Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

GaYellowDawg

(4,446 posts)
Fri Sep 21, 2012, 09:20 PM Sep 2012

Hesitant for the President? SUPREME. COURT. NOMINATIONS.

If any of you don't want to vote for the President, think about it:

SUPREME COURT NOMINATIONS.

Mitt Romney would put up two or three more Roberts clones during his term. As I said in a reply to another post, even Ralph Nader can't pretend that the nominations from Democratic and Republican presidents are vastly different. Does anyone think that John Roberts and Samuel Alito or justices like them would have been nominated under Gore? If you do... well, you know how dumb you are? If Rick Perry had a child by his sister, and George Bush had a child by his sister, and those children had a child, you'd be dumber than that child.

And it's not just Supreme Court nominations. There are all kinds of lower court appointments that don't need to be stacked conservative.

You may not think there's much difference between the parties when it comes to the Presidency, but there is still a MASSIVE difference when it comes to the judiciary. If you don't like anything that the President has done, then dammit, for the sake of the judicial branch, do the smart thing, hold your damn nose, shut the hell up until after November, and vote DEMOCRATIC!!

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Hesitant for the President? SUPREME. COURT. NOMINATIONS. (Original Post) GaYellowDawg Sep 2012 OP
Well stated. These are Lifetime Appointments. cr8tvlde Sep 2012 #1
Yeah. Replace the last remaining liberals with more Elena Kagans? Pab Sungenis Sep 2012 #2
Kagans vs more Scalias and Thomases? I'll take more Kagans, thankyouverymuch nt MariaM83 Sep 2012 #3
Either way Pab Sungenis Sep 2012 #4
The problem is this DonCoquixote Sep 2012 #5

cr8tvlde

(1,185 posts)
1. Well stated. These are Lifetime Appointments.
Fri Sep 21, 2012, 10:00 PM
Sep 2012

And with their superior health care et al, they live to a very ripe old age.

 

Pab Sungenis

(9,612 posts)
2. Yeah. Replace the last remaining liberals with more Elena Kagans?
Fri Sep 21, 2012, 10:38 PM
Sep 2012

Supreme Court fearmongering is a losing battle. The Court is lost either way this election goes, so start campaigning on health care, jobs, and other issues that are winners for our side.

DonCoquixote

(13,616 posts)
5. The problem is this
Sat Sep 22, 2012, 12:03 AM
Sep 2012

If Miit wins, he can be emboldened to choose someone who will NOT let his consciences bother them like Roberts did. Imagine a YOUNG, HEALTHY ayd rand type that can be there long after every member of the current court is dead. With the decisions often veering one one, yes, we do have to prevent a super rightwing type. Mitt has already proven he can be pushed, after all, you know half the GOP willhope Mit drops dead so Ryan can get HIS budget in. There are plenty of judges that will happily play the Paul Ryan role.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Hesitant for the Presiden...