Jump to content

Featured Replies

1 hour ago, EaglesRocker97 said:
Possibility that Roberts was recruiting Kavanaugh to come to his side.

I would think Gorsuch might be more likely than Kavanaugh. Gorsuch is more likely to cite precedent and has said as much regarding Roe v Wade. 

This whole thing just reminds me of how Republicans played dirty politics to steal at least one SC seat from an elected president. 

  • Replies 5.1k
  • Views 155.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • vikas83
    vikas83

    Putting aside one’s stance on the issue, we should all agree that it is egregious and dangerous that this was leaked. Draft opinions should remain private and debated among the justices. Not every cas

  • vikas83
    vikas83

    I meant someone competent. You go ahead and enjoy that White Castle at your leisure.

  • the meme template you didn't know you needed!        

Posted Images

5 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

"Integrity of the court"

ErLvJijXIAAeyTX.jpg

Image

14 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

Every day, you never fail to one up yourself on being a massive a-hole and monumental scumbag. You try so hard to be funny and clever yet fail since your cognitive abilities stopped developing somewhere in middle school, so fail miserably at being both a troll and a comedian, in addition to being a decent human being.

I haven’t seen a biological male this emotional since Adam Morrison in the NCAA Tournament. And nothings even been announced yet. Gear down sport, you and whatever unfortunate girl that you guilt in to sleeping with you will still be allowed to kill the innocent result of your actions.

Just now, JohnSnowsHair said:

I would think Gorsuch might be more likely than Kavanaugh. Gorsuch is more likely to cite precedent and has said as much regarding Roe v Wade. 

This whole thing just reminds me of how Republicans played dirty politics to steal at least one SC seat from an elected president. 

Tears GIFs - Get the best GIF on GIPHY

3 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

"Integrity of the court"

ErLvJijXIAAeyTX.jpg

Your point? This is the next step in a series of steps eroding the court's integrity. I suppose that’s what you aim to say. I agree 100%. A stain on the court along with the other stains that preceded it. If Garland were on the court today as he should be it would be 5-4 the other direction. 

  • Author
43 minutes ago, jsdarkstar said:

The Radical Right is going to rue the day when it happens. The Majority of Americans oppose it and they will hold politicians accountable. Especially, women.

Precedent means nothing to the radical right and they all lied about it under oath in the confirmation hearings. 

 

I'd like to agree with you, but we're a stupid society who cares more about Twitter and celebrity court battles than real issues. The left doesn't have the presence of mind or wherewithal to understand what's at stake and get off the couch.

2 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

 

This whole thing just reminds me of how Republicans played dirty politics to steal at least one SC seat from an elected president. 

yep...and the reason the evangelical right held their nose & supported an immoral, serial adulterer...they wanted those supreme court seats for just this reason...and they got them. 

  • Author
36 minutes ago, binkybink77 said:

Complicated pregnancy can lead to autism but autism also results more often when no known factors have contributed. Your second hand experience into someone’s medical history and judgement of their family and children extrapolated into an opinion about what they "should have done” seems gross to me. The child with autism is a human being and not some terrible mistake. 
 

That is great and noble that you would adopt. Be a hero and take on the challenge of adopting from foster care then instead of just pontificating on a message board on the good person you "would” be. 

 

How characteristically sanctimonious of you...

POTUS statement:

 

Btw - They didn’t lie under oath. However, they did spin and mislead. It was all very obvious. 

  • Author
4 minutes ago, The_Omega said:

I haven’t seen a biological male this emotional since Adam Morrison in the NCAA Tournament. And nothings even been announced yet. Gear down sport, you and whatever unfortunate girl that you guilt in to sleeping with you will still be allowed to kill the innocent result of your actions.

 

Lol, swing and a miss.

3 minutes ago, toolg said:

POTUS statement:

 

Solid

This is one of the best takes I've seen on the decision:

Honestly, if killing babies is that important to you, move to a blue state that will allow it. Go be with other like minded-people. If you're against slaughtering children, move to a red state and make your voice heard. State's rights are pivotal here. 

  • Author
15 minutes ago, jsdarkstar said:

Will the Radical Right take away our Medicare and Social Security Benefits. They have been trying for decades. 

 

They definitely will at the first opportunity.

1 minute ago, DrPhilly said:

Your point? This is the next step in a series of steps eroding the court's integrity. I suppose that’s what you aim to say. I agree 100%. A stain on the court along with the other stains that preceded it. If Garland were on the court today as he should be it would be 5-4 the other direction. 

My point is that the court has already lost any integrity it had.  From Kavanaugh's pathetic Hilary conspiracy rant to Thomas's wife's texts about overturning the election and installing a dictator, it's all gone.

But to your Garland point, I'd consider this ruling (assuming it happens) to be the one positive to come out of that dirty play by McConnell.  This is a potential nail in the coffin of the modern Republican Party and it never would have happened without the court going too far to the activist right.  Short term, I think we'll see some modest help for the Dems in the mid-term, but longterm I think it's absolutely devastating to the right.  It has less to do with galvanizing the left (liberal's youth and short attention spans means that's always temporary) and more to do with breaking up the right.  Good luck keeping moderate, religious suburbanites on-board with the hard-right carnival-barker sheet-show when you don't have Roe to keep them close.

  • Author
33 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Less welfare babies we all need to worry about.  Don't want to get one because of your religious beliefs.....then great.  Feed your kid and be a good parent or F off.  

 

Indeed!

7 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said:

 

How characteristically sanctimonious of you...0

I’m being sanctimonious but you are the one spreading someone’s medical history and making judgmental comments about an autistic child - seemingly implying that he is some kind of punishment - all while proclaiming you would do it right and adopt if you decided on children. Literally you are declaring the saint you "would be”. :roll: 

1 minute ago, VanHammersly said:

My point is that the court has already lost any integrity it had.  From Kavanaugh's pathetic Hilary conspiracy rant to Thomas's wife's texts about overturning the election and installing a dictator, it's all gone.

But to your Garland point, I'd consider this ruling (assuming it happens) to be the one positive to come out of that dirty play by McConnell.  This is a potential nail in the coffin of the modern Republican Party and it never would have happened without the court going too far to the activist right.  Short term, I think we'll see some modest help for the Dems in the mid-term, but longterm I think it's absolutely devastating to the right.  It has less to do with galvanizing the left (liberal's youth and short attention spans means that's always temporary) and more to do with breaking up the right.  Good luck keeping moderate, religious suburbanites on-board with the hard-right carnival-barker sheet-show when you don't have Roe to keep them close.

Man, between Disney crushing DeSantis, the huge win for the left that was Elon Musk purchasing twitter, and now another huge win for dems in the SC overturning Roe vs. Wade, you must be on cloud nine. Exhausted from all the winning. Take a break, van, you've earned it. 

  • Author
32 minutes ago, VanHammersly said:

Taking away rights from Americans rarely goes well politically, no matter which side does it.

 

My lawyer friend was saying last night that this is first time SCOTUS has taken away right. I couldn't really think of another example, either. They've either expanded rights or denied their extension but never outright annulled one that I can think of.

  • Author
4 minutes ago, binkybink77 said:

I’m being sanctimonious but you are the one spreading someone’s medical history and making judgmental comments about an autistic child - seemingly implying that he is some kind of punishment - all while proclaiming you would do it right and adopt if you decided on children. Literally you are declaring the saint you "would be”. :roll: 

 

Can you quote where I "declared I'm a saint?" I'm usually quite forthcoming that I'm nothing of the sort. I'm talking about being rational.

1 minute ago, Kz! said:

Man, between Disney crushing DeSantis, the huge win for the left that was Elon Musk purchasing twitter, and now another huge win for dems in the SC overturning Roe vs. Wade, you must be on cloud nine. Exhausted from all the winning. Take a break, van, you've earned it. 

I mean, the Disney thing mainly just shows how little Desantis cares about conservative values, but it's not a particularly wide-reaching issue.  

I'm good with Musk purchasing twitter, which for some reason...bothers you?

And as for this one, I've said on here for years that I wished Roe would go.  It's a symbol that wasn't working as intended.  It's only use was as a boogyman to keep the right in line.

:roll: 

  • Author
24 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said:

I would think Gorsuch might be more likely than Kavanaugh. Gorsuch is more likely to cite precedent and has said as much regarding Roe v Wade.

 

Well there was talk last night about how Collins voted to confirm Kavanaugh because she thought he would uphold. I saw the clip, it was a classic non-answer in my opinion with just enough for someone to chew on if they were desperate for cover. I saw the clip, it was a classic non-answer in my opinion with just enough for someone to chew on if they were desperate for cover.

1 minute ago, VanHammersly said:

I mean, the Disney thing mainly just shows how little Desantis cares about conservative values, but it's not a particularly wide-reaching issue.  

I'm good with Musk purchasing twitter, which for some reason...bothers you?

And as for this one, I've said on here for years that I wished Roe would go.  It's a symbol that wasn't working as intended.  It's only use was as a boogyman to keep the right in line.

"Good with"... no, you said it was a huge win for the left. :lol: 

Image

Create an account or sign in to comment