Notices

Serious Debates & News Debate and discussion about political, moral, philosophical, celebrity and news topics.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 19-09-2020, 11:03 PM   #26
Trouble1321075
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 560
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dezzy View Post
Well considering most of the Republicans said that it would be unjust to nominate an SC judge before an election in 2016, they really shouldn't be outrageous hypocrites and do exactly that now the shoe is on the other foot.
They are fools if they don't use their position to name another judge to the bench.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Trouble1321075 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-09-2020, 11:04 PM   #27
Liam-
Senior Member
 
Liam-'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Cardiff.
Posts: 20,050

Favourites (more):
BB19: Lewis F
CBB21: Shane Jenek
CBB20: Sarah Harding
BB18: Deborah


Default

Well the White House has said that there won’t be time to do it before the election anyway
__________________
Liam- is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-09-2020, 11:08 PM   #28
Dezzy
Babs
 
Dezzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 42,822

Favourites (more):
CBB21: Shane Jenek
CBB19: Kim Woodburn
BB17: Jayne
CBB17: Tiffany Pollard


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trouble1321075 View Post
They are fools if they don't use their position to name another judge to the bench.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
No, they'd just be hypocrites offering up more reasons not to trust them. I don't know how you can defend the republicans and then try to paint democrats as hypocrites while ignoring and then trying to justify Republican hypocrisy.
__________________
Dezzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-09-2020, 11:11 PM   #29
Trouble1321075
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 560
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dezzy View Post
Honestly, being like 'BUT THE DEMOCRATS' is pointless. Republicans enforced a standard in 2016 that they themselves will not abide by in 2020. You can complain about the dems all you want but it's not gonna change the fact that the republicans are massive hypocrites.
You can call republicans names all you want but its not gonna change the fact that they are doing exactly what the progressives would of done if the roles were reversed. They would of blocked a republican nominee in 16 had they held a majority in the senate and they would of elected a progressive judge to fill the current open seat before the election. Republicans are gonna put another judge on the bench.
This is ginsbergs fault for not stepping down when obama asked her to. She gambled that she could outlast a republican controlled process and she and her party lost.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Trouble1321075 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-09-2020, 11:16 PM   #30
Trouble1321075
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 560
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dezzy View Post
No, they'd just be hypocrites offering up more reasons not to trust them. I don't know how you can defend the republicans and then try to paint democrats as hypocrites while ignoring and then trying to justify Republican hypocrisy.
Im being honest about it. Neither party would pass up an opportunity to name a judge to the bench. Look at the lengths progressives went to block kavanaugh. Politics has become a bloodsport.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Trouble1321075 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-09-2020, 11:41 PM   #31
arista
Senior Member
 
arista's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 107,383
Default

arista is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2020, 04:00 AM   #32
Dezzy
Babs
 
Dezzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 42,822

Favourites (more):
CBB21: Shane Jenek
CBB19: Kim Woodburn
BB17: Jayne
CBB17: Tiffany Pollard


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trouble1321075 View Post
You can call republicans names all you want but its not gonna change the fact that they are doing exactly what the progressives would of done if the roles were reversed. They would of blocked a republican nominee in 16 had they held a majority in the senate and they would of elected a progressive judge to fill the current open seat before the election. Republicans are gonna put another judge on the bench.
This is ginsbergs fault for not stepping down when obama asked her to. She gambled that she could outlast a republican controlled process and she and her party lost.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Yeah, **** her for dying! Good grief.... So, let me get this straight, the Republicans being dirty little lying hypocrites that can't abide by the standards they force on others is not their fault, it's the fault of a woman who died of cancer and the dems for not being as morally corrupt and opportunistic as the republicans... That's a lot of blame for the republican's actions to place at everyone's door BUT the republicans.

Your logic is..... fascinating....
__________________
Dezzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2020, 04:00 AM   #33
Dezzy
Babs
 
Dezzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 42,822

Favourites (more):
CBB21: Shane Jenek
CBB19: Kim Woodburn
BB17: Jayne
CBB17: Tiffany Pollard


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trouble1321075 View Post
Im being honest about it. Neither party would pass up an opportunity to name a judge to the bench. Look at the lengths progressives went to block kavanaugh. Politics has become a bloodsport.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Because Kavanaugh's a rapist piece of ****. You also can't talk about politics becoming a bloodsport when you're obviously playing the game by jumping through hoops to avoid attributing any blame to the republicans for their own actions.
__________________

Last edited by Dezzy; 20-09-2020 at 04:02 AM.
Dezzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2020, 04:25 AM   #34
arista
Senior Member
 
arista's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 107,383
Default

President Trump is picking a Lady for the Job.
He said speaking to a reporter at a Rally.


So all is good


Ref: SkyNewsHD
arista is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2020, 06:54 AM   #35
Ammi
Quand il pleut, il pleut
 
Ammi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: on Blueberry Hill
Posts: 52,498


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GiRTh View Post
A great loss. RIP
...she was a true advocate of all equality../...just of equal humankind.....

...her words in discrimination...

"I try to teach through my opinions, through my speeches, how wrong it is to judge people on the basis of what they look like, color of their skin, whether they’re men or women."
__________________



Paris is always a good idea...

Last edited by Ammi; 20-09-2020 at 06:54 AM.
Ammi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2020, 10:45 AM   #36
Niamh.
I Love my brick
 
Niamh.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Ireland-The peoples Republic of Cork!
Posts: 128,397

Favourites (more):
BB19: Cian
IAC2018: Rita Simons
CBB22: Kirstie Alley
CBB21: Shane Lynch


Default

RIP
__________________

Spoiler:

Quote:
Originally Posted by GiRTh View Post
You compare Jim Davidson to Nelson Mandela?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jesus. View Post
I know, how stupid? He's more like Gandhi.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Isaiah 7:14 View Post



Katie Hopkins reveals epilepsy made her suicidal - and says she identifies as a MAN
Quote:
Originally Posted by Livia View Post
Just because she is a giant cock, doesn't make her a man.
Niamh. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2020, 03:03 PM   #37
Trouble1321075
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 560
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dezzy View Post
Yeah, **** her for dying! Good grief.... So, let me get this straight, the Republicans being dirty little lying hypocrites that can't abide by the standards they force on others is not their fault, it's the fault of a woman who died of cancer and the dems for not being as morally corrupt and opportunistic as the republicans... That's a lot of blame for the republican's actions to place at everyone's door BUT the republicans.



Your logic is..... fascinating....
Im not "blaming" her. I am pointing that she was offered an opportunity from Obama to step down and she rejected his offer. That is not an opinion, it is a fact.
She took a calculated political risk and her health failed her. Her time of passing has occurred with a republican president in office and a republican majority senate. That is the worst case scenerio for democrats.
You and others are complaining that its not fair and republicans are hypocrites. The fact is that it is completely fair. No rules are being broken.
Republicans and Democrats are both hypocrites. Its naive to believe that either party would of done anything differently in the same situation. They both play a win at all costs game.
I got news for you, you better worry about Breyers seat too because he is no spring chicken. Thomas may also retire if we have a republican president and senate.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Trouble1321075 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2020, 03:09 PM   #38
The Slim Reaper
Pain to my sham friends
 
The Slim Reaper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: In MS Paint on your desktop
Posts: 6,189
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trouble1321075 View Post
Im not "blaming" her. I am pointing that she was offered an opportunity from Obama to step down and she rejected his offer. That is not an opinion, it is a fact.
She took a calculated political risk and her health failed her. Her time of passing has occurred with a republican president in office and a republican majority senate. That is the worst case scenerio for democrats.
You and others are complaining that its not fair and republicans are hypocrites. The fact is that it is completely fair. No rules are being broken.
Republicans and Democrats are both hypocrites. Its naive to believe that either party would of done anything differently in the same situation. They both play a win at all costs game.
I got news for you, you better worry about Breyers seat too because he is no spring chicken. Thomas may also retire if we have a republican president and senate.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Prior to Garland, republican presidents appointed judges if dems held the senate, and dem presidents appointed judges with republican senates.

It's not even a dem issue, republicans just decided to take a dump on precedent and started inventing their own rules and now they've decided that their own rules don't apply to them. Because you're a republican I can understand that you don't care (even though these things are cyclical and will come back around eventually), but to not even acknowledge reality doesn't make a lot of sense.
__________________


Spoiler:



Quote:
Originally Posted by Livia View Post
I think he was one of the best members we ever had here. Funny, intelligent and frustrating and really very kind. I hope he comes back.

Last edited by The Slim Reaper; 20-09-2020 at 03:10 PM.
The Slim Reaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2020, 03:14 PM   #39
Dezzy
Babs
 
Dezzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 42,822

Favourites (more):
CBB21: Shane Jenek
CBB19: Kim Woodburn
BB17: Jayne
CBB17: Tiffany Pollard


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trouble1321075 View Post
Im not "blaming" her. I am pointing that she was offered an opportunity from Obama to step down and she rejected his offer. That is not an opinion, it is a fact.
She took a calculated political risk and her health failed her. Her time of passing has occurred with a republican president in office and a republican majority senate. That is the worst case scenerio for democrats.
You and others are complaining that its not fair and republicans are hypocrites. The fact is that it is completely fair. No rules are being broken.
Republicans and Democrats are both hypocrites. Its naive to believe that either party would of done anything differently in the same situation. They both play a win at all costs game.
I got news for you, you better worry about Breyers seat too because he is no spring chicken. Thomas may also retire if we have a republican president and senate.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
You're endorsing that politicians, people in power, act in bad faith, you treat this like it's a game in which you have to do anything to win and it's not. It's about securing human rights, it's not about winning or losing. If those in power act in bad faith, then they must pay the consequences because the decisions that the SC make are no joke.

If Republicans opposed the appointment of a new Judge in 2016 because it was an election year, they simply cannot change their minds because it now benefits them. When you enforce a standard upon others, you must also adhere to it.

I'm not naive, you have simply divorced yourself from your own sense of morality just so you can bend over backwards to exalt the republicans from blame. It's utterly ridiculous that anyone would support those in charge acting in such bad faith against the interests of the people and find it acceptable because it's 'their side' that benefits from it. Politics is not a game.
__________________
Dezzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2020, 03:17 PM   #40
The Slim Reaper
Pain to my sham friends
 
The Slim Reaper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: In MS Paint on your desktop
Posts: 6,189
Default

It might actually do the US good to have abortion taken away for a couple of years, so they can start to realise the US experiment was to move away from European theocracies not create a new one.
__________________


Spoiler:



Quote:
Originally Posted by Livia View Post
I think he was one of the best members we ever had here. Funny, intelligent and frustrating and really very kind. I hope he comes back.
The Slim Reaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2020, 03:23 PM   #41
Trouble1321075
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 560
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper View Post
Prior to Garland, republican presidents appointed judges if dems held the senate, and dem presidents appointed judges with republican senates.

It's not even a dem issue, republicans just decided to take a dump on precedent and started inventing their own rules and now they've decided that their own rules don't apply to them. Because you're a republican I can understand that you don't care (even though these things are cyclical and will come back around eventually), but to not even acknowledge reality doesn't make a lot of sense.
Im not denying reality. I am acknowledging it. Republicans control the senate and the whitehouse. They are going to confirm a judge to their liking.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Trouble1321075 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2020, 03:30 PM   #42
Trouble1321075
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 560
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dezzy View Post
You're endorsing that politicians, people in power, act in bad faith, you treat this like it's a game in which you have to do anything to win and it's not. It's about securing human rights, it's not about winning or losing. If those in power act in bad faith, then they must pay the consequences because the decisions that the SC make are no joke.



If Republicans opposed the appointment of a new Judge in 2016 because it was an election year, they simply cannot change their minds because it now benefits them. When you enforce a standard upon others, you must also adhere to it.



I'm not naive, you have simply divorced yourself from your own sense of morality just so you can bend over backwards to exalt the republicans from blame. It's utterly ridiculous that anyone would support those in charge acting in such bad faith against the interests of the people and find it acceptable because it's 'their side' that benefits from it. Politics is not a game.
I have not divorced myself. If it were up to me i would force congress to handle things differently than they do. What your suggesting is that republicans should not act in their own selfish interests when we all know democrats do the same thing.
Do you remember how they passed ACA into law, did you complain about that? It was dirty pool and the left defended it. Politics isnt a gentleman's game its a bare knuckle fight.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Trouble1321075 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2020, 03:32 PM   #43
Trouble1321075
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 560
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper View Post
It might actually do the US good to have abortion taken away for a couple of years, so they can start to realise the US experiment was to move away from European theocracies not create a new one.
Abortion should be decided on a local level not a federal one.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Trouble1321075 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2020, 03:43 PM   #44
Trouble1321075
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 560
Default

To put an exclamation point on this conversation about hypocrisy. This season of BB usa we have 3 blacks on the show. 2 girls and 1 guy. The girls were approach about voting out the guy and they said they would not vote out someone who is black. I personally don't have a problem with that. They can vote on who they want for whatever reason they want but imagine the reaction if someone said they would not vote out a white person. There is no shortage of hypocrisy on either side. The selective outrage based on partisanship does not move me. Both sides are guilty of it and neither side has any room to complain about it when they get a taste of it back.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Trouble1321075 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2020, 03:49 PM   #45
The Slim Reaper
Pain to my sham friends
 
The Slim Reaper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: In MS Paint on your desktop
Posts: 6,189
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trouble1321075 View Post
Abortion should be decided on a local level not a federal one.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
So local that it's decided on the female level.

You do realise the first 2 things they'll do will be to abolish abortion at the federal level (rendering local level irrelevant), and cancel obamacare, kicking millions off healthcare and removing pre-condition protections, in the middle of a pandemic?
__________________


Spoiler:



Quote:
Originally Posted by Livia View Post
I think he was one of the best members we ever had here. Funny, intelligent and frustrating and really very kind. I hope he comes back.

Last edited by The Slim Reaper; 20-09-2020 at 03:51 PM.
The Slim Reaper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2020, 04:22 PM   #46
Trouble1321075
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 560
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Slim Reaper View Post
So local that it's decided on the female level.

You do realise the first 2 things they'll do will be to abolish abortion at the federal level (rendering local level irrelevant), and cancel obamacare, kicking millions off healthcare and removing pre-condition protections, in the middle of a pandemic?
I think i may be the one person on the planet who is indifferent about abortion.
As far as obamacare goes, i don't think it should of ever been passed in the first place. I think it makes matters even worse than they were before. It is the wrong approach to lowering costs if thats the goal.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Trouble1321075 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2020, 04:22 PM   #47
Dezzy
Babs
 
Dezzy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 42,822

Favourites (more):
CBB21: Shane Jenek
CBB19: Kim Woodburn
BB17: Jayne
CBB17: Tiffany Pollard


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trouble1321075 View Post
I have not divorced myself. If it were up to me i would force congress to handle things differently than they do. What your suggesting is that republicans should not act in their own selfish interests when we all know democrats do the same thing.
Do you remember how they passed ACA into law, did you complain about that? It was dirty pool and the left defended it. Politics isnt a gentleman's game its a bare knuckle fight.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
You're making excuses for selfish behaviour by people who should be fighting for you, not degrading your rights for their own profit.

Hypothetical hypocrisy does not counter very real hypocrisy. You can bleat on about democrats forever, but it doesn't change the fact you are defending ACTUAL hypocrisy just because it comes from the side you favour.

Yes, how dare the Democrats pass a law that granted affordable healthcare to those who wouldn't have it before. Such hypocrites. Oh wait, creating a law that benefits the country is way different to forcing through the appointment of a judge that defies precedent that the Republicans enforced during the last election year. Honestly, your comparison just doesn't work. Apples and oranges.

It's quite sad how people will defend those who stand upon their necks.
__________________
Dezzy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2020, 04:48 PM   #48
Trouble1321075
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 560
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dezzy View Post
You're making excuses for selfish behaviour by people who should be fighting for you, not degrading your rights for their own profit.



Hypothetical hypocrisy does not counter very real hypocrisy. You can bleat on about democrats forever, but it doesn't change the fact you are defending ACTUAL hypocrisy just because it comes from the side you favour.



Yes, how dare the Democrats pass a law that granted affordable healthcare to those who wouldn't have it before. Such hypocrites. Oh wait, creating a law that benefits the country is way different to forcing through the appointment of a judge that defies precedent that the Republicans enforced during the last election year. Honestly, your comparison just doesn't work. Apples and oranges.



It's quite sad how people will defend those who stand upon their necks.
The democrats are not fighting for you any more than the republicans are fighting for me. They are telling us the things they think we want to hear to get our votes. They dont give a damn about you, me or anyone but themselves.
You claim i am defending the republicans because I favor them. I generally do view them as the lesser of two evils but that has nothing to do with I am defending them. I am defending them because they are not breaking any rules. I may or may not like the judge they appoint, i dont like the last 2, but they have the power and the right to nominate whoever they want. If democrats think its unfair they should of made a rule in congress that prevents it. Don't forget it was harry reid who ended the filibuster rule for judges when he was the democrats leader of the senate. If that rule were in place the democrats could of blocked not just this next nomination but the 2 previous ones as well. Democrats didn't like having their judicial nominations blocked. They didn't want to negotiate with the other side so they changed it to a simple majority vote and now they are reaping what they sowed.
Rest assured republicans are gonna find themselves in the wrong side of this rule someday too. I will be equally unsympathetic to them too.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
Trouble1321075 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2020, 06:39 PM   #49
Nicky91
nickeh
 
Nicky91's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Eindhoven, Netherlands
Posts: 44,184
Blog Entries: 25

Favourites:
Strictly 2019: Emma Weymouth
Strictly 2018: Lauren Steadman
Strictly 2017: Brian Conley


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Trouble1321075 View Post
Im not denying reality. I am acknowledging it. Republicans control the senate and the whitehouse. They are going to confirm a judge to their liking.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk
yep and they will remain like that until 2040 at least since that is how long Trump is gonna remain in office

__________________
Strictly Faves: HRVY, Caroline, Jason, JJ, Bill, Clara, Jacqui

TiBB on Ice 4 Participant: Nicky & Heather


#BeKind #OnlyTogetherWeCanBeatCorona


#WearaMask
Nicky91 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-09-2020, 07:09 PM   #50
Trouble1321075
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Posts: 560
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nicky91 View Post
yep and they will remain like that until 2040 at least since that is how long Trump is gonna remain in office



im assuming you meant 2024

If that does happen, I can see Trump getting 2 more appointees. Breyer is getting up their in years and thomas has expressed a desire to retired in the past. The scotus could end up with 5 Trump appointees on it.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Last edited by Trouble1321075; 20-09-2020 at 07:10 PM.
Trouble1321075 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmark/share this topic

Tags
bader, ginsburg, passed, ruth

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:45 AM.




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
no new posts