Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Antonin Scalia dead at age 79

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Can mods delete a particular post?

    Comment


    • #62
      Red Team,

      Someone please kill the synth
      only if we re-name the moderators as coursers, and the WAB will thereby be known as The Institute...
      There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

      Comment


      • #63
        Originally posted by tbm3fan View Post
        Can mods delete a particular post?
        Yup

        edit to add: we very seldom do so, only if it's spam or at the posters direct request and for good reason (opsec etc)
        Last edited by Parihaka; 20 Feb 16,, 06:56.
        In the realm of spirit, seek clarity; in the material world, seek utility.

        Leibniz

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by astralis View Post
          Red Team,



          only if we re-name the moderators as coursers, and the WAB will thereby be known as The Institute...
          I quite like this idea, though I'm a Brotherhood of Steel man myself.
          "Draft beer, not people."

          Comment


          • #65
            We have a nominee !

            President Obama nominated Merrick Garland, DC Appeals chief judge, to fill the late Antonin Scalia's seat on the Supreme Court.

            Judge Garland's first visit to the White House came at the age of 17, when he was one of 119 Presidential Scholars invited to the White House for an address by President Nixon (4 June 1970, exactly one month after Kent State). He was also a National Merit Scholar, attended Harvard on a scholarship and graduated summa cum laude in social studies.

            He graduated from Harvard Law School in 1977, magna cum laude, and was a member of the Harvard Law Review. After graduation he served as clerk to Second Appeals Court Judge Henry Friendly and Supreme Court Justice William Brennan.

            In the Clinton Administration, he served as deputy assistant attorney general and was involved in prosecution of the Oklahoma City bombing, Atlanta Olympics bombings and that of Ted Kaczynski (UNABOM).

            President Clinton nominated him to the DC Circuit Court in 1995, and despite receiving no criticism, the Republican controlled Senate Judiciary Committee refused to vote on his nomination (Sen Chuck Grassley thought it was too expensive to add another position). He was renominated in 1997, and 19 months after his original nomination was confirmed 76-23. All 23 of the (GOP) 'no' votes were over the cost of the appointment.

            When Justice John Paul Stevens retired in 2010, Utah Sen Orrin Hatch urged President Obama to nominate Judge Garland; the president nominated Judge Elena Kagan, instead.

            Judge Garland is considered a centrist moderate “with a pro-prosecution bent in criminal cases” (as per Carrie Johnson of NPR).
            Trust me?
            I'm an economist!

            Comment


            • #66
              all of which puts Republicans into a terrible conundrum, do we accept someone whom is so blatantly...acceptable...or do we take our chances with an election, with the likely outcome that you'll get a President Clinton with the increasing probability of a Democratic Senate?

              if they don't like Garland they'll certainly hate Sri Srinivasan.
              There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

              Comment


              • #67
                Diversity another Harvard Law School Graduate to dilute the number of Yale Law School graduates.

                http://www.latimes.com/opinion/opini...028-story.html
                Last edited by Dazed; 16 Mar 16,, 22:19. Reason: link

                Comment


                • #68
                  Here's the way to understand the Republican Party today.

                  On the one hand, they are struggling to accept Donald Trump as the finest representative of their cherished partisan and national values.

                  On the other hand, they are struggling to reject Merrick Garland's nomination to the Supreme Court on the grounds that he is the President's choice.

                  .

                  Expect heads to explode when these two thoughts finally collide.
                  Trust me?
                  I'm an economist!

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Obama playing it very smart and the GOP very dumb. There will be a concerted campaign to paint Mr Garland as some sort of 'fellow traveller', but the fact Orrin Hatch spoke of him favourably recently will undercut that campaign outside hard core partisans. If they let him through the base throws a tantrum and Obama looks 'Presidential' for putting up a sensible candidate. if they block him they offer the clearest possible example of what they have been reduced to while risking Hilary appointing a much younger, much more liberal justice. The first of several I suspect.

                    As a mate of mine points out, life is so much harder for dumb people. The GOP leadership & base has become so obsessed with the caricature of Obama they have created in their own heads they have given him a nice little 'win/win' for his last year in office. Stupid is as stupid does.
                    sigpic

                    Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      lol, "hard to be more liberal than Merrick Garland". come jan 2017, odds are that a new President Clinton will be making him eat his words.

                      http://time.com/4265434/mitch-mcconn...supreme-court/

                      Senate Majority Leader Rules Out ‘Lame Duck’ Supreme Court Confirmation
                      Shawna Thomas / NBC News 11:23 AM ET

                      Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., on Sunday tried to shut down Beltway musings that President Obama’s latest pick for the Supreme Court could still find a way to be confirmed in the lame duck session if Hillary Clinton wins the election.

                      When asked whether he would completely rule out a “lame duck scenario” for Obama’s nominee, Judge Merrick Garland, McConnell told Chuck Todd on NBC’s “Meet the Press”: “We’re not going to be confirming a judge to the Supreme Court under this president.”

                      When pushed on the possibility that someone more liberal than Garland could be nominated in 2017 if Hillary Clinton wins the presidency, McConnell responded, “It’d be hard to be more liberal than Merrick Garland, but it’s my hope that she will not be making the appointment.”
                      There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by astralis View Post
                        all of which puts Republicans into a terrible conundrum, do we accept someone whom is so blatantly...acceptable...or do we take our chances with an election, with the likely outcome that you'll get a President Clinton with the increasing probability of a Democratic Senate? if they don't like Garland they'll certainly hate Sri Srinivasan.
                        Huh? Srinivasan is more a loose-canon than a centrist; he has worked at both the extreme ends of the spectrum, and done well. If he had been nominated, then it would be as a canary to sniff out how the Republicans react. The fact that the White House nominated Garland indicates that Obama is serious. It will be interesting to see how this plays out...

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by astralis View Post
                          lol, "hard to be more liberal than Merrick Garland". come jan 2017, odds are that a new President Clinton will be making him eat his words.

                          http://time.com/4265434/mitch-mcconn...supreme-court/

                          Senate Majority Leader Rules Out ‘Lame Duck’ Supreme Court Confirmation
                          Shawna Thomas / NBC News 11:23 AM ET

                          Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., on Sunday tried to shut down Beltway musings that President Obama’s latest pick for the Supreme Court could still find a way to be confirmed in the lame duck session if Hillary Clinton wins the election.

                          When asked whether he would completely rule out a “lame duck scenario” for Obama’s nominee, Judge Merrick Garland, McConnell told Chuck Todd on NBC’s “Meet the Press”: “We’re not going to be confirming a judge to the Supreme Court under this president.”

                          When pushed on the possibility that someone more liberal than Garland could be nominated in 2017 if Hillary Clinton wins the presidency, McConnell responded, “It’d be hard to be more liberal than Merrick Garland, but it’s my hope that she will not be making the appointment.”
                          There are those who like to think that Harry Reid is a jackass. Well, with that comment by McConnell I believe we have a new king of the hill. At least he was honest this time when he said it was personal, "this president"

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by Bigfella View Post
                            As a mate of mine points out, life is so much harder for dumb people. The GOP leadership & base has become so obsessed with the caricature of Obama they have created in their own heads they have given him a nice little 'win/win' for his last year in office. Stupid is as stupid does.
                            I just wish the Republicans would come to their senses, and realize this. But they won't.

                            They've spent so much time & effort vilifying Obama, that they've dug themselves a hole that will take a LONG time to get out of.
                            "There is never enough time to do or say all the things that we would wish. The thing is to try to do as much as you can in the time that you have. Remember Scrooge, time is short, and suddenly, you're not there any more." -Ghost of Christmas Present, Scrooge

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              Things could be really ironic if not only does Clinton become President but they also lose the Senate.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Stitch View Post
                                I just wish the Republicans would come to their senses, and realize this. But they won't.

                                They've spent so much time & effort vilifying Obama, that they've dug themselves a hole that will take a LONG time to get out of.
                                The problem is that on one level it has worked well. They control most of the governments in the country & the legislative branch Federally. The GOP has both ridden & encouraged this wave of anger as well as the increasingly closed loop that is producing it. Now it appears that the anger is being focussed on the party itself. Interesting times indeed.

                                Given the ages of Ginsburg, Breyer & Kennedy, these fools may just give Hilary the chance to nominate 4 justices, two of them either Conservative or 'swing'. They are being offered a good deal & they have created a situation where they can't take it. Idjuts.
                                sigpic

                                Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X