idw.community

3 0

"“I think they should wait until the next president and let the next president pick.”"

Pres.. DJ Trump, in an interview with Good Morning America re: supreme court nominations in 2016

TheMiddleWay 7 Sep 23
Share

Post a comment Author often replies/likes Reply Author often replies/likes Add Photo

Be part of the movement!

Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.

Create your free account

3 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

1

I think he was right.
And they are right to do the opposite, now. To do otherwise would be inconsistent.
Procedurally, once a nomination is made, it's entirely up to the Senate to manage their calendar according to their priorities. It was then, and it is now.
Strategically, the objective both was then, and still is, to incrementally restore the Court to a more conservative stance; the way it should be. Quite consistent between 2016 and 2020.
There should have never, ever, been a single 'progressive' Justice on the Court in the first place. Roe v Wade is probably the most obvious example of why there shouldn't be.

The SCOTUS is a conservative institution, by its very nature. Each progressive Justice taking up a seat, serves only to corrupt the Court and make it less effective at its conservative raison d'etre.
Specifically: to assess the legitimacy of the Law, using the Constitution as the yardstick.
When a Law fails that test, the Law needs to be changed... not the yardstick.

Anybody who views the Constitution as a subjective, malleable, "living" document... has no business on the Court. A "living" yardstick is useless for measuring... the very notion renders the Constitution effectively meaningless. That's kind of a big deal in a Constitutional Republic.
If they believe that the Constitution needs to be "re-imagined"... there's a process for that. And it needs to take place in the light of day among the Representatives of the People themselves, not in the back-rooms of the Supreme Court among a handful of lifetime ideologues.

3

Of course. The law does not prevent either side from defending whatever is advantageous to their party. Only an idiot would back off from that position when the opposition is taking full advantage of it.

1

Because the then Pres (Obama) and Senate were from parties, and so bc ot was an election year it would make little sense for the Senate to confirm a SC pick with whom they (Repubs) share little vision with the direction of country shaping legislature.

But now that the current Pres is likely to put up a pick the Senate majority is likely to agree is a good choice to rule conservatively on the bench then it would be beyond foolish, suicidal even in the current polemically charged environment, to not go full steam ahead.

It was wrong for the REPS to not at least hear a nominee back then as it is wrong for the DEMS to not want to hear a nominee now.

There is no high ground left in Washington; everyone is in the swamp.

@TheMiddleWay I disagree. There is no reason for the Senate to confirm a SC pick whose political leanings would likely render legislative decisions contrary to the constitution, rushing America's demise faster than it need be.

That's as destructive a stance as never-Trumpers refusing to support Trump bc he is, apperently, a crude and crass man. When will PC BS culture ever get quashed anyway?

This higher ground approach, failing to meet the enemy on the battleground, is as ludicrously responsible for the current toxic cultural ailments plaguing America as the lunatic left's desired to turn America inside out. Republicans need to get off the high horse and band together to fight fire with fire while there is still a choice to do so.

@NonAgrssvMight
You express disagreement based on ideology, not procedure.

Ideologically, what the GOP did in 2016 and 2020 is correct for those that share the GOP ideology but incorrect for those that don't share the GOP ideology.

Procedurally, what the GOP did in 2016 and the DEMS are attempting to do in 2020 is wrong regardless of ideology.

@TheMiddleWay I tapped out a completely differnt answer that was first attempting to continue arguing for the common sense position why 2020 is different than 2016. But then I realized your arguement positioning procedure over ideological motives is the actual issue at hand.

Like I said in my last post, the Repubs have to stop worrying about following procedure to the letter when they are dealing with opposition who has blatantly vowed they "will win by any means necessary." The non-lunatic left is in a battle with opposition who does not adhere to, nor observe previously agreed upon procedure. The lunatic left uses the constituion when it benefits them so that when they grab enough power they can turn around to burn it down along with everyone's rights because it suits their twisted, unAmerican agenda to win by any means necessary.

Do you honestly think the Dems would do anything different had the roles been reversed in 2016 and 2020? If not then your preciously held procedure is taking you in one direction all the way to the end. This fight is not going to be won by one side adhering to principles and high moral standards while other side breaks all the rules of procedure without any morale standing in order to have everything their own way.

It really is time, no past time, to wake up and get engaged already. Precedent for this fight was already set while we were all too busy complacently snoozing

@NonAgrssvMight I find it sad that you refer to any of your fellow Americans as the 'enemy'. I know, I know, you have a laundry list of reasons you feel justify your perception, but it will still just be sad. That's not very American of you.

@NonAgrssvMight
So since the dems follow the low road, the reps might as well follow them down in it?
Whatever happened to being the bigger man, to taking the high road... to a victory won without honor is no victory at all?

@Amzungu and I find it sad my friend that peeps still still have little to no clue what is going on around them. What do you call these out of control mobs that continuously "vow to burn the place down" when they don't get what they want? Animals roving the streets beating innocent people, burning businesses, assaulting police officers. Make no doubt about it: they are the enemy, depending of course which side of the lunacy you reside on, who are motivated to bring America to her knees all in an effort to grab power indefinitely. If you do not see and hear anything day in and day out to corroborate what I am talking about, then I fear you are in for a violent shock.

@NonAgrssvMight

Do you honestly think the Dems would do anything different had the roles been reversed in 2016 and 2020?

Not at all. I think they would have done exactly the same thing. And I would not have tried to find excuses for the DEMS in that hypothetical anymore than I find excuses for the REPS in the actual.

Regardless of what my personal ideology is, there is no more high ground left in Washington; it's all swamp and every one of them is down in the muck.

@TheMiddleWay unfortunately that has been the way conservatives have largely conducted themselves for the past century, and where has it got them? Republicans are by and large more left today than JFK was when he was alive. Repubs have alliwed the lunatic left move the goal posts increasingly left with no push back, hoping holding to policy and procedures nobody else is adhering to and we've lost our lunch and about to lose a whole lot more if the Dems are allowed to steal this election with their threats and underhanded schemes.

Check out Mark Levin, Dan Bongino, Savage or even Ben Shapiro for some insight beyond what I am spewing.

@TheMiddleWay I wish you were right that they are on a level playing field. But at least it does look like some of the Republicans may finally be loosening if not taking off their ties and jackets to prepare for the rumble that appears all but inevitable.

@NonAgrssvMight

Check out Mark Levin, Dan Bongino, Savage or even Ben Shapiro for some insight beyond what I am spewing.

They will no more give me an unbiased perspective of the right than I can expect Rachel Maddow or Don Lemon to give me an unbiased perspective of the left. 😉

@TheMiddleWay but somebody's more right, now you need to figure out who or remain procedurally "MiddleWay", by the sounds of it.

@NonAgrssvMight

but somebody's more right

Not necessarily. In the extremes of their views and in my experience, Shapiro is as equally wrong as Maddow. Neither the far right nor the far left are "more right" and instead, from my view in the middle, insist on being "more wrong" as a means to appease their base and secure viewership and sponsorship.

You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:134582
IDW.community does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.