Find your diamond
Find your jewelry
shape
carat
color
clarity

Anthony Kennedy Retiring from SCOTUS

I dont see why it is horrible, kennedy was a conservative, who will be replaced with a conservative. It wont change things ?
 
He was moderately conservative, not Trump-insane-person conservative. He was pro-gay rights, pro-choice, and voted with liberals on death penalty stuff.

Trump won't want to replace him with another moderate, he will want to replace Kennedy with a sycophant who will vote to limit Roe V. Wade and LGBT rights.
 
Didnt he signal he sides with trump on the baker case saying it was fine to discriminate? Since trump came on board I havnt seen him vote for the minority . He writes a note basically saying , just this once and sides with bigotry, against unions and for trumps pregnancy center, gerrymandering in texas and for a travel ban. He is no free thinker to me.
 
Our only hope is that Mueller uncovers what we all know is the truth: that the Trump campaign (which includes Mike Pence) conspired with Russia to steal the election and that, therefore, both Trump and Mike Pence will both be impeached. And we must hope that by the November 2018 elections the House of representatives will be, due to popular action, Democratic (not Democrat). Then we no longer have to ignore the conspiracy with Russia. Then we can impeach the misogynist morons who make it illegal for women to fail to hold a funeral for a fetus they miscarried (Pence) and who brag about grabbing women by their private parts (Trump). And, the cherry on top of the sundae: that dunce and hypocrite and coward, Paul Ryan, would not be Speaker of the House since his Follow-The-Fuhrer Party would no longer be running the House of Representatives.
 
tkyasx78 said:
I dont see why it is horrible, kennedy was a conservative, who will be replaced with a conservative. It wont change things ?
Click to expand...
He will be replaced by a Republican lifer who might outlive him. So yeah. Changes things. Kennedy is 81. So he wasn’t going to stay there for another lifetime whereas this new one might.
 
The only surprise for me is that it's Kennedy and not Ginsburg who is retiring.
 
To make it worse, 2 Reps just beat Dems in elections, yesterday. Mitt Romney?!? Seriously?!? Who’s drinkin’ the Kool-Aid?!? :eek-2:
 
yennyfire said:
That’s it! This is a nightmare with no end in sight! I am totally without hope for our country at this point!
Click to expand...

they still have to be approved by the senate. I have to believe they won't approve any of trumps " very fine people" and they will require the nominee to be qualified and follow and protect the constitution.

I have to believe that or I won't be able to sleep at night.
 
tkyasx78 said:
they still have to be approved by the senate. I have to believe they won't approve any of trumps " very fine people" and they will require the nominee to be qualified and follow and protect the constitution.

I have to believe that or I won't be able to sleep at night.
Click to expand...

I wish I had your optimism @tkyasx78 . I don’t trust this administration to do the right thing about anything.
 
Stop dreaming!. Trump is not gonna nominate a liberal to replace Anthony Kennedy. IMO, Ginsburg should of retired when Obama was Prez.
 
Dancing Fire said:
Stop dreaming!. Trump is not gonna nominate a liberal to replace Anthony Kennedy.
Click to expand...

Or, maybe he will nominate a moderate dem or moderate conservative to try to win some dems over in November at the ballot box. :whistle:
 
yennyfire said:
That’s it! This is a nightmare with no end in sight! I am totally without hope for our country at this point!
Click to expand...

It may be the end for us, but not for our children and not for future Americans and for future would-be Americans (i.e. future would-be immigrants). I remember seeing a photo of a woman at an anti-gun rally with her children. She had a sign that said she would oppose guns and that her children would live on after her to do so. The millennials are pro-same sex marriage and anti-Trump. So maybe we won't live to see it, but there be change a comin' some day. We don't have to be so impatient. But we do have to free those babies from prison. So be at the rallies on Saturday! :))

WeWillOutliveYou.jpg
 
the_mother_thing said:
Or, maybe he will nominate a moderate dem or moderate conservative to try to win some dems over in November at the ballot box. :whistle:
Click to expand...
Obama put Kagan and Sotomayor on the bench so two picks for Trump is fair. Hopefully it will be another originalist. If Ginsburg retires in the last year of Trump's presidency I would have no problem with waiting until after the 2020 election to replace her. Schumer's complaint that hearings should be held after the midterm for Kennedy's replacement does not hold water because Kagan was nominated in 2010 and confirmed in August before the 2010 midterms. He can suck an egg.
 
Calliecake said:
Thank you for saying this @yennyfire . I feel the same way. :angryfire:
Click to expand...

I sure do wish that I didn’t feel this way. And, of course, I won’t give up for the sake of future generations, but it sure does seem that the mountain gets higher with each passing day!

AGBF said:
It may be the end for us, but not for our children and not for future Americans and for future would-be Americans (i.e. future would-be immigrants). I remember seeing a photo of a woman at an anti-gun rally with her children. She had a sign that said she would oppose guns and that her children would live on after her to do so. The millennials are pro-same sex marriage and anti-Trump. So maybe we won't live to see it, but there be change a comin' some day. We don't have to be so impatient. But we do have to free those babies from prison. So be at the rallies on Saturday! :))

WeWillOutliveYou.jpg
Click to expand...

Amen!! And I love the kid from Parkland! Go get ‘em!!
 
tkyasx78 said:
they still have to be approved by the senate. I have to believe they won't approve any of trumps " very fine people" and they will require the nominee to be qualified and follow and protect the constitution.

I have to believe that or I won't be able to sleep at night.
Click to expand...

From your lips to God’s ears!!
 
tkyasx78 said:
they still have to be approved by the senate.
Click to expand...

yennyfire said:
From your lips to God’s ears!!
Click to expand...

The Democratic party has a strategy in place. Democrats plan to make this the biggest fight since Reagan attempted to put Robert Bork on The Supreme Court. Since Donald Trump has pledged to put on only judges who have pledged to overturn Roe v.Wade, if he gets one of the candidates from his list onto the Court, Roe v. Wade will be done. Every US Senator knows this. John McCain is too ill to vote, so the Senate, which is usually 49 to 51 is voting 49 to 50. The Democrats only need one Republican vote to stop the nomination.

There are different possibilities. If Jeff Flake does as he has threatened and votes in protest of Trump's tariffs on the Senate Judiciary Committee not to let the nomination of another judge out of committee until Trump changes the law on tariffs, other members of Congress may have the courage to vote "no" to the nomination once it reaches the floor. The Democrats hope that by then the Democrats who supported Gorsuch and the Republican women who are pro-choice (Collins and Murkowski) will break with the other Republicans. American women are already burning up the telephone lines to protest this nomination. Everyone knows this is the life or death of Roe v. Wade and women are really, really invested in it.

We will see if women's passion brings women and their energy into the streets in time to stop the Trump nomination. The women's marches since Trump was elected have been huge. Taking away the right to abortion from women would be huge.

AGBF
 
This is devastating to states run by conservative white men. Women will still be able to travel in the USA to have an abortion at states that are liberal so there is that. We are governed by the conservative right who take zero interesting or care in the thoughts of the left. So be it. Because maybe not in my life but there will be a swing back and when it happens it will be sharp. Not much difference between American and Saudi Arabia when it comes to men in charge.
 
Tekate said:
This is devastating to states run by conservative white men. Women will still be able to travel in the USA to have an abortion at states that are liberal so there is that.
Click to expand...

This was how life was when I was a young woman. I never had an abortion, but many of my friends did. We lived in Connecticut, a state which banned abortions. I accompanied my (then) best friend over the state line to New York when we were about 18 so that she could get an abortion. (She was Catholic.) I believe there were restrictions on the kind of anesthesia that could be used because she wasn't 21 and didn't have her parents' consent. (God forbid they ever found out!) Birth control was also illegal in some places. At least pills. When we graduated from high school and moved to Boston to work, a medical student my friend started to date knew a doctor who was willing to prescribe them to unmarried women and we both went to see him (although I do not think I had even had relations yet!).
 
tkyasx78 said:
they still have to be approved by the senate. I have to believe they won't approve any of trumps " very fine people" and they will require the nominee to be qualified and follow and protect the constitution.

I have to believe that or I won't be able to sleep at night.
Click to expand...

Why, given that those making and judging the law should be completely impartial and judge each case on the facts and information available and presented on a case-by-case basis, are US judges not politically neutral?

Is anyone in a position of power in the US politically neutral?


From the perspective of an outsider in the UK, where the highest judges in the land (from what I can tell) don't give two hoots about what the Government wants and often make judgements that screw them over because the evidence was not in their favour, the political and judicial system in the US seems, frankly, incomprehensibly corrupt.


EDIT:

And on a similar note (while I'm ranting ;)) ) the attitudes in some parts of the US regarding LGBT rights, abortion, women's rights, religion, etc. etc., are astonishingly stuck in the 18th century.

WTF does it matter what people do with their bodies / how they live their lives / who they love / whether or not they believe in a higher power whose existence cannot be empirically proven either way / whether they have breasts or a penis... as long as those people are living their life with no harm to others and to better themselves and the lives of those around them?

Stop obsessing about judging and controlling how others live their lives, focus on improving your own life and the opportunities for others locally and further afield to do the same, and actually take the time to look around and have a world view that extends further than your state line, and you might actually stop being regarded as somewhat backwards in other parts of the world!


[/sweeping stereotypes]
[/sweeping statements]
[/old man rant]


*normal service will be resumed shortly*

:lol:
 
Last edited:
redwood66 said:
Obama put Kagan and Sotomayor on the bench so two picks for Trump is fair. Hopefully it will be another originalist. If Ginsburg retires in the last year of Trump's presidency I would have no problem with waiting until after the 2020 election to replace her. Schumer's complaint that hearings should be held after the midterm for Kennedy's replacement does not hold water because Kagan was nominated in 2010 and confirmed in August before the 2010 midterms. He can suck an egg.
Click to expand...

So it's only fair political gamesmanship when Republicans do it? Mitchell successfully blocked Garland and now Schumer is trying the same tactic.

Maybe you would have no problem with waiting until after 2020 to replace Ginsburg (should she leave), but do you honestly think the Trump administrations and republicans as a whole are going to say - oh, fair is fair, we had two picks, let's see who the next president is first...:lol::lol::lol: too funny
 
OoohShiny said:
And on a similar note (while I'm ranting ;)) ) the attitudes in some parts of the US regarding LGBT rights, abortion, women's rights, religion, etc. etc., are astonishingly stuck in the 18th century.

WTF does it matter what people do with their bodies / how they live their lives / who they love / whether or not they believe in a higher power whose existence cannot be empirically proven either way / whether they have breasts or a penis... as long as those people are living their life with no harm to others and to better themselves and the lives of those around them?

Stop obsessing about judging and controlling how others live their lives, focus on improving your own life and the opportunities for others locally and further afield to do the same, and actually take the time to look around and have a world view that extends further than your state line, and you might actually stop being regarded as somewhat backwards in other parts of the world!
Click to expand...

What is the relationship between religion and government in the UK? Because if you've been watching or listening to our news, it's obvious that belief in the dogma of the christian bible (yanno the one and only holy book dictated by the one and only real legitimate god, everybody else is a heathen) gives all those white christian males in our government, and their minions on the streets, carte blanche to insert themselves in our vaginas, up our butts, and into our penises.
 
OoohShiny said:
Why, given that those making and judging the law should be completely impartial and judge each case on the facts and information available and presented on a case-by-case basis, are US judges not politically neutral?

Is anyone in a position of power in the US politically neutral?


From the perspective of an outsider in the UK, where the highest judges in the land (from what I can tell) don't give two hoots about what the Government wants and often make judgements that screw them over because the evidence was not in their favour, the political and judicial system in the US seems, frankly, incomprehensibly corrupt.


EDIT:

And on a similar note (while I'm ranting ;)) ) the attitudes in some parts of the US regarding LGBT rights, abortion, women's rights, religion, etc. etc., are astonishingly stuck in the 18th century.

WTF does it matter what people do with their bodies / how they live their lives / who they love / whether or not they believe in a higher power whose existence cannot be empirically proven either way / whether they have breasts or a penis... as long as those people are living their life with no harm to others and to better themselves and the lives of those around them?

Stop obsessing about judging and controlling how others live their lives, focus on improving your own life and the opportunities for others locally and further afield to do the same, and actually take the time to look around and have a world view that extends further than your state line, and you might actually stop being regarded as somewhat backwards in other parts of the world!


[/sweeping stereotypes]
[/sweeping statements]
[/old man rant]


*normal service will be resumed shortly*

:lol:
Click to expand...

living through it in the US, it's disheartening. the idea that someone else should dictate how others can/can't live...and that someone else is often a huge hypocrite when the microscope is turned on their own lives. the idea that politicians will poke and prod for "wedge" issues to divide us and avoid dealing with the real, hard problems we need to face. ugh!

to me the current administration is a desperate grasp to control and preserve a pecking order that is only beneficial to those who defend it.

when i was a kid, i looked at apartheid and thought, how can this be, how can such a small minority that's not even originally from this country get away with this terrible behavior? and now to see a minority of rich, white, entitled men (gross generalization) getting away with increasingly bad behavior in the US and convincing half the population that they are doing the right thing...we keep getting wrapped up in dem vs rep but it's really not that. republicans used to stand for small government, personal responsibility, fiscal prudence....those values have gotten lost.

but that intense desperation to cling to the old order isn't usually enough to prevent change...so here's hoping it comes sooner rather than later. and that we don't overreact and keep swinging back and forth on a pendulum but find some workable long-term solutions to our entrenched issues. *fingers crossed*

worst case, everything is cyclical. but sad that we don't seem to learn from our past mistakes.

/rant
 
Maria D said:
So it's only fair political gamesmanship when Republicans do it? Mitchell successfully blocked Garland and now Schumer is trying the same tactic.

Maybe you would have no problem with waiting until after 2020 to replace Ginsburg (should she leave), but do you honestly think the Trump administrations and republicans as a whole are going to say - oh, fair is fair, we had two picks, let's see who the next president is first...:lol::lol::lol: too funny
Click to expand...
Yep. I try to be fair. :)) I find it works best.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
GET 3 FREE HCA RESULTS JOIN THE FORUM. ASK FOR HELP
Jewelry Blog
PriceScope-Concierge-Ad
Find prime cuts.
Top