but simply saying "they do it too" seems conveniently simplistic to me.

We just experienced Hillary making an uninspiring run based on policy, undermined by a rift within the party (or conversely, Bernie was undermined).

GOP strategists are specifically behind the state of state legislatures - obviously democrats do try to win elections, but it's actual top-down strategy from only one side or a while now.

The GOP is universally accepted as the pro-military party, even though they won't fund the VA and marched us into Iraq.

The obstruction of Garland was unprecedented. Period. No equal.

GOP stated strategy was to obstruct Obama into a single term. Democrats have never done this.

I'm not trying to make a sweeping moral judgement here, but isn't the above basically factual?
I would say almost everything you said here is pretty factual.

Democrats arenít obstructing Trump, trying to make him a single term President? Of course they are.

And, Democrats wrote the book on obstructing judicial nominees. Biden talked openly about doing what McConnell did, the Dems filibustered and the blue slip process to an unprecedented degree, and it was Harry Reid who invoked the nuclear option.

Youíve got prominent Democrats calling for harassment by mob.  Their entire platform is based upon appealing to feelings; Iíd hardly describe them as policy wonks.  Hillary didnít run on policy. She ran on ďIím not TrumpĒ, while calling half the country deplorable.

Both parties are motivated by the same thing: gaining and maintaining power.
Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings
« Reply #50 on: June 27, 2018, 08:16:31 PM »

Offline Cman

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12686
  • Tommy Points: 88
Sorry, as our former president said just a few years ago, "elections have consequences". And America elected MAGA as president and republicans in charge of both houses of congress. To act as though Obama and Schumer wouldn't do the same thing if they were in charge is a joke and a lie.
I agree. That's precisely why we should wait until the midterms with this, right?

There's no waiting for the midterms. It's not about principle, its about politics.

The only reason McConnell waited until after the election is because he could, because Rs had control of the Senate. The Dems don't have that leverage, so its a non-starter. Again, its not about principle.
Celtics fan for life.

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings
« Reply #51 on: June 27, 2018, 08:21:17 PM »

Offline jpotter33

  • NGT
  • Walter Brown
  • ********************************
  • Posts: 32235
  • Tommy Points: 404
From McConnell himself:
Quote
ďThe Senate stands ready to fulfill its constitutional role by offering advice and consent on President Trumpís nominee to fill this vacancy,Ē Mr. McConnell, Republican of Kentucky and the majority leader, said after Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement. ďWe will vote to confirm Justice Kennedyís successor this fall.Ē

From McConnell in 2016:
Quote
"One of my proudest moments was when I told Obama, 'You will not fill this Supreme Court vacancy,"

It's like you can't make this stuff up. Republicans who voted for Trump over Hillary - we know who you are - got exactly what they wanted. It's amazing a president can can lose the popular vote by nearly 3 million votes, yet have so much impact on the next generation. And we are only 1 1/2 years in. Hang in there Ruth, we need you!

I mean, not really, because weíre a liberal democratic republic and not a true democracy, which is a good thing, unless you like mob rule.

But, yeah, imagine if she ends up retiring/passing in the next year or so, too. Thatíd be pretty scary. Itís crazy how blatantly hypocritical both sides are on pretty much any issue now; itís only right if someone from my own ideology is doing it.

I prefer a Supreme Court with at least one centrist swing vote. 4 conservatives, 4 liberals, 1 swing. Or better 3 conservatives, 3 liberals and 3 swings. I think having things this way is best for America.

Agreed. For as many supposed ďcentristsĒ as there are out there, you sure donít see this type of argument very often. I think a right-dominated SCOTUS is just as dangerous as a left-dominated SCOTUS; each side has their own areas where they are hostile to individual liberty.
Whatever crushes individuality is despotism, by whatever name it may be called and whether it professes to be enforcing the will of God or the injunctions of men.

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings
« Reply #52 on: June 27, 2018, 08:21:41 PM »

Offline Cman

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12686
  • Tommy Points: 88
I agree with the latter, but not the former. The GOP has been decidedly more cutthroat and partisan for at least the past 20 years.

In fact, I'd say democrats focus on none of those 5 things as much. They:

1) Focus more (than the GOP) on policy, albeit plenty of identity politics as well.

2) Get creamed at the state level, because it *hasn't* been the party strategy

3) Never manage to make an effective pro-military argument

4) Have never obstructed at any level approaching the current state. Simple filibustering of the past doesn't even rate on this scale.

5) Bernie vs Hillary is a classic example, but democrats repeatedly throw their own under the bus for the moral/ ideological high ground

Both parties are really messed up, but there's also no real equivalency here. It scares me that so many people can't see the difference and want to lump a little with a lot.
I just don't agree with almost any of this.

Can you give any specifics? You're entitled to your opinion (and I'm sure there is some gray area), but simply saying "they do it too" seems conveniently simplistic to me.

We just experienced Hillary making an uninspiring run based on policy, undermined by a rift within the party (or conversely, Bernie was undermined).

GOP strategists are specifically behind the state of state legislatures - obviously democrats do try to win elections, but it's actual top-down strategy from only one side or a while now.

The GOP is universally accepted as the pro-military party, even though they won't fund the VA and marched us into Iraq.

The obstruction of Garland was unprecedented. Period. No equal.

GOP stated strategy was to obstruct Obama into a single term. Democrats have never done this.

I'm not trying to make a sweeping moral judgement here, but isn't the above basically factual?
I would say almost everything you said here is pretty factual.

Democrats arenít obstructing Trump, trying to make him a single term President? Of course they are.

And, Democrats wrote the book on obstructing judicial nominees. Biden talked openly about doing what McConnell did, the Dems filibustered and the blue slip process to an unprecedented degree, and it was Harry Reid who invoked the nuclear option.

Youíve got prominent Democrats calling for harassment by mob.  Their entire platform is based upon appealing to feelings; Iíd hardly describe them as policy wonks.  Hillary didnít run on policy. She ran on ďIím not TrumpĒ, while calling half the country deplorable.

Both parties are motivated by the same thing: gaining and maintaining power.

Hillary did have plenty more policy than Trump (not surprising) but I agree she did a poor job running on it, and instead ran "against Trump" rather than "for" something.

But I take your point about political parties. Similar to what I said above, its about politics, not principles.
Celtics fan for life.

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings
« Reply #53 on: June 27, 2018, 08:22:21 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
Sorry, as our former president said just a few years ago, "elections have consequences". And America elected MAGA as president and republicans in charge of both houses of congress. To act as though Obama and Schumer wouldn't do the same thing if they were in charge is a joke and a lie.
I agree. That's precisely why we should wait until the midterms with this, right?

There's no waiting for the midterms. It's not about principle, its about politics.

The only reason McConnell waited until after the election is because he could, because Rs had control of the Senate. The Dems don't have that leverage, so its a non-starter. Again, its not about principle.
The Senate is 50-49 right now, so Republicans actually have to get votes from both Collins and Murkowski on this. We'll see.
"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings
« Reply #54 on: June 27, 2018, 08:26:18 PM »

Offline Cman

  • Frank Ramsey
  • ************
  • Posts: 12686
  • Tommy Points: 88
Sorry, as our former president said just a few years ago, "elections have consequences". And America elected MAGA as president and republicans in charge of both houses of congress. To act as though Obama and Schumer wouldn't do the same thing if they were in charge is a joke and a lie.
I agree. That's precisely why we should wait until the midterms with this, right?

There's no waiting for the midterms. It's not about principle, its about politics.

The only reason McConnell waited until after the election is because he could, because Rs had control of the Senate. The Dems don't have that leverage, so its a non-starter. Again, its not about principle.
The Senate is 50-49 right now, so Republicans actually have to get votes from both Collins and Murkowski on this. We'll see.
Right, which I think ties Trump's hands a bit. He's not going to select someone who won't get confirmed.
(Right?)
Celtics fan for life.

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings
« Reply #55 on: June 27, 2018, 08:30:53 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
I prefer a Supreme Court with at least one centrist swing vote. 4 conservatives, 4 liberals, 1 swing. Or better 3 conservatives, 3 liberals and 3 swings. I think having things this way is best for America.

Agreed. For as many supposed ďcentristsĒ as there are out there, you sure donít see this type of argument very often. I think a right-dominated SCOTUS is just as dangerous as a left-dominated SCOTUS; each side has their own areas where they are hostile to individual liberty.
Well, Obama did try to put a third swing on SCOTUS, but somehow even moderate Republicans thought that was a bad idea.

However, Hardiman scores as less conservative than Roberts. If I remember correctly, he was the runner-up after Gorsuch for the previous nomination, so we'll see.
"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings
« Reply #56 on: June 27, 2018, 08:32:02 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
Sorry, as our former president said just a few years ago, "elections have consequences". And America elected MAGA as president and republicans in charge of both houses of congress. To act as though Obama and Schumer wouldn't do the same thing if they were in charge is a joke and a lie.
I agree. That's precisely why we should wait until the midterms with this, right?

There's no waiting for the midterms. It's not about principle, its about politics.

The only reason McConnell waited until after the election is because he could, because Rs had control of the Senate. The Dems don't have that leverage, so its a non-starter. Again, its not about principle.
The Senate is 50-49 right now, so Republicans actually have to get votes from both Collins and Murkowski on this. We'll see.
Right, which I think ties Trump's hands a bit. He's not going to select someone who won't get confirmed.
(Right?)
Collins and Murkowski have both been supportive of Roe vs Wade in the past, so this will likely be a sticking point for them.
"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings
« Reply #57 on: June 27, 2018, 08:32:12 PM »

Offline byennie

  • Webmaster
  • Bailey Howell
  • **
  • Posts: 2362
  • Tommy Points: 2981
Democrats arenít obstructing Trump, trying to make him a single term President? Of course they are.

And, Democrats wrote the book on obstructing judicial nominees. Biden talked openly about doing what McConnell did, the Dems filibustered and the blue slip process to an unprecedented degree, and it was Harry Reid who invoked the nuclear option.

Youíve got prominent Democrats calling for harassment by mob.  Their entire platform is based upon appealing to feelings; Iíd hardly describe them as policy wonks.  Hillary didnít run on policy. She ran on ďIím not TrumpĒ, while calling half the country deplorable.

Both parties are motivated by the same thing: gaining and maintaining power.
Again, similarities are not equivalencies. They are both participants in the same 2 party American system. Of course they employ some of the same tactics. Of course there are isolated examples of pretty much everything.

Compared to Trump, Hillary was an absolute policy wonk. Did you read their platforms? What about Bernie's platform? He nearly won the whole thing on progressive democratic socialism, practically a different approach to government altogether. The gulf between Hillary and Bernie's proposals and Trump's "build a wall and Mexico pays for it" was night and day.

Democrats walked Al Franken out the door for a PG rated photo op that he apologized for. Republicans stood by Trump after the "cat" grabber incident and rallied behind an unpopular pedophile and disgraced judge for Senate.

Biden and Reid may have talked and dabbled, but the current GOP run of 9 years culminating in Garland is unlike anything in history. You can claim the dems would have done the same, but the fact is they haven't.

I agree both parties seek power. I agree some of the same things happen. Maybe the democrats will get power back and behave even worse. Who knows. What I do know, is that TODAY, and for at least the past decade, the Republican party is the one playing much dirtier with democracy. Maybe it's temporary. Maybe it's not inherently that way. But right now, it is.

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings
« Reply #58 on: June 27, 2018, 08:35:03 PM »

Offline nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 38883
  • Tommy Points: 6281
I agree with the latter, but not the former. The GOP has been decidedly more cutthroat and partisan for at least the past 20 years.

In fact, I'd say democrats focus on none of those 5 things as much. They:

1) Focus more (than the GOP) on policy, albeit plenty of identity politics as well.

2) Get creamed at the state level, because it *hasn't* been the party strategy

3) Never manage to make an effective pro-military argument

4) Have never obstructed at any level approaching the current state. Simple filibustering of the past doesn't even rate on this scale.

5) Bernie vs Hillary is a classic example, but democrats repeatedly throw their own under the bus for the moral/ ideological high ground

Both parties are really messed up, but there's also no real equivalency here. It scares me that so many people can't see the difference and want to lump a little with a lot.
I just don't agree with almost any of this.

Can you give any specifics? You're entitled to your opinion (and I'm sure there is some gray area), but simply saying "they do it too" seems conveniently simplistic to me.

We just experienced Hillary making an uninspiring run based on policy, undermined by a rift within the party (or conversely, Bernie was undermined).

GOP strategists are specifically behind the state of state legislatures - obviously democrats do try to win elections, but it's actual top-down strategy from only one side or a while now.

The GOP is universally accepted as the pro-military party, even though they won't fund the VA and marched us into Iraq.

The obstruction of Garland was unprecedented. Period. No equal.

GOP stated strategy was to obstruct Obama into a single term. Democrats have never done this.

I'm not trying to make a sweeping moral judgement here, but isn't the above basically factual?
I would say almost everything you said here is pretty factual.

Democrats arenít obstructing Trump, trying to make him a single term President? Of course they are.

And, Democrats wrote the book on obstructing judicial nominees. Biden talked openly about doing what McConnell did, the Dems filibustered and the blue slip process to an unprecedented degree, and it was Harry Reid who invoked the nuclear option.

Youíve got prominent Democrats calling for harassment by mob.  Their entire platform is based upon appealing to feelings; Iíd hardly describe them as policy wonks.  Hillary didnít run on policy. She ran on ďIím not TrumpĒ, while calling half the country deplorable.

Both parties are motivated by the same thing: gaining and maintaining power.
As i said "almost everything".
I think for sure the GOP concentrates on the local elections more than the Dems. The Dems power bases are in the inner cities. The GOP in rural America and what rules in rural America....local politics. Smart move by the GOP. I think thats pretty factual.

I think its pretty factual that the GOP is looked upon as the "military" party. Heck, just about everyone I know that ever served became or were Republican.

The obstruction of Garland was unprecedented. Almost 10 months without a vote has never happened to a SC candidate purpisely for political reasons. That's pretty factual.

The obstruction of anything for Obama to vote on was pretty unprecedented. Yes, each party has done it before, but never to the extent that happened for Obama's final 6 years. Also, yes the Dems are trying to do the same thing but with the House, Senate and Supreme Court all being conservative majority, they aren't and will never be able to obstruct to the extent that the Republicans did under Obama. Simple fact is if Trump wasn't trying to push everything so far right and selected qualified individuals for nominations, there probably would be zero obstruction happening becausethe Dems just wouldn't have the power to do it.

I do agree that in the end, both parties only want power. I just think the Reps play their politucs a bit dirtier, on the whole, than the Dems do.



Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings
« Reply #59 on: June 27, 2018, 08:41:41 PM »

Offline kozlodoev

  • NCE
  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17914
  • Tommy Points: 1294
Quote
donít think so. I think heíll select somebody qualified.

I changed my mind I think it will be Hardiman.
I've concluded this might be the best case scenario.
"I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve."