NolaAuTiger 3,295 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 4 minutes ago, GiveEmElle said: Oh @NolaAuTiger What were you saying about 5-4 decisions? You’re literally proving nothing. I didn’t say they don’t happen. My goodness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaltyTiger 7,825 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 On 6/10/2018 at 9:37 PM, homersapien said: . In fact, I am set personally Hypocrite. You dogged @Proud Tiger when he mentioned his situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GiveEmElle 1,559 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 35 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said: The Supreme Court doesn’t make law. Judges are not yoked to political parties. Less than 10% of cases are decided 5-4. If you had a clue about the typical case SCOTUS hears, you’d see this a lot differently. Most of the time they are interpreting laws that you wouldn’t know where to find - and not by any fault of your own Then explain why McConnell et al blocked Obama’s pick if there’s no chance of it leaning in favor of one political party? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,396 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 5 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said: Hypocrite. You dogged @Proud Tiger when he mentioned his situation. Quote me please. That's BS. Meanwhile, please tell us, are you pretty much set or are you still working to get by? ****** Weasel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GiveEmElle 1,559 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 31 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said: You’re literally proving nothing. I didn’t say they don’t happen. My goodness. I wasn’t trying to prove anything. I found it amusing that you were discussing the rarity of a 5-4 and one happened today. That is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NolaAuTiger 3,295 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 6 minutes ago, GiveEmElle said: Then explain why McConnell et al blocked Obama’s pick if there’s no chance of it leaning in favor of one political party? For the same reasons Barry wouldn’t replace Scalia with a like-minded judge. On the rare occasion that a hot-button issue makes its way to the court, yes you can predict how a judge will lean. But even then, judges are unpredictable. Gorsuch has shown he is unpredictable at times already. Just as Scalia voiced far left opinions at times. Do you see how you’ve shifted already? Do you have a point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NolaAuTiger 3,295 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 4 minutes ago, homersapien said: Quote me please. That's BS. And meanwhile, tell us, are you pretty much set or are you still working to get by? Weasel. You’re just an old hypocrite. Have fun looking in the mirror tonight. Halfwit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NolaAuTiger 3,295 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 5 hours ago, GiveEmElle said: Well gee. You got me on that abortion thing. So tell me, how many Republicans have tried to get Roe v. Wade overturned? I can recall three Republican presidents in my lifetime ( not including Trump) and none of them touched it. Your party isn’t against abortion. Abortion is just a political tool to get the evangelical vote and pretend to have the moral high ground. @GiveEmElle this comment operates from a misinformed assumption. You know not the province of the executive if you think they have power to overturn SCOTUS jurisprudence. Since then your point has seemingly vanished. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SaltyTiger 7,825 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 13 minutes ago, homersapien said: ****** Weasel. I am offended. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NolaAuTiger 3,295 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 28 minutes ago, GiveEmElle said: I wasn’t trying to prove anything. I found it amusing that you were discussing the rarity of a 5-4 and one happened today. That is all. That doesn’t make it not rare though. Even 6-3 opinions aren’t common. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NolaAuTiger 3,295 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 17 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said: I am offended. Don’t be. Homer has been missing his meds and naps. On top of that, can’t stand Trump being his president and getting owned by a little law student every day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevon67 2,368 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 7 hours ago, homersapien said: Quote me please. That's BS. Meanwhile, please tell us, are you pretty much set or are you still working to get by? ****** Weasel. You and that weasel s***......lucky you can hide behind a monitor........you say that s*** in person someone is going to slap the frost off your pumpkin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GiveEmElle 1,559 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 7 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said: That doesn’t make it not rare though. Even 6-3 opinions aren’t common. It does make it funny though. Except of course where the decision is basically voter suppression. Which is what the GOP wants. See how having conservative judges works in their favor? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GiveEmElle 1,559 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 8 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said: @GiveEmElle this comment operates from a misinformed assumption. You know not the province of the executive if you think they have power to overturn SCOTUS jurisprudence. Since then your point has seemingly vanished. Listen darlin, I didn’t say the executive could overturn SCOTUS decisions. I swear, you Trump people read what you want into a post and criticize for something never said. I even provided a link where a Republican said getting SCOTUS picks advance GOP causes. My point is this, the GOP presidents in my lifetime have run on an anti abortion platform but then do nothing in regards to preventing abortion. It’s just a stance to pretend to have the moral high ground. You know, like when an administration rips immigrant children from their parents arms and throw them in cages or even lose them and liberals speak out the conservatives can say, “well you’re for abortion” completely ignoring the wrong being done now to immigrant children. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NolaAuTiger 3,295 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 5 minutes ago, GiveEmElle said: Listen darlin, I didn’t say the executive could overturn SCOTUS decisions. I swear, you Trump people read what you want into a post and criticize for something never said. I even provided a link where a Republican said getting SCOTUS picks advance GOP causes. My point is this, the GOP presidents in my lifetime have run on an anti abortion platform but then do nothing in regards to preventing abortion. It’s just a stance to pretend to have the moral high ground. You know, like when an administration rips immigrant children from their parents arms and throw them in cages or even lose them and liberals speak out the conservatives can say, “well you’re for abortion” completely ignoring the wrong being done now to immigrant children. Sweetie, you’re missing the mark. A President has no power of abortion. According to the court, there is this thing called “substantive due process” (which I disagree with). The Execruive has no control over that. Actually, the GOP doesn’t have the power to ban abortion. They do fight to prevent our tax dollars from going there. The Democratic Party is ok with terminating babies in the womb, the majority of which are blacks (they claim to care about), and in your despair you’re trying to pull the GOP down also when there’s actully no correlation. Who are they throwing in cages? Your problem isn’t with the GOP, your problem is with federal laws... you know, the ones that were in place even while Barry was POTUS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NolaAuTiger 3,295 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 29 minutes ago, GiveEmElle said: It does make it funny though. Except of course where the decision is basically voter suppression. Which is what the GOP wants. See how having conservative judges works in their favor? You sound really clueless right now. You’re literally affirming that you’ve no clue what you’re talking about. Voter suppression? The issue before the court was whether Ohio’s policy was prohibited under federal law. If the people want it to change, they can “vote on their feet” and elect new congressmen. I hate to break it to you but SCOTUS is not a political hotbed nor are the cases they hear on an everyday basis. If you think those judges have a political agenda, you’re dead wrong. Have you read the law and committee reports or are you just spewing out whatever comes to mind????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GiveEmElle 1,559 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 1 minute ago, NolaAuTiger said: Sweetie, you’re missing the mark. A President has no power of abortion. According to the court, there is this thing called “substantive due process” (which I disagree with). The Execruive has no control over that. Actually, the GOP doesn’t have the power to ban abortion. They do fight to prevent our tax dollars from going there. The Democratic Party is ok with terminating babies in the womb, the majority of which are blacks (they claim to care about), and in your despair you’re trying to pull the GOP down also when there’s actully no correlation. Who are they throwing in cages? Your problem isn’t with the GOP, your problem is with federal laws... you know, the ones that were in place even while Barry was POTUS. Again, I didn’t say he did. But a POTUS with a SCOTUS pick can advance their causes. Just this year we’ve witnessed the cake decision which is opening the doors for discrimination against the gay community and yesterday a decision that promotes voter supprsssion. I’m certain if Obama’s had gotten to seat his SCOTUS pick these decisions would have went a different direction. But if what you’re saying is true, then why did McConnell block Obama’s pick? If it has no bearing on decisions why block? And don’t give me that nonsense about congress being able to do that. It was Obama’s pick and it was stolen from him to advance the causes of the GOP, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GiveEmElle 1,559 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 4 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said: You sound really clueless right now. You’re literally affirming that you’ve no clue what you’re talking about. Voter suppression? The issue before the court was whether Ohio’s policy was prohibited under federal law. If the people want it to change, they can “vote on their feet” and elect new congressmen. I hate to break it to you but SCOTUS is not a political hotbed nor are the cases they hear on an everyday basis. If you think those judges have a political agenda, you’re dead wrong. Have you read the law and committee reports or are you just spewing out whatever comes to mind????? It’s taking away the right to vote from people if they fail to vote in an election. That is voter suppression. I work within the electoral process so I’m speaking from that experience. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NolaAuTiger 3,295 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 55 minutes ago, GiveEmElle said: Again, I didn’t say he did. But a POTUS with a SCOTUS pick can advance their causes. Just this year we’ve witnessed the cake decision which is opening the doors for discrimination against the gay community and yesterday a decision that promotes voter supprsssion. I’m certain if Obama’s had gotten to seat his SCOTUS pick these decisions would have went a different direction. But if what you’re saying is true, then why did McConnell block Obama’s pick? If it has no bearing on decisions why block? And don’t give me that nonsense about congress being able to do that. It was Obama’s pick and it was stolen from him to advance the causes of the GOP, How would Obama’s guy have changed the outcome when the the cake decision was 7-2???? Just stop. Please explain the differences in interpretive methodology between traditional “conservative” justices and “liberal” justices. Also explain why each sometimes go to “opposite” ends (conservative justices ruling liberal and vice versa). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NolaAuTiger 3,295 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 34 minutes ago, GiveEmElle said: It’s taking away the right to vote from people if they fail to vote in an election. That is voter suppression. I work within the electoral process so I’m speaking from that experience. It’s not against federal law - that was the issue before the court. That is what matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NolaAuTiger 3,295 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 @GiveEmElle when hot bed issues are on the horizon of the court, sure, you can have a general idea of which way particular justices will vote (but not all). However, the reality is that on a typical day, the Supreme Court is interpreting the equivalent of a federal IRS regulation, buried deep in the code, that few people even know exists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,396 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 11 hours ago, SaltyTiger said: I am offended. And you offended me with your baseless hypocrite charge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,396 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 3 hours ago, kevon67 said: You and that weasel s***......lucky you can hide behind a monitor........you say that s*** in person someone is going to slap the frost off your pumpkin. Mind your own business Mr. Internet Tough Guy. Salty called me a hypocrite for no reason. Although I probably should, I don't feel obligated to simply turn the other cheek and take it without comment. It's a weakness of mine. People who make such charges without evidence to back them up are weasels. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,396 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 10 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said: Don’t be. Homer has been missing his meds and naps. On top of that, can’t stand Trump being his president and getting owned by a little law student every day. Sniper weasel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GiveEmElle 1,559 Posted June 12, 2018 Share Posted June 12, 2018 2 hours ago, NolaAuTiger said: It’s not against federal law - that was the issue before the court. That is what matters. What matters is voter rights are being suppressed to favor Republicans. https://usat.ly/2sXnE4I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.