1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

  2. Live Rockets Discussion
    Jalen Green looks like a legit star, Amen Thompson is shining and the Rockets have found something without Alperen Sengun. Clutch is talking about the 10-game winning streak at 11:00am as we talk Rockets live!

    Talking Rockets - LIVE!

Kennedy to retire - USSC will swing even further right

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by NewRoxFan, Jun 27, 2018.

  1. NewRoxFan

    NewRoxFan Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2002
    Messages:
    53,813
    Likes Received:
    53,593
    You didn't answer the question. Was Garland a highly qualified appointment? If yes, than it appears that being a highly qualified appointment does not matter.

    And... "well within their rights"? Was there another instance when a highly qualified USSC appointment that was denied even a hearing?

    "... some political biases"? You would honestly say that Clarence Thomas only has "some" political bias? Or, Ruth Bader Ginsburg? Or can't you easily predict what they will rule, regardless of arguments presented?

    And ..."not affected by upcoming elections"? If we are carefully appointing the very best legal minds to be our Supreme court, wouldn't you expect that they would rule by law, not by political or even selfish concerns? Which of the current justices would you have such concerns about?
     
  2. Bobbythegreat

    Bobbythegreat Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2013
    Messages:
    63,171
    Likes Received:
    25,826

    Yes I do, 30 out of 50 is a majority. A strong majority actually. I suppose the real question is, do you understand what a majority is?

    Sure, but what you don't seem to understand is that you are holding on to something that is completely and totally irrelevant and ignoring what is relevant. I'll grant you that California went for Clinton overwhelmingly and that swayed the overall national popular vote....problem is that it doesn't mean anything. The system was set up specifically so that one large state couldn't overrule the vast majority of states. Large states are still given an advantage over small states, but not enough of an advantage to where 20 states can overrule 30 as you'd have happen.

    Lying to yourself isn't going to change the fact that Hillary Clinton managed to lose 30 states, some of which have voted for the Democratic candidate every year since the last time California voted for a Republican. You can't make her failure go away by hyping up the fact that California loved her. It's simply not something that matters.

    Control over the SCOTUS was a major issue in the election and that swayed states that have been blue for decades to vote against Hillary. You can't say that those people didn't want Trump to pick the next few SCOTUS justices all you can do is throw a fit about it.

    As to "LGBT rights", you do know that Donald Trump is the very first president who was pro-gay marriage before he was elected right? Even your boy Obama spoke out against it to help get elected. I mean, I know that you are just regurgitating talking points here, but if you put just ANY thought into it, you'd realize how laughable they really are.
     
  3. JayGoogle

    JayGoogle Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2007
    Messages:
    50,145
    Likes Received:
    40,819
    No, it means exactly what it means. More people voted Democrat. You can't then say that the majority voted Republican because they did not. It's a lie.

    You can't even admit this fact because you keep going "CALIFORNIA! CALIFORNIA!" As if that makes what I said any less true. I know you believe that if one person on a farm vote counts as much as 10 people on an apartment floor, we been through this, I know you think that the land actually has a vote. I think its debatable and it definitely cheapens our democracy but that is a topic for another day.

    Again, your point that one election represents the will of the people is foolish. If you think everyone that voted had the foresight of Kennedy retiring then I honestly don't know what to say to you, it's clear you are dishonest.

    What you are basically saying is that yes, the electorate had the foresight that Kennedy would retire

    The electorate didn't even have the foresight to know that the Dems would lose house and senate lol. When polled in even red places Americans feel like the president needs a check on his power, so to me it is clear that the electorate didn't mean to give all three branches to the GOP, it's just something that happened that the country has had to deal with for 2 years....now the midterms are coming and we will see if the electorate will correct itself and if the polls are right.

    As for Trump and LGBT rights...lol, all I will say is actions speak louder than words. Obama has done more for LGBT rights, that shouldn't even be debatable, but I know you like to make things up, so go on ahead.
     
  4. Bobbythegreat

    Bobbythegreat Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2013
    Messages:
    63,171
    Likes Received:
    25,826
    Try to follow along here hero, I said a majority of the country, when 30 out of 50 states votes for a guy, that means the majority of the country voted for him.

    I fully admit that California swayed the national popular vote....but the national popular vote is irrelevant and that's why I don't put any stock in it. You can keep clinging to that in order to not learn the lesson from the last election if you want, but it's not going to do you any good.

    Also, you can whine about the system that worked exactly as it was intended simply because it didn't go your way, but it'll come across like a young child whining about how they aren't allowed to drive. Hopefully you'll understand when you are older...no matter how old you are now.

    When an issue is front and center during an election, specifically talking about multiple SCOTUS justices, it's fair to say that election showed how the people thought about that issue....even if you struggle to follow.


    They didn't control either leading into that election, so...yeah, they kind of did know that the Democrats wouldn't control either the house or Senate....the people didn't want them to.


    Right, and it was a conservative SCOTUS that gave gay people the right to marry....something Obama spoke against before he was elected. What specifically did Obama do for them? It's gonna be pretty hard to answer given that Obama did effectively nothing positive while in office, but do your best to make something up to defend your guy.
     
  5. JayGoogle

    JayGoogle Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2007
    Messages:
    50,145
    Likes Received:
    40,819
    The majority of people voted D, boss.

    Lol, the system working as intended doesn't mean it is correct. Your point?

    Well, why have any other elections then? Clearly, the 2016 election determined the future of America for the next 20-30, maybe 50 years according to you.

    The 2016 election represents the will of the people, why have a 2018 election at all then?

    Actually, it was the liberal SCOTUS members that gave them that lol. Kennedy was the swing vote bro, don't act like if there were more conservatives on the court that they would have ruled the same because the MAJORITY of conservative judges dissented.
    #Facts

    Also, it's actually pretty easy, want to play?
    • He repealed Don't Ask Don't Tell
    • He was the first president to openly support gay marriage
    • He Ended DOMA
    • He amended Executive Order 11246 to include sexual orientation as a protected class
    • This on top of just in general advocating for the cause and supporting it.
    Sure, he was once against it, but he changed, and he put action behind that change.

    So, your turn. What has Trump done for the LGBT community?
     
  6. Bobbythegreat

    Bobbythegreat Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2013
    Messages:
    63,171
    Likes Received:
    25,826
    Awesome.....and the majority of states voted R, you know, the thing that matters, killer.



    It worked as intended AND is correct.....even if you can't see that because you have a sad that you didn't get your way.

    It determined the next 2 SOCTUS justices, just as the people wanted it to. Try to follow along high speed.

    Oh, so it wasn't a conservative majority SCOTUS then? Your #AlternativeFacts are certainly interesting even if they are completely inaccurate.

    Ah, so Obama supported it after he opposed it....where have I heard that before? I would think being the first president to never oppose it would be more interesting. Also, it's funny that I see no legislation listed, just executive orders. I guess he only sort of supported those things, but not enough to do anything long lasting.
     
  7. JayGoogle

    JayGoogle Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2007
    Messages:
    50,145
    Likes Received:
    40,819
    Eh highly debatable. You have to realize that the founders didn't even like the idea of a two party system.

    So the people knew Kennedy would retire? Do you have proof of this? From what I understand not even Kennedy knew at the time.

    You are the most delusional poster on here, it's actually quite amazing.

    4 Conservatives dissented on Obergfell.
    4 Democrats did not, plus 1...count it...1 Conservative.

    A majority conservative court gave LGBT rights to the public, but the conservatives ACTUALLY in the court voted against it. For you to deny this is just amazing, your extreme partisanship knows no bounds, nor does your complete delusion.

    So can you name anything Trump has done for LGBT rights or no?
     
    #487 JayGoogle, Sep 5, 2018
    Last edited: Sep 5, 2018
  8. Bobbythegreat

    Bobbythegreat Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2013
    Messages:
    63,171
    Likes Received:
    25,826
    Sure the issue could be debated, but you'd lose. In fact, the ONLY reason you would support a system where every election was decided by 2 or 3 large states is because that would make the candidates you support win more often. If things were reversed, you'd be pretty upset that the views of a majority of the country are ignored in favor of the view of a handful of states.

    I find that people often struggle to see things from the perspective of others and that's the only reason discussions like this even exist in the first place.

    It's more likely that they thought Ginsburg would die, but yeah, they knew that it was about at least 2 SCOTUS seats, that's what BOTH parties campaigned on....it's just that more of the country thought that it would be better for Trump to pick those than for Clinton to pick them.

    So what you're saying is that it was a conservative majority court then. Glad we agree.

    There's nothing really to be done for them anymore, their major civil rights issue was gay marriage, something Obama decided against doing something about and left it to a conservative majority SCOTUS to handle.

    If there was a legitimate LGBT rights issue left to handle, that would be one thing, but that's simply not the case.
     
  9. Deckard

    Deckard Blade Runner
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2002
    Messages:
    56,793
    Likes Received:
    39,077
    I know I've said this to you before, but I simply don't have the patience you have with whoever you're replying to. Not any longer. Hey, I'm glad you are making the effort, along with a few others. It isn't a complete waste of time. Why do I think that? While your efforts may be wasted on who you are replying to, it isn't wasted on a lot of other people here, who need to be reminded of these things.

    The "fake news" some of the Far Right lap up like puppies faced with a can of dog food needs to be countered with the truth. Fence sitters who voted Green or Libertarian, or stayed at home in 2016 in their ignorance, and who may have been influenced by "fake news" they didn't know was fake, need to know the truth. Kudos for keeping it up. I've largely given up on many people who post here, who seem to roll delightfully in fake news like a dog sometimes will roll in cow patties. Many, but not all. I'm more interested in the "fence sitters," those who aren't sure what to do, and what the truth actually is. They need to realize that the Republic is in serious danger. They need to VOTE in November. You point out good reasons to do just that. Thank you and thanks to the others like you. :cool:
     
  10. JayGoogle

    JayGoogle Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2007
    Messages:
    50,145
    Likes Received:
    40,819
    I meant the idea of it being originally intended this way is debatable.

    Whatever, you think 2016 is the ONE election that decides the will of the people. Clearly you don't understand how politics work. There is always a reaction.

    If you take the vote away from 2 liberals on the court, what happens?

    You are right, little left to be done since Obama did most of the doing in ensuring that all of their rights were secure. He did everything in his power to do that and continues to push for LGBT rights internationally.

    So as I said, Obama did a ton for LGBT rights, him ending DOMA is what led to the Scotus decision.

    We'll see what happens when you get a strong right SCOTUS court and administration, the right wing has continued to do little to advance civil rights, so I don't have much hope.

    In Obergfell, the conservative majority voted 4-1against it. Kennedy was socially a moderate, thankfully, not sure about Kavanagh and we'll see how much Roberts cares about precedent, he claims to care a lot about it, but we'll see. My hope is that Roberts will put precedent ahead of partisanship, but time will tell.
     
  11. Deckard

    Deckard Blade Runner
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2002
    Messages:
    56,793
    Likes Received:
    39,077
    My hope regarding Roe v. Wade and LGBTQ+ rights rests with Roberts in the interim. He surprised me with the healthcare vote. We'll see.
     
  12. Bobbythegreat

    Bobbythegreat Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2013
    Messages:
    63,171
    Likes Received:
    25,826
    Actually, that's even less debatable. The reason the system was set up that way was to ensure that one or two states couldn't determine the outcome of every election. Small states wouldn't join if they thought their opinions wouldn't matter.

    It determined the will of the people when it comes to those SCOTUS nominations. They decided they'd rather have Trump do it than Clinton do it. We'll see what they decide next time.

    Make your uncle a woman and he's your aunt.

    Obama did nothing really, the SCOTUS did.

    Well there really aren't many current civil rights issues other than the continued attacks on the first and second amendment.....but those attacks aren't coming from the right.
     
  13. JayGoogle

    JayGoogle Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2007
    Messages:
    50,145
    Likes Received:
    40,819
    I don't know man it irks me that someone can deny a fact staring right in their face.

    He's actually saying that we have LGBT rights because of conservatives. This is such a bold faced lie, it's hard to let people get away with saying such nonsense.

    We have LGBT rights because liberals and the left have kept pushing for it. Are we now supposed to thank ONE guy for being the swing vote and ignore all the work of all the others? F that.

    I thank Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor, and Kagan for this. And yes, I'm passionate about these rights, I'm sorry to derail an important thread on them because my best friend, a childhood friend, friends since toddlerhood, is gay. Found out awhile ago or so but I always had a feeling because he never liked talking about women and always seemed distant about it. So let's just say thanks to him I know a lot more gay people than I ever thought I would.

    So it irks me to see someone being dishonest about this **** and acting like his side are the true champions for LGBT rights when they have done absolutely 0 for that community. In fact, all they've done is stand in the way for as long as possible. Just because Trump says a few things and one SCOTUS judge decided to be on the right side of history at the right time I'm supposed to ignore everything that conservatives have done to keep these rights from reaching the LGBT community? Bump that.
     
    mdrowe00 and Deckard like this.
  14. JayGoogle

    JayGoogle Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2007
    Messages:
    50,145
    Likes Received:
    40,819
    https://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/24/us/24marriage.html

    You have no idea what you are talking about as usual.

    You can't even name me things conservatives have done for LGBT rights, other than try to block them whenever possible. Which is why when asked, you can't.

    Can you tell me which judges were for/against Obergefell? Can you now count which ones were democrats and which ones were conservatives by appointment? You now know who actually delivered these rights to the people.
     
  15. Bobbythegreat

    Bobbythegreat Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2013
    Messages:
    63,171
    Likes Received:
    25,826
    LOL I do love how triggered you get when people point out that your boy Obama didn't do anything worth a damn while in office.
     
  16. B-Bob

    B-Bob "94-year-old self-described dreamer"

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    34,618
    Likes Received:
    33,558
    Wow, somebody deserves a trolling derail trophy up in here!
     
  17. JayGoogle

    JayGoogle Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2007
    Messages:
    50,145
    Likes Received:
    40,819
    As expected. When presented with evidence you ignore it completely.
    When asked to present evidence you ignore it completely.

    If you do the little equation I presented to you, you'd find your answer, but I wonder if you have the capability to do it and then to admit that liberals are the reason we have the LGBT rights we do today.
     
    FranchiseBlade likes this.
  18. Os Trigonum

    Os Trigonum Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2014
    Messages:
    72,465
    Likes Received:
    110,418
    honestly I have lost track of what you and I were going back and forth on, seems like it must be five or six pages back at this point . . . but to your last question ('you wanted to have a conservative judge?'), I do not fear conservatism the way some here seem to fear it. Whether a judge is liberal or conservative is less important in the long run than whether he or she has the basic integrity needed for the job.

    Again I'll reiterate that I do think Obama erred politically with his choice of Garland (who by the way was WELL qualified for the job, just as Kavanaugh is), but the Democrats also erred in not getting Clinton elected. As I said earlier, the Republicans gambled and won. Had Clinton won the Presidency there's a pretty firm feeling Garland would have been confirmed before her inauguration.
     
  19. Bobbythegreat

    Bobbythegreat Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2013
    Messages:
    63,171
    Likes Received:
    25,826
    You didn't really do that, you just threw a tantrum when I pointed out that your boy not only didn't support gay marriage before he was elected for political reasons, but he didn't actually do anything for the LGBT community while in office, the conservative majority SCOTUS did.
     
  20. JayGoogle

    JayGoogle Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2007
    Messages:
    50,145
    Likes Received:
    40,819
    LOL. It is irrelevant to me because Obama supported gay marriage while in office (#Facts) and while he had power. His actions have spoken loud and true on this issue. He admitted his mistakes and put ACTION behind his words.

    I actually did provide evidence, you just completely ignored it because it doesn't suit your fantasy land narrative of conservatives actually doing anything for the LGBT community. You can read the article I posted, I'm not quoting a part of it, I'm not even going to link it again, you can try reading it yourself. If you do, then if you did about 5 minutes of research, you'd learn that Obama's decision on DOMA was instrumental in everything that happened afterward.

    You've shown a basic inability to count. Apparently, you think conservatives in the Supreme Court voted for gay rights because you can't count to 4. 4 conservatives voted against it, 4 democrats voted for it. I don't know, maybe you can't count to 4, I have no idea.

    The only one throwing a tantrum here is you because you can't admit that your side has been against civil rights this entire time.

    Watch this.

    Can you admit that Conservatives on the court voted 4-1 against gay marriage?
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now