Ruth Bader Ginsburg dies at 87

Rodney Bathgate

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Also on this

1) its not that I disbelieve she said it but it just seems an odd thing to say on your deathbed, family member with an agenda made it up perhaps ?

2) if she did say it, wow Donny T had some major free real estate in her mind, your last thought on this earth is about donald trump....

Did she expect the seat to remain unfilled for 4 years if President Trump got his ‘4 more years’?

Danzy

Pelezico wrote: »

Thank goodness no. But she should have retired years ago. She kept the seat warm for what she hoped was another pinko liberal.

She should have.

Hard for driven people like that to turn off though.

Pelezico

Pelezico wrote: »

Thank goodness no. But she should have retired years ago. She kept the seat warm for what she hoped was another pinko liberal.

Why should she have retired?

I’m just an outsider looking in here but I’ve read a good few posts saying she was an intelligent woman so I have to ask. Why did she not step down when Obama was in office in order for the democrats to ensure someone on their side continued in the job? She was in her 80s at that stage.

Did she believe she was invincible? And what’s the dying wish part about? RIP to the woman but life still goes for hundreds of millions of others.

Eric Cartman

Rodney Bathgate wrote: »

Did she expect the seat to remain unfilled for 4 years if President Trump got his ‘4 more years’?

Ohh no because it was going to be all sunshine and rainbows and biden was going to win and the legal equivalent of AOC was going to step in to this seat and everything was to be fine and magic .

RBG wasnt balance/fair etc.. she literally held a seat till she died to try and stop political opponents filling it, I hope the reward for such is to install somebody who’s even too conservative for me, a real ‘jesus, guns, freedom’ type with a hardon for the death penalty.

Danzy

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Why should she have retired?

If she wanted to maintain or advance the interpretation of the law she subscribed to.

ceadaoin.

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Also on this

1) its not that I disbelieve she said it but it just seems an odd thing to say on your deathbed, family member with an agenda made it up perhaps ?

2) if she did say it, wow Donny T had some major free real estate in her mind, your last thought on this earth is about donald trump....

Its well known that because of her choice not to step down when Obama was in office that she gambled on Hillary being elected and unfortunately lost. Its also well known that as a result she was trying to hold on until the election despite increasingly poor health. I mean, she and her seat was and will be a pretty big deal for america, so its perfectly believable that she said that.

Its not about trump, she had been around long enough to know that. its about the US and its future ffs, and in particular womens rights, which were her lifes work, and could be totally ****ed now.

I appreciate everything she did for womens rights in the US. Legend.

Melanchthon

weisses wrote: »

It just shows once again what a ****hole the US really is

From my limited understanding though doesn't the Irish supreme court tend to apply the thinking conservative US supreme court members do.

That the constitution should be interpreted as written at the time, specifically this is the case with the Irish supreme court holding a referendum about Gay marriage when potentially there was a argument to just legislate AFAIK that's the US conservative view but no one calls the Ireland a sh-thole because of those decisions.

Rodney Bathgate

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

I’m just an outsider looking in here but I’ve read a good few posts saying she was an intelligent woman so I have to ask. Why did she not step down when Obama was in office in order for the democrats to ensure someone on their side continued in the job? She was in her 80s at that stage.

Did she believe she was invincible? And what’s the dying wish part about? RIP to the woman but life still goes for hundreds of millions of others.

Possibly a narcissist.

Faugheen

Some truly horrible bastards in this thread.

Imagine the crying and the whinging if anything like what we’re seeing here was said about one of their beloved conservative justices.

Danzy

[quote="Eric Cartman;114663071"
RBG wasnt balance/fair etc.. she literally held a seat till she died to try and stop political opponents filling it.[/quote]

She did but that is understandable. Same as it is understandable that they'll try to replace her as quickly as possible.

Nevermind the other imperatives to do do.

weisses

Eric Cartman wrote: »

RBG wasnt balance/fair etc.. she literally held a seat till she died to try and stop political opponents filling it, I hope the reward for such is to install somebody who’s even too conservative for me, a real ‘jesus, guns, freedom’ type with a hardon for the death penalty.

She declined to step down during Obama, that makes the part in bold incorrect, including the ramblings after

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Rodney Bathgate wrote: »

No idea who he will seek to appoint.

We have seen that the Democrats will embrace any crazy idea, the marxist BLM movement being the latest. **** like CHOP/CHAZ and the riots and looting that have been going on for months in ‘liberal’ cities like Portland and Seattle with the support of the Democrat mayors/governors etc.

Having a stronger conservative majority will hopefully protect the country from these lunatics attempting to roll back fundamental stuff like property rights (for ‘reparations’) and gun ownership rights. Plus anything around the death penalty.

What ideas are you specifically taking about her regarding the democrats?

gmisk

Very sad news an absolute powerhouse.

I saw the doc recently RBG well worth a watch.

Faugheen

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Why?

To stick it to the lefties, innit

weisses

Melanchthon wrote: »

From my limited understanding though doesn't the Irish supreme court tend to apply the thinking conservative US supreme court members do.

That the constitution should be interpreted as written at the time, specifically this is the case with the Irish supreme court holding a referendum about Gay marriage when potentially there was a argument to just legislate AFAIK that's the US conservative view but no one calls the Ireland a sh-thole because of those decisions.

You cannot compare Ireland with the US .....

Eric Cartman

weisses wrote: »

She declined to step down during Obama, that makes the part in bold incorrect, including the ramblings after

She was gambling on how much time she could spend active, hoping to get mid way through a hillary term and then retire. She lost that gamble and then couldnt bare to step down with trump at the helm

Danzy

weisses wrote: »

You cannot compare Ireland with the US .....

His point is correct though.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Ohh no because it was going to be all sunshine and rainbows and biden was going to win and the legal equivalent of AOC was going to step in to this seat and everything was to be fine and magic .

RBG wasnt balance/fair etc.. she literally held a seat till she died to try and stop political opponents filling it, I hope the reward for such is to install somebody who’s even too conservative for me, a real ‘jesus, guns, freedom’ type with a hardon for the death penalty.

You mean she wasn't connservative.

If you think the SC need pro guns and pro religion in order to achieve balance. You have no idea what balance is.

You want bias. Please be honest.

Melanchthon

weisses wrote: »

You cannot compare Ireland with the US .....

But you can compare the philosophy of supreme court's in two constitutional republics that work on a common law system

Faugheen

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

You mean she wasn't connservative.

If you think the SC need pro guns and pro religion in order to achieve balance. You have no idea what balance is.

You want bias. Please be honest.

Lol. Good luck getting that honesty.

osarusan

I don't see why Trump wouldn't try and fill it if he can. The Democrats will try to stop him.

That's politics, I'd expect it to be just the same if it was all reversed. People might point to McConnell and his blatant inconsistencies, but so what, blatant inconsistencies abound on all sides.

In this case, maybe some Republicans who are up for re-election will gauge the mood in their constituencies and come out against a nomination before the election. I think one or two already have.

Or perhaps there will be a sense that it would be better to nominate a moderate conservative that the Democrats find palatable, and get it done and dusted before the election, which they may well lose, and the nomination along with it. I doubt they would go in that direction though.

hotmail.com

Robert Black wrote: »

Imagine getting upset because some old judge in America died? Lmao

Weird alright, particularly as she had no effect on Ireland and nor will her replacement.

Faugheen

osarusan wrote: »

I don't see why Trump wouldn't try and fill it if he can. The Democrats will try to stop him.

That's politics, I'd expect it to be just the same if it was all reversed. People might point to McConnell and his blatant inconsistencies, but so what, blatant inconsistencies abound on all sides.

In this case, maybe some Republicans who are up for re-election will gauge the mood in their constituencies and come out against a nomination before the election. I think one or two already have.

Or perhaps there will be a sense that it would be better to nominate a moderate conservative that the Democrats find palatable, and get it done and dusted before the election, which they may well lose, and the nomination along with it. I doubt they would go in that direction though.

The top court shouldn’t be political, though.

Pelezico

Melanchthon wrote: »

But you can compare the philosophy of supreme court's in two constitutional republics that work on a common law system

Then start another thread. This thread is dedicated to a pinko liberal who stayed too long in the job.

The liberals lapped her up... and were in awe at her wisdom. What a joke.

gmisk

Pelezico wrote: »

Thank goodness no. But she should have retired years ago. She kept the seat warm for what she hoped was another pinko liberal.

Pinko liberal?
Absolute rubbish. You are saying she was a communist/Communist supporter? Laughable.
She only became "liberal" by comparison as the members of the supreme court became more and more conservative in it's makeup.

Eric Cartman

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Why?

To leave a lasting mark on the US legal system that favours conservative decisions for the next few decades and removing a harder left vote. Shifting the general brow of the courts decisions to the right

osarusan

Faugheen wrote: »

The top court shouldn’t be political, though.

Whether it should be or not, it is. That's the reality of it.

Pelezico

Rodney Bathgate wrote: »

Read my post. They have embraced BLM. BLM are an Marxist movement are looking to overthrown democracy.

I completely agree. They are anarchists.

Danzy

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

You mean she wasn't connservative.

If you think the SC need pro guns and pro religion in order to achieve balance. You have no idea what balance is.

You want bias. Please be honest.

RBG was an activist Judge, she brought her politics, her views, her life experience in to how she interpreted the law. To a degree that stood out over the last few decades.

Everyone will to some degree.