Hes got the votes apparently.
Ginsburg Dead
- Thread starter Renegade
- Start date
The #1 community for Gun Owners in Texas
Member Benefits:
Fewer Ads! Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership Discuss anti-gun legislation Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses Discover free outdoor shooting areas View up to date on firearm-related events Share photos & video with other members ...and so much more!
Member Benefits:
- Status
Because I worry that is too easy for the communists to try to make changes to the constitution that are bad for the country. For example, the 2nd amendment could be eliminated if the bar was not so high. That is why I said "maybe fortunately." I don't think they could ever get 2/3 of the house and senate to agree to that.
But that does not stop the morons from doing things like levy high taxes on ammo and stuff like that.
I did not; got a link?
Thanks. I noticed while it appears McConnell has the support to hold a vote, Romney didn’t outright promise to vote with the party, he just said he wouldn’t oppose holding the hearing and a vote.
See post 68;
Here it is almost verbatim from the horse’s ass.
Mitt Romney sticks with Republicans, favors quick vote on Supreme Court nominee
Utah Sen. Mitt Romney is not breaking ranks with his party this time.
Mitch needs to be on the phone to TRUMF RFN for the nom.
Like usual they’ll piddle around and waste the opportunity.
Axxe55
Retiretgtshit stirrer
I'm going to put this bluntly. Ginsburg's body ain't even cold in the ground yet. Lets show a little measure of respect. Whether, any of us agree or disagree with her opinions, rulings, or her ideology or whatever, she was still a human being and a person. She does deserve to be respected.
And Trump, and McConnell, and the Senate have to follow certain measures of showing respect for her as well. Trying to push a nominee too fast would show a lack of respect for Ginsburg, and hat would make Trump look bad, and could alienate him with some voters come November. Yes, time is critical in sending a name to the Senate, but sending one too fast, could be just as bad as too late.
Ginsburg, was a liberal in many of her opinions and rulings, but she was still a person. I seriously doubt she was an evil person, and I do think she ruled as she believed. So personally, I won't lower myself to disrespecting her just because she's dead.
And Trump, and McConnell, and the Senate have to follow certain measures of showing respect for her as well. Trying to push a nominee too fast would show a lack of respect for Ginsburg, and hat would make Trump look bad, and could alienate him with some voters come November. Yes, time is critical in sending a name to the Senate, but sending one too fast, could be just as bad as too late.
Ginsburg, was a liberal in many of her opinions and rulings, but she was still a person. I seriously doubt she was an evil person, and I do think she ruled as she believed. So personally, I won't lower myself to disrespecting her just because she's dead.
RBG deserves the same respect as anyone who served as a justice. Submitting a nomination is not disrespectful, but going on with life and doing the constitutional duty of the office of the president. Acting on that nomination is also a constitutional duty. The seat on the court was nor the property of RGB but the property of the people.
Also, I didn't find any clause in the constitution that requires the Senate to hold hearings in a nomination.
Also, I didn't find any clause in the constitution that requires the Senate to hold hearings in a nomination.
Last edited:
How much respect has anyone in government given her after her Death.
Unless I am mistaken its a big thing to be buried in 24 hours in the Jewish culture.
So unless she is already in the ground and they are using an empty closed casket all this lay in state is for show and not respect for her.
She said herself that the president should nominate, its his constitutional duty. that meme has been posted in a ton of places.
Respect.
Seriously?
Like the Left has ANY concept of respect?
F them. They want a war well we’re in one. Stop trying to appease them.
Do you honestly think any leftard gives a single damn about “respect”?
Like they care about your city or business or home that get burned down by hordes of raging thugs?
The very same people that respect you if you speak of something they don’t like?
Go ahead. I’ll wait.
Trump can still attend RGB’s funeral after getting the new nominee rolling.
Seriously?
Like the Left has ANY concept of respect?
F them. They want a war well we’re in one. Stop trying to appease them.
Do you honestly think any leftard gives a single damn about “respect”?
Like they care about your city or business or home that get burned down by hordes of raging thugs?
The very same people that respect you if you speak of something they don’t like?
Go ahead. I’ll wait.
Trump can still attend RGB’s funeral after getting the new nominee rolling.
tired of sht
Member
I don't resect shit commies
- Oct 7, 2015
- 3,678
- 96
I respect rgb as much as she respected fetuses. She's not human and glad she's dead.
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
Axxe55
Retiretgtshit stirrer
You might want to read up on her views on abortion. She was more in line with that this was a woman's decision to make, not the governments.
Abortion rights
Ginsburg discussed her views on abortion and gender equality in a 2009 New York Times interview, in which she said about abortion "[t]he basic thing is that the government has no business making that choice for a woman."[76] Although Ginsburg consistently supported abortion rights and joined in the court's opinion striking down Nebraska's partial-birth abortion law in Stenberg v. Carhart, 530 U.S. 914 (2000), on the 40th anniversary of the court's ruling in Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973), she criticized the decision in Roe as terminating a nascent democratic movement to liberalize abortion laws which might have built a more durable consensus in support of abortion rights.[77] Ginsburg was in the minority for Gonzales v. Carhart, 550 U.S. 124 (2007), a 5–4 decision upholding restrictions on partial birth abortion. In her dissent, Ginsburg opposed the majority's decision to defer to legislative findings that the procedure was not safe for women. Ginsburg focused her ire on the way Congress reached its findings and with the veracity of the findings.[78] Joining the majority for Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt, 579 U.S. 15-274 (2016), a case which struck down parts of a 2013 Texas law regulating abortion providers, Ginsburg also authored a short concurring opinion which was even more critical of the legislation at issue.[79] She asserted the legislation was not aimed at protecting women's health, as Texas had said, but rather to impede women's access to abortions
- Status
Latest posts
-
-
-
I see why Hollywood is afraid of firearms - Alec Baldwin kills set employee- Latest: Cool 'Horn Luke
-
-
