The Political Discussion Thread

[Annoyed]

Hey, it's not like the Judge died on purpose... It's better the Democrats and Republicans stopped bickering about these things and appointed someone worthy of the seat, someone who will have all Americans best interests at heart.

Which is the exact opposite of what the LSoS will try to put in there as far as I'm concerned.

The fact that he died in office without having retired probably indicates that he knew he was on borrowed time and was trying to hang on till after the elections, hoping the Democrats lose.

It's impossible to put "someone who will have all Americans best interests at heart." in there. What is in my best interest is a lot different than what would (on the surface at least) best serve the interests of a professional couch potato/leech that depends upon the government check for their existence, for example.

I just hope to hell the Republicans in Congress don't allow the LSoS to pull some kind of shiznit to avoid submitting his nomination to the Senate.

[SoulReaver]

so a fascist judge is dead?

[Falcon Horus]

so a fascist judge is dead?

The man's dead and the republicans take the opportunity to undermine Obama yet again -- they are such a childish bunch. Unbelievable.

Supreme court justice Antonin Scalia dies: legal and political worlds react

[Annoyed]

so a fascist judge is dead?

You seem to consider anyone in a position of authority to be "a facist" as far as I can tell. Maybe you're an anarchist, or perhaps you even support the criminal viewpoint on things, I dunno.

Guess what? if you want to have a society, a company, or any other cooperative effort involving humans, you have to have rules and standards of behavior, so therefore, you need people of authority to enforce those rules.

And as far as this judge goes, he was on the conservative side of things. If your concern is possible facism, the Democrats pose a much stronger threat if given free reign. They want to hand out goodies to everyone, making them dependent upon the government. But to get the money to do that, they wouldn't mind taxing every working stiff in the country into the poorhouse, using the force of govt. to do so. Remember that

“Any government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have."

[Annoyed]

The man's dead and the republicans take the opportunity to undermine Obama yet again -- they are such a childish bunch. Unbelievable.

Supreme court justice Antonin Scalia dies: legal and political worlds react

Eh? Republicans are SUPPOSED to undermine & oppose and hinder the agenda of the LSoS.

You could just as easily say "The man's dead and the democrats take the opportunity to stack the SCOTUS with liberals yet again -- they are such a childish bunch. Unbelievable. "

If the shoe was on the other foot, A Republican President, with a Democratic senate, and a liberal justice had passed, the Democrats in the senate would oppose the Republican nominee just as strongly. So the "propriety" card doesn't play here.

Fortunately, the Democrats only hold 44 seats in the Senate, and 60 votes are required to confirm, so the LSoS's hands are tied. I don't think he's smart enough to accept that, though, and I expect he will try some chicanery to put someone in there without submitting him to Congress.

The best thing to do would be to delay filling the seat till after the elections, and let whomever wins this fall make the nomination. Let the voters make their feelings known on which way they want to go. Remember, the makeup of the Senate may change this fall too.

[Falcon Horus]

They are quite literally ignoring their duties which they promised to uphold. They should not be saying they want to wait until next year when "maybe" someone they like is in office. AND they should at least hear the nominee out before passing judgement.

Instead, they don't even wait for a nominee and are already crossing their arms in a big fat no.

A progressive country the US is most certainly not.

[SoulReaver]

You seem to consider anyone in a position of authority to be "a facist" as far as I can tell. Maybe you're an anarchist libertarian

I know libertarianism completely goes against conservative doctrine (a true fully-free-market society can only function under a police state, history has shown that)

or perhaps you even support the criminal viewpoint on things, I dunno.

so civil liberties are a criminal notion?

Guess what? if you want to have a society, a company, or any other cooperative effort involving humans, you have to have rules and standards of behavior, so therefore, you need people of authority to enforce those rules.

then why rail against government when you support the most oppressive type of government? it's no secret Scalia was a fascist (stopped the ballot recounting of the fake 2000 elections & got that SSOS Bush elected, supported patriot & homeland security act (wait one, that means you too oppose the democratic process & support the patriot & homeland security act?))

And as far as this judge goes, he was on the conservative side of things. If your concern is possible facism, the Democrats pose a much stronger threat if given free reign. They want to hand out goodies to everyone, making them dependent upon the government. But to get the money to do that, they wouldn't mind taxing every working stiff in the country into the poorhouse, using the force of govt. to do so. Remember that

“Any government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take away everything you have."

lol that's ironic since you're in favour of an infinitely worse sort of government - namely one that doesn't give you anything, but still takes away everything you have (aka. capitalist dictatorship)

if the government can already take everything I have, then at least might as well have some good with the bad & have a government that also gives me what I want. in other words a left wing dictatorship is still better than a right-wing dictatorship. capice? comprende?

[jelgate]

They are quite literally ignoring their duties which they promised to uphold. They should not be saying they want to wait until next year when "maybe" someone they like is in office. AND they should at least hear the nominee out before passing judgement.

Instead, they don't even wait for a nominee and are already crossing their arms in a big fat no.

A progressive country the US is most certainly not.

From what I hear, European democracies aren't much different. I agree with it being wrong and the politicians agendas do annoy me but it seems to occur everywhere.

That is why its best to consider a totalitarian government ruled by me

[SoulReaver]

That is why its best to consider a totalitarian government ruled by me

or better alternative: a totalitarian government where everyone else rules over you

[Annoyed]

There, fixed it for you.

From what I hear, European democracies aren't much different. I agree with it being wrong and the politicians agendas do annoy me but it seems to occur everywhere.

That is why its best to consider a totalitarian government ruled by Annoyed

[Falcon Horus]

From what I hear, European democracies aren't much different. I agree with it being wrong and the politicians agendas do annoy me but it seems to occur everywhere.

At least we have more people to pick from.

[Annoyed]

They are quite literally ignoring their duties which they promised to uphold. They should not be saying they want to wait until next year when "maybe" someone they like is in office. AND they should at least hear the nominee out before passing judgement.

Instead, they don't even wait for a nominee and are already crossing their arms in a big fat no.

A progressive country the US is most certainly not.

You need to rephrase this. Do you really think that the LSoS will submit a nominee that will be acceptable to the Senate? The senate is held by the opposition, so it is up to him to submit someone that his opposition will accept. Not doing so is displaying the exact same behavior that you are accusing the Republicans of.

[jelgate]

At least we have more people to pick from.

I will admit that is true but it doesn't change my point. Its hard to criticize political games when your country is not any different in securing their own agenda.

[Falcon Horus]

I will admit that is true but it doesn't change my point. Its hard to criticize political games when your country is not any different in securing their own agenda.

Yes, but at least as far as my country goes... we have a democracy.
And also, a clear separation of church and state.

[jelgate]

So do we