| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#22
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Another of Harry's dreams shattered ....
On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 10:54:15 -0700 (PDT), Its Me wrote:
On Thursday, June 28, 2018 at 11:23:04 AM UTC-4, Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/28/18 11:09 AM, wrote: On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 10:34:57 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote: wrote: On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 07:48:35 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/28/18 12:59 AM, wrote: On Wed, 27 Jun 2018 16:19:13 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/27/18 4:15 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/27/2018 4:09 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/27/18 3:52 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/27/2018 3:22 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: Mr. Luddite wrote: Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement Wednesday, giving President Donald Trump the chance to cement conservative control of the high court. The nuclear option was exercised to get Justice Neil Gorsuch confirmed so Trump's nominee to replace Kennedy will face a Senate process in which Republicans hold the slimmest majority, but Democrats can't delay confirmation. Making America Great Again, huh Harry? It is perfectly ok with me if this country continues its slide to the far right and fascism, racism, and xenophobia. I’m an old guy, and it won’t change my life. The changes will assure my wife plenty of clients. Let other smarter countries lead the world as the USA slides into the abyss. I've been watching MSNBC since shortly after Kennedy's announcement. It's sorta funny in a way.* It's like MSNBC called an emergency meeting of all their political pundits. Chris Matthews was getting all worked up a while ago trying to come up with any way the Democrats can delay confirmation hearings until after the mid-terms, obviously hoping for a shift in power. There also is a Yale law professor on the panel.* He said that the list of potential replacements that has been circulated in the event of an opening is actually populated with some very impressive and qualified potentials.* Some were students of his. He's a Democrat but was making the point that the list he's seen has some very good people on it. I don't know what the Dem's strategy will be, but I am pretty sure the party will do whatever it can to stall the decision until after the November elections, with the hope they can retake the Senate, which is a long shot. I'm sure Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch is "good people," but that doesn't mean I think he ought to be on the high court. To me, he's just too partisan. Retiring Associate Justice Kennedy is a right-winger, but on some important issues, he had an open mind and voted that way. If the Dems do retake the Senate, Trump's ability to nominate to the High Court will end. I suspect you will see a short list circulated very soon, a "pick" and confirmation hearings in very short order.* Then a Senate vote of 51 to 50 (Pence voting to break tie).** This will likely be done by late September - mid October. There are at least two female Republican U.S. Senators who will defend Roe v. Wade, and are not positive votes for a Trump nominee. It does beg the question if Trump picks a judge who is soft on abortion but otherwise textualist (the Constitution is really silent on abortion) would it be a fairly easy confirmation? I hope not. I'm no expert on procedures of the U.S. Senate, but if the Dems cannot figure out a viable way to stall confirmation until the fall elections, I don't know how approval of another rights-stealing right-wing ****head associate justice can be prevented. You didn't answer the question. If the nominee was soft on abortion as the litmus issue would that be acceptable to democrats? An example would be a woman who has already signaled she agrees with the right to choose but might be thought to be conservative in reading the constitution. Which of Trump’s possible nominees is a strong supporter of abortion rights? Since the 3 or 4 that CNN has pointed out may be DoA in the senate (why CNN highlighted them I suppose) I would suggest we will probably see some new faces that won't get immediately spiked by Schumer. Of course if they do manage to stall until after November and the Senate does not flip, you may get someone like Amy Coney Barrett who will be a pro life woman. I would rather see a pro 2d amendment guy but the one they like seems to be soft on the 4th amendment (searching your phone isn't a search). If I were in the Senate, I would not vote for any nominee who wasn't strongly and loudly opposed to weakening Roe in any way. Claiming Roe is "settled law" isn't something that will hold water with this right-wing court or Trumpsters. Of course, I am not a one issue voter...so there are many issues out there that would make me not vote for any Trump conservative nominees. You are most certainly a one issue voter. Are they a democrat or republican? Even donnee would whole heartedly and without reservation agree with that post! |
|
#23
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Another of Harry's dreams shattered ....
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/28/18 11:09 AM, wrote: On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 10:34:57 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote: wrote: On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 07:48:35 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/28/18 12:59 AM, wrote: On Wed, 27 Jun 2018 16:19:13 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/27/18 4:15 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/27/2018 4:09 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/27/18 3:52 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/27/2018 3:22 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: Mr. Luddite wrote: Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement Wednesday, giving President Donald Trump the chance to cement conservative control of the high court. The nuclear option was exercised to get Justice Neil Gorsuch confirmed so Trump's nominee to replace Kennedy will face a Senate process in which Republicans hold the slimmest majority, but Democrats can't delay confirmation. Making America Great Again, huh Harry? It is perfectly ok with me if this country continues its slide to the far right and fascism, racism, and xenophobia. I’m an old guy, and it won’t change my life. The changes will assure my wife plenty of clients. Let other smarter countries lead the world as the USA slides into the abyss. I've been watching MSNBC since shortly after Kennedy's announcement. It's sorta funny in a way.Â* It's like MSNBC called an emergency meeting of all their political pundits. Chris Matthews was getting all worked up a while ago trying to come up with any way the Democrats can delay confirmation hearings until after the mid-terms, obviously hoping for a shift in power. There also is a Yale law professor on the panel.Â* He said that the list of potential replacements that has been circulated in the event of an opening is actually populated with some very impressive and qualified potentials.Â* Some were students of his. He's a Democrat but was making the point that the list he's seen has some very good people on it. I don't know what the Dem's strategy will be, but I am pretty sure the party will do whatever it can to stall the decision until after the November elections, with the hope they can retake the Senate, which is a long shot. I'm sure Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch is "good people," but that doesn't mean I think he ought to be on the high court. To me, he's just too partisan. Retiring Associate Justice Kennedy is a right-winger, but on some important issues, he had an open mind and voted that way. If the Dems do retake the Senate, Trump's ability to nominate to the High Court will end. I suspect you will see a short list circulated very soon, a "pick" and confirmation hearings in very short order.Â* Then a Senate vote of 51 to 50 (Pence voting to break tie).Â*Â* This will likely be done by late September - mid October. There are at least two female Republican U.S. Senators who will defend Roe v. Wade, and are not positive votes for a Trump nominee. It does beg the question if Trump picks a judge who is soft on abortion but otherwise textualist (the Constitution is really silent on abortion) would it be a fairly easy confirmation? I hope not. I'm no expert on procedures of the U.S. Senate, but if the Dems cannot figure out a viable way to stall confirmation until the fall elections, I don't know how approval of another rights-stealing right-wing ****head associate justice can be prevented. You didn't answer the question. If the nominee was soft on abortion as the litmus issue would that be acceptable to democrats? An example would be a woman who has already signaled she agrees with the right to choose but might be thought to be conservative in reading the constitution. Which of Trump’s possible nominees is a strong supporter of abortion rights? Since the 3 or 4 that CNN has pointed out may be DoA in the senate (why CNN highlighted them I suppose) I would suggest we will probably see some new faces that won't get immediately spiked by Schumer. Of course if they do manage to stall until after November and the Senate does not flip, you may get someone like Amy Coney Barrett who will be a pro life woman. I would rather see a pro 2d amendment guy but the one they like seems to be soft on the 4th amendment (searching your phone isn't a search). If I were in the Senate, I would not vote for any nominee who wasn't strongly and loudly opposed to weakening Roe in any way. Claiming Roe is "settled law" isn't something that will hold water with this right-wing court or Trumpsters. Of course, I am not a one issue voter...so there are many issues out there that would make me not vote for any Trump conservative nominees. So, just so you can obstruct until the fall, is a reason to oppose all nominees? And making a Supreme Court pick a one issue case, is beyond stupid!!! |
|
#24
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Another of Harry's dreams shattered ....
On 6/28/18 2:30 PM, Bill wrote:
Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/28/18 11:09 AM, wrote: On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 10:34:57 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote: wrote: On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 07:48:35 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/28/18 12:59 AM, wrote: On Wed, 27 Jun 2018 16:19:13 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/27/18 4:15 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/27/2018 4:09 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/27/18 3:52 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/27/2018 3:22 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: Mr. Luddite wrote: Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement Wednesday, giving President Donald Trump the chance to cement conservative control of the high court. The nuclear option was exercised to get Justice Neil Gorsuch confirmed so Trump's nominee to replace Kennedy will face a Senate process in which Republicans hold the slimmest majority, but Democrats can't delay confirmation. Making America Great Again, huh Harry? It is perfectly ok with me if this country continues its slide to the far right and fascism, racism, and xenophobia. I’m an old guy, and it won’t change my life. The changes will assure my wife plenty of clients. Let other smarter countries lead the world as the USA slides into the abyss. I've been watching MSNBC since shortly after Kennedy's announcement. It's sorta funny in a way.Â* It's like MSNBC called an emergency meeting of all their political pundits. Chris Matthews was getting all worked up a while ago trying to come up with any way the Democrats can delay confirmation hearings until after the mid-terms, obviously hoping for a shift in power. There also is a Yale law professor on the panel.Â* He said that the list of potential replacements that has been circulated in the event of an opening is actually populated with some very impressive and qualified potentials.Â* Some were students of his. He's a Democrat but was making the point that the list he's seen has some very good people on it. I don't know what the Dem's strategy will be, but I am pretty sure the party will do whatever it can to stall the decision until after the November elections, with the hope they can retake the Senate, which is a long shot. I'm sure Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch is "good people," but that doesn't mean I think he ought to be on the high court. To me, he's just too partisan. Retiring Associate Justice Kennedy is a right-winger, but on some important issues, he had an open mind and voted that way. If the Dems do retake the Senate, Trump's ability to nominate to the High Court will end. I suspect you will see a short list circulated very soon, a "pick" and confirmation hearings in very short order.Â* Then a Senate vote of 51 to 50 (Pence voting to break tie).Â*Â* This will likely be done by late September - mid October. There are at least two female Republican U.S. Senators who will defend Roe v. Wade, and are not positive votes for a Trump nominee. It does beg the question if Trump picks a judge who is soft on abortion but otherwise textualist (the Constitution is really silent on abortion) would it be a fairly easy confirmation? I hope not. I'm no expert on procedures of the U.S. Senate, but if the Dems cannot figure out a viable way to stall confirmation until the fall elections, I don't know how approval of another rights-stealing right-wing ****head associate justice can be prevented. You didn't answer the question. If the nominee was soft on abortion as the litmus issue would that be acceptable to democrats? An example would be a woman who has already signaled she agrees with the right to choose but might be thought to be conservative in reading the constitution. Which of Trump’s possible nominees is a strong supporter of abortion rights? Since the 3 or 4 that CNN has pointed out may be DoA in the senate (why CNN highlighted them I suppose) I would suggest we will probably see some new faces that won't get immediately spiked by Schumer. Of course if they do manage to stall until after November and the Senate does not flip, you may get someone like Amy Coney Barrett who will be a pro life woman. I would rather see a pro 2d amendment guy but the one they like seems to be soft on the 4th amendment (searching your phone isn't a search). If I were in the Senate, I would not vote for any nominee who wasn't strongly and loudly opposed to weakening Roe in any way. Claiming Roe is "settled law" isn't something that will hold water with this right-wing court or Trumpsters. Of course, I am not a one issue voter...so there are many issues out there that would make me not vote for any Trump conservative nominees. So, just so you can obstruct until the fall, is a reason to oppose all nominees? And making a Supreme Court pick a one issue case, is beyond stupid!!! I can't think of a good reason to NOT oppose any Trump nominees for the Supreme Court. But maybe he will surprise everyone and come up with a moderate Republican. There must be one somewhere. |
|
#25
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Another of Harry's dreams shattered ....
Keyser Soze wrote:
On 6/28/18 2:30 PM, Bill wrote: Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/28/18 11:09 AM, wrote: On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 10:34:57 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote: wrote: On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 07:48:35 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/28/18 12:59 AM, wrote: On Wed, 27 Jun 2018 16:19:13 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/27/18 4:15 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/27/2018 4:09 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/27/18 3:52 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/27/2018 3:22 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: Mr. Luddite wrote: Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement Wednesday, giving President Donald Trump the chance to cement conservative control of the high court. The nuclear option was exercised to get Justice Neil Gorsuch confirmed so Trump's nominee to replace Kennedy will face a Senate process in which Republicans hold the slimmest majority, but Democrats can't delay confirmation. Making America Great Again, huh Harry? It is perfectly ok with me if this country continues its slide to the far right and fascism, racism, and xenophobia. I’m an old guy, and it won’t change my life. The changes will assure my wife plenty of clients. Let other smarter countries lead the world as the USA slides into the abyss. I've been watching MSNBC since shortly after Kennedy's announcement. It's sorta funny in a way.Â* It's like MSNBC called an emergency meeting of all their political pundits. Chris Matthews was getting all worked up a while ago trying to come up with any way the Democrats can delay confirmation hearings until after the mid-terms, obviously hoping for a shift in power. There also is a Yale law professor on the panel.Â* He said that the list of potential replacements that has been circulated in the event of an opening is actually populated with some very impressive and qualified potentials.Â* Some were students of his. He's a Democrat but was making the point that the list he's seen has some very good people on it. I don't know what the Dem's strategy will be, but I am pretty sure the party will do whatever it can to stall the decision until after the November elections, with the hope they can retake the Senate, which is a long shot. I'm sure Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch is "good people," but that doesn't mean I think he ought to be on the high court. To me, he's just too partisan. Retiring Associate Justice Kennedy is a right-winger, but on some important issues, he had an open mind and voted that way. If the Dems do retake the Senate, Trump's ability to nominate to the High Court will end. I suspect you will see a short list circulated very soon, a "pick" and confirmation hearings in very short order.Â* Then a Senate vote of 51 to 50 (Pence voting to break tie).Â*Â* This will likely be done by late September - mid October. There are at least two female Republican U.S. Senators who will defend Roe v. Wade, and are not positive votes for a Trump nominee. It does beg the question if Trump picks a judge who is soft on abortion but otherwise textualist (the Constitution is really silent on abortion) would it be a fairly easy confirmation? I hope not. I'm no expert on procedures of the U.S. Senate, but if the Dems cannot figure out a viable way to stall confirmation until the fall elections, I don't know how approval of another rights-stealing right-wing ****head associate justice can be prevented. You didn't answer the question. If the nominee was soft on abortion as the litmus issue would that be acceptable to democrats? An example would be a woman who has already signaled she agrees with the right to choose but might be thought to be conservative in reading the constitution. Which of Trump’s possible nominees is a strong supporter of abortion rights? Since the 3 or 4 that CNN has pointed out may be DoA in the senate (why CNN highlighted them I suppose) I would suggest we will probably see some new faces that won't get immediately spiked by Schumer. Of course if they do manage to stall until after November and the Senate does not flip, you may get someone like Amy Coney Barrett who will be a pro life woman. I would rather see a pro 2d amendment guy but the one they like seems to be soft on the 4th amendment (searching your phone isn't a search). If I were in the Senate, I would not vote for any nominee who wasn't strongly and loudly opposed to weakening Roe in any way. Claiming Roe is "settled law" isn't something that will hold water with this right-wing court or Trumpsters. Of course, I am not a one issue voter...so there are many issues out there that would make me not vote for any Trump conservative nominees. So, just so you can obstruct until the fall, is a reason to oppose all nominees? And making a Supreme Court pick a one issue case, is beyond stupid!!! I can't think of a good reason to NOT oppose any Trump nominees for the Supreme Court. But maybe he will surprise everyone and come up with a moderate Republican. There must be one somewhere. Is there a moderate Democrat in Congress? |
|
#26
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Another of Harry's dreams shattered ....
On Fri, 29 Jun 2018 00:20:00 -0000 (UTC), Bill
wrote: Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/28/18 2:30 PM, Bill wrote: Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/28/18 11:09 AM, wrote: On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 10:34:57 -0400, Keyser Söze wrote: wrote: On Thu, 28 Jun 2018 07:48:35 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/28/18 12:59 AM, wrote: On Wed, 27 Jun 2018 16:19:13 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/27/18 4:15 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/27/2018 4:09 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 6/27/18 3:52 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: On 6/27/2018 3:22 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: Mr. Luddite wrote: Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy announced his retirement Wednesday, giving President Donald Trump the chance to cement conservative control of the high court. The nuclear option was exercised to get Justice Neil Gorsuch confirmed so Trump's nominee to replace Kennedy will face a Senate process in which Republicans hold the slimmest majority, but Democrats can't delay confirmation. Making America Great Again, huh Harry? It is perfectly ok with me if this country continues its slide to the far right and fascism, racism, and xenophobia. I’m an old guy, and it won’t change my life. The changes will assure my wife plenty of clients. Let other smarter countries lead the world as the USA slides into the abyss. I've been watching MSNBC since shortly after Kennedy's announcement. It's sorta funny in a way.Â* It's like MSNBC called an emergency meeting of all their political pundits. Chris Matthews was getting all worked up a while ago trying to come up with any way the Democrats can delay confirmation hearings until after the mid-terms, obviously hoping for a shift in power. There also is a Yale law professor on the panel.Â* He said that the list of potential replacements that has been circulated in the event of an opening is actually populated with some very impressive and qualified potentials.Â* Some were students of his. He's a Democrat but was making the point that the list he's seen has some very good people on it. I don't know what the Dem's strategy will be, but I am pretty sure the party will do whatever it can to stall the decision until after the November elections, with the hope they can retake the Senate, which is a long shot. I'm sure Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch is "good people," but that doesn't mean I think he ought to be on the high court. To me, he's just too partisan. Retiring Associate Justice Kennedy is a right-winger, but on some important issues, he had an open mind and voted that way. If the Dems do retake the Senate, Trump's ability to nominate to the High Court will end. I suspect you will see a short list circulated very soon, a "pick" and confirmation hearings in very short order.Â* Then a Senate vote of 51 to 50 (Pence voting to break tie).Â*Â* This will likely be done by late September - mid October. There are at least two female Republican U.S. Senators who will defend Roe v. Wade, and are not positive votes for a Trump nominee. It does beg the question if Trump picks a judge who is soft on abortion but otherwise textualist (the Constitution is really silent on abortion) would it be a fairly easy confirmation? I hope not. I'm no expert on procedures of the U.S. Senate, but if the Dems cannot figure out a viable way to stall confirmation until the fall elections, I don't know how approval of another rights-stealing right-wing ****head associate justice can be prevented. You didn't answer the question. If the nominee was soft on abortion as the litmus issue would that be acceptable to democrats? An example would be a woman who has already signaled she agrees with the right to choose but might be thought to be conservative in reading the constitution. Which of Trump’s possible nominees is a strong supporter of abortion rights? Since the 3 or 4 that CNN has pointed out may be DoA in the senate (why CNN highlighted them I suppose) I would suggest we will probably see some new faces that won't get immediately spiked by Schumer. Of course if they do manage to stall until after November and the Senate does not flip, you may get someone like Amy Coney Barrett who will be a pro life woman. I would rather see a pro 2d amendment guy but the one they like seems to be soft on the 4th amendment (searching your phone isn't a search). If I were in the Senate, I would not vote for any nominee who wasn't strongly and loudly opposed to weakening Roe in any way. Claiming Roe is "settled law" isn't something that will hold water with this right-wing court or Trumpsters. Of course, I am not a one issue voter...so there are many issues out there that would make me not vote for any Trump conservative nominees. So, just so you can obstruct until the fall, is a reason to oppose all nominees? And making a Supreme Court pick a one issue case, is beyond stupid!!! I can't think of a good reason to NOT oppose any Trump nominees for the Supreme Court. But maybe he will surprise everyone and come up with a moderate Republican. There must be one somewhere. Is there a moderate Democrat in Congress? A few, the ones who come from red districts and are running scared like Joe Manchin Even Bill Nelson long time (D) senator from Florida is pretty damned nervous because Rick Scott is all over him and old Bill keeps reminding us of every time he voted with the republicans in his ads. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| My dreams almost fulfilled | General | |||
| Winger Dreams | General | |||
| The answer to Joe's dreams! | ASA | |||
| With all its broken dreams, it is sti | General | |||
Linear Mode
