Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 4 of 4 1 2 3 4
Re: Check out this nitwit [Re: mikezpen] #605232
17/05/2020 21:01
17/05/2020 21:01
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 16,528
T
TBP Online content
10 and 5 Guy
TBP  Online Content
10 and 5 Guy
T
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 16,528
The purpose of government is to secure our rights. That's why it exists. It's not to determine who gets what or to set forth some vision of what society "needs" and regulate its way to that vision. We know about societies that do that. They're tyrannies. Police states.

Education is a local and state responsibility. The Federal government had no constitutional authority in that area, and it's been ineffective in that role anyway. State and local officials are much more in touch with the needs of the people in the community. And we need school choice. Some people are well-served by public schools; some, especially those in poorer communities, often aren't. We need to ficx that -- and money is not the cure -- but most importantly, we need to make every parent able to make that choice.

Government money brings government control.

No one should be receiving subsidies. Not corporations, banks, car companies, farmers, anyone. This pandemic can be argued as an exception, since the reason the businesses are closing and jobs are gone is because the government ordered it. Whatever one thinks of those stay-home orders, they caused a lot of jobs and businesses (especially small businesses) to disappear.

None of this is within the scope of the Federal government's constitutional powers. The general welfare clause is not an unlimited grant of power; it's attendant to the enumerated powers, to implementing those powers. if the intent were not to keep the government within the enumerated powers, then why enumerate them?

Government is supposed to be limited, not only as a protection of liberty, but also because we want government to be strong enough and efficient enough to do the thigns it is supposed to do and do them well without being stretched beyond its effective capacities.


Progressives lack compassion and tolerance. Their self-aggrandizement is all that matters.
Re: Check out this nitwit [Re: mikezpen] #605234
18/05/2020 08:33
18/05/2020 08:33
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 10,415
Near West Side, beautiful Clev...
pogo Offline
10 and 5 Guy
pogo  Offline
10 and 5 Guy
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 10,415
Near West Side, beautiful Clev...
Again with the rhetoric.
Your bit on education describes the American tradition. You said earlier that it was failing, at least in the public sphere. But imply that it should be untouchable.
So action from any level is bad, bad, bad?

Then the assumption that government is the enemy.
"The purpose of government is to secure our rights." From whom? The minions of local government action? Or private action that is allowed by them?
You can state your preferences, but your preferences are just that. Not engraved in either Constitutional history or practice.
A very canny politician, John Marshall worked Marbury vs. Madison into American governmental practice to establish that what the SC says is what is Constitutional.
I hate many of their decisions, particularly recently. For that matter so have court majorities over the years, overruling its own previous decisions.
And of course minorities often oppose what majorities on the court rule. But we act like what they say in the majority is the "Constitution."
I doubt that you will disagree with the consensus that McConnell"s packing of the fed bench, all the way up to the SC will be his lasting legacy. He understands the above. (To our national detriment.)

The logic of being skeptical of government behavior is inescapable, given national, state and local actions over the years. And seeing who is on the subsidy gravy train
I tend to agree with your opinion on the subject. But the way you state your absolutes is rhetoric. You don't even state them as principles of good government.
Again, advice. Argue your opinions. Don't state them as derived from some sort of divine ten commandments.


Never give a sucker an even break. - W.C. Fields -
Practiced by Vladimir Putin
Re: Check out this nitwit [Re: mikezpen] #605238
18/05/2020 15:19
18/05/2020 15:19
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 16,528
T
TBP Online content
10 and 5 Guy
TBP  Online Content
10 and 5 Guy
T
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 16,528
My ideas on education are to get a good education for every possible child. Much of public education is failing. Where did I say it should be untouchable? Precisely the opposite.

Excessive government is certainly the enemy of the people. Government exists for certain limited purposes. It is not to run our lives. We can do that perfectly well ourselves.

Marshall was wrong. The constitution is in most aspects very specific. It is not just what the Court says. Suppose that the Court ruled that the Constitution does not allow us to criticize our government or assemble peaceably. Would that be what it says? That is, in fact, exactly contrary to the First Amendment.

Packing the court? How is he packing the courts? There were vacancies. The president and the Senate fulfilled their duty to fill them.

Yes, I am skeptical of the government and the politicians and their behavior. It would be unhealthy not to be. If the people are not skeptical of their government, if they are not holding it in check, then you have the Soviet Union, Red China, or Nazi Germany. The government works for us, and it is limited, and that is as it should be. Certainly, the acts of people like Whitmer have no basis or authority. If we let them get away with just decreeing whatever they want for as long as they want, there will be NO freedom left -- and that's the way they like it.

That is why you need to have the government limited to specific, designated powers. That is how you protect freedom.


Progressives lack compassion and tolerance. Their self-aggrandizement is all that matters.
Re: Check out this nitwit [Re: TBP] #605240
19/05/2020 08:25
19/05/2020 08:25
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 10,415
Near West Side, beautiful Clev...
pogo Offline
10 and 5 Guy
pogo  Offline
10 and 5 Guy
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 10,415
Near West Side, beautiful Clev...
Originally Posted by TBP


Packing the court? How is he packing the courts? There were vacancies. The president and the Senate fulfilled their duty to fill them.
.


Your question ignores the general political consensus to a level that it really isn't worth answering. But it's a rainy day here and I can't get out to plant more flowers. So - -

1. Against all US political history McConnell blocked a SC nominee, Merritt Garland, who had been applauded by politicians and observers of all political stripes - from even getting a hearing.
2.Quoting NPR, "Part of that success is due to the huge number of judicial vacancies that existed when Trump took office — 122. That staggering number is due to the fact that Republicans, who controlled the Senate in the last two years of the Obama presidency, confirmed only two appeals court judges — a record that dates back to the 1800s."
3.Doing away with the "Blue Slip" system, where judicial nominees were approved by both Senators in the state where they would serve. Senators rarely turned down nominees. Generally only when - - -
4.ABA vetting of candidates as to their basic competence (failed). Approval by peers was no longer relevant. And the ABA is notably conservative. It is not the Alliance For Justice. Again, politics and even previous decisions were not at issue. Only experience and competence was judged.
5.Using the Federalist Society list of young (to make them long term) lawyers of consistently far right politics as the list from which to make appointments. NO previous administration has outsourced choice to any private group
to supply the list of potential appointees. Of course groups from the ACLU to the Fed. Society critiqued. But they did not choose.
6. No. 5 is probably the reason that nos. 4 & 5 took place. McConnell et al did not want to have to pay attention to anyone but his political ally.

So. You should give credit to McConnell for his legacy if you approve the results. Me, I got queasy even writing the above. It makes me want to send a check to the Alliance For Justice.


Never give a sucker an even break. - W.C. Fields -
Practiced by Vladimir Putin
Re: Check out this nitwit [Re: mikezpen] #605241
19/05/2020 13:35
19/05/2020 13:35
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 16,528
T
TBP Online content
10 and 5 Guy
TBP  Online Content
10 and 5 Guy
T
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 16,528
The courts are not supposed to be political. They're not supposed to respond to any political consensus, real or imagined.

McConnell was completely right to block Garland. Was he somehow entitled to a seat? If there were a nomination this year, I hope he would hold it off until after the first of the year. Let the Supreme Court be an issue, and let the people have their say. Do we want judges who stick to the Constitution, or judges who believe in a "living" Constitution (which is none at all, ultimately)? That's why it was an issue last time and why it may become one this time.

Trump inherited a lot of judicial vacancies, and he moved quickly to fill them, mostly with excellent judges.

What was so sacrosanct about the blue slip? It was just a tradition? Why should that prevail over the will of the whole Senate?

The ABA is extremely biased to the left. They will always downgrade an originalist or similar candidate. It's not a competence rating; it's an ideological rating. Presidents Reagan and Bush ignored it too, and for the same reason.

The president has not chosen from the list he originally presented. The Federalist Society is a strong defender of the Constitution; it's one of the places I would turn for advice on judicial choices.

McConnell has been pretty good on judges. I haven't been a fan on a lot of other things.


Progressives lack compassion and tolerance. Their self-aggrandizement is all that matters.
Re: Check out this nitwit [Re: mikezpen] #605242
19/05/2020 15:21
19/05/2020 15:21
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 10,415
Near West Side, beautiful Clev...
pogo Offline
10 and 5 Guy
pogo  Offline
10 and 5 Guy
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 10,415
Near West Side, beautiful Clev...
1. True. In the best of all worlds. Which has not been true at any time in the history of the United States.
2.Block? Not to give any hearing on his merits? To follow his (and your) politics to use whatever political mechanism to achieve his partisan ends? Shame. And as anti-democratic (small d) as is possible.
3.Inherited? Invented by McConnell.
4. Okay. You can violate (I looked it up) more than 100 years of precedent for political advantage. Speaks to my point that McConnell does whatever he feels necessary to win.
5. Bullcrap. The ABA is about as hidebound and conservative as is possible. In the large majority. They are dominated by institutional practitioners. Historically and currently. They hurrumph about their prerogatives being violated. But they opposed almost no candidates except the absolutely unqualified.
And Bush and Reagan did submit names to them. Ignored? I honestly do not know how often they ignored the ABA ratings. I do remember a comment from a Trumper that they considered the ABA a pain in the ---.
6. Again. Bullcrap. Name one. Even one, who was not on their list.
So listen to the Federalists. And I would listen to my Oberlin classmate Nan Aron, head and founder of the Alliance For Justice. But selection power? Nope. Not even for her/them.
&. On judges, certainly an honest statement, as much as I disagree. I would be interested in hearing where you are "not a fan."


Never give a sucker an even break. - W.C. Fields -
Practiced by Vladimir Putin
Re: Check out this nitwit [Re: mikezpen] #605248
20/05/2020 09:28
20/05/2020 09:28
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 54,416
Hillary's Vast Right-Wing Cons...
M
mikezpen Offline OP
10 and 5 Guy
mikezpen  Offline OP
10 and 5 Guy
M
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 54,416
Hillary's Vast Right-Wing Cons...
Had the Senate been Dem in that situation,w/they have allowed a Republican Supreme Court Justice to be considered. I doubt it.

Let me ask you. How do you feel about adding a couple of minority justices to the Sup. Ct. for a total of 11, to make it more "diverse". (which is the excuse they'll use for packing it) ? Which is what some Dems propose and Biden said he'd consider?

Last edited by mikezpen; 20/05/2020 09:30.

Joe Biden has spent his entire life trying to succeed in presidential politics,and now he has. Too bad he’s not there to enjoy it.
Re: Check out this nitwit [Re: mikezpen] #605254
20/05/2020 19:03
20/05/2020 19:03
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 10,415
Near West Side, beautiful Clev...
pogo Offline
10 and 5 Guy
pogo  Offline
10 and 5 Guy
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 10,415
Near West Side, beautiful Clev...
Doubt if you will. But Garland was a lot less controversial than a good number of candidates over the years.
You would have to assume that it is more of a wild west Senate now, and that the Dems would be just as precedent busting.

Nope. it reeks of course of court packing. I would be much more in favor of a requirement that Justices of a certain age be required to retire. Even though it would do away with my favorite lady in Washington, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg.
Who interestingly was a moderate voice through most of her tenure. Only when the Court bifurcated ideologically, did she start casting hard dissents and attacking the logic of conservative ideological decisions.

And of course it would be totally irrelevant in terms of changing the court. More Trump nominees. More partisan approvals.
Probably McConnell would have changed the rules requiring 60 votes on federal nominees (except for the Supreme Court.) But he didn't have to. In his frustration over blockage of Obama nominees, Harry Reid changed the rules to require a majority Senate approval, including of Federal judges. So now the Federalist Society judicial slate waltzes through. Harry blew it for short term advantage. I doubt that McConnell would not have done the same thing.


Never give a sucker an even break. - W.C. Fields -
Practiced by Vladimir Putin
Re: Check out this nitwit [Re: mikezpen] #605266
21/05/2020 10:48
21/05/2020 10:48
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 54,416
Hillary's Vast Right-Wing Cons...
M
mikezpen Offline OP
10 and 5 Guy
mikezpen  Offline OP
10 and 5 Guy
M
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 54,416
Hillary's Vast Right-Wing Cons...
I'd put an age limit on judges and also a long term limit of maybe 20 years on ALL federal judges.The courts have way too much power they shouldn't have-Congress is supposed to have the most power but it's handed it over by sitting on its hands.The Supreme Court isn't supposed to make policy, but it does, both good and bad.

Last edited by mikezpen; 21/05/2020 10:50.

Joe Biden has spent his entire life trying to succeed in presidential politics,and now he has. Too bad he’s not there to enjoy it.
Re: Check out this nitwit [Re: pogo] #605271
21/05/2020 13:59
21/05/2020 13:59
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 16,528
T
TBP Online content
10 and 5 Guy
TBP  Online Content
10 and 5 Guy
T
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 16,528
Originally Posted by pogo
1.The ABA is about as hidebound and conservative as is possible.


You undoubtedly believe that. But it's just not true. The legal establishment as a whole tends to hve a left-sing bias, and the ABA is quite ideological.

https://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/yes-the-aba-is-still-a-left-wing-advocacy-group/

Quote
The ABA has a history of taking liberal positions on issues including abortion, the death penalty, same-sex marriage, affirmative action, and the Second Amendment.


https://www.forbes.com/2009/04/06/originalism-liberal-bias-opinions-columnists-aba.html

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/nov/1/american-bar-association-refers-conservatives-you-/

Quote
American Bar Association evaluators referred to conservatives as “you people” and prodded one of President Trump’s judicial picks on his personal beliefs about abortion before slapping him with the group’s lowest judicial rating, the nominee told Congress on Wednesday.

Leonard Grasz, nominated for the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, received a “not qualified” rating from the ABA after the grilling. He said that during the questioning it became clear the ABA evaluators didn’t like his pro-life stance.

“I was asked repeatedly for my personal opinion on social issues including abortion — it seemed to be a great topic of interest to the reviewer,” Mr. Grasz, an Omaha based lawyer, told the Senate Judiciary Committee.


Quote
Name one. Even one, who was not on their list.


On the original list? (Released almost exactly four years ago, BTW) I'll give you two names: Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...trumps-short-list-for-the-supreme-court/

Quote
Steven Colloton of Iowa
Allison Eid of Colorado
Raymond Gruender of Missouri
Thomas Hardiman of Pennsylvania
Raymond Kethledge of Michigan
Joan Larsen of Michigan
Thomas Lee of Utah
William Pryor of Alabama
David Stras of Minnesota
Diane Sykes of Wisconsin
Don Willett of Texas


I would oppose Hardiman, BTW.


Progressives lack compassion and tolerance. Their self-aggrandizement is all that matters.
Page 4 of 4 1 2 3 4

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.1.1
(Release build 20180111)
Page Time: 0.087s Queries: 14 (0.029s) Memory: 5.7564 MB (Peak: 5.9938 MB) Zlib disabled. Server Time: 2020-06-04 10:01:38 UTC