What will the angry left do now?
With the retirement of Justice Anthony Kennedy the radical left is now beside itself. Kennedy was a swing vote from the Originalist side. Unlike their Conservative counter parts, activist judges are never swing votes. They adhere to ideology. Their reign may be at an end as the last Reagan Judge retires. President Trump has been very effective at restoring the Supreme Court and even lessor Courts to their mission of upholding the Constitution.
So the question becomes what will the ideologues on the left do about the Court as well as all the power the have lost since the 2016 election?
Chuck Schumer has already made a statement saying that the next appointment to the Supreme Court should wait until after the election. His reasoning? That McConnell held Scalia's seat until after the election. Of course, that was a Presidential election not a Congressional election and Republicans can ignore it as they have the votes (despite the absent McCain) to do it all themselves, providing they stick together. That would be option one for the democrats - trying to get a Republican to vote with them, somebody like the very fickle woman representing the state of Maine. The problem with that is that the President is choosing from a list of highly regarded Judges. The same list which produced Justice Neil Gorsuch.
Procedurally there isn't much Schumer can do, provided the President nominates someone like Gorsuch, who has little record with the hot button issues and proper vetting is done by Republicans. Democrats and their allies in the media will be looking for any flaw once the nominee is named (professionally or personally). There is only so much time the democrats can take during the process and McConnell has already got them working through August recess.
That brings me to what I think democrats will do. They are going to produce somebody, ala Anita Hill, at the last minute to kill time and slime the nominee. Like Hill and the owner of the Red Hen, there are those who will step forward for the cause no matter what it means. For the left - the end always justifies the means.
Tags
Who is online
225 visitors
MSNBC’s Chris Matthews did not mince words in reacting to Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy’s surprise retirement announcement on Wednesday.
“I don’t think the Democrats should allow meetings to occur with Trump’s nominee to fill this vacancy by Justice Kennedy,” Matthews said. “I think they have to fight eye for an eye for what happened in ‘16 when the Republicans, led by Mitch McConnell, refused to even consider or even meet with Merrick Garland.”
Look at that face, twisted in anger! I want to see it like that every day
I take it Mr. Tingle down his leg does not know how the scotus is decided like quite a few other snowflakes I've noticed.
I'll have to watch the cock envying Rachel Madcow tonight as she slobbers all over herself. It should be Hillaryious.
I think the tingle is running in the opposite direction
I'll have to watch the cock envying Rachel Madcow tonight as she slobbers all over herself. It should be Hillaryious.
I'll do the same. They cry and I celebrate
LOL
I have been looking forward to that also...
abortion, supreme court, unions (lots of meat on her bone... LOL)
cheers
Sounds just like a masochistic torturer from the dark ages who loved to watch people suffer. I feel sad for you if that's what generates your pleasure instead of seeing people happy and content. That's what life without empathy can turn into.
Personally I would love to see all Trump supporters get educated, find a job in the growing tech industry, grow wealth, experience other cultures growing their empathy for all people regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, faith or lack thereof and truly finding happiness. I certainly don't like watching them gnash their teeth and bitter anger and frustration, I derive no pleasure from their self-induced torment.
The American people are happy & content. It's only the haters who are angry.
Personally I would love to see all Trump supporters
Without the right to vote or express an opinion! Ya, we know
Not according to Kennedy. He said that he wasn't one of those loony "originalists".
Not in some cases. He was appointed by President Ronald Reagan after his two top choices were sabotaged by radical Ted Kennedy & his followers. The choice of Anthony Kennedy was from the beginning a sort of compromise. He predates Scalia's defining description of Originalism. So, I don't care what you want to call it, Anthony Kennedy was part of the strict constructionist or Originalist side (which should be the only side), though he did vote with the activists in a few very key cases, most notably in the case of Planned Parenthood vs Casey in which he actually helped the side of judicial activism by strengthening the controversial Roe v Wade decision.
No he isn't and he's plainly said so. You obviously know little or nothing about his career.
That doesn't mean that he didn't usually side with the conservative extremists, but he most definitely isn't an "Originalist" or a "strict constructionist". I think you've confused Kennedy with a total loon like Scalia or Thomas.
Considerably more than you do
I can’t wait to become familiar with the career of the person who replaces him on the court as well.
Chuck Schumer feels the same way
Here's a book which will help you learn a bit more:
.
Plus to make the claim you did not only would you have to ignore all the rulings which Kennedy authored but you'd also have to ignore his own statements to the judiciary committee during his confirmation hearing.
Let them stay perpetually angry while the rest of America prospers.
How mad are the Democratic Senators up for reelection in red states right now?
Wow, quite a circle jerk.
I'm happy for you that you are overjoyed that more than 1/2 of the US population is not being represented at all by this government.
This country is no longer what it once was and it never will be the shining beacon on the hill with the GOP in charge of every branch power.
I think the voters are trying to tell the brain dead Democrats something, but the Dims aren't listening.
Nope, the dems have turned to violence and socialism
Not so much yet, But try to push the country too far too fast to the right and we will see the violence increase. That's what happens when a large part of a country is forced to go along where they dont want to go and they lack the political power to do anything ab out it.
Keep ignoring half of America at all our risk.
Kind of like the major legislation of Obamacare that was forced upon 70% of Americans who did not want it. Democrats voted against their own constituents.
The political powers change....no excuse for violence.
exactly and how did that work out ?
Well not good for many....taxes on health plans to employers where increased, that cost was passed on to employees. The cost burden to Medicaid was increased. Not enough have signed on as predicted so the cost of premiums has skyrocketed, more of burden on the taxpayers. The deductibles and co-pays have increased substantially, going from a $1000 a year to $10,000. There has been no decrease in the cost of healthcare as promised.
And, as one of the architects of Obamacare stated the bill was written to deceive the CBO.
Exactly ignoring half the countries needs and wants it doesn't work out well usually. Maybe some day we'll learn that. But I'm not going to hold my breath till we do.
Just not sure what that is....all we hear is hatred about Trump....no discussion of policies.
The Democrats seem to have a messaging problem right now. That is their own doing, can't ignore something that isn't there.
You are not alone. Many people dont understand what the opposition wants.Hell many people dont even really know what they want, but they do know what they dont want quicker and with all their being.
Never mind the republicans that have resorted to violence and crime.
Really? Where and when has that happened?
I agree, But I dont think their message has really changed much, they want equality for all including races and gender. A worthy message even if unrealistic. When every human born is born exactly the same we''ll have equality , personally I never see that happening.
Charolettesville and currently on the border...just for a couple of examples.
Arresting criminal invaders and placing them in custody is violent behavior? I think that is called defending the country and ICE's job.
One nut ball in a car is not "Repubicans" or the right.
Taking away their children by force is a violent act.
re read my comment. you seem confused.
What do you propose we do? Place children in with adults in jail? Let them go because they have kids?
I propose they follow the law. There is no law requiring children be taken from their parents and placed into detention.
No, it is more social programs that the US can't sustain. They call it "equality".
then what do we do with them. They can't go into the jail with the parents. Do you propose just let 5 year-olds roam the streets?
Give their parents the time to deal with where their kids go. Many of them do have other family that can and want to take them in. Or allow the parents out with an ankle monitor so they can care for their kids until they have their date in court.
Taking them away and spreading them across the country is extremely cruel and expensive.
Leaving their home and sneaking across one or more countries in order to sneak into ours is cruel and Child Abuse .Maybe it is a good thing they were taken from their parents before they got really hurt.
That would be nice but their parents don't give a crap about our laws and are already blatantly breaking them at will. Crappy parents if you ask me.
E.A And even Worse some times they are not " The Parents " hence we are …..
It is sad that you have made that conclusion for every one of those that are seeking asylum and have cooperated. I'll just say, I disagree that they are "crappy parents" and I didn't ask you.
The majority of people requesting asylum are denied.
E.A Those TWO words seem NOT to make any sense to some, You have to spend a few YEARS explaining it to THEM!
LOL, Nope it's only coming from the left - as usual.
You mean Antifa and "La Raza"?
that is a dishonest response and you know it.
What about them? Do you not view them as extremists?
So what? That doesn't justify taking their kids away.
They are extremist groups.
it does justify keeping the parents in custody. we do not keep children in with adult prisoners in adult institutions. They are either left in custody of verifiable family and untilproper family is found they can and are placed in proper juvinile facilities. Just like the children caught in the car with the drunk parents.
It happens to be true
"The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has formally classified the activities of anti-fascist groups (antifa) as “domestic terrorist violence” since early 2016, according to confidential law enforcement documents obtained by Politico and interviews ."
Good enough?
then you should be able to prove it. I'll wait.
The problem is we aren't giving the kids back..even after deporting the parent.
We aren't disagreeing on that matter.
No, I don't. I didn't make either claim, but I know one thing - you told him his claim of Obamacare being unpopular was false, then you said it benefited people. That made no sense. Furthermore, you need to be shown the error repeatedly. You just cant get it?
Here's the initial exchange:
Now we can see clearly that you were talking about opinion polls and my response was about the fact that the law benefited the majority (they got something of value) from the legislation.
I don't think I'm the one not getting it. I was never talking about opinions, I was talking about representation. If you are represented you benefit from legislation...I should have made it more clear that was what I meant.
you made this response:
Prove the violence is only coming from the left.
Let’s not forget the BLM domestic terrorists often working in concert with Antifa.
I haven't forgotten them or Obama inviting them to the White House. Nor do I forget all the Cops who were murdered
Portland, this weekend.
antifa attacked trump supporters and then "predictably" antifa got their asses handed to them by those trump supporters.
a civil war? no.
a civil public spanking yes
enjoy.
I'd say the Dems are not doing to bad a job. They have managed to get done what Trump would not do;
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
President Trump tweets he has accepted resignation of scandal-plagued EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt.
Source:
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I guess Pruitt didn't like having to face the real world while dining in a real restaurant with real people who called him on his ethics and screwing our taxpayers and our country and its people for his own personal gain.
IF equality was ever achieved, many social programs may not even be needed.
Yep, It appears he took advantage of his power and now he's done. Good more probably should follow his lead. (Carlson quickly comes to mind.)
Yeppers. There may be a few others who are taking a good look at what the real world is capable of. Both Pruitt and her Majesty Sarah Sanders have found that out just recently. The real world is not afraid to let their voices be heard.
Just like the Republicans weren't afraid of letting their voices be heard when the Dems were in the WH. Seems the Republicans can dish it out but feel the butt hurt when the shoe is on the other 'cheek'.
And the same was true of the last administration
The view always sucks when you're the pivot man, huh?
The thing is that I'm not a pivot. I'm a moderate.
How is it that fiscal conservatives have stopped being fiscally conservative? The money trump is spending would ordinarily have conservatives in a tizzy. There was a whole lot of complaining about the debt when it was Obama...and crickets now.
Were over half of us not at all represented from 1933-1947 or 1949-1953 or 1961-1969 or 1977-1981 or 1993-1995 or 2009-2011? Why does that only apply 1/3 of 2001, 2003-2007, 2017-present?
I hope Trump does as well with the next pick as he did with the last. However, he could probably just throw a dart at the list and do better than the liberal nut jobs on the Court. Speaking of nut jobs, is Ginsberg ever going to retire or does she just plant to join the walking dead?
I like
Amul Thapar and think he’d be a great choice. Would Dems try to filibuster the first Asian American Supreme Court nominee?
They filibustered Miguel Estrada because he was Hispanic.
I like William Pryor.
Yup, A Hispanic who would think for himself. They couldn't allow that
I'm not even going to pretend I don't want to see a liberal judge after this gone and a conservative lean strongly in SCOTUS.
Lets not play games and pretend the left wouldn't stack the court extremely liberal if they could. Be mad all you want... acting like you would want the court "balanced" even if Hillary won is insulting people's intelligence. 6 more years gives a good chance of another 1 or 2 liberal judges replaced as well.
Yep, it's a good possibility. Any way you look at it, the Court will be conservative for next 50-60 years.
How do ya figure that considering the average age of the current judges is 70 years old ?
50 and 70 = death in most humans for sure.
I'd expect almost a complete turn over in the next 20 years or so considering the oldest justice currently , was born on March 15, 1933 and the youngest was born back in April 28, 1960.
That's not what Obama did. Garland was a good choice.
Garland was center left. Replacing a conservative judge. Politics were played as it always is. The Dems didn't have the numbers in the senate then and they don't now. Dems could have shut congress down but that would have looked bad on them they thought. They thought there was no way Hillary was going to lose. They weighed their options, placed a bet, and lost.
now im not saying they were wrong or right. PoliTically if I was in their shoes I may have done the same thing ... as many thought Hillary was a lock.
However, my point was... if Hillary had won ..8 years... and was able to turn the court 6-3 liberal ... would you really care that it wasn't "balanced" or would you tell the right that they lost so deal with it?
to be fair the right would be crying it should be balanced then too...the eternal game of faux outrage from both...
also, nice to see you again Fiery
yes, I really would care that it wasn't balanced. I really believe that balance is much better for all concerned. Don't you? You've been reading my comments for years...have you ever seen me say it would be great to stack the court?
It's really good to see you too SH.
The "Strict" constitutional way...or the "Interpretation" way.
Hmm. Fair enough. I believe you would want to see it balanced. Do you believe the majority would? Although... let's remember Kennedy was more center right especially lately. I dont think it's a huge swing unless he replaces a liberal judge.
i do think this is bad for Trump in the 2nd election. Many voted for him to secure the SCOTUS. I could see some going another way now that it's accomplished... unless they think Ginsburg could be replaced.
balance is balance.
If the left wanted him, he couldn't have been a good choice.
Doesn't answer my question does it.
It may end up that way, but given trumps list...I'm not sure it won't end up being a big swing. Hopefully someone will fill the void left by Kennedy's retirement.
I think it does.
It won't be going the other way any time soon, and only losers of elections want it to be "balanced". That's not how it works in DC
Don't wait for responses from me. You seem incapable of being non partisan.
So you have no parameters ?
Things are incapable of balancing without parameters. Is the concept confusing somehow?
So what parameters are you looking for as a balance.
Constitutional or Interpretive !
Is that too confusing to answer ?
I think you're giving me a non binary option. Even those considered "strict constitutional" have been interpreted differently by different justices. Note: I think the term you mean to be using is "strict constructionist" view rather than constitutional.
The abortion issue is not something that can be decided based a "strict constitutional way" since the Constitution is silent on reproductive rights. It isn't silent on privacy rights or first amendment rights. So the decision in roe was interpretive...unless you see it as constructionist . In short the way I view this is that in reality there is only one option...interpretive. The other option is also interpretive since there isn't consensus.
Ok, now I see why you like Trump so much. You have a knee jerk response against 'the others', no deep thinking required. For or against depends on what the other side is for or against. It so weird, so many conservatives seem more happy about going against the 'enemy' instead of evaluating each idea on its own merit. What kind of people get so giddy over lording their power and enjoy mean assholey behavior towards others? You see it when Trump speaks at events, watch the people behind him, they are the kind of people who cheered when the christians were pitted against the lions, or who picnic while watching the death penalty implemented.
Reuters
Image caption
Mr Kennedy has sided with liberals on many decisions
What Will The Angry Left Do Now?
VOTE LIKE NEVER BEFORE!
Nah. They'll stay at home like they always do. Republicans will be energized to new levels though. MAGA.
This should end any hope they had for any big blue wave 🌊. Go Big Red!
How's it going Vic? Now that this is an older article I would like to chime in.(Less trolls).
I take your question "What will the angry left do now?" a bit differently than some. I don't see the "Angry Left" as being truly representative of the majority of Democrats in this country.
The "Angry Left" is backing itself into a corner where violence is all they have left in their arsenal. Sad, bloody and self-defeating it will be. I say there is a 50/50 chance that though they will set the stage for violence it may well be that people leaning to the right would commit the first act of actual violence.
Is there any doubt that the majority of Americans are sick and tired of the constant pushing of boundaries and obstruction of government as well as our own activities being conducted by the extremists on both sides ?
It doesn't matter which side of extremists lights the fuse, neither side is going to like seeing armed citizens coming onto the streets confronting them. These citizens won't be representing political sides, they will be Americans coming out to protect their own homes, businesses and families.
Can't happen in America? Oh yes it can. We are faced with two groups each sworn to obstruct the other and remain in a state of virtually no government and no progress. The tolerance level of those not controlled or inclined to follow rigid ideologies (the majority of Americans) is dropping rapidly. Regardless of our race, religion, and any other cultural differences Americans do not like being tread upon by anybody, not even other Americans.
We are rapidly approaching the point of no return. You may be right, it may be someone from the right who reacts and is first to act. I know I could never have the self restraint of the people who were harassed this past week, just going out to eat or to the movies. Sam Donaldson used to say "my rights end where your nose begins". I never believed in that. Getting in peoples face is a provocation and that's exactly what's going on. Right now the far left is following Alinsky's rules for radicals #8 - Keep the pressure on. I have to confess, there is more reactionary in me than Conservative. Maybe it's good that I'm in a sleepy town far from all the turmoil.
Is there any doubt that the majority of Americans are sick and tired of the constant pushing of boundaries and obstruction of government as well as our own activities being conducted by the extremists on both sides ?
No doubt. No solution in sight.
It doesn't matter which side of extremists lights the fuse, neither side is going to like seeing armed citizens coming onto the streets confronting them. These citizens won't be representing political sides, they will be Americans coming out to protect their own homes, businesses and families.
We are reliving the politics of Europe during the 1920's
Can't happen in America?
We've lived a long time off the prosperity & security we earned in WWII. We take all of it for granted. We've been lucky as well. When we needed an Abraham Lincoln we had him. When we needed a Reagan we had him. Now we are sharply divided. I don't see one side extending any olive branches and I don't see anybody who can unify the country anywhere
Ludin and her children, ages 9 and 17, were separated immediately after they crossed the border illegally into Texas. Sent to different parts of the country, they were kept apart for 40 days. We were there for their reunion.
Published On
June 29, 2018
After 40 Days Apart,
a Migrant Family Reunites
Ludin and her children, ages 9 and 17, were separated immediately after they crossed the border illegally into Texas. Sent to different parts of the country, they were kept apart for 40 days. We were there for their reunion.
By SAMEEN AMIN, BRENT McDONALD, NILO TABRIZY and AINARA TIEFENTHÄLER