Page 1554 of 2681 FirstFirst ... 55410541454150415441552155315541555155615641604165420542554 ... LastLast
Results 15,531 to 15,540 of 26805

Thread: Politics Thread

  1. #15531
    Supporting Member Masterofreality's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    On America's Great North Coast
    Posts
    22,953
    "I Got CHAMPIONS in that Lockerroom!" -Stanley Burrell

  2. #15532

  3. #15533
    Supporting Member bjf123's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Section 114
    Posts
    6,214

    Politics Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by Strange Brew View Post
    Bill is pushing this narrative. People have accepted 2020. A real threat to Democracy is the silencing of the opposition and using the letter agencies to target political opponents and parents. This narrative from the Ds is a sick joke. It needs to stop as it leads to more division.
    Agreed. While I think both parties really don’t care about the American people, I see the Left as a bigger threat to democracy. Maher talks about the First Amendment going away if the Republicans win. Which party wants you silenced, and has the support and assistance of the media and big tech, if you don’t support their narrative? It sure as hell isn’t the Republicans.

    He referenced the rule of law. Where was the rule of law when the riots were happening in many cities a few years ago? You had Democratic mayors and DAs telling their police to stand down and then not prosecuting the rioters. And before anyone accuses me of hypocrisy, I have no problem with those who got into the halls of Congress on January 6 being prosecuted.

    He talked about a Republican controlled House impeaching Biden. I’m not sure if I would support that unless they find one hell of a “high crime or misdemeanor”. But, given the Democrats’ handling of their impeachment trials against Trump, what heck did you think was going to happen? They were talking about impeaching him before he had even been sworn in. I now fully expect impeachment hearings to happen any time the House is the under the control of the the opposite party of the sitting President. That’s 100% on the Democrats.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Last edited by bjf123; 11-05-2022 at 06:32 PM.
    Golf is a relatively simple game, played by reasonably intelligent people, stupidly.

  4. #15534
    Supporting Member Masterofreality's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    On America's Great North Coast
    Posts
    22,953
    Know what a “threat to democracy” really is?
    The Democrats blabbering about trashing the Filibuster and wanting to expand the Supreme Court.
    And for those who say Republicans will do that if in power, welp. THEY had control in full from 2017- January 2020 and never nary an indication that there was any intention to do that, nor in previous times when Repubs were in power.

    Just remember that.
    "I Got CHAMPIONS in that Lockerroom!" -Stanley Burrell

  5. #15535
    Supporting Member Masterofreality's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    On America's Great North Coast
    Posts
    22,953
    By the way, “Two Faced Tim” Ryan is flip flopping again.
    Now he has an ad where he firing guns at targets and claiming he’s all pro gun rights. And he’s also now flipped to wanting guaranteed minimum sentences based upon a perp’s prior history and wanting to ban noncitizens from voting. All flips.

    When u see a candidate flip to the oppo position he knows he’s in trouble
    "I Got CHAMPIONS in that Lockerroom!" -Stanley Burrell

  6. #15536
    When just one isnt enough X-band '01's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    The Overlook Hotel
    Posts
    15,193
    My understanding of the filibuster rules right now is that it no longer exists on justices at any level - the Democrats eliminated it for judicial appointments at the lower levels and the Republicans eliminated the filibuster for Supreme Court justices. The filibuster is still in play for other legislation in the Senate, even though most Democrats wanted to eliminate it when it came time for certaing types of legislation (i.e. voting rights).

    Yeah, there's been talk from the Spirit Squad AOC types to expand the court, but even FDR couldn't pack the court in that manner. Don't expect that to happen whether or not the Democrats or Republicans are in charge of the Senate anytime soon.

  7. #15537
    Supporting Member xubrew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    11,156
    I personally think the Supreme Court should be 10. Or 12. Or even as few as 8.

    My thinking is that for a lower court’s ruling to be overturned, it should have to lose by more than just one vote. The margin should be 2. Again, just my opinion.
    "You can't fix stupid." Ron White

  8. #15538
    All-Conference Strange Brew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Denver, Co
    Posts
    6,938
    Quote Originally Posted by xubrew View Post
    I personally think the Supreme Court should be 10. Or 12. Or even as few as 8.

    My thinking is that for a lower court’s ruling to be overturned, it should have to lose by more than just one vote. The margin should be 2. Again, just my opinion.
    I hear what you’re saying and that would give the lower courts more authority than the SC. Which imo, is not a good thing.
    Official XUHoops Resident Legal Scholar.
    (Do not take this seriously)

  9. #15539
    Supporting Member paulxu's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    South Carolina
    Posts
    21,416
    Effective filibuster in place when you have the Senate and refuse to bring a nomination to even a committee hearing. (People should decide,etc.)
    See Merrick Garland.
    But then, you can ram one through in a month if you want to. (Screw the people)
    See Amy Barrett.
    ...he went up late, and I was already up there.

  10. #15540
    All-Conference Strange Brew's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Denver, Co
    Posts
    6,938
    Quote Originally Posted by paulxu View Post
    Effective filibuster in place when you have the Senate and refuse to bring a nomination to even a committee hearing. (People should decide,etc.)
    See Merrick Garland.
    But then, you can ram one through in a month if you want to. (Screw the people)
    See Amy Barrett.
    Blame Harry Reid Paul.
    Official XUHoops Resident Legal Scholar.
    (Do not take this seriously)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •