Ask Me Help Desk

Ask Me Help Desk (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/forum.php)
-   Current Events (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/forumdisplay.php?f=486)
-   -   Dem Senators put a gun to SCOTUS he (https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showthread.php?t=846257)

  • Aug 16, 2019, 11:04 AM
    tomder55
    Dem Senators put a gun to SCOTUS he
    Dem Senators put a gun to SCOTUS HEAD ..............In a threatening amicus brief, Senators Sheldon Whitehouse, Mazie Hirono, Richard Blumenthal, Richard Durbin and Kirsten Gillibrand all but tell the Justices that they’ll retaliate politically if the Court doesn’t do what they say in a Second Amendment case.
    The case involves a challenge to a New York City law that banned licensed gun owners from bringing handguns outside the city even if a gun is unloaded and locked in a container separate from its ammunition. The Court accepted the case in January. Fearing a Supreme Court defeat, New York softened the restrictions and in July asked the Court to dismiss the case as moot. The Justices are scheduled to consider that question Oct. 1. The plaintiffs say the regulations are still unconstitutional. The Senators fear
    that the Court will clarify its Second Amendment jurisprudence and broaden protections for gun ownership so they claim that NYCs revisions makes it a moot point. The Brief say that
    “The Supreme Court is not well,” .......“Perhaps the Court can heal itself before the public demands it be ‘restructured in order to reduce the influence of politics.’” By “restructured,” they mean that if SCOTUS doesn't toe the Democrat agenda that they increase the number of Justices in SCOTUS And pack the court as FDR threatened to do years ago.
    The Senators falsely claim that the conservative justices form a monolithic majority which unfortunately is far from the truth .Kavanaugh and Chief Justice Roberts have voted in the majority a number of times against the other conservative members ;and Gorsuch has himself been the 5th vote with the other liberal members Unfortunately this type of 'legitimacy ' threat plays right into the imagined fears of Roberts who appears to be more interested in keeping his beltway dinner invitations coming than in making constitutional rulings . If he keeps it up he will face legitimacy questions from both sides of the divide .
  • Aug 16, 2019, 12:21 PM
    talaniman
    Got a link thats not a right wing loony noise machine?
  • Aug 16, 2019, 12:47 PM
    Athos
    I read something almost word for word from the Wall Street Journal. Shouldn't you cite that publication? Still not sure about the rules here about that.
  • Aug 16, 2019, 01:42 PM
    talaniman
    LOL, it appears the only free sites anymore are the right wing loony ones. The rest most require a subscription. Guess you guys got one, or Tom didn't want to link a loony tune site.

    This modern stuff sucks unless you're a capitalist!
  • Aug 16, 2019, 04:38 PM
    tomder55
    you guys are boring attacking a source .I can easily find sources from both spectrums as could you . Here's one more for your liking .
    https://thinkprogress.org/five-democ...t-7601fed719e6

    here is the quote I clearly identified as a quote from the amicus . It is in the one I just linked .….
    And Whitehouse concludes the brief with a threat. “The Supreme Court is not well,” he writes, “and the people know it. Perhaps the Court can heal itself before the public demands it be ‘restructured in order to reduce the influence of politics’.”

    In a more reasonable time ,FDR threatended to pack the court . But public opinion was against it . Still it served the purpose of intimidating the court . That is their real goal . They don't care about this case . They want to have used the tool to threaten to us it in other cases they care about .
  • Aug 16, 2019, 05:08 PM
    talaniman
    Is that like managers playing the refs? What's wrong with that? The dufus does stuff like that all the time.
  • Aug 16, 2019, 05:43 PM
    tomder55
    so you approve of the idea of court packing ? Turn around is a B . The number of justices has been 9 since 1869 . Tell you what you do . Try impeaching justices you don't like . After all there is precedence for that . Samuel Chase one of the signatories of the Declaration of Independence was impeached by the House after the election of 1800 for being a partisan . He was acquitted by the Senate . So the precedent is the independence of SCOTUS .or at least that is the theory . Chances are that SCOTUS was not going to hear the case anyway. It is just amusing how frightened the leftys are that they would .

    you really think the WSJ is a loony tune site ? Their report was straight up without commentary . I did not cite it because it is subscription only .
  • Aug 16, 2019, 06:51 PM
    talaniman
    I'm kind of nuetral over packing SCOTUS, because what goes around does come back to bite you, like getting rid of the fillibuster and a variety of other political tricks and traps. Sometimes I even hope congress never comes back from vacation, and then I think they should never have one. The only thing that saves my sanity, if you can call it that, is realizing we're all loony, and lucky to get anything positive done.

    That and getting on my soapbox for a good healthy rant every now and then.
  • Aug 16, 2019, 08:24 PM
    paraclete
    Did they forget there is a seperation for a reason?
  • Aug 16, 2019, 09:34 PM
    Specter1
    Considering that appointment to the Supreme Court is for life and transcends political regimes, I think adding justices is pointless.
  • Aug 17, 2019, 03:38 AM
    paraclete
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Specter1 View Post
    Considering that appointment to the Supreme Court is for life and transcends political regimes, I think adding justices is pointless.

    No it usurpation of political power
  • Aug 17, 2019, 05:45 AM
    talaniman
    All branches of government have their own tricks and traps to bend the rules in their favor. That's America.
  • Aug 17, 2019, 06:05 AM
    jlisenbe
    Quote:

    Got a link thats not a right wing loony noise machine?
    Says the man who linked to crooksandliars.com on another thread.

    Quote:

    Is that like managers playing the refs? What's wrong with that? The dufus does stuff like that all the time.
    Yes, and you complain about it all the time. So it's OK if a liberal dem does it but not if Trump does it?
  • Aug 17, 2019, 06:29 AM
    talaniman
    Don't be foolish, you chunk rocks I chunk them back! You know the rules!
  • Aug 17, 2019, 06:32 AM
    paraclete
    There are Rules?
  • Aug 17, 2019, 06:43 AM
    talaniman
    Sure there are, you chunk a rock, I duck, I chunk a rock, it's entirely up to you to duck.
  • Aug 17, 2019, 06:44 AM
    jlisenbe
    Quote:

    Sure there are, you chunk a rock, I duck, I chunk a rock, it's entirely up to you to duck.
    That was funny! You got my Saturday off to a good start. Have a great day, my friend.
  • Aug 17, 2019, 04:09 PM
    paraclete
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by talaniman View Post
    Sure there are, you chunk a rock, I duck, I chunk a rock, it's entirely up to you to duck.

    Hang on until I get my shanghi and we will see how well you duck. You rocka my roof I rocka your head
  • Aug 17, 2019, 07:42 PM
    tomder55
    Specter1 makes a great point. sorta . It is because that justices of SCOTUS are lifers that this threat is compelling . Now if there were term limits and if SCOTUS rules could be over turned by the legislature and Executive then perhaps the equilibrium the framers envisioned could be realized. That wont happen without an article 5 convention . off my soap box.
  • Aug 17, 2019, 09:35 PM
    talaniman
    YAWN...The framers didn't envision Moscow Mitch, or the dufus, or Bozo Barr either, or how much money they would control. Yeah great idea letting those bozos being able to overrule SCOTUS whenever they didn't like a ruling. You can put your Nikes back in their box Tom.
  • Aug 18, 2019, 03:19 AM
    tomder55
    scores of bad decisions with no redress .That is tyranny of the black robes .
  • Aug 18, 2019, 05:47 AM
    jlisenbe
    Quote:

    YAWN...The framers didn't envision Moscow Mitch, or the dufus, or Bozo Barr either, or how much money they would control.
    As opposed to the sanctified purity of Obama, Lynch, Clinton, and Holder? Please. Nothing has happened with Trump that compares to the meeting Lynch had with BC on the tarmac, or the abject lying that went on about the Benghazi disaster. If you want to see genuine corruption, just look back a few years.
  • Aug 18, 2019, 05:57 AM
    talaniman
    So I guess that justifies letting your side do it since we did it?
  • Aug 18, 2019, 07:19 AM
    jlisenbe
    Quote:

    So I guess that justifies letting your side do it since we did it?
    You're right. It does not, and that's a valid point, but I just wonder how loudly all the liberals howled during the eight years of Obama's two terms. They, and I imagine you, all fell into line in obedient servitude and praise of Mr. Obama. So when you want to be all "riled up" about Trump, just remember that, at least to me, it wouldn't have such a hollow ring to it if you had been as "riled up" back then about Obama.
  • Aug 18, 2019, 07:44 AM
    talaniman
    So the bottom line according to you is it's just your turn to support a corrupt lying, cheating dufus? Hey that's fair, but that makes YOU no better than me, since we both support our own corrupt governing. We can agree on that at least and own the bad stuff we are doing to our country.

    Same old BS just a different name right?
  • Aug 18, 2019, 12:28 PM
    jlisenbe
    Quote:

    So the bottom line according to you is it's just your turn to support a corrupt lying, cheating dufus? Hey that's fair, but that makes YOU no better than me, since we both support our own corrupt governing. We can agree on that at least and own the bad stuff we are doing to our country.
    I see you point, but it policy. All about government policy.
  • Aug 18, 2019, 04:36 PM
    talaniman
    Policies that help the rich and hurt the poor, and are cruel to men women and children is not good policy.
  • Aug 18, 2019, 05:29 PM
    jlisenbe
    Quote:

    Policies that help the rich and hurt the poor, and are cruel to men women and children is not good policy.
    Having the best economy in decades is good for everyone, rich or poor. The cruelty allegation is no doubt a reference to the southern border and that is largely gossip level material. Tilting SCOTUS back towards respect for the Constitution and law is a great thing.
  • Aug 19, 2019, 08:30 PM
    Athos
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jlisenbe View Post
    Having the best economy in decades is good for everyone, rich or poor.

    For all the rich, not for all the poor. Econ 101.

    Quote:

    The cruelty allegation is no doubt a reference to the southern border and that is largely gossip level material.
    You have made some wild comments here, but this one beats all. "Gossip material"? The abuses and deaths of children have gone all around the world in too many videos to count and in every major newspaper in the world. The US under Trump is seen as a barbarous nation. You see this as gossip - I'm not surprised.

    Quote:

    Tilting SCOTUS back towards respect for the Constitution and law is a great thing.
    You mean packing the court with conservatives while Moscow Mitch denied the Democrats their choice of Garland.
  • Aug 20, 2019, 04:57 AM
    jlisenbe
    Quote:

    For all the rich, not for all the poor. Econ 101.
    What a ridiculous comment. When a poor person gets a job, or gets a better job than the one he/she had, then that is a good thing. It is your hatred of Trump that prevents you from seeing the blindingly obvious.
  • Aug 20, 2019, 05:21 AM
    talaniman
    If there is a better job available, and you are qualified. I heard after they rounded up all those migrants at the chiken hanging plant they had a job fair and all the hamburger hangers are flocking to replace them.

    Burger flipper to chicken hanger is a real step up.
  • Aug 20, 2019, 05:34 AM
    jlisenbe
    Quote:

    Burger flipper to chicken hanger is a real step up.
    Most people would consider a 25% raise to be a real step up. They are both respectable jobs for working people trying to make a living.
  • Aug 20, 2019, 08:56 AM
    Wondergirl
    Who gets a 25% raise???
  • Aug 20, 2019, 09:12 AM
    Athos
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jlisenbe View Post
    It is your hatred of Trump that prevents you from seeing the blindingly obvious.


    The blindingly obvious of children being abused and dying? Obvious, yes. And for you, blinding.

    Better hatred of Trump than calling the abuse of children, including infants and toddlers, "mere gossip material". You are breathtakingly callous to refer to such horrors as gossip.
  • Aug 20, 2019, 09:16 AM
    jlisenbe
    Quote:

    Who gets a 25% raise???
    If you are working at a Burger King for, let's say, 9 an hour, and you move to a chicken processing plant for 11.25, then you just received a 25% wage increase. Bear in mind that moving from a fast food place to a chicken plant was the topic.

    You've been locked up in that library too long.

    Quote:

    The blindingly obvious of children being abused and dying? Obvious, yes. And for you, blinding.

    Are you talking about Chicago or the southern border, because your remarks are far more appropriate for Chicago. But since Chicago is run by liberal dems, then you seem not too interested. Blind indeed.
  • Aug 20, 2019, 09:25 AM
    Wondergirl
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jlisenbe View Post
    If you are working at a Burger King for, let's say, 9 an hour, and you move to a chicken processing plant for 11.25, then you just received a 25% wage increase. Bear in mind that moving from a fast food place to a chicken plant was the topic.

    You've been locked up in that library too long.

    In this example, a 25% raise is a whole 'nother animal from a 25% wage increase!!!

    And then the personal put-down. That's why I rarely post here anymore.
  • Aug 20, 2019, 09:27 AM
    Athos
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by jlisenbe View Post
    Are you talking about Chicago or the southern border, .


    I'm talking about YOUR allegations that the cruelty at the southern border is "largely gossip material". Are you now going to deny you said that?
  • Aug 20, 2019, 09:40 AM
    jlisenbe
    Quote:

    I'm talking about YOUR allegations that the cruelty at the southern border is "largely gossip material". Are you now going to deny you said that?
    Absolutely not, but you missed a key word. I said they are LARGELY gossip material. Do I, for instance, believe anything AOC said? No. People are being cared for in what strikes me as LARGELY an acceptable manner.

    Children have died, and that is tragic, but in nearly every case efforts were made to intervene medically. Most of the kids walked from Guatemala, so it would be no surprise they would be in less than good medical condition. It would be amazingly helpful if people entering our country would do so in a legal fashion.

    https://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na...524-story.html

    As for Chicago, children are shot and killed on a monthly basis. But like I said, since it is run by liberal dems, then no one cares. The same can be said for New Orleans, Detroit, Baltimore, LA, and many other large American cities. You are keyed in on the southern border because you see it as an opportunity to criticize Trump.
  • Aug 20, 2019, 10:15 AM
    talaniman
    Everyday is a new opportunity to criticize the dufus. Are you kidding me?
  • Aug 20, 2019, 10:23 AM
    jlisenbe
    No concern for Chicago or any other large American citizen where the policies of liberal dems are proving disastrous. Your bias is showing.

  • All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:20 AM.