What the World needs next..

Post #436,311 by Ashton 9/19/20 8:43:47 PM 9/19/20 8:43:47 PM Reply	What the World needs next.. is an 8.3 Earthquake, '45'-feet below the WH kitchen, as Menace assembles all his closest thus worst. (What it gets is seven degrees of consternation) unless ... there IS a Lady Luck with geo-analytics Chops. I'm told that the Old Gods re-attain their Powers ..when enough new-people Believe Again: Please, Let's Hear It for Cthulhu! {swallow our innaleckshual chops for a spell}.
Post #436,313 by Another Scott 9/19/20 11:10:50 PM 9/19/20 11:10:50 PM Reply	Hey!!11 A sink hole would be better. They already have drainage problems there. Jane Mayer: https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/for-mitch-mcconnell-keeping-his-senate-majority-matters-more-than-the-supreme-court But McConnell is also what Ornstein calls “a ruthless pragmatist,” whose No. 1 goal has always been to remain Majority Leader of the Senate. He’s made the conservative makeover of the federal court system his pet project, but if he faces a choice between another right-wing Justice and losing his control of the Senate, no one who knows him well thinks he’d hesitate for a moment to do whatever is necessary to stay in power. In fact, back in the summer of 2016, when it looked like Trump would lose to Hillary Clinton, far from being distressed at his party’s dim prospects, McConnell was savoring the probability of being the single most powerful Republican in the country, according to a confidant who spoke with him then. The problem for McConnell now is that it may be impossible for him to both confirm a new Justice and hold onto his personal power as Majority Leader. A power grab for the Court that is too brutish may provoke so much outrage among Democrats and independents that it could undermine Republican Senate candidates in November. As he knows better than anyone, polls show that Republican hopes of holding the Senate are very much in doubt. If Joe Biden is elected, enabling a Democratic Vice-President to cast the deciding vote in the Senate, Democrats need only to pick up three seats to win a majority. And, at the moment, according to recent polls, Democratic challengers stand good chances against Republican incumbents in Maine, Arizona, and Colorado. Democrats also have shots at capturing seats in South Carolina and Iowa. Let's make Addison really unhappy on November 3, and thereafter. "What's my offer? How about NOTHING!" Cheers, Scott.
Post #436,315 by Ashton 9/20/20 4:03:47 AM 9/20/20 4:03:47 AM Reply	Probably best that.. there's no guessing enroute to deNazification /or not ... tick tick ttick
Post #436,317 by rcareaga 9/20/20 11:30:37 AM 9/20/20 11:30:37 AM Reply	yabut… If McConnell loses his majority in November, you can be certain that he’ll attempt to push through a nominee before January. gloomily,
Post #436,321 by Another Scott 9/20/20 9:43:36 PM 9/20/20 9:43:36 PM Reply	But he needs 50+1 votes. Will he get it from senators who will soon be in the minority? Maybe, maybe not. Maybe they'll be thinking that 5:4 is better for them than 5:8. We'll see. It's horrible that we have these horrible battles every time a Justice dies. We need a sensible court that does its job fairly. Doing away with lifetime appointments (16 years or 75 and one goes on Senior Status or something), enlarging the court, and probably a few other things that I don't know enough about to talk sensibly enough, are needed. Here's hoping that the Democratic majority is large enough, for long enough, to start straightening these things about the SCOTUS (and the other US courts) out. Cheers, Scott.
Post #436,323 by rcareaga 9/20/20 10:29:43 PM 9/20/20 10:29:43 PM Reply	Re: But he needs 50+1 votes. Will he get it from senators who will soon be in the minority? Jeebus, Scott, of course he’ll get the votes after the election! Can you doubt this? rc
Post #436,325 by Another Scott 9/21/20 12:03:43 AM 9/21/20 12:03:43 AM Reply	McConnell has had trouble counting in the past. Mark Kelly's race is a special election so he will probably be seated in November. It only takes a tiny number of votes to deny Moscow Mitch and Donnie the seat. It's not over yet. Cheers, Scott.
Post #436,332 by Ashton 9/21/20 4:38:37 PM 9/21/20 4:38:37 PM Reply	"It's not over yet." No, Our Rome doesn't burn ..we are amidst the s l o w death-via-Despicables®.
Post #436,336 by rcareaga 9/21/20 9:44:47 PM 9/21/20 9:44:47 PM Reply	Do you imagine, for example… that Susan Collins, one of the purportedly “moderate” GOP senators, will, in defeat, do the right thing? On the contrary, a vote of “fuck you” to her treacherous constituents will secure her a lucrative sinecure at some right-wing think tank. Relying on the present GOP Senate caucus to behave in principled fashion is like trusting Lucy to hold the football in place. cynically,
Post #436,337 by Another Scott 9/22/20 12:17:12 AM 9/22/20 12:17:12 AM Reply	No, I'm not counting on Disappointed Susan. Politicians like to stay in power. They're not going to blindly run off a cliff if they see other, better, options. https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/21/senate-republicans-supreme-court-vote-419698 Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) oppose moving forward with a nomination, meaning that McConnell can afford to lose only one more Republican in the 53-47 GOP-majority Senate. Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) has yet to reveal his position, as Democrats remain united that Ginsburg’s replacement should not be considered until next year. “We’ll find out at lunch tomorrow what the plan is, but I think what’s in play here is to have one set of rules that we consistently follow,” Collins, who faced backlash for backing Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court confirmation in 2018 and who is trailing in polls in Maine, said on Monday. “In this case, we’re talking about 40 days before the election. So I believe we should wait and see who the winner of the election is.” An average Supreme Court confirmation process takes more than two months, and the election is 43 days away. And even if the full Senate or just the Judiciary Committee remained in session through October, it would deprive some of McConnell’s vulnerable incumbents of the opportunity to campaign in their home states in the final stretch. I suspect that they're going to rush some hearings but won't have a floor vote before the election day. There really isn't enough time, even as Moscow Mitch tries to rush it. (Like Jane Mayer reported, I too believe that he's more interested in maintaining power than having a very possibly temporary SCOTUS win, so he'll tread more carefully than he wants you to believe.) What happens after November 3 is anyone's guess. It may very well depend on the size of the blue wave. But even if they do ram someone onto the court this year, it's not over. Progress is slow and comes in fits and starts. Biden would have every reason to push for enlarging the SCOTUS and for other reforms (an Amendment for 18 year terms sounds like a good idea, along with some other things) and could bring much of the country with him. We'll see. Cheers, Scott.
Post #436,338 by mmoffitt 9/22/20 10:54:30 AM 9/22/20 10:54:30 AM Reply	Why 18 years? I understand you don't want judicial philosophy changing with Presidents, but serving three times as long as a senator seems excessive to me. It's not like we don't have enough lawyers. The year the US Constitution was ratified, White Male life expectancy (because back then, that's all that mattered) was 38 years. The youngest ever justice was 32 when he joined the bench. I'll concede that most justices lived well beyond life expectancy, but there is a compelling argument that the framers didn't think anyone would be on the bench for more than six years or so. A term of ten years is plenty. I certainly wouldn't support any more than that. bcnu, Mikem It's mourning in America again.
Post #436,340 by pwhysall 9/22/20 11:42:23 AM 9/22/20 11:42:23 AM Reply	On 38 years That's a bad number to use. Now take the life expectancy of people who made it out of infancy. Much higher number - 54 for men, 56 for women. That number will, of course, be higher the more money you had.
Post #436,343 by rcareaga 9/22/20 4:00:51 PM 9/22/20 4:00:51 PM Reply	What Peter said Those old “life expectancy” stats reflected both the mortality rate of infants and of their mothers. A male of the economic class from which Supreme Court justices were selected could reasonably expect to reach, say, my present age—and I was born not quite half a year after George VI pegged out. cordially,
Post #436,347 by Another Scott 9/22/20 11:45:22 PM 9/22/20 11:45:22 PM Reply	Yup. Franklin - 84 John Adams - 91 etc. MM - I mentioned 18 because I'd seen it mentioned elsewhere. Someone out there wants to include something like a new justice could only serve the remaining time of the justice they replace (e.g. Thomas couldn't resign at the end of 17.95 years and be replaced by his clone to sit there for a fresh 18 year term). I expect there will be a lot of various proposals talked about with increasing fervor coming in January. Rand - you were right to suspect that Moscow Mitch will keep his minions together. Supposedly he wants a vote as soon as October 28 (according to a story at TheHill today). It'll be interesting how much gravel Schumer can throw in the gears (e.g. the 2 hour rule he invoked today). Cheers, Scott.
Post #436,348 by mmoffitt 9/23/20 8:30:56 AM 9/23/20 8:30:56 AM Reply	This is just a thought experiment, though, isn't it? I don't think any of us expect there to be any changes made with respect to lifetime appointments do we? I certainly don't. I don't expect any immediate (or slowly evolving for that matter) miracles. This is a broken government printing gobs of money to move around so that no one will notice that our broken government sits atop a broken economic system. What remains as true today as when I first uttered it during the 1992 campaign, no nation in the history of the world has survived a debt as large as ours is right now. TBH, back then I wouldn't have thought we could just continue printing money to make up for the failure of Capitalism to this point. It is amazing to me that still not enough people have looked behind the curtain to not burn it all down, but simply acknowledge that it is already burned down. It is quite the spectacle. bcnu, Mikem It's mourning in America again.
Post #436,371 by Ashton 9/24/20 12:38:35 AM 9/24/20 12:38:35 AM Reply	Thus: When?? do other countries wake-up to our ∞ paper-backed specie supply.. Hmm?
Post #436,344 by rcareaga 9/22/20 4:00:56 PM 9/22/20 4:01:36 PM Reply	(ignore; dup) (gone) Edited by rcareaga Sept. 22, 2020, 04:01:36 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #436,339 by mmoffitt 9/22/20 11:19:24 AM 9/22/20 11:19:24 AM Reply	He just picked up Rmoney's. Senator Mitt Romney argued that it was “appropriate” for the court to have a more conservative bent to represent a “center right” country. “It’s also appropriate for a nation that is, if you will, center right to have a court which reflects center right points of view,” Romney told reporters on Capitol Hill. But as a Daily Beast reporter noted, both Trump and Romney, the 2012 Republican presidential nominee, lost the popular vote by millions of votes. And while Republicans make up a majority of the Senate, they actually represent a minority of the country, so it’s unclear the US is truly “center right.” https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/live/2020/sep/22/donald-trump-joe-biden-ruth-bader-ginsburg-coronavirus-covid-19-live-updates bcnu, Mikem It's mourning in America again.
Post #436,341 by boxley 9/22/20 12:41:48 PM 9/22/20 12:41:48 PM Reply	why dont we just ditch the USSC? Since you love the popular vote so much put out an app in the app store that allows the popular vote folks press to vote on every case that shows up there. "Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
Post #436,345 by Ashton 9/22/20 4:18:41 PM 9/22/20 4:18:41 PM Reply	That scenario played-out on TV moons ago ... Badly; If'n you don't know Why on Inspection, Pity.
Post #436,346 by drook 9/22/20 10:13:46 PM 9/22/20 10:14:01 PM Reply	Believe they did that in "Brazil" also, and "Max Headroom" -- Drew Edited by drook Sept. 22, 2020, 10:14:01 PM EDT Expand All History
Post #436,350 by boxley 9/23/20 11:02:20 AM 9/23/20 11:02:20 AM Reply	I remember Bill Clinton's election and was informed by white college educated ladies that they couldn't possibly vote for him because Howard Stern supported him but Howard wore a dress on the cover of his book so he must be gay so Clinton must be gay too. That is why I do not think much of the popular vote thingy. "Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
Post #436,351 by mmoffitt 9/23/20 11:29:30 AM 9/23/20 11:29:30 AM Reply	For every one of her, there are 10,000 of these. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qyx5j6i98kw&feature=youtu.be&t=47 bcnu, Mikem It's mourning in America again.
Post #436,355 by Ashton 9/23/20 2:12:30 PM 9/23/20 2:12:30 PM Reply	{{Has gun, cyanide; hopes to grab gun {insurance} before elixir does it fershure.}}
Post #436,357 by boxley 9/23/20 3:10:42 PM 9/23/20 3:10:42 PM Reply	another reason why the popular vote is a bad idea "Science is the belief in the ignorance of the experts" – Richard Feynman
Post #436,368 by Another Scott 9/23/20 11:56:55 PM 9/23/20 11:56:55 PM Reply	... except compared to all the others.

Welcome to IWETHEY!