Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics' started by GeneWright, Sep 18, 2020.
To be honest, I'm just sad. Ruth Bader Ginsburg fought until the very end and she will be missed.
The Republican hypocrisy will be swift.
She went to foreign countries and told them that the U.S. constitution was irrelevant and nothing for them to emulate. She took an oath to support and defend the constitution. She did not keep her oath. ‘Nuf said.
While I disagreed with much of her policy, it is notable that I still respected her greatly, I respected that she took part in one of the most important parts of government, deciding and debating the limits of government, and that’s special to me.
I never respected her. She was one of those people, who wore a black robe, who thought that she was a member of the national legislature. And, as I said before, she disrespected the U.S. constitution.
Gender rights are anti American
No they aren't anti-American, but after a time, quotas and reverse discrimination are anti-American.
It is interesting to note that anti-Semitism is okay with you because Democrat Omar hates Jewish people, and since she is politically correct, you agree with her. As a “person of color,” she can hate with impunity, and that is okay by you.
For Omar, she's actually my representative and I both voted for her in the Minnesota house of representatives and U.S. house of representatives as well as every primary she's been in.
The allegations of anti-semitism are twisted. She's critical of Israel, not anti-Semitic. Anything she's said that has been misconstrued as anti-Semitic, she has also apologized for.
You voted for her? That's sick, but I'm not surprised. I voted for Jimmy Carter in 1976. Omar is a first class hater.
The only reason why I am not totally ashamed of that vote was because his opponent was Gerald Ford. Ford had a quid pro quo with Nixon and the pardon. Anyone who knows Ford’s background knows that he was Republican lapdog who would do what he was told.
Does it bother you that I'm about to do it again?
No, she's in a "safe seat" and will be able to hold it for the rest of her life if she so chooses. I think that she should be kicked out the country. She obviously does not appreciate the freedoms she has been granted here.
When I lived in Massachusetts, there was often only one person on the ballot for my representative to Congress. I usually left the ballot blank, because that representative did nothing for his district. He was a Democrat and the people of Massachusetts would elect a convicted felon to office, sitting the jail cell, if he or she is a Democrat.
I’m not kidding. They once elected James Michael Curley to office when he was sitting in jail. Why? As one old Irishman told me, if you had a useless brother-in-law who couldn’t find a job anywhere else, Curley would get him a job in the city or state government.
Franklin Roosevelt depended on Curley to win the Massachusetts primary for him in 1932. When Curly failed, Roosevelt was deeply embarrassed because he had counted on him and it hurt his chances to win the presidential nomination.
When Roosevelt became President, someone asked him what appoint he was going to give to Curly.
“Ambassador to Poland,” was FDR’s answer.
“Can you think of anything that Mr. Curly would like to steal in Poland?” was FDR’s response.
Here is a classic Curly - Franklin Roosevelt button.
You forget. He gets all his information from Fox.
Hold them to their words.
2016, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas): “It has been 80 years since a Supreme Court vacancy was nominated and confirmed in an election year. There is a long tradition that you don’t do this in an election year.”
2018, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.): “If an opening comes in the last year of President Trump’s term, and the primary process has started, we’ll wait to the next election.”
2016, Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.): “I don’t think we should be moving on a nominee in the last year of this president’s term - I would say that if it was a Republican president.”
2016, Sen. David Perdue (R-Ga.): “The very balance of our nation’s highest court is in serious jeopardy. As a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I will do everything in my power to encourage the president and Senate leadership not to start this process until we hear from the American people.”
2016, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa): “A lifetime appointment that could dramatically impact individual freedoms and change the direction of the court for at least a generation is too important to get bogged down in politics. The American people shouldn’t be denied a voice.”
2016, Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.): “The campaign is already under way. It is essential to the institution of the Senate and to the very health of our republic to not launch our nation into a partisan, divisive confirmation battle during the very same time the American people are casting their ballots to elect our next president.”
2016, Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.): “In this election year, the American people will have an opportunity to have their say in the future direction of our country. For this reason, I believe the vacancy left open by Justice Antonin Scalia should not be filled until there is a new president.”
2016, Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.): “The Senate should not confirm a new Supreme Court justice until we have a new president.”
2016, Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Col.): “I think we’re too close to the election. The president who is elected in November should be the one who makes this decision.”
2016, Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio): “I believe the best thing for the country is to trust the American people to weigh in on who should make a lifetime appointment that could reshape the Supreme Court for generations. This wouldn’t be unusual. It is common practice for the Senate to stop acting on lifetime appointments during the last year of a presidential term, and it’s been nearly 80 years since any president was permitted to immediately fill a vacancy that arose in a presidential election year.”
2016, Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wisc.): “I strongly agree that the American people should decide the future direction of the Supreme Court by their votes for president and the majority party in the U.S. Senate.”
“The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president.”
Mitch McConnell, March 2016
Please consider copying and pasting this quotation above on your page to share with friends. We must raise our voices and demand fairness. Silence won't help.
The hypocrites are impervious to their own hypocrisy.
I am curious. Is it a status thing or has she accomplished something that you are pleased with?
Danged if you haven’t been on a knifes edge this weekend. You need some sugar for your coffee or something?
A few reasons:
- a huge portion of our district are Somali immigrants like her, so she has lived their stories and can relate personally to their struggles while representing us.
- she's an outspoken progressive, and identifies as a democratic socialist. Many of her beliefs align with my values, so I'm glad to have her voice in Congress.
- I feel it's important to have a representative democracy in general. The demographics for leaders in this nation have been pretty narrow for the history of this country (old, white, Christian, male) and that's fine I guess, but I would personally much rather have closer representation to the demographics of the united States. I mean, even male vs. female is an abysmal 23% female and that's reaching towards record highs. So with her being able to bring greater representation to women, people of color, Islamic people, and first generation immigrants, she seems a great choice for this.
I get it. She certainly is an outspoken progressive. I vehemently have a distaste for Lindsay Graham because he is outspoken. And that would be fine if he were truly accomplishing something. But Graham’s accomplishments are purely self serving. He doesn’t represent me. He represents himself. Which is the basis of my query. Do you feel she serves her constituency, or is her outspoken nature born of her own aspirations? She certainly garners the TV time.
Tough to say yet. She's still very new to Congress. There was a primary challenger she beat here a bit ago that was driving at the same things you are.
My ultimate hope, is that she is just the beginning. The more people we elect like her across the country, the more feasible their goals become. If Bernie did one thing right, it was teaching the progressive youth about the importance of local/downballot races and running for office ourselves.
As for now, she's still part of the freshman class only having been there since 2019. Of the freshman class, she ranks 8th of 91 in number of co-sponsored bills. So, I'm willing to give her more time to develop before I start looking to primary challengers. This is a safe blue district, so essentially the real election happened a month back in the primaries