Home | About | Donate

Warnings of Trumpism 'Forever' as Senate GOP Rams Through 44 Lifetime Judges in One Day


#84

I stay away from casinos. When I was a kid some of my friends taught me how to play poker. I ended up losing some hilarious dirty comics that my uncle had left with some of his old ham radio stuff. McAdams and coke for me. Come to think of it, one comic featured Barney Google. I wonder if the search engine conglomerate got their name from old Barney.


#85

Says the guy lauding one Bill Clinton as President because “He raised taxes on the rich”.

Bill Clinton who had one Madeline Albright as Secretary of State , the same that claimed 500,000 dead children in Iraq due to US sanctions was worth it.

Bill Clinton who passed welfare reform which lead to tens of thousands more households entering poverty.

Bill Clinton whom a Republican lauded because “He did more to privatize Government services than any other President”

Bill Clinton who was the President who pulled peacekeepers out of Uganda when the UN general on the ground implored more to be sent to head off a potential genocide and then had the State department lean on other Countries to do the same in case the US “lost face”.

Bill Clinton who passed NAFTA and repealed Glass_steagall.

Bill Clinton who had several women come forward to claim they raped by him and who was a regular on the Lolita express.

But hey he raised taxes on the rich and nobody perfect right?

And the best rebuttal you can come up with is to speak to another’s grammar? You can get a job at MSNBC.


#86

Yes you would but my question was directed towards someone I think has principles .


#87

I have a few all or nothing card games I could mention but Trumpism is the fish food we are offered today.


#88

Wrong. The matter of voting for Hillary to stop Trump was a state-by-state decision.

For example, here in MI, Hillary managed to get 190,000 fewer votes than Obama in 2012, in a state Obama won handily twice, even over native son, Mitt Romney. I’m going to repeat that: 190,000 Obama voters voted for someone else in just one overall blue state.

Perhaps it doesn’t occur to you that candidates matter. I suggest you start focusing on a d-party candidate who can beat Trump. Out of those declared, none will beat him unless a recession starts within six months.


#89

This President does not have ANY ideology to footprint other than the same ones shared by the leadership of the Democratic and Republican parties. See how they clap for each other?


#90

The only difference is one parties majority are overt tyrants and the other parties majority is covert tyrants; therefor the covert tyrants are the more effective evil!


#91

Clinton raised taxes on the rich? A myth oftimes repeated.

He raised the top marginal tax rates on the top 1 percent of wage earners by 3 percent in 1993. Two years later he lowered Capital gains taxes from 28 percent to 20 percent. He also raised the exemption on the estate tax by over 40 percent.

The one percent get most of their income via stock sales and purchases, not salary and they came way out ahead after Clintons “tax increases”. The stock market boomed soon after that and that 1 percent made a killing increasing their wealth exponentially just as they do today.


#92

Why should we ever expect to get what we want if we’re never willing to ask for it, vote for it, or demand it?


#93

Its traditional here.


#94

Amen.


#95

Hillary frequently boasted during the 2016 campaign that she knew “how to get things done” in D.C. That was code for “I’ll propose whatever the Republicans in Congress will approve.” Given that the Senate Republicans were playing very hard hardball - remember Merrick Garland? - Hillary would have nominated right-wing jurists to please the Republicans, and the Democrats in the Senate, led by Fast-trackin’ Chuck Schumer, would have supported the nominations out of party loyalty. The result would have been a right-wing judiciary confirmed with bipartisan unanimity.

DP loyalists, of course, would have praised the nominations and confirmations because, for them, bad things are good when a Democratic President does them. (see Obama, 2009-2017.)

The real question concerns how the Republicans got control of the Senate. The answer lies in the perfidious behavior of the Democrats and their leader, Obama, during 2009-2010.

#96

These confirmations require progressives to “look forward, not back”, as some Trojan horse once said. The confirmations are legal and lifetime appointments, so the only solution is to pack the courts as FDR tried to do. “Pack” here means increase the number of judges.

The SCOTUS has five right-wing justices now, so progressives need to have six of their own on that court, and eight would be better. The same arithmetic can easily be applied to the appellate courts. The question is “How do we get there?”

Packing the courts is impeded by two obstacles. The first is the Judiciary Act of 1869, which sets the SCOTUS membership at one Chief Justice and eight Associate Justices. Amending that law would require progressive simple majorities in both houses of Congress and a progressive President to sign the legislation. Getting progressive judicial nominees would require a progressive President, and confirmation would require a progressive simple majority in the Senate. That’s the absolute minimum. Absent a progressive President, progressives would need two-thirds majorities in both houses of Congress to override a veto, but even then, a non-progressive President could nominate “centrists” or simply refuse to nominate progressive-minded jurists and instead leave the nine-member SCOTUS as is.

The second obstacle is electing a Congress and a President sufficiently progressive to amend the Judiciary Act and put progressives on the courts. A Democratic Congress and a Democratic President might - might - produce center-left nominees for rare future judicial vacancies, but will Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi and their band of Republican Democrats support the radical action of expanding the courts to please the left? No, they won’t.

The only candidates who will do what now must be done are in the Green Party. If you want to undo what the Republicans hath wrought, the Green Party is your only choice. Get to work!


#97

The library is closing soon - gotta run!


#98

G,

If We as a People never break away from parties that give us nothing but the very least possible good, and the most apparent evil, We are not a People worth our humanity.

To stay aligned with evil, in any form, is evil as well.


#99

A bit more objective article would have noted that this was made possible by the actions of the Democratic Party controlled Senate on November 21, 2013 which, under then leader Harry Reid of Nevada, eliminated the prior de facto consent tradition for federal judicial appointments, something Republicans did with Supreme Court nominees last year. The result is a totally politicized judiciary. Perhaps selection of federal judges should be restructured giving that responsibilities to a less politicized constituency, perhaps to the members of State Supreme Courts and making tenure limited, perhaps to a decade. Of course, Murphy’s Law would then probably result in more politicized state supreme courts.


#100

. Both major parties are for endless war and for a corrupt medical system . you are for the better of 2 evils. Nothing is ever going to change w this system-- Trump is just more in your face than dems. You should go out and get the 100 million or so eligible voters who did not vote at all in 2016 to vote,

Does the government represent the people

http://www.nobodyforpresident.org/


#101

Trump does what he does because he can. There are no open signs of opposition. There are no demonstrations or street protests, no sit-ins, no Molotov cocktails, just a passive populous meekly lowering their heads and humbly accepting to be sodomized by the monster.
If the great degenerate decided to put a huge tariff on beer, you would see street protests, sit-ins, and Molotov cocktails. The People have the government they deserve.


#102

G,

The growing apparent reality, isn’t that a third party has no chance of winning, the growing apparent reality is that 95 to 97 percent of the voting electorate, election after election, is satisfied with being systematically lied to by the political parties they vote for, perhaps not at the local and State levels, but absolutely at the Federal level.

Those of us who vote for third party candidates, do so not out of conscience or protest, we do so because we know these people are the best humans for the job of serving the People, not the Military Industrial Complex.

Forgive me if I am being judgemental.


#103

"Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do."