The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Justice Ginsburg Dies
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

I don’t know as much about the ins-and-outs of the Constitution as the late Justice Ginsburg did, but I could swear the Constitution does not grant Supreme Court Justices their own Dying Wish …

I guess lockdown is over for the duration of the Ruth Bader Ginsburg funeral orgies.

It will be interesting to see how extravagant, prolonged, and shameless they will be:

John McCain-level?
John Lewis-level?
Or thermonuclear George Floyd-level?

Ginsburg, who was 87, had been in bad health for years. She served a little over 27 years on the Supreme Court, which is 50% longer than she would have under a sensible system in which Supreme Court Justices get a single 18-year-term. Under that more dignified system, Gisburg would have served from age 6o to 78.

This system would also mean that each Presidential Administration would get two nominees per four years in office: one in the new President’s first year, another in the third year.

In the long run, this system would create a stable Supreme Court of 9 Justices. Transition would be a problem, but the simplest solution would be to allow the current Justices to finish their life terms if they so choose, while adding new Justices in each odd-numbered year. This would cause the total number of Justices on the Supreme Court to be higher than 9 for a number of years, but so what? It doesn’t violate the Constitution, which doesn’t specify the number of judges on the Supreme Court. The Court has gotten by with only 8 Justices, so having 10 or 13 or whatever for a few years wouldn’t be so bad either, except for a tighter fit for office space.

By the way, here’s the opening of my March 4, 2020 book review of Frank H. Buckley’s American Secession. Buckley predicted Ginsburg’s death, especially combined with Trump’s re-election, might be profoundly destabilizing:

Frank H. Buckley’s highbrow yet quick and lively new book American Secession comes with the foreboding subtitle The Looming Threat of a National Breakup, but the conservative George Mason U. law professor and Trump family adviser is sanguine.

In Buckley’s view, a Trump reelection combined with Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death might trigger a Calexit movement by aggrieved Californians (a state where Hillary won by 4.3 million votes, while she lost by 1.5 million in the other 49 states) enraged at having to share a country with Trump voters.

Will the Coalition of the Fringes suddenly take a sharp turn in its focus after 16 weeks of Black Black Black?

Ginsburg appears to be saying back in 1993 that she didn’t have any black law clerks during her 13 years as an appellate judge because the tiny number of black law students competent enough to clerk for her were signing up with higher ranking judges. And indeed, during her first 25 years on the Supreme Court, she was able to find a (single) black up to her standards to be a clerk for her.

Ginsburg was not very Woke by 2020 standards.

 
Hide 300 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Biden will want Michelle Obama on the Supreme Court.

    • LOL: John Johnson
    • Replies: @Colin Wright
    @Wake up

    'Biden will want Michelle Obama on the Supreme Court."

    ? Surely George Floyd has a mother or a baby momma or something.

    , @Steve in Greensboro
    @Wake up

    Nah. Angela Davis.

    , @JohnnyD
    @Wake up

    His second choice would be Benjamin Crump.

    , @Buck Ransom
    @Wake up

    If Uncle Joe exits his basement to join RBG in the heavenly choir in the next week or so,
    things will get more interesting than anyone can stand.

    Replies: @Black-hole creator, @usNthem

    , @Neoconned
    @Wake up

    Recall Mitch McConnell denied Obama his SCOTUS pick....i wonder if Pelosi & company will force Trump to wait for the new yr to get his pick to replace Miss Ginsburg....

    Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard, @Curle, @MarkinLA

  2. Before: The Most Important Election Of Our Lifetime

    Now: The Most Important Election Of Anyone’s Lifetime Ever

    • Agree: Kronos, 36 ulster
    • Replies: @Buck Ransom
    @ConservaWhig

    The Dems and the Swamp People have been counting on the Supreme Court to grease Sleepy Joe's entry into the Oval Orifice. I detect a problem.

    , @BenKenobi
    @ConservaWhig

    https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/009/994/foreboding-gandalf.jpg

    , @Ray Caruso
    @ConservaWhig

    Not really. There have been many more important U.S. presidential elections than this one. One of them, surely, was the 1964 election. Had Barry Goldwater defeated the execrable Lyndon Baines Johnson instead of being creamed by him in a wave of ridiculous sentimentality about the assassinated John Kennedy, there might not have been a 1965 Immigration Act and the consequent transformation of America into a Third World "diversity" zoo. TitanicNation hit the iceberg a while ago—in fact, it has really hit several icebergs, the 1965 Immigration Act being only one of them. This election is the equivalent of a bid to keep the pumps working for another 20 minutes. Even if it succeeds, the ship is still going to sink into the dark abyss, and soon.

  3. Good riddance.

    • Agree: Joseph Doaks
    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    @neutral


    Good riddance.
     
    Exactly.

    Conservatives need to stop being nice and pleasant about these sorts of disagreements. Ginsburg wasn't a Senator, elected and pushing for what she believed was in the interest of her constituents.
    Rather Ginsburg was a judge, who believed she had the right overrule our elected leaders based on her idea of what ought to be and dictate what she believed ought to be law into law.

    Ginsburg was an enemy of our constituton and enemy of republican government, and enemy of self-government, an enemy of the people.

    Replies: @Hibernian

  4. good riddance!

    • Agree: L. Guapo
  5. God bless the lady, and thanks to her for her service. Now let the blood-bath commence.

    • LOL: Kolya Krassotkin
    • Replies: @Steve in Greensboro
    @personfellowindividual

    God bless her, eh? Perhaps she will be welcomed into Heaven by chorusing flights of cherubim, the spirits of all the babies aborted during her tenure.

    Replies: @bruce county

    , @GeneralRipper
    @personfellowindividual

    Too late, her Daddy already greeted her at the gates of Hell...lol

  6. Tsar Bomba level.

    • LOL: Abe
    • Replies: @Paul Jolliffe
    @tr

    Gotta love an I-Steve comment that works the Cold War into anything.

    (I doubt that ducking helped the pilot much . . . )

    https://youtu.be/YtCTzbh4mNQ

  7. For all it’s faults, if one is inclined to create an effective power-sharing system for a country of 330m, then allocating justices to fill specific ethnic or racial slots (As opposed to the current system of just endlessly appointing Catholic and Jewish justices pretending it’s 1920 and know-nothings are roaming the streets) the supreme court is one thing that works. But this would require the white or white protestant justices to think of themselves as such and also for their numbers to be greater than 0.

    • Replies: @ben tillman
    @Altai


    For all it’s faults, if one is inclined to create an effective power-sharing system for a country of 330m, then allocating justices to fill specific ethnic or racial slots (As opposed to the current system of just endlessly appointing Catholic and Jewish justices pretending it’s 1920 and know-nothings are roaming the streets) the supreme court is one thing that works.
     
    If one is inclined to create an effective power-sharing system for a country of 330MM, one divides the country into 10 parts of 33 million each.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @MBlanc46

    , @Gordo
    @Altai

    Making your country a giant Singapore would be preferable to Bosnia or Brazil. Less Bloodshed.

  8. Two Words: Josh Hawley.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    @vinteuil

    I want that guy for president first.

    , @Hibernian
    @vinteuil

    I think he said he didn't want it.

    , @AnotherDad
    @vinteuil

    C'mon, there's no question:

    He's young.
    He's a patriot.
    He's not soft on crime.
    He doesn't wilt under pressure.
    And he's a straight shooter.

    The clear choice: Kyle Rittenhouse

    Replies: @Joe Stalin

    , @Unladen Swallow
    @vinteuil

    Or Ted Cruz, but I am not sure either one of them wants to be on the Supreme Court. However Trump must put forth a nominee, the Democrats don't want a nominee selected not because they think they will win primarily, but because they don't want the lunatics in their party to come out and definitely cost them the election. The left wing of the Democrats going insane over Gorsuch and in particular Kavanaugh was bad look for them and a confirmation battle over this seat would be a walk in the park by comparison, free advertising for the Trump campaign.

    , @Pericles
    @vinteuil

    I'd like to hear who Alito and Thomas would like to see on the bench.

    (As a bonus, it would also be extremely diverse to consider their opinions.)

  9. Why can’t we have lifetime terms and take care of unwanted judges by impeaching the bastards? This would lead to an unstable Supreme Court, but unstable in a fun way. Like politics should be.

    After all, SCOTUS doesn’t deserve its respect nor its authority m. And it’s not as though kicking the old cows out will lead to Fire in the Streets. Which we have anyway.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    @guest

    You can already impeach judges. It is just nearly impossible.

    Replies: @Diversity Heretic

  10. Heading should read: ” Ginsburg’s clerks find it impossible to cover the smell and admit RBG died months ago.”

    • Agree: Redneck farmer
    • Replies: @Pericles
    @Buffalo Joe

    E.A. Poe, The Facts in the Case of R.B. Ginsburg.

  11. 1. There should be at least as many Supreme Court justices as we have Federal Circuits. Which right now is 13 (11 + DC Circuit + Federal Circuit). I would advocate for at least 20.

    2. Requirements that each Circuit be represented by at least one justice who had been a judge or lawyer in that Circuit.

    3. Steve’s plan assumes (a) the Supreme Court remains as powerful and involved in everyday life as it has been since the Warren Court; and (b) politicians want to have a balanced, fair court appointment process. The first is not guaranteed, and the second is just plain not true.

    4. Shit is about to get very, very real. The insanity of 2020 is about to pushed to 11. Trump & the Repubs could force a candidate through before election day, and the D’s could do nothing but violence. Abortion is their sacrament.

    • Replies: @Eqas65
    @R.G. Camara

    Why should abortion be made illegal? 75% or so of women who have abortions are negroes, and the white women who have abortion are mostly mudsharks.

    I also believe that the occasional non-mudshark white women who have abortions are mostly meth addicts who shouldn’t be having kids anyway.

    I’m always amazed at the number of anti-abortion cuckservatives on UNZ.

    Replies: @Eric Novak, @ken, @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan, @Reg Cæsar

    , @Anon
    @R.G. Camara

    "Abortion is (Left's) sacrament"

    Yes. How else would the left not be outnumbered in the cities if so many black babies werent aborted?

    The white left loves black abortions because they personally detest blacks.

    Replies: @Rosie

    , @PhysicistDave
    @R.G. Camara

    R.G. Camara wrote:


    Shit is about to get very, very real. The insanity of 2020 is about to pushed to 11. Trump & the Repubs could force a candidate through before election day, and the D’s could do nothing but violence. Abortion is their sacrament.
     
    I wonder. I don't think the average black in the ghetto really gets that worked up over the Supreme Court: many blacks do feel, rightly or wrongly, that cops are beastly to them. But do they hate the Supreme Court? Or ignore it?

    Similarly for abortion. Are black folks fanatical about abortion? This survey seems to show that blacks are in the middle between Dems and Republicans.

    Of course, the Woke White Left is indeed fanatical about abortion. But it seems to me a lot easier to get random moderates to virtue-signal by saying they support "Black Lives" than by saying they support unlimited abortions.

    In my experience, outside of the crazy Left, most Americans know that abortion is a difficult and tragic issue.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @R.G. Camara, @MarkinLA

  12. McConnell needs to ram her and Thomas replacement through. It wouldn’t be nice to comment on her. However, I will be opening that bottle of 25 year old single malt.

    • Agree: R.G. Camara, ben tillman
    • Thanks: GeneralRipper
  13. Ginsburg’s death, especially combined with Trump’s re-election, might be profoundly destabilizing

    Yes, please! The current system must be destabilized.

    • Agree: Colin Wright, J.Ross, Gordo
    • Thanks: Buck Ransom
    • Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican
    @Twinkie


    Yes, please! The current system must be destabilized.
     
    How far are you willing to go, Twinkie?

    https://youtu.be/I3yzdRCpJmg?t=150

    I think we should let Twinkie know what’s going on.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9o8gzua-K_E
  14. @vinteuil
    Two Words: Josh Hawley.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Hibernian, @AnotherDad, @Unladen Swallow, @Pericles

    I want that guy for president first.

  15. https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/08/supreme-court-ruth-bader-ginsburg-mcconnell-murkowski-grassley.html
    Indicates some Republicans already lining up to oppose filling the vacancy. They just don’t get tired of losing.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @TimothyS


    They just don’t get tired of losing.
     
    They don't see it as losing.

    Replies: @TimothyS

    , @indocon
    @TimothyS

    Not that simple, a few minutes earlier there was a statement from somebody saying that Romney would not vote on any nominee in current congress, then his spokeswomen issued a statement denying denying that he said that.

    Behind the scene these Republican critters are seeing what we all are seeing, I think you will see them fall in line.

    Replies: @Hibernian

    , @Hibernian
    @TimothyS

    Start the search now and nominate after the election. Or nominate a moderate to replace a far leftist.

    Replies: @MarkinLA, @Father O'Hara

  16. @guest
    Why can’t we have lifetime terms and take care of unwanted judges by impeaching the bastards? This would lead to an unstable Supreme Court, but unstable in a fun way. Like politics should be.

    After all, SCOTUS doesn’t deserve its respect nor its authority m. And it’s not as though kicking the old cows out will lead to Fire in the Streets. Which we have anyway.

    Replies: @MarkinLA

    You can already impeach judges. It is just nearly impossible.

    • Replies: @Diversity Heretic
    @MarkinLA

    The last impeachment of a Supreme Court justice (Samuel Chase) occurred during the administration of Thomas Jefferson. When it failed, President Jefferson characterized the impeachment option as "a scarecrow."

    One ought not to speak ill of the dead, but my reaction here is that Satan needed help elsewhere.

  17. Anonymous[387] • Disclaimer says:

    I would not get too excited about this development if Ginsberg’s replacement is Amy Comey Barrett.
    From Wiki: Comey Barrett has “seven children: five biological children and two children adopted from Haiti.”
    She sounds like a mushy-minded bleating heart type for whom “conservatism” is all about abortion, abortion, abortion (she’s a practicing Catholic). When it comes to heritage Americans and upholding their interests, I’m very suspicious about her bona fides (although I could be wrong).

    • Disagree: Intelligent Dasein
    • Replies: @Currahee
    @Anonymous

    Yes, the abortion people seem convinced that America would be a better place with a greater proportion of BLACKS! Someone who brings two extra BLACKS! into this country must be in agreement with them.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    , @Anon
    @Anonymous

    You do realize that without the right to life we can’t really base other rights, such as the right to property or to freedom of conscience, of speech, of association? It all comes down to majority consensus.. which right now looks more and more like mass cultural suicide. It’s a matter of principle.

    Replies: @Hibernian, @TTSSYF, @Jack D

    , @ben tillman
    @Anonymous


    She sounds like a mushy-minded bleating heart type for whom “conservatism” is all about abortion, abortion, abortion (she’s a practicing Catholic). When it comes to heritage Americans and upholding their interests, I’m very suspicious about her bona fides (although I could be wrong).
     
    You could be wrong, but it looks like no one here thinks so.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein

    , @Eqas65
    @Anonymous

    Barrett would be a nightmare.

    The anti-abortion lunatics are all negroid lovers. Have you ever seen their signs whining about how many negroes are aborted?

    Replies: @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan, @Etruscan Film Star

    , @Paul Mendez
    @Anonymous


    (she’s a practicing Catholic).
     
    More like she’s a heretical Catholic. She belongs to an ecumenical, communal group called “People of Praise” that ignores the centrality of the Mass and Mary’s role as mother of the Church in Catholicism.
    , @Alexander Turok
    @Anonymous

    Opinions on social issues in America can be classified with a 2D political spectrum in accordance with double horseshoe theory, the quadrants of which are:

    1. Prohibiting abortion would strengthen the traditional social structure of the West, and that's great!
    2. Prohibiting abortion would strengthen the traditional social structure of the West, and that's terrible!
    3. Prohibiting abortion would weaken the traditional social structure of the West, and that's great!
    4. Prohibiting abortion would weaken the traditional social structure of the West, and that's terrible!

    Most people are only familiar with quadrants 1 and 2. We here at Unz are familiar with 4. because that demographic is well-represented here. Amy Comey Barrett seems to be situated between quadrants 1 and 3. She's not going full-on critical race theory like many younger evangelicals, and probably upholds her religion's traditional teachings with regards to marriage and divorce. But she might be the kind of person who, like the Pope, would look forward to replacing the traditional people of the West with other groups more receptive to the preaching.

    We should have a compromise where we have a constitutional amendment saying that nobody can be nominated or approved until Jan 21 and the court will be restricted to 9 members. If we had high-energy politicians we'd be able to rush it through Congress and then get it through 3/4ths of the legislatures before the election. Unfortunately, we have a low-energy political system and so we're gonna have 4 judges added next year, then 8 some election cycles later, then 16, and eventually we'll all wind up there.

  18. Taxidermist Lawyers Up. Mannequin Roller Frame Maker Arrested en Route to Argentina.

  19. Ding Dong the witch is dead.

    • LOL: GeneralRipper, Gordo
    • Replies: @Wilkey
    @Colin Wright

    There’s something to be said for being gracious to the deceased, recently or otherwise. But Ginsburg clung bitterly to her SCOTUS seat through multiple health crises. She should have and could have retired in 2013/2014, when Obama was president and the Dems controlled the Senate. Even then she was already in her 80s and had spent 20 years on the Court. But she refused, Republicans will get to replace her and Democrats will get to spend a crucial presidential election season reinforcing to white women why they shouldn’t support Democrats, after having spent the last four months inciting riots and yammering on about white privilege and abolishing the police.

    Trump really is no Hitler. He is more like Forrest Gump. One political gift after another keeps falling into his lap, little of it through any merit of his own.

  20. She died on Rosh Hashanah.
    Will some cosmic significance be attributed to this?
    Should be quite a scene this weekend in Brooklyn.

    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    @Buck Ransom

    Not much RBG honoring by Brooklyn's ultra-orthodox Jews who disavowed her pro-abortion rulings!

    Replies: @Buck Ransom

  21. @Wake up
    Biden will want Michelle Obama on the Supreme Court.

    Replies: @Colin Wright, @Steve in Greensboro, @JohnnyD, @Buck Ransom, @Neoconned

    ‘Biden will want Michelle Obama on the Supreme Court.”

    ? Surely George Floyd has a mother or a baby momma or something.

  22. @Wake up
    Biden will want Michelle Obama on the Supreme Court.

    Replies: @Colin Wright, @Steve in Greensboro, @JohnnyD, @Buck Ransom, @Neoconned

    Nah. Angela Davis.

  23. If Trump is SMART, he will nominate some obvious middle-of-the-roader — preferably female.

    The Democrats can then make idiots out of themselves opposing the nomination.

    • Disagree: Ponce Faggy
    • Replies: @Mike_from_SGV
    @Colin Wright

    Yeah, with only 3 months to get it done, Trump has only one shot. No time for a second nomination if the first one is voted down, probably. Any sensible moderate person would be a huge improvement over Bader. He could troll the Dems by nominating a conservative black female, if there is such a thing.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @Thoughts

    , @Curle
    @Colin Wright

    The middle of the road folks got us here.

    Replies: @anon, @nebulafox

    , @guest
    @Colin Wright

    They already have made idiots out of themselves with Bork, Thomas, Kavanaugh...Nothing came of it.

    Granted, people are more sensitive on behalf of women. But an endless stream of women have been dragged through the mud in the MSM. A potential justice would be nothing radically new.

    , @Not Raul
    @Colin Wright

    Are there any middle-of-the-roaders on Trump's list of potential nominees?

    https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/09/trump-releases-new-list-of-potential-supreme-court-nominees/

    An endorsement from the Federalist Society seems to be a requirement for Republican judicial appointees.

    Replies: @Dan Hayes

  24. Man is this goiñg to cause a meltdown.

    Funny I was just wondering about her right before the news broke. I figured they must have pulled every trick in the book to keep her alive this long.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    @Bill P

    Everything they learned from Biden they applied to her.

  25. @personfellowindividual
    God bless the lady, and thanks to her for her service. Now let the blood-bath commence.

    Replies: @Steve in Greensboro, @GeneralRipper

    God bless her, eh? Perhaps she will be welcomed into Heaven by chorusing flights of cherubim, the spirits of all the babies aborted during her tenure.

    • Replies: @bruce county
    @Steve in Greensboro

    That would be a very loud chorus. About 33.6 million cherubs or approximately the population of Canada since she took her seat.

  26. There are 3-4-5 traitorous Republican Senators who just might block Trump from appointing a Ginzburg successor. I hope Trump has a few pre-vetted nominees that he and Mitch McConnell can force through in 45 days. Mitch McConnell will be polling all Republican Senators while Dems hold blowout commemorations for the ol abolitionist witch.

    This mess will give more cover to invisible Joe.
    Blame this mess on sickly Ginzborg. The magic juice from Walter Reed finally failed her. She could have resigned any time in the last three years. Ol Witch was obviously trying to outlast Trump.

    • Agree: Joseph Doaks
    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    @Clyde

    It's her own damn fauLt. She could have resigned in 2014 when Obama had the pick and the Senate. Obama didn't have the chops to convince her to go. Trump, by contrast, eliminated that hair-splitting weasel Kennedy, and did so before he had a chance to not hold the Senate.

    Replies: @Barnard, @Curle

    , @MEH 0910
    @Clyde

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/president-donald-j-trumps-supreme-court-list/

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/additions-president-donald-j-trumps-supreme-court-list/

  27. @vinteuil
    Two Words: Josh Hawley.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Hibernian, @AnotherDad, @Unladen Swallow, @Pericles

    I think he said he didn’t want it.

  28. @Wake up
    Biden will want Michelle Obama on the Supreme Court.

    Replies: @Colin Wright, @Steve in Greensboro, @JohnnyD, @Buck Ransom, @Neoconned

    His second choice would be Benjamin Crump.

  29. Prediction 1 (75% confidence): New justice nominated by Trump and confirmed by a Republican Senate before the new year.

    Prediction 2: (50% confidence): Biden wins and Democrats capture majority of the Senate.

    Prediction (15% confidence): If the above two occur, the Democrats pack the Supreme Court next year.

    The reduced power of the filibuster has been a terrible thing for US politics. When you need 60 votes you have to aim for consensus and compromise. When all you need is a majority, you push things as far as you can. as quick as you can while you have the votes. Terribly destabilizing for the country

    • Replies: @Jim Don Bob
    @NJ Transit Commuter


    The reduced power of the filibuster has been a terrible thing for US politics. When you need 60 votes you have to aim for consensus and compromise. When all you need is a majority, you push things as far as you can. as quick as you can while you have the votes. Terribly destabilizing for the country.
     
    I just used my last Agree but you are spot on. Of course, the Ds started this never thinking that it would come back to bite them in the ass.
    , @ben tillman
    @NJ Transit Commuter

    I certainly agree with that last paragraph.

  30. Remarkable that her pancreatic cancer was discovered in 2009. Surviving 11 years with pancreatic cancer, that made her one tough witch

    • Replies: @Single and Ready to Drop Red Pills
    @Andy

    You just know they had her in zero G plugged into experimental nanotechnology with bat soup chemicals in her veins. I mean, I don’t blame her for wanting to stay alive. But why the hell didn’t she quit in early 2016 knowing she had cancer?

    Replies: @Jasper Been

    , @Cortes
    @Andy

    My father in law lasted four long, hard, hard years. The late judge must have endured hell.

    Replies: @BB753

  31. Ah so! Through the agency of cosmic indifference, Ruth Bader Ginsburg went to the same high school as I – James Madison H.S. in Brooklyn NY. As she was 1 year older than I am, our enrollment there probably overlapped.

    • Replies: @Father O'Hara
    @Anonymouse

    That is certainly good news for the Dear Leader that one if his readers is one year younger than RBG!

    , @Bardon Kaldian
    @Anonymouse

    I thought she went to the same high school with James Madison.

  32. @Bill P
    Man is this goiñg to cause a meltdown.

    Funny I was just wondering about her right before the news broke. I figured they must have pulled every trick in the book to keep her alive this long.

    Replies: @MarkinLA

    Everything they learned from Biden they applied to her.

  33. @Wake up
    Biden will want Michelle Obama on the Supreme Court.

    Replies: @Colin Wright, @Steve in Greensboro, @JohnnyD, @Buck Ransom, @Neoconned

    If Uncle Joe exits his basement to join RBG in the heavenly choir in the next week or so,
    things will get more interesting than anyone can stand.

    • Replies: @Black-hole creator
    @Buck Ransom

    Hey, maybe he will regale us with some funny offensive Jewish jokes. I like Joe's speeches, some the best unintentional comedy ever.

    Replies: @Ron Mexico

    , @usNthem
    @Buck Ransom

    I wouldn’t say heavenly choir - more like the one downstairs...

    Replies: @G. Poulin

  34. She would tell people her favorite client as a lawyer was the widower denied Social Security widow’s benefits because solely he was a man. In other words, not a widow. Justice Rehnquist agreed this was unfair but couldn’t see how it was unconstitutional. RBG worked him, reminding him it’s about the boy, about the boy! Why should the lad suffer because the wrong parent died? She changed his mind and prevailed.

    She often made feminist points like this by finding the odd male victim.

    She also had a bug up, well, you know, about the 1961 Hoyt decision. Mrs Hoyt was convicted of murdering Mr Hoyt by an all-male jury in Florida. The jury was male for the simple reason that almost no women volunteered for duty.

    She determined to turn this around, and did so after 18 years. Her colleagues got Louisiana’s opt-in system for women (the same as Florida’s) overturned in the mid-’70s. In 1979, in her last case before (as opposed to aboard) SCOTUS, Missouri’s opt-out system was also overturned.

    Legislators in most other states had already made the change, but these two couldn’t, as it wasn’t law, but a provision in their state constitutions. Only the voters could amend those, and they were in no hurry to.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Reg Cæsar


    She determined to turn this around, and did so after 18 years. Her colleagues got Louisiana’s opt-in system for women (the same as Florida’s) overturned in the mid-’70s. In 1979, in her last case before (as opposed to aboard) SCOTUS, Missouri’s opt-out system was also overturned.
     
    Well, that's one good thing she did, then. It is completely inappropriate to have an all-male jury in a woman's trial, as it would be to have an all-female jury in a man's trial.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @Reg Cæsar, @Curle, @Anonymous

  35. Oddly, I was more confident in RBG than I am in John Roberts. And I’m to the right of Attila the Hun, in the words of my HS debate partner.

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    @Jimbo in OPKS

    Attila was a liberal wuss.

    , @njguy73
    @Jimbo in OPKS


    I am a little to the right of ... Why is the Attila comparison used? Fifth-century Hunnish depredations on the Roman Empire were the work of an overpowerful executive pursuing a policy of economic redistribution in an atmosphere of permissive social mores. I am a little to the right of Rush Limbaugh. I'm so conservative that I approve of San Francisco City Hall marriages, adoption by same-sex couples, and New Hampshire's recently ordained Episcopal bishop. Gays want to get married, have children, and go to church. Next they'll be advocating school vouchers, boycotting HBO, and voting Republican.

     

    P. J. O'Rourke, 2004

    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2004/07/i-agree-with-me/303373/

    Replies: @68W58

  36. Leftists not taking it well!

    • Replies: @ChrisZ
    @Peripatetic Commenter

    I think the hysterical Twitterer Nicole has a point.

    Justice Ginsberg’s 20th year on the bench and her 80th on earth coincided comfortably with Obama’s presidency. It was an opportune time for her to retire, if only to enjoy what was left of her days. What purpose was served by her hanging onto her seat beyond that time?

    She was a very accomplished woman who deserves respect (which she didn’t really get from the rank and file left; they lauded her as a cartoon figure—RBG to go with their Super Squad of FDR, JFK, LBJ, MLK, HRC—as a symbol more than an intellectual figure). But she seems to have had the same appetite for holding onto power as McCain or Arlen Specter, who imagined themselves so indispensable as public figures that they tenaciously clung to their positions despite incapacitating illness.

    Liberals have a good reason to be upset at her, and I applaud Nicole’s show of sincerity.

    As for myself, I will take a satisfied glee in their discomfort.

    , @Harry Baldwin
    @Peripatetic Commenter

    Nicole is making a perfectly valid point. Ginsburg no doubt assumed her replacement would be chosen by Hillary and that prospect pleased her. She made some very injudicious comments about Trump before the 2016 election.


    Ginsburg had given an interview to The New York Times saying she didn’t “even want to contemplate” the country and court under a President Trump.

    She later called him a “faker” in a separate interview with CNN.

    "He has no consistency about him. He says whatever comes into his head at the moment. He really has an ego. ... How has he gotten away with not turning over his tax returns? The press seems to be very gentle with him on that," she said.
     
    She later said, “On reflection, my recent remarks in response to press inquiries were ill-advised and I regret making them. Judges should avoid commenting on a candidate for public office. In the future I will be more circumspect.”

    It's nice that she regretted making those remarks, but she did make them and they reflect very poorly on her self-discipline, judgment, and judicial temperament.
    , @Muggles
    @Peripatetic Commenter


    fuck you Ruth Bader Ginsburg
     
    Gratitude isn't high on the list of Woke attributes.

    Without hate they have nothing.

    Replies: @CJ

    , @AnotherDad
    @Peripatetic Commenter

    Nicole is right. Ginsburg's non-retirement under Obama was arrogant.

    But, of course, it's the arrogance that is entirely typical of the leftist "activist" law making judge--that their political opinions are oh so special they should be cast into law without regard to the people's assent. But then that judicial arrogance is precisely what Nicole wants.

    Sometimes getting what you want doesn't work out as planned.

    , @U. Ranus
    @Peripatetic Commenter


    fuck you for not retiring under Obama
     
    Obama would have replaced her with a Democrat, but would he have replaced her with a Jew? She couldn't be sure.

    Replies: @hOUSTON 1992

  37. If the Republicans should happen to lose, a week after the election Trump should nominate Merrick Garland. He’d be a damn sight better than what Biden will throw out there. Plus, the irony of the Democrats trying to destroy the guy that they supposedly championed four years earlier would not be lost on many people.

    • LOL: Some Guy
    • Replies: @Peterike
    @Che Blutarsky

    “ Plus, the irony of the Democrats trying to destroy the guy that they supposedly championed four years earlier would not be lost on many people.”

    It would be totally lost on at least 50% of the populace.

    , @Flip
    @Che Blutarsky

    The Second Amendment would be toast if Garland got onto the court. McConnell did us a big favor.

    , @Peter D. Bredon
    @Che Blutarsky

    Ironic?

    Yeah, that sounds like Republicans/conservatives: We lost, and were exterminated, but the joke's on the Democrats!

    , @Harry Baldwin
    @Che Blutarsky

    No, on key issues the liberals on the court march in lockstep, so whether it's a Ginsburg or a Garland makes no real difference.

    , @Wilkey
    @Che Blutarsky


    If the Republicans should happen to lose, a week after the election Trump should nominate Merrick Garland.
     
    Even if Republicans should lose, they will have control of Congress for almost two months after the election to confirm whomever they choose. I don't believe in lame duck sessions, and believe they should be abolished, but that's the law. Perhaps that in itself would be enough motivation to abolish the lame duck session.

    But Republicans won't be waiting until after the election to confirm a new justice. Ginsburg has been on her death bed for quite some time, so it's hard to believe they don't have a nominee all lined up. There *will* be a confirmation vote before the election because Republicans need to turn out the base, and Supreme Court appointments do that. And the nominee will probably be a woman to (a) avoid more sexual assault allegations, (b) improve GOP prospects with the women's vote, and (c) encourage RINO senators to support her.

    If the Democrats want to oppose a white woman nominee to SCOTUS then they're just further working to scare away the white vote for good and forever.

    Replies: @International Jew, @PhysicistDave

    , @Anonymous
    @Che Blutarsky


    If the Republicans should happen to lose, a week after the election Trump should nominate Merrick Garland. He’d be a damn sight better than what Biden will throw out there.
     
    Garland would probably vote to give anchor babies citizenship. That is the only issue that matters.
  38. Imagine a failing deception machine so mismanaged that it could not postpone the public release of the Ginsburg death (whenever it actually happened) until after it rigged the election.

  39. Notice she didn’t say “until after the election.”

    Presumable if Trump wins she wants us to wait four years to replace her.

    One big upside of this is that Trump just got a cushion for any decision resulting from a disputed election.

  40. “My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.” –RB Ginsburg

    Unfortunate wording. I can understand not nominating until after the election, but if Trump wins over Dementia Guy™ it should be going ahead regardless of what her fervent wishes are.

    Personally wouldn’t mind seeing a nomination now, BLM and its commies have had their run; and now it’s L&E time.

    • Replies: @James O'Meara
    @hooodathunkit

    "Installed" because the point is, after the mail-in/Russia fiasco results in Biden being "installed". I.E., the coup.

    , @Jack D
    @hooodathunkit

    The Dems (this includes Ginsburg (or at least her granddaughter - who knows if she actually said this) ) keep saying "new president" because they are trying to use Mitch McConnell's words against him. In 2016, McConnell said (and this is an exact quote):

    “The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president,”

    Of course in 2016 we were going to get a new president one way or the other. Right now this doesn't make any sense unless you assume that Trump is certain to lose or that the seat should remain vacant for up to 5 years.

  41. holy fucking shit.

    this will be armageddon.

  42. No!

    She lives on:

    • Replies: @RadicalCenter
    @Cortes

    “She”?

  43. Hey, Siri!

    Add “buy more ammo” to my to-do list.

  44. • Replies: @AndrewR
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    Lol the tweet is gone. But he's not wrong

  45. RIP. I hope she didn’t suffer much. Pancreatic cancer sounds like a bad way to go.

    Shit’s gonna get ugly.

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard
    @Corn


    Shit’s gonna get ugly.
     
    Yup.

    All kinds of, "respectable," people are already calling for arson, rioting, murder, and more on Twitter.

    Replies: @anon

    , @AndrewR
    @Corn

    Any sympathy I would have for her is negated by the fact she should have retired between 2009 and 2014, when the Dems had both the Senate and the WH. I don't know what her endgame was but whatever respectable legacy or sympathy she deserved went out the window the last few years. She made an absolute mockery of the Court. Maybe we should thank her for that, actually.

  46. @Twinkie

    Ginsburg’s death, especially combined with Trump’s re-election, might be profoundly destabilizing
     
    Yes, please! The current system must be destabilized.

    Replies: @Jenner Ickham Errican

    Yes, please! The current system must be destabilized.

    How far are you willing to go, Twinkie?

    I think we should let Twinkie know what’s going on.

  47. If Democrats can get 2 additional Senators to object to a vote on a new justice, they can kill this until next year.

    • Replies: @Redneck farmer
    @JohnnyWalker123

    Let me get this in before anyone else: Mitt Romney never turned down a chance to make things worse for America.

    , @Anon
    @JohnnyWalker123

    You can pry at least one of them loose by nominating a conservative judge who happens to be a personal friend of Romney's, for example. Even Romney would have a hard time eeling out of that one.

  48. At his point being kind to Democrats will be taken to be a sign of weakness. They were in the “Who? Whom?” mode even before the 2016 election.
    Besides, what are Democrats going to do? Hurl Molotov Cocktails? They are already doing it.

    Some Hollywood guy wished “I Want a Film that Begins with an Earthquake and Works Up to a Climax.” It’s happening right now.

  49. RBG should have stepped down when her pancreatic cancer reappeared. Unlike Jimmy Dean, you cannot speak from beyond the grave and she ‘died’ months ago. Trump needs to nominate a new Justice and force a vote in the Senate. Its unfortunate that Linda Chavez is not a lawyer ( but there is no Constituional Requirement a Supreme Court Justice must be one) but she is a Republican moderate who is Jewish and is, at 73, not a generational appointee. Nominating her would pose a problem for the Democrats should they try and accuse her of being a rapist or a white supemacist.

    • Troll: L. Guapo
    • Replies: @Harry Baldwin
    @unit472

    Linda Chavez is a useless RINO. Might as well nominate Mitt Romney.

  50. @Clyde
    There are 3-4-5 traitorous Republican Senators who just might block Trump from appointing a Ginzburg successor. I hope Trump has a few pre-vetted nominees that he and Mitch McConnell can force through in 45 days. Mitch McConnell will be polling all Republican Senators while Dems hold blowout commemorations for the ol abolitionist witch.

    This mess will give more cover to invisible Joe.
    Blame this mess on sickly Ginzborg. The magic juice from Walter Reed finally failed her. She could have resigned any time in the last three years. Ol Witch was obviously trying to outlast Trump.

    Replies: @TomSchmidt, @MEH 0910

    It’s her own damn fauLt. She could have resigned in 2014 when Obama had the pick and the Senate. Obama didn’t have the chops to convince her to go. Trump, by contrast, eliminated that hair-splitting weasel Kennedy, and did so before he had a chance to not hold the Senate.

    • Replies: @Barnard
    @TomSchmidt

    Yes, and Kennedy was replaced with another weasel, just like 75% of Republican Supreme Court nominees.

    Replies: @TomSchmidt

    , @Curle
    @TomSchmidt

    She knew he’d replace her with a man.

  51. @Jimbo in OPKS
    Oddly, I was more confident in RBG than I am in John Roberts. And I’m to the right of Attila the Hun, in the words of my HS debate partner.

    Replies: @TomSchmidt, @njguy73

    Attila was a liberal wuss.

  52. THE TURTLE EMERGES FROM HIS SHELL
    https://postimg.cc/SYWyDk5N
    (Not verified, his site has an anodyne budget statement at its header.)

  53. @Wake up
    Biden will want Michelle Obama on the Supreme Court.

    Replies: @Colin Wright, @Steve in Greensboro, @JohnnyD, @Buck Ransom, @Neoconned

    Recall Mitch McConnell denied Obama his SCOTUS pick….i wonder if Pelosi & company will force Trump to wait for the new yr to get his pick to replace Miss Ginsburg….

    • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard
    @Neoconned


    Recall Mitch McConnell denied Obama his SCOTUS pick….i wonder if Pelosi & company will force Trump to wait for the new yr to get his pick to replace Miss Ginsburg….
     
    The halfway sane portion of the Leftist mob on Twitter is already citing this as a 'precedent' that McConnell must observe.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    , @Curle
    @Neoconned

    Pelosi and company have no say.

    , @MarkinLA
    @Neoconned

    The tradition was that in an election year when the President and Senate are in different parties they wait until after the election. It doesn't apply here but they will pretend it does.

    Replies: @ScarletNumber

  54. In Buckley’s view, a Trump reelection combined with Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death might trigger a Calexit movement by aggrieved Californians (a state where Hillary won by 4.3 million votes, while she lost by 1.5 million in the other 49 states) enraged at having to share a country with Trump voters.

    But California isn’t dominated by Jane Fondas anymore. Just like with Quebec and Scotland a Californian independence referendum would be undone by immigrants and recent immigrants.

    Mexicans, blacks and ‘IKEA-Americans’ (Koreans, Chinese, Indians, Perians etc) would vote to remain in America.

    Calexit just doesn’t seem likely to me. There is no cohesive Californian identity to spur a sense of common good or national aspiration and California is not Catalonia, the Basque country or Flanders, it has quietly become quite a third world place in much of it’s major population centres, it rather does need a federal system to help it stay afloat, ‘muh GDP’ not withstanding.

    But America becoming a confederation rather than a federation, makes a lot of sense to me. But I don’t know how easy it would be to implement without it being a confederation in name only, the only true greater freedoms the states could get is control of their borders and residency. The only ones that ever really mattered in the first place. 40 years of most of the middle class and up going to college hundreds and thousands of miles from their hometowns and rarely returning will be a hard thing to pry from the middle and upper middle classes if it means their children are less likely to get into better schools or fulfill the lifescript they deem a prerequisite to a middle class life.

    The fastest way to get political change in a late-stage liberal democracy is to convince middle class mothers that a policy or opinion is tied to her and or her childrens’ status.

    • Agree: Patrick in SC, epebble
    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Altai


    The fastest way to get political change in a late-stage liberal democracy is to convince middle class mothers that a policy or opinion is tied to her and or her childrens’ status.
     
    Downward economic mobility is now common enough that I'm not even sure it's just about status anymore, but real concerns about having a decent standard of living.

    Replies: @Altai

  55. After how Kavanaugh was treated the Senate should confirm a nominee ASAP. Democrats don’t deserve any mercy

  56. @ConservaWhig
    Before: The Most Important Election Of Our Lifetime

    Now: The Most Important Election Of Anyone's Lifetime Ever

    Replies: @Buck Ransom, @BenKenobi, @Ray Caruso

    The Dems and the Swamp People have been counting on the Supreme Court to grease Sleepy Joe’s entry into the Oval Orifice. I detect a problem.

  57. @TimothyS
    https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/08/supreme-court-ruth-bader-ginsburg-mcconnell-murkowski-grassley.html
    Indicates some Republicans already lining up to oppose filling the vacancy. They just don't get tired of losing.

    Replies: @Rosie, @indocon, @Hibernian

    They just don’t get tired of losing.

    They don’t see it as losing.

    • Thanks: MBlanc46
    • Replies: @TimothyS
    @Rosie

    If they are opposed to the Trump agenda, you're certainly correct. However, there are a lot of 'conservatives' who appear to perceive a liability in appointing a nominee before the election. There are two potential downsides: a) Displeasing some voters with the particular nominee. b) Changing the balance of tight senate races.
    To both I would say: Delay creates the risk, admittedly small, that Harris will pick the next supreme court seat. The people who support Trump's agenda already know that nominating supreme court justices is at issue. I don't believe it will substantially swing that element.
    So either they are not tired of losing, or they are not tired of back-stabbing.

  58. Watch for some attempt from the Joe Manchin/Susan Collins caucus to reach a deal wherein Biden gets to replace RBG in exchange for a commitment not to abolish the filibuster if the Dems win the Senate. Maybe to sweeten the deal Justice Thomas resigns and Republicans do get to replace him.

  59. @Buck Ransom
    @Wake up

    If Uncle Joe exits his basement to join RBG in the heavenly choir in the next week or so,
    things will get more interesting than anyone can stand.

    Replies: @Black-hole creator, @usNthem

    Hey, maybe he will regale us with some funny offensive Jewish jokes. I like Joe’s speeches, some the best unintentional comedy ever.

    • Replies: @Ron Mexico
    @Black-hole creator

    Only the highlights. Most of his speech time is a meandering snoozefest.

  60. @Reg Cæsar
    She would tell people her favorite client as a lawyer was the widower denied Social Security widow's benefits because solely he was a man. In other words, not a widow. Justice Rehnquist agreed this was unfair but couldn't see how it was unconstitutional. RBG worked him, reminding him it's about the boy, about the boy! Why should the lad suffer because the wrong parent died? She changed his mind and prevailed.

    She often made feminist points like this by finding the odd male victim.

    She also had a bug up, well, you know, about the 1961 Hoyt decision. Mrs Hoyt was convicted of murdering Mr Hoyt by an all-male jury in Florida. The jury was male for the simple reason that almost no women volunteered for duty.

    She determined to turn this around, and did so after 18 years. Her colleagues got Louisiana's opt-in system for women (the same as Florida's) overturned in the mid-'70s. In 1979, in her last case before (as opposed to aboard) SCOTUS, Missouri's opt-out system was also overturned.

    Legislators in most other states had already made the change, but these two couldn't, as it wasn't law, but a provision in their state constitutions. Only the voters could amend those, and they were in no hurry to.

    Replies: @Rosie

    She determined to turn this around, and did so after 18 years. Her colleagues got Louisiana’s opt-in system for women (the same as Florida’s) overturned in the mid-’70s. In 1979, in her last case before (as opposed to aboard) SCOTUS, Missouri’s opt-out system was also overturned.

    Well, that’s one good thing she did, then. It is completely inappropriate to have an all-male jury in a woman’s trial, as it would be to have an all-female jury in a man’s trial.

    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    @Rosie


    Well, that’s one good thing she did, then. It is completely inappropriate to have an all-male jury in a woman’s trial, as it would be to have an all-female jury in a man’s trial.
     
    No, it's still a bad thing.

    You may--or may not--be right about defendant's sex and jury makeup. (It's certainly not a ridiculous argument.)

    However, the core point: it's a political decision. Weighing this sort of psychological/sociological argument and saying "ok, let's do that" is precisely the job of our representatives--just like it is for what should be crimes, what should be penalities, how much money the schools should get, where road should be built, how much taxes should be levied and in what manner.

    It's called republican government. And it is precious.

    Replies: @Rosie

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @Rosie


    Well, that’s one good thing she did, then. It is completely inappropriate to have an all-male jury in a woman’s trial...
     
    The women of Hillsborough County, Florida didn't think so sixty years ago. All they had to do was go down to the courthouse and sign up. They didn't, thus the jury pool was 1% female.

    Next door Pinellas County had just run a campaign to get their own women to sign up. It was successful. Their pool was 4% female.


    The Hoyts had moved down from Massachusetts. Women were already called for jury duty in the Commonwealth, but could get a waiver if a trial looked to be too gruesome for feminine sensibilities. Mrs Hoyt used a metal instrument to beat Mr Hoyt to death, so a jury in Boston might very well have been all-male as well.

    Except for those ladies into cheap thriller fiction. They might enjoy it.

    Replies: @Rosie

    , @Curle
    @Rosie

    “ as it would be to have an all-female jury in a man’s trial.”

    Not if you’re the male and the defendant, you’d love an all female jury. Contrary to popular opinion women really like men and they often express those sentiments by acquitting them even when they are guilty as hell.

    Replies: @ScarletNumber, @Rosie

    , @Anonymous
    @Rosie

    Rosie, was Justice Ginsburg a personal hero of yours?

    https://twitter.com/sairarahman/status/1307313810668052482

    Replies: @Rosie

  61. Having been with three or my four of my 90+ year old grandparents as they neared death, I can say with confidence it is extremely unlikely Justice Ginsberg was in any condition to make a statement like this at the end. The lie is not surprising, but wholly unnecessary, the left was going to do what they do to block Trump from making an appointment with or without it.

  62. @NJ Transit Commuter
    Prediction 1 (75% confidence): New justice nominated by Trump and confirmed by a Republican Senate before the new year.

    Prediction 2: (50% confidence): Biden wins and Democrats capture majority of the Senate.

    Prediction (15% confidence): If the above two occur, the Democrats pack the Supreme Court next year.

    The reduced power of the filibuster has been a terrible thing for US politics. When you need 60 votes you have to aim for consensus and compromise. When all you need is a majority, you push things as far as you can. as quick as you can while you have the votes. Terribly destabilizing for the country

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @ben tillman

    The reduced power of the filibuster has been a terrible thing for US politics. When you need 60 votes you have to aim for consensus and compromise. When all you need is a majority, you push things as far as you can. as quick as you can while you have the votes. Terribly destabilizing for the country.

    I just used my last Agree but you are spot on. Of course, the Ds started this never thinking that it would come back to bite them in the ass.

  63. @TomSchmidt
    @Clyde

    It's her own damn fauLt. She could have resigned in 2014 when Obama had the pick and the Senate. Obama didn't have the chops to convince her to go. Trump, by contrast, eliminated that hair-splitting weasel Kennedy, and did so before he had a chance to not hold the Senate.

    Replies: @Barnard, @Curle

    Yes, and Kennedy was replaced with another weasel, just like 75% of Republican Supreme Court nominees.

    • Replies: @TomSchmidt
    @Barnard

    I think Kavanagh, like Clarence Thomas, is going to stick it to the left for how he was treated. Gore such, not so much. Roberts... ugh.

    Replies: @Dan Hayes

  64. What are the odds that her replacement will have been mitzvah’d? Asking for a down-and-out chap I met in the metro.

  65. @Cortes
    No!

    She lives on:

    https://www.out.com/sites/out.com/files/2017/10/27/masha-gessen-1.jpg

    Replies: @RadicalCenter

    “She”?

  66. Only one black clerk, huh.? How many were from a more…familiar group?

  67. @R.G. Camara
    1. There should be at least as many Supreme Court justices as we have Federal Circuits. Which right now is 13 (11 + DC Circuit + Federal Circuit). I would advocate for at least 20.

    2. Requirements that each Circuit be represented by at least one justice who had been a judge or lawyer in that Circuit.

    3. Steve's plan assumes (a) the Supreme Court remains as powerful and involved in everyday life as it has been since the Warren Court; and (b) politicians want to have a balanced, fair court appointment process. The first is not guaranteed, and the second is just plain not true.

    4. Shit is about to get very, very real. The insanity of 2020 is about to pushed to 11. Trump & the Repubs could force a candidate through before election day, and the D's could do nothing but violence. Abortion is their sacrament.

    Replies: @Eqas65, @Anon, @PhysicistDave

    Why should abortion be made illegal? 75% or so of women who have abortions are negroes, and the white women who have abortion are mostly mudsharks.

    I also believe that the occasional non-mudshark white women who have abortions are mostly meth addicts who shouldn’t be having kids anyway.

    I’m always amazed at the number of anti-abortion cuckservatives on UNZ.

    • Replies: @Eric Novak
    @Eqas65

    The overwhelming number of births prevented since Roe v. Wade in 1973 have been white.

    Replies: @RVBlake

    , @ken
    @Eqas65

    Because it's evil you piece of crap. You are as malevolent as the black dude laughing at cops getting shot.

    , @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan
    @Eqas65

    Away with thou, Satan!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqlXa2__CkE

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @Eqas65


    I’m always amazed at the number of anti-abortion cuckservatives on UNZ.
     
    What is the moral difference between dispatching an embryotic Negro and dispatching an adult one? An open hunting season on the the latter would be much more effective than the present one on the former is proving to be.

    Indeed, the forced abortions that so horrify Hillary in countries like China would work, too, especially if combined with hysterectomies.

    You clearly believe the ends justify the means, so you have no argument against these tactics, other than the cuckish one that they're unpopular and won't pass.

    To paraphrase the teenage Mr Altman,

    Genocide is painless, it brings on many changes, and you can take or leave it if you please.

    Replies: @GeneralRipper

  68. @Altai

    In Buckley’s view, a Trump reelection combined with Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death might trigger a Calexit movement by aggrieved Californians (a state where Hillary won by 4.3 million votes, while she lost by 1.5 million in the other 49 states) enraged at having to share a country with Trump voters.
     
    But California isn't dominated by Jane Fondas anymore. Just like with Quebec and Scotland a Californian independence referendum would be undone by immigrants and recent immigrants.

    Mexicans, blacks and 'IKEA-Americans' (Koreans, Chinese, Indians, Perians etc) would vote to remain in America.

    Calexit just doesn't seem likely to me. There is no cohesive Californian identity to spur a sense of common good or national aspiration and California is not Catalonia, the Basque country or Flanders, it has quietly become quite a third world place in much of it's major population centres, it rather does need a federal system to help it stay afloat, 'muh GDP' not withstanding.

    But America becoming a confederation rather than a federation, makes a lot of sense to me. But I don't know how easy it would be to implement without it being a confederation in name only, the only true greater freedoms the states could get is control of their borders and residency. The only ones that ever really mattered in the first place. 40 years of most of the middle class and up going to college hundreds and thousands of miles from their hometowns and rarely returning will be a hard thing to pry from the middle and upper middle classes if it means their children are less likely to get into better schools or fulfill the lifescript they deem a prerequisite to a middle class life.

    The fastest way to get political change in a late-stage liberal democracy is to convince middle class mothers that a policy or opinion is tied to her and or her childrens' status.

    Replies: @Rosie

    The fastest way to get political change in a late-stage liberal democracy is to convince middle class mothers that a policy or opinion is tied to her and or her childrens’ status.

    Downward economic mobility is now common enough that I’m not even sure it’s just about status anymore, but real concerns about having a decent standard of living.

    • Replies: @Altai
    @Rosie

    Popular culture doesn't reflect this yet. And people haven't just realised it yet. You get oblique references to it in shows about young people nervously ironically joking about their lack of a proper future but the paycheck to paycheck in a stressful diverse, atomised world isn't displayed. America has little in safety nets and staggering swaths of the population are one bad fall from an empty savings account after hospital bills. (I often wonder if the already ethnic conflict overlapping class conflict from the great waves led to the US not implementing a universal healthcare system with the rest of the West despite being the most flush with cash)

    I think somebody wrote one reason things have gone so unchallenged in the US is that Americans don't realise 'you can lose everything'. They have no folk memory of being conquered, dispossessed or invaded. They just assume 'this too will pass' without much cost or consequence. Or worse, they've given up thinking they have any control. The Americanisation of North West Europe or perhaps long peace seems to have made them forget too.

  69. actually, no. probably not armageddon. i take that back.

    the uselessness of the Republican party will be revealed in finality here.

    enough total garbage, pointless Senators will refuse to vote, and that will be it.

    burn the Republican party to the ground.

    for a brief moment i considered voting for Trump again. then i came to my senses.

    Romney, Murkowski, Collins, and some other losers will not just vote no, but HELL NO. totally stupid assholes. mind boggling level of getting it wrong.

    they can’t wait to be the new John McCain. the Republican who stopped Trump from filling the Ginsburg seat. patted on the head by Democrats forever, or until the next election. invited to every DC party forever, or until Democrats hate them again.

    • Agree: L. Guapo
  70. “My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.”

    I’ll take words that were never said for $400, Alex.

    Tucker said that reportedly she said this to her grand daughter on her death bed. It’s about as believable as some dead jogger’s mother talking about how he was trying to turn his life around.

    These people can’t even make up lies that would fail in a Hollywood sitcom writers’ room.

    • Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist
    @Jim Don Bob

    No one denies that Ginsburg was very intelligent. I can't imagine her uttering this florid, tacky phrase, even in extremis -- 'my most fervent wish' belongs on a cross-stitch sampler.

    Also, its content betrays its orgin, i.e. likely from party flack. For example, presidents aren't 'installed'.

    It's so transparently made up as to be a taunt.

    Replies: @International Jew

  71. @ConservaWhig
    Before: The Most Important Election Of Our Lifetime

    Now: The Most Important Election Of Anyone's Lifetime Ever

    Replies: @Buck Ransom, @BenKenobi, @Ray Caruso

    • LOL: Mr McKenna
  72. Trump and the Republicans need to ram through a replacement by December. No time to be squeamish. These next 3 months may be the last time there is a Republican President and Senate for a very long time.

    • Agree: Kolya Krassotkin
  73. Sen. Susan Collins
    Sen. Chuck Grassley
    Sen. Lisa Murkowski
    Sen. Mitt Romney

    Twitter says they will negate Trump-McConnell by refusing to vote until 2021

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @Clyde

    I'm surprised by Grassley except as Chairman of the Judiciary Committe he would have to preside over hearings that might make the Kavanaugh hearings look like a church picnic.

    , @MEH 0910
    @Clyde

    https://twitter.com/billscher/status/1308205145025654791

    , @MEH 0910
    @Clyde

    https://twitter.com/politico/status/1308440476819820547

    https://twitter.com/SenatorRomney/status/1308403638897958914

  74. @Anonymous
    I would not get too excited about this development if Ginsberg's replacement is Amy Comey Barrett.
    From Wiki: Comey Barrett has "seven children: five biological children and two children adopted from Haiti."
    She sounds like a mushy-minded bleating heart type for whom "conservatism" is all about abortion, abortion, abortion (she's a practicing Catholic). When it comes to heritage Americans and upholding their interests, I'm very suspicious about her bona fides (although I could be wrong).

    Replies: @Currahee, @Anon, @ben tillman, @Eqas65, @Paul Mendez, @Alexander Turok

    Yes, the abortion people seem convinced that America would be a better place with a greater proportion of BLACKS! Someone who brings two extra BLACKS! into this country must be in agreement with them.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Currahee



    five biological children
     
    Yes, the abortion people seem convinced that America would be a better place with a greater proportion of BLACKS!
     
    And how are your five biological children doing?

    At the last pre-Roe census, America was 87.7% white and 11.1% black. At the last post-Roe census, those figures were 72.4% and 12.6%. They're bound to be worse when the present one is collated.

    It seems like the "abortion people" were whitening this country, while the "prochoice" folks are doing the opposite.

    Which is not surprising, when you consider that the majority of abortions take the life of a white child.


    Yes, the abortion people seem convinced that America would be a better place with a greater proportion of BLACKS!
     
    In that case, they agree with the CSA, which left a union that was 85% white for one that was at best 55% so. Foresight in action!

    Replies: @Anonymous

  75. She was taken on the Jewish new year as well, very good timing. The year 5780 has begun with a bang!

    Somewhat unrelated, this is an interesting comment by Trump

    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    The uneasy laughter from the crowd as Trump says, "You have good genes." As though they are not comfortable with admitting that genetics count, that there could be some truth in the notion that not all people are created equal and that they came out on top in the genetic lottery, as though that thought will lead, inexorably, to Nazism and the gas chambers and so must be orphaned.

    Yet everyone in the crowd, if cornered, would fight for their children in preference to the survival of the invading Somalian's children. It's this reticence to own their own feelings that divides a white person internally and makes them, in their own introspective eyes, hypocrites and therefore , objectively now, vulnerable to manipulation by other races. Poor whites. They don't realize that other races don't understand white's internal awareness of their own hypocrisy--because other races, for the most part, are incapable of introspection and so cannot imagine what goes on in a white person's mind--but those other races can smell white's tentativeness and have an instinct for exploiting it.

    An honest person doesn't stand a chance in a battle with a dishonest person. A civilized person doesn't stand a chance against an animal.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    , @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    Good genes in Minnesota

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8c/Charles%26Dad.jpg

  76. let’s point out here that the Democrats YELLED LOUDLY FOR MONTHS that they PROMISE to eliminate the filibuster and ram thru as much law as they can with 51 Senate votes as soon as they take control of the government.

    the idiot, moron, incomprehensibly stupid Republicans will fail to fill this Supreme Court seat, massively demoralize their voters on the way out, and permanently lose control of the country in a devastating rout on Election Day.

    they could actually keep control of the Senate on this issue, but they’re going to go out of their way to deliberately lose. wow. this is astounding stuff. they give their voters NOTHING to vote for. they pledge and guarantee, that under no circumstances, will we put a conservative on the Supreme Court.

  77. @Colin Wright
    If Trump is SMART, he will nominate some obvious middle-of-the-roader -- preferably female.

    The Democrats can then make idiots out of themselves opposing the nomination.

    Replies: @Mike_from_SGV, @Curle, @guest, @Not Raul

    Yeah, with only 3 months to get it done, Trump has only one shot. No time for a second nomination if the first one is voted down, probably. Any sensible moderate person would be a huge improvement over Bader. He could troll the Dems by nominating a conservative black female, if there is such a thing.

    • Agree: HammerJack
    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Mike_from_SGV

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janice_Rogers_Brown

    Replies: @Not Raul

    , @Thoughts
    @Mike_from_SGV

    It would be a cool f-u if Trump took all the names of the Black Female Police Chiefs who have stepped down over mistreatment due to BLM and put them in his next administration.

    As far as the Supreme Court, we need to stop looking for a Black Savior and put up a Strong, Conservative, Hetero White Based Christian Dude

    Trump really should make it a priority to identify all of the people screwed by BLM and Soros...I'd get all of those people on my ship...The L.A. DA Steve mentions all the time, all the black police chief women who resigned, all of those people are deserving of Support...and they seem to be smart and have invaluable experience as well.

  78. Trump just blown out of the election.

    Every White woman in America will vote Biden to protect her right to abort a kid of a guy they THOUGHT was Alpha but is really beta male.

    Get ready for Supreme Court Justice Stacey Abrams. In the Harris Administration.

    Typical betrayal from Mittens, Murkowski, etc.

    • Agree: Voltarde
    • Replies: @Ron Mexico
    @Whiskey

    What color are the skies in your world?

  79. @Rosie
    @Altai


    The fastest way to get political change in a late-stage liberal democracy is to convince middle class mothers that a policy or opinion is tied to her and or her childrens’ status.
     
    Downward economic mobility is now common enough that I'm not even sure it's just about status anymore, but real concerns about having a decent standard of living.

    Replies: @Altai

    Popular culture doesn’t reflect this yet. And people haven’t just realised it yet. You get oblique references to it in shows about young people nervously ironically joking about their lack of a proper future but the paycheck to paycheck in a stressful diverse, atomised world isn’t displayed. America has little in safety nets and staggering swaths of the population are one bad fall from an empty savings account after hospital bills. (I often wonder if the already ethnic conflict overlapping class conflict from the great waves led to the US not implementing a universal healthcare system with the rest of the West despite being the most flush with cash)

    I think somebody wrote one reason things have gone so unchallenged in the US is that Americans don’t realise ‘you can lose everything’. They have no folk memory of being conquered, dispossessed or invaded. They just assume ‘this too will pass’ without much cost or consequence. Or worse, they’ve given up thinking they have any control. The Americanisation of North West Europe or perhaps long peace seems to have made them forget too.

  80. If only the faux Republican SCOTUS Justices showed even a fraction of Ginzburg’s unwavering political determination. Instead of RBG’s unaltering partisan political efforts, we are left with Republican wussies like Roberts and possibly even Gorsuch.
    That being said, RBG was just another in a long line of justices as exemplified by Earl Warren who made the law out of whole cloth to confirm to their liberal proclivities.

    • Thanks: Muggles
  81. Meanwhile over at the Clinton household, Hillary downs another shot, throws a lamp at Bill and screams…”First Floyd, then Lewis and now Ginsburg. People will be tired of big funerals when I finally kick off.”

    • Replies: @Buck Ransom
    @Buffalo Joe

    But HRC's casket will be carried by a dozen flying monkeys.
    Even John McCain and Saint George didn't get embellishments like that.

    , @International Jew
    @Buffalo Joe

    Not to worry. If RBG's family cares about Jewish tradition, she'll be buried as soon as possible. (By sundown of the same day, though Rosh Hashanah might delay that just a bit.) So no endless lying-in-state.

    Replies: @James O'Meara, @Father O'Hara

  82. Oh Lord, this is going to be a shit show isn’t it? I’m really glad I’m in Canada and won’t be in America the week of the election.

  83. Anonymous[188] • Disclaimer says:

    I guess lockdown is over for the duration of the Ruth Bader Ginsburg funeral orgies.

    I’m sure there will be violations of social distancing, and Steve and his ilk will eagerly promote these incidents, much as Leftists proclaim every school shooting committed by a white boy an act of terrorism even when no hints of a political motive are present. He is the master of dishonesty and bad faith.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @Anonymous

    When you're a guest in someone's house you speak that way of your host? Stay classy.

    Replies: @AndrewR

  84. @Buffalo Joe
    Meanwhile over at the Clinton household, Hillary downs another shot, throws a lamp at Bill and screams..."First Floyd, then Lewis and now Ginsburg. People will be tired of big funerals when I finally kick off."

    Replies: @Buck Ransom, @International Jew

    But HRC’s casket will be carried by a dozen flying monkeys.
    Even John McCain and Saint George didn’t get embellishments like that.

  85. @vinteuil
    Two Words: Josh Hawley.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Hibernian, @AnotherDad, @Unladen Swallow, @Pericles

    C’mon, there’s no question:

    He’s young.
    He’s a patriot.
    He’s not soft on crime.
    He doesn’t wilt under pressure.
    And he’s a straight shooter.

    The clear choice: Kyle Rittenhouse

    • LOL: Voltarde, bomag
    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
    @AnotherDad

    https://sushishirt.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/VLadies-Kyle-Rittenhouse-We-Will-Always-Remember-The-Kenosha-Hat-Trick-Shirt.jpg

  86. @Anonymouse
    Ah so! Through the agency of cosmic indifference, Ruth Bader Ginsburg went to the same high school as I - James Madison H.S. in Brooklyn NY. As she was 1 year older than I am, our enrollment there probably overlapped.

    Replies: @Father O'Hara, @Bardon Kaldian

    That is certainly good news for the Dear Leader that one if his readers is one year younger than RBG!

  87. @R.G. Camara
    1. There should be at least as many Supreme Court justices as we have Federal Circuits. Which right now is 13 (11 + DC Circuit + Federal Circuit). I would advocate for at least 20.

    2. Requirements that each Circuit be represented by at least one justice who had been a judge or lawyer in that Circuit.

    3. Steve's plan assumes (a) the Supreme Court remains as powerful and involved in everyday life as it has been since the Warren Court; and (b) politicians want to have a balanced, fair court appointment process. The first is not guaranteed, and the second is just plain not true.

    4. Shit is about to get very, very real. The insanity of 2020 is about to pushed to 11. Trump & the Repubs could force a candidate through before election day, and the D's could do nothing but violence. Abortion is their sacrament.

    Replies: @Eqas65, @Anon, @PhysicistDave

    “Abortion is (Left’s) sacrament”

    Yes. How else would the left not be outnumbered in the cities if so many black babies werent aborted?

    The white left loves black abortions because they personally detest blacks.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Anon


    The white left loves black abortions because they personally detest blacks.
     
    I have thought a great deal about this question, and still I feel uncertain. There is no doubt that they act as if they detest blacks; they avoid them like the plague. On the other hand, I think at least some of them think that bad whites are to blame for anything that is wrong with underclass blacks.

    Replies: @ThreeCranes

  88. How could they tell she was finally dead?

  89. @Colin Wright
    If Trump is SMART, he will nominate some obvious middle-of-the-roader -- preferably female.

    The Democrats can then make idiots out of themselves opposing the nomination.

    Replies: @Mike_from_SGV, @Curle, @guest, @Not Raul

    The middle of the road folks got us here.

    • Agree: Twinkie
    • Replies: @anon
    @Curle


    The middle of the road folks got us here.
     
    For an individual, most of life is business as usual, the middle of the road. But there are times when the individual has to make more fateful decisions and take bigger risks.
    Democracy is being tested. Can the middle of the road average American step up to make the fateful decisions and take the bigger risks?
    , @nebulafox
    @Curle

    I agree.

    Signed,

    Former Middle of the Road guy.

  90. Trump should nominate Ginsburg’s replacement soon. Roberts just can’t be trusted in a disputed election, so they need one more trustworthy conservative. My vote would go to Amul Thapur, who was a finalist the last go around. Besides, it’s a good strategy to get the Dems to attack a non-white nominee.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Hapalong Cassidy


    My vote would go to Amul Thapur, who was a finalist the last go around. Besides, it’s a good strategy to get the Dems to attack a non-white nominee.
     
    What is his position on automatic jus solis citizenship? Nothing else matters.
  91. @Che Blutarsky
    If the Republicans should happen to lose, a week after the election Trump should nominate Merrick Garland. He'd be a damn sight better than what Biden will throw out there. Plus, the irony of the Democrats trying to destroy the guy that they supposedly championed four years earlier would not be lost on many people.

    Replies: @Peterike, @Flip, @Peter D. Bredon, @Harry Baldwin, @Wilkey, @Anonymous

    “ Plus, the irony of the Democrats trying to destroy the guy that they supposedly championed four years earlier would not be lost on many people.”

    It would be totally lost on at least 50% of the populace.

  92. @Buck Ransom
    She died on Rosh Hashanah.
    Will some cosmic significance be attributed to this?
    Should be quite a scene this weekend in Brooklyn.

    Replies: @Dan Hayes

    Not much RBG honoring by Brooklyn’s ultra-orthodox Jews who disavowed her pro-abortion rulings!

    • Agree: Hibernian
    • Replies: @Buck Ransom
    @Dan Hayes

    Aw c'mon, man! It's Chuck Schumer country. He should be able to get a parade going, maybe even with some chicken-swinging.

  93. @Buck Ransom
    @Wake up

    If Uncle Joe exits his basement to join RBG in the heavenly choir in the next week or so,
    things will get more interesting than anyone can stand.

    Replies: @Black-hole creator, @usNthem

    I wouldn’t say heavenly choir – more like the one downstairs…

    • Replies: @G. Poulin
    @usNthem

    Don't think they have a choir down there. They have a very loud metal band, and the worse part is, they're not even good.

  94. @Andy
    Remarkable that her pancreatic cancer was discovered in 2009. Surviving 11 years with pancreatic cancer, that made her one tough witch

    Replies: @Single and Ready to Drop Red Pills, @Cortes

    You just know they had her in zero G plugged into experimental nanotechnology with bat soup chemicals in her veins. I mean, I don’t blame her for wanting to stay alive. But why the hell didn’t she quit in early 2016 knowing she had cancer?

    • LOL: Buck Ransom
    • Replies: @Jasper Been
    @Single and Ready to Drop Red Pills

    To answer your question, it was hubris, as I have been saying on Twitter. Democrats have no one to blame but her for this moment.

  95. A 4-4 court means no one is going to decide the election, which will inevitably be litigated.

    She was a politician, not a fair and unbiased judge. She was completely devoid of any class.

  96. @AnotherDad
    @vinteuil

    C'mon, there's no question:

    He's young.
    He's a patriot.
    He's not soft on crime.
    He doesn't wilt under pressure.
    And he's a straight shooter.

    The clear choice: Kyle Rittenhouse

    Replies: @Joe Stalin

    • LOL: Dan Hayes
  97. What a surprise. Ruth’s chances looked so promising to the left. Sure, she had serious health concerns, but she was “such a fighter.” In a Hill article from July, the author ends the essay with, “I want to live in a world of R.B.Gs. So today I am wishing her a speedy recovery and return to the bench.”

    https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/508021-wishing-ruth-bader-ginsburg-a-speedy-recovery

    Oh well…I’m sure the quality of her work as a Supreme being over the last year or two didn’t suffer merely by being at death’s door. Rest assured that Joe Biden will be equally capable as the leader of the free world.

  98. @Dan Hayes
    @Buck Ransom

    Not much RBG honoring by Brooklyn's ultra-orthodox Jews who disavowed her pro-abortion rulings!

    Replies: @Buck Ransom

    Aw c’mon, man! It’s Chuck Schumer country. He should be able to get a parade going, maybe even with some chicken-swinging.

  99. They are really taking this well!

  100. @vinteuil
    Two Words: Josh Hawley.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Hibernian, @AnotherDad, @Unladen Swallow, @Pericles

    Or Ted Cruz, but I am not sure either one of them wants to be on the Supreme Court. However Trump must put forth a nominee, the Democrats don’t want a nominee selected not because they think they will win primarily, but because they don’t want the lunatics in their party to come out and definitely cost them the election. The left wing of the Democrats going insane over Gorsuch and in particular Kavanaugh was bad look for them and a confirmation battle over this seat would be a walk in the park by comparison, free advertising for the Trump campaign.

  101. Anon[639] • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonymous
    I would not get too excited about this development if Ginsberg's replacement is Amy Comey Barrett.
    From Wiki: Comey Barrett has "seven children: five biological children and two children adopted from Haiti."
    She sounds like a mushy-minded bleating heart type for whom "conservatism" is all about abortion, abortion, abortion (she's a practicing Catholic). When it comes to heritage Americans and upholding their interests, I'm very suspicious about her bona fides (although I could be wrong).

    Replies: @Currahee, @Anon, @ben tillman, @Eqas65, @Paul Mendez, @Alexander Turok

    You do realize that without the right to life we can’t really base other rights, such as the right to property or to freedom of conscience, of speech, of association? It all comes down to majority consensus.. which right now looks more and more like mass cultural suicide. It’s a matter of principle.

    • Agree: Hibernian
    • Disagree: TTSSYF
    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @Anon

    Right to life is not a Catholic only issue. An Evangelical theologian, Harold O. J. Brown, made sure of that following Roe. Many Evangelicals at that time were reluctant to get involved in the pro-life cause because at the time its leadership was heavily Catholic. This is not to say that they approved of abortion or the decision. The Southern Baptist Convention had liberal leadership at the time and those leaders were at least mushy on the issue.

    , @TTSSYF
    @Anon

    Spontaneous abortions occur naturally and not infrequently. I don't see why choosing to have an abortion in the very early stages of pregnancy, before the cells have differentiated sufficiently, should be disallowed. I think it should be illegal after a certain number of weeks.

    Replies: @ken

    , @Jack D
    @Anon

    If by "right to life" you mean the total outlawing of abortion, then you are wrong. Under the common law, which is the basis for our system of laws and freedoms, abortion was permitted until the "quickening" . The quickening was the moment when the mother began to feel the fetus kicking, which is somewhere in the range of 14 to 26 weeks. Grand rhetorical statements like yours are just hot air.

    It's common sense that in the weeks just before birth, when the fetus is viable, it should be considered to be the equivalent of a baby (and we don't murder babies). OTOH, it's also common sense that just after the egg and the sperm are united, the embryo is still just a bunch of cells and doesn't have the same status as a baby and that it's unfair for the law to forcibly enlist women to be unwanted baby incubators for 9 months. So really this is just a line drawing problem for the law . The law is full of line drawing problems - we allow you to have a glass of wine with dinner but we don't let you drive after you've had a fifth of Scotch. Absolutist approaches to line drawing problems (e.g. Prohibition) usually lead to poor results because real life is lived in shades of gray.

    Replies: @Hibernian, @Rosie

  102. @neutral
    Good riddance.

    Replies: @AnotherDad

    Good riddance.

    Exactly.

    Conservatives need to stop being nice and pleasant about these sorts of disagreements. Ginsburg wasn’t a Senator, elected and pushing for what she believed was in the interest of her constituents.
    Rather Ginsburg was a judge, who believed she had the right overrule our elected leaders based on her idea of what ought to be and dictate what she believed ought to be law into law.

    Ginsburg was an enemy of our constituton and enemy of republican government, and enemy of self-government, an enemy of the people.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @AnotherDad

    De mortuis nil nisi bonum, at least for a decent interval. But don't go overboard with hypocritical praise, like Romney. (Or maybe he really means it.)

  103. Ding dong the witch is dead!

  104. @Che Blutarsky
    If the Republicans should happen to lose, a week after the election Trump should nominate Merrick Garland. He'd be a damn sight better than what Biden will throw out there. Plus, the irony of the Democrats trying to destroy the guy that they supposedly championed four years earlier would not be lost on many people.

    Replies: @Peterike, @Flip, @Peter D. Bredon, @Harry Baldwin, @Wilkey, @Anonymous

    The Second Amendment would be toast if Garland got onto the court. McConnell did us a big favor.

  105. “Ginsburg was not very Woke by 2020 standards.”

    Few jews are in practice.

  106. @Altai
    For all it's faults, if one is inclined to create an effective power-sharing system for a country of 330m, then allocating justices to fill specific ethnic or racial slots (As opposed to the current system of just endlessly appointing Catholic and Jewish justices pretending it's 1920 and know-nothings are roaming the streets) the supreme court is one thing that works. But this would require the white or white protestant justices to think of themselves as such and also for their numbers to be greater than 0.

    Replies: @ben tillman, @Gordo

    For all it’s faults, if one is inclined to create an effective power-sharing system for a country of 330m, then allocating justices to fill specific ethnic or racial slots (As opposed to the current system of just endlessly appointing Catholic and Jewish justices pretending it’s 1920 and know-nothings are roaming the streets) the supreme court is one thing that works.

    If one is inclined to create an effective power-sharing system for a country of 330MM, one divides the country into 10 parts of 33 million each.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @ben tillman


    If one is inclined to create an effective power-sharing system for a country of 330MM, one divides the country into 10 parts of 33 million each.
     
    Here you go:



    https://i.imgur.com/zCQ5196.jpg

    Replies: @Richard S, @AnotherDad

    , @MBlanc46
    @ben tillman

    That’s it, ben. Never forget that disaggregation is the only way forward for heritage Americans.

  107. @TimothyS
    https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/08/supreme-court-ruth-bader-ginsburg-mcconnell-murkowski-grassley.html
    Indicates some Republicans already lining up to oppose filling the vacancy. They just don't get tired of losing.

    Replies: @Rosie, @indocon, @Hibernian

    Not that simple, a few minutes earlier there was a statement from somebody saying that Romney would not vote on any nominee in current congress, then his spokeswomen issued a statement denying denying that he said that.

    Behind the scene these Republican critters are seeing what we all are seeing, I think you will see them fall in line.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @indocon

    The days when nobody would vote against a colleague are over. The Senator nominated would look bad and and provide ammunition for the other side, if he didn't recuse himself. This would be an obvious Hobson's choice. Then there's the chance that, in the event that the nomination was successful, the Repubs would lose the Senate seat in the special election to replace him. There's no state so red that it could be assumed this couldn't happen. Look at what happened in Alabama. These things are probably part of the reason why Hawley and Cruz said they didn't want it.

  108. Seems to clearly confirm that RBG was lying to the American people since at least this spring about her health. An honorable person would have resigned no later than the end of the SCOTUS term, knowing he/she would be unable to serve in the next one. Just shows what a low-class, vindictive person RBG was.

  109. @TomSchmidt
    @Clyde

    It's her own damn fauLt. She could have resigned in 2014 when Obama had the pick and the Senate. Obama didn't have the chops to convince her to go. Trump, by contrast, eliminated that hair-splitting weasel Kennedy, and did so before he had a chance to not hold the Senate.

    Replies: @Barnard, @Curle

    She knew he’d replace her with a man.

  110. Trump landed a Kansan farmhouse on top of the b(w)itch! No tears in my house tonight.

  111. @Rosie
    @Reg Cæsar


    She determined to turn this around, and did so after 18 years. Her colleagues got Louisiana’s opt-in system for women (the same as Florida’s) overturned in the mid-’70s. In 1979, in her last case before (as opposed to aboard) SCOTUS, Missouri’s opt-out system was also overturned.
     
    Well, that's one good thing she did, then. It is completely inappropriate to have an all-male jury in a woman's trial, as it would be to have an all-female jury in a man's trial.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @Reg Cæsar, @Curle, @Anonymous

    Well, that’s one good thing she did, then. It is completely inappropriate to have an all-male jury in a woman’s trial, as it would be to have an all-female jury in a man’s trial.

    No, it’s still a bad thing.

    You may–or may not–be right about defendant’s sex and jury makeup. (It’s certainly not a ridiculous argument.)

    However, the core point: it’s a political decision. Weighing this sort of psychological/sociological argument and saying “ok, let’s do that” is precisely the job of our representatives–just like it is for what should be crimes, what should be penalities, how much money the schools should get, where road should be built, how much taxes should be levied and in what manner.

    It’s called republican government. And it is precious.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @AnotherDad


    No, it’s still a bad thing.

    You may–or may not–be right about defendant’s sex and jury makeup. (It’s certainly not a ridiculous argument.)

    However, the core point: it’s a political decision. Weighing this sort of psychological/sociological argument and saying “ok, let’s do that” is precisely the job of our representatives
     
    First of all, though I agree with the policy, that doesn't necessarily mean I agree with the manner in which it was achieved.

    However, in these circumstances, I actually do think the judiciary should be involved. The question of whether women should serve on juries is not properly a political question, because it's not really about civil liberties and/or equal rights. It's about due process: the right to a fair trial. That is not a legislative issue. It is a true constitutional issue. If we're going to have single-sex juries, then the jurors ought to be the same gender as the defendant. The idea of an opposite-sex only jury is offensive to the whole idea of trial by a jury of one's peers.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  112. @Anonymous
    I would not get too excited about this development if Ginsberg's replacement is Amy Comey Barrett.
    From Wiki: Comey Barrett has "seven children: five biological children and two children adopted from Haiti."
    She sounds like a mushy-minded bleating heart type for whom "conservatism" is all about abortion, abortion, abortion (she's a practicing Catholic). When it comes to heritage Americans and upholding their interests, I'm very suspicious about her bona fides (although I could be wrong).

    Replies: @Currahee, @Anon, @ben tillman, @Eqas65, @Paul Mendez, @Alexander Turok

    She sounds like a mushy-minded bleating heart type for whom “conservatism” is all about abortion, abortion, abortion (she’s a practicing Catholic). When it comes to heritage Americans and upholding their interests, I’m very suspicious about her bona fides (although I could be wrong).

    You could be wrong, but it looks like no one here thinks so.

    • Replies: @Intelligent Dasein
    @ben tillman

    I think he's wrong. I also think he's an idiot.

  113. @Rosie
    @Reg Cæsar


    She determined to turn this around, and did so after 18 years. Her colleagues got Louisiana’s opt-in system for women (the same as Florida’s) overturned in the mid-’70s. In 1979, in her last case before (as opposed to aboard) SCOTUS, Missouri’s opt-out system was also overturned.
     
    Well, that's one good thing she did, then. It is completely inappropriate to have an all-male jury in a woman's trial, as it would be to have an all-female jury in a man's trial.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @Reg Cæsar, @Curle, @Anonymous

    Well, that’s one good thing she did, then. It is completely inappropriate to have an all-male jury in a woman’s trial…

    The women of Hillsborough County, Florida didn’t think so sixty years ago. All they had to do was go down to the courthouse and sign up. They didn’t, thus the jury pool was 1% female.

    Next door Pinellas County had just run a campaign to get their own women to sign up. It was successful. Their pool was 4% female.

    The Hoyts had moved down from Massachusetts. Women were already called for jury duty in the Commonwealth, but could get a waiver if a trial looked to be too gruesome for feminine sensibilities. Mrs Hoyt used a metal instrument to beat Mr Hoyt to death, so a jury in Boston might very well have been all-male as well.

    Except for those ladies into cheap thriller fiction. They might enjoy it.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Reg Cæsar


    The women of Hillsborough County, Florida didn’t think so sixty years ago.
     
    They were wrong.
  114. @Whiskey
    Trump just blown out of the election.

    Every White woman in America will vote Biden to protect her right to abort a kid of a guy they THOUGHT was Alpha but is really beta male.

    Get ready for Supreme Court Justice Stacey Abrams. In the Harris Administration.

    Typical betrayal from Mittens, Murkowski, etc.

    Replies: @Ron Mexico

    What color are the skies in your world?

  115. @ben tillman
    @Altai


    For all it’s faults, if one is inclined to create an effective power-sharing system for a country of 330m, then allocating justices to fill specific ethnic or racial slots (As opposed to the current system of just endlessly appointing Catholic and Jewish justices pretending it’s 1920 and know-nothings are roaming the streets) the supreme court is one thing that works.
     
    If one is inclined to create an effective power-sharing system for a country of 330MM, one divides the country into 10 parts of 33 million each.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @MBlanc46

    If one is inclined to create an effective power-sharing system for a country of 330MM, one divides the country into 10 parts of 33 million each.

    Here you go:

    • Thanks: epebble
    • Replies: @Richard S
    @Reg Cæsar

    Lol, brilliant!

    Biological-Sailerism tells us which of the successor states would prosper in that scenario and which would decline.

    If the Fed’s Doomsday stockpile was also divvied up equally ... it’d be a hell of a round of Civilization :-)

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    , @AnotherDad
    @Reg Cæsar

    Not actually accurate. Nine Canadas would cover it.

    When i was a kid and took my first trips to Canada in the mid-60s, it's population was almost exactly a tenth of the US. (US nearing 200m, Canada nearing 20m).

    Just looked it up and they supposedly have 37m people up there. (Their 2016 census counted 35m.) They've actually been growing--and genociding themselves with immigration--even faster than the USofA. That's saying something Maybe they figure they need the body heat?

    Replies: @Anonymous

  116. @Anonymous
    I would not get too excited about this development if Ginsberg's replacement is Amy Comey Barrett.
    From Wiki: Comey Barrett has "seven children: five biological children and two children adopted from Haiti."
    She sounds like a mushy-minded bleating heart type for whom "conservatism" is all about abortion, abortion, abortion (she's a practicing Catholic). When it comes to heritage Americans and upholding their interests, I'm very suspicious about her bona fides (although I could be wrong).

    Replies: @Currahee, @Anon, @ben tillman, @Eqas65, @Paul Mendez, @Alexander Turok

    Barrett would be a nightmare.

    The anti-abortion lunatics are all negroid lovers. Have you ever seen their signs whining about how many negroes are aborted?

    • Agree: Bardon Kaldian
    • Replies: @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan
    @Eqas65

    All right wingers who support abortion (and the lockdowns) are immensely short-sighted morons. Taking away the ability of dumb females and unscrupulous males to avoid the consequences of whoring will do drastically more to benefit society than a marginal fall in the number of blacks.

    , @Etruscan Film Star
    @Eqas65

    Race realism dissolves as soon as the subject of abortion comes up.

  117. @Anon
    @R.G. Camara

    "Abortion is (Left's) sacrament"

    Yes. How else would the left not be outnumbered in the cities if so many black babies werent aborted?

    The white left loves black abortions because they personally detest blacks.

    Replies: @Rosie

    The white left loves black abortions because they personally detest blacks.

    I have thought a great deal about this question, and still I feel uncertain. There is no doubt that they act as if they detest blacks; they avoid them like the plague. On the other hand, I think at least some of them think that bad whites are to blame for anything that is wrong with underclass blacks.

    • Replies: @ThreeCranes
    @Rosie

    They like them one at a time, in small doses, as the only black kid in their overwhelmingly white class. And that's how they fondly reminisce about them and hide their own true feelings from themselves. But don't ever point this out to them and force them to confront their own rationalizing. They're brittle on that score. It takes real sacrifice and work to maintain illusions, dammit!

  118. @Reg Cæsar
    @Rosie


    Well, that’s one good thing she did, then. It is completely inappropriate to have an all-male jury in a woman’s trial...
     
    The women of Hillsborough County, Florida didn't think so sixty years ago. All they had to do was go down to the courthouse and sign up. They didn't, thus the jury pool was 1% female.

    Next door Pinellas County had just run a campaign to get their own women to sign up. It was successful. Their pool was 4% female.


    The Hoyts had moved down from Massachusetts. Women were already called for jury duty in the Commonwealth, but could get a waiver if a trial looked to be too gruesome for feminine sensibilities. Mrs Hoyt used a metal instrument to beat Mr Hoyt to death, so a jury in Boston might very well have been all-male as well.

    Except for those ladies into cheap thriller fiction. They might enjoy it.

    Replies: @Rosie

    The women of Hillsborough County, Florida didn’t think so sixty years ago.

    They were wrong.

  119. @NJ Transit Commuter
    Prediction 1 (75% confidence): New justice nominated by Trump and confirmed by a Republican Senate before the new year.

    Prediction 2: (50% confidence): Biden wins and Democrats capture majority of the Senate.

    Prediction (15% confidence): If the above two occur, the Democrats pack the Supreme Court next year.

    The reduced power of the filibuster has been a terrible thing for US politics. When you need 60 votes you have to aim for consensus and compromise. When all you need is a majority, you push things as far as you can. as quick as you can while you have the votes. Terribly destabilizing for the country

    Replies: @Jim Don Bob, @ben tillman

    I certainly agree with that last paragraph.

  120. @TimothyS
    https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/08/supreme-court-ruth-bader-ginsburg-mcconnell-murkowski-grassley.html
    Indicates some Republicans already lining up to oppose filling the vacancy. They just don't get tired of losing.

    Replies: @Rosie, @indocon, @Hibernian

    Start the search now and nominate after the election. Or nominate a moderate to replace a far leftist.

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    @Hibernian

    You have to cancel out Roberts.

    , @Father O'Hara
    @Hibernian

    Huh? Start the search? Knowing Ginsburg has been dying,wouldnt they have several candidates lined up,vetted, practiced,etc?

    Also,Trump was informed of the passing by a reporter. Someone should've grabbed him and told him first. He might've said something dumb.

  121. @Jimbo in OPKS
    Oddly, I was more confident in RBG than I am in John Roberts. And I’m to the right of Attila the Hun, in the words of my HS debate partner.

    Replies: @TomSchmidt, @njguy73

    I am a little to the right of … Why is the Attila comparison used? Fifth-century Hunnish depredations on the Roman Empire were the work of an overpowerful executive pursuing a policy of economic redistribution in an atmosphere of permissive social mores. I am a little to the right of Rush Limbaugh. I’m so conservative that I approve of San Francisco City Hall marriages, adoption by same-sex couples, and New Hampshire’s recently ordained Episcopal bishop. Gays want to get married, have children, and go to church. Next they’ll be advocating school vouchers, boycotting HBO, and voting Republican.

    P. J. O’Rourke, 2004

    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2004/07/i-agree-with-me/303373/

    • Replies: @68W58
    @njguy73

    PJ (who I once really admired) is so conservative that he voted for Hillary in 2016.

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon

  122. @Black-hole creator
    @Buck Ransom

    Hey, maybe he will regale us with some funny offensive Jewish jokes. I like Joe's speeches, some the best unintentional comedy ever.

    Replies: @Ron Mexico

    Only the highlights. Most of his speech time is a meandering snoozefest.

  123. @Barnard
    @TomSchmidt

    Yes, and Kennedy was replaced with another weasel, just like 75% of Republican Supreme Court nominees.

    Replies: @TomSchmidt

    I think Kavanagh, like Clarence Thomas, is going to stick it to the left for how he was treated. Gore such, not so much. Roberts… ugh.

    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    @TomSchmidt

    Gorsuch is a big, big disappointment. Rumor has it that Kagan convinced dumb goy Gorsuch of his recent pro-gay ruling. Like Brennan, Kagan may not be a towering legal mind but is an adroit political operator who knows how to swing votes.

  124. @Colin Wright
    If Trump is SMART, he will nominate some obvious middle-of-the-roader -- preferably female.

    The Democrats can then make idiots out of themselves opposing the nomination.

    Replies: @Mike_from_SGV, @Curle, @guest, @Not Raul

    They already have made idiots out of themselves with Bork, Thomas, Kavanaugh…Nothing came of it.

    Granted, people are more sensitive on behalf of women. But an endless stream of women have been dragged through the mud in the MSM. A potential justice would be nothing radically new.

  125. @Clyde
    Sen. Susan Collins
    Sen. Chuck Grassley
    Sen. Lisa Murkowski
    Sen. Mitt Romney

    Twitter says they will negate Trump-McConnell by refusing to vote until 2021

    Replies: @Hibernian, @MEH 0910, @MEH 0910

    I’m surprised by Grassley except as Chairman of the Judiciary Committe he would have to preside over hearings that might make the Kavanaugh hearings look like a church picnic.

  126. @Anonymous

    I guess lockdown is over for the duration of the Ruth Bader Ginsburg funeral orgies.
     
    I'm sure there will be violations of social distancing, and Steve and his ilk will eagerly promote these incidents, much as Leftists proclaim every school shooting committed by a white boy an act of terrorism even when no hints of a political motive are present. He is the master of dishonesty and bad faith.

    Replies: @Hibernian

    When you’re a guest in someone’s house you speak that way of your host? Stay classy.

    • Agree: Harry Baldwin
    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @Hibernian

    Sailer is a public commentator (on Ron Unz's site) who allows [some] public comments. This is not his "home" and we are not his "guests."

    To his credit, he does publish a notable amount of criticism towards him.

  127. @ben tillman
    @Anonymous


    She sounds like a mushy-minded bleating heart type for whom “conservatism” is all about abortion, abortion, abortion (she’s a practicing Catholic). When it comes to heritage Americans and upholding their interests, I’m very suspicious about her bona fides (although I could be wrong).
     
    You could be wrong, but it looks like no one here thinks so.

    Replies: @Intelligent Dasein

    I think he’s wrong. I also think he’s an idiot.

  128. “My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed.”

    NEW President? Sounds like a deathbed confession to me. “My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until CHUCK AND NANCY FINISH STEALING THE ELECTION. Oh, while you’re here, fill out these six mail-in ballots for me, dear.”

    At his point being kind to Democrats will be taken to be a sign of weakness.

    Taken to be….?

  129. @AnotherDad
    @Rosie


    Well, that’s one good thing she did, then. It is completely inappropriate to have an all-male jury in a woman’s trial, as it would be to have an all-female jury in a man’s trial.
     
    No, it's still a bad thing.

    You may--or may not--be right about defendant's sex and jury makeup. (It's certainly not a ridiculous argument.)

    However, the core point: it's a political decision. Weighing this sort of psychological/sociological argument and saying "ok, let's do that" is precisely the job of our representatives--just like it is for what should be crimes, what should be penalities, how much money the schools should get, where road should be built, how much taxes should be levied and in what manner.

    It's called republican government. And it is precious.

    Replies: @Rosie

    No, it’s still a bad thing.

    You may–or may not–be right about defendant’s sex and jury makeup. (It’s certainly not a ridiculous argument.)

    However, the core point: it’s a political decision. Weighing this sort of psychological/sociological argument and saying “ok, let’s do that” is precisely the job of our representatives

    First of all, though I agree with the policy, that doesn’t necessarily mean I agree with the manner in which it was achieved.

    However, in these circumstances, I actually do think the judiciary should be involved. The question of whether women should serve on juries is not properly a political question, because it’s not really about civil liberties and/or equal rights. It’s about due process: the right to a fair trial. That is not a legislative issue. It is a true constitutional issue. If we’re going to have single-sex juries, then the jurors ought to be the same gender as the defendant. The idea of an opposite-sex only jury is offensive to the whole idea of trial by a jury of one’s peers.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Rosie


    If we’re going to have single-sex juries, then the jurors ought to be the same gender [sic] as the defendant.
     
    How are you going to do that without forcing women onto juries? For someone who believed in a woman's right to her own body, the Notorious RBG was all too ready to lock those bodies up in some stuffy room in some humid courthouse. Against their will. She had more sympathy for the criminal.

    Don't even get me started on Selective Service...

    Replies: @Rosie

  130. @ben tillman
    @Altai


    For all it’s faults, if one is inclined to create an effective power-sharing system for a country of 330m, then allocating justices to fill specific ethnic or racial slots (As opposed to the current system of just endlessly appointing Catholic and Jewish justices pretending it’s 1920 and know-nothings are roaming the streets) the supreme court is one thing that works.
     
    If one is inclined to create an effective power-sharing system for a country of 330MM, one divides the country into 10 parts of 33 million each.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @MBlanc46

    That’s it, ben. Never forget that disaggregation is the only way forward for heritage Americans.

  131. This is not going to be a big deal whatsoever. Everybody is going to yawn and forget it. It’s not part of the narrative the Leftists have been propounding these last six months. They’ve already decreed that the election is going to be about BLM, and they won’t be able to change that horse in mid-stream.

    Death is far too real and sober a thing for Leftists, who don’t do real and sober.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @Intelligent Dasein

    I disagree. The forces arrayed against us use a multi-pronged approach. Death by a thousand cuts.

    Ginsburg will receive memorial accolades all out of proportion to her role. She was not even the first female Supreme Court justice. Sandra Day O'Connor was, and she was nominated by Ronald Reagan. Any services to Ginsburg should rightly be less than those to O'Connor, which I can't even remember and were not that big.

    You say,


    Death is far too real and sober a thing for Leftists, who don’t do real and sober.
     
    and you might be right, but that is not the point. They will use anything they can to further their causes, even death. In fact, when death is something they keep distant, it is a thing they can use without conscience. And they will, right now.
    , @Ed
    @Intelligent Dasein

    This will galvanize both sides. ActBlue has raised record amounts these past few hours. Suddenly GOP senators in places like NC and even AZ have life in their re-election battles.

  132. What if Trump decides to leave it open until after the election? How would the current eight-person SCOTUS vote on the different questions that might arise in a contested election?

    • Replies: @Ed
    @Anon7

    Trump will nominate someone, reports are saying as early as next week or after Ginsberg is buried.

    The question is McConnell may not have the vote for a pre-election confirmation. Murkowski is a no, Collins is mum but most predict she won’t go for it. Romney is mum but most think he’s a no. McSalley came out with a firm yes.

    I’m not sure what Gardner does but he usually sticks with the party. They might be able to get it through before E-day but there’s an argument for keeping it open to spur conservative turnout.

    Replies: @Jack D

  133. @Che Blutarsky
    If the Republicans should happen to lose, a week after the election Trump should nominate Merrick Garland. He'd be a damn sight better than what Biden will throw out there. Plus, the irony of the Democrats trying to destroy the guy that they supposedly championed four years earlier would not be lost on many people.

    Replies: @Peterike, @Flip, @Peter D. Bredon, @Harry Baldwin, @Wilkey, @Anonymous

    Ironic?

    Yeah, that sounds like Republicans/conservatives: We lost, and were exterminated, but the joke’s on the Democrats!

  134. @Peripatetic Commenter
    Leftists not taking it well!

    https://twitter.com/BadBunnyTwitch/status/1307103243953152005

    Replies: @ChrisZ, @Harry Baldwin, @Muggles, @AnotherDad, @U. Ranus

    I think the hysterical Twitterer Nicole has a point.

    Justice Ginsberg’s 20th year on the bench and her 80th on earth coincided comfortably with Obama’s presidency. It was an opportune time for her to retire, if only to enjoy what was left of her days. What purpose was served by her hanging onto her seat beyond that time?

    She was a very accomplished woman who deserves respect (which she didn’t really get from the rank and file left; they lauded her as a cartoon figure—RBG to go with their Super Squad of FDR, JFK, LBJ, MLK, HRC—as a symbol more than an intellectual figure). But she seems to have had the same appetite for holding onto power as McCain or Arlen Specter, who imagined themselves so indispensable as public figures that they tenaciously clung to their positions despite incapacitating illness.

    Liberals have a good reason to be upset at her, and I applaud Nicole’s show of sincerity.

    As for myself, I will take a satisfied glee in their discomfort.

  135. @hooodathunkit

    "My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed." --RB Ginsburg
     
    Unfortunate wording. I can understand not nominating until after the election, but if Trump wins over Dementia Guy™ it should be going ahead regardless of what her fervent wishes are.

    Personally wouldn't mind seeing a nomination now, BLM and its commies have had their run; and now it's L&E time.

    Replies: @James O'Meara, @Jack D

    “Installed” because the point is, after the mail-in/Russia fiasco results in Biden being “installed”. I.E., the coup.

  136. @TomSchmidt
    @Barnard

    I think Kavanagh, like Clarence Thomas, is going to stick it to the left for how he was treated. Gore such, not so much. Roberts... ugh.

    Replies: @Dan Hayes

    Gorsuch is a big, big disappointment. Rumor has it that Kagan convinced dumb goy Gorsuch of his recent pro-gay ruling. Like Brennan, Kagan may not be a towering legal mind but is an adroit political operator who knows how to swing votes.

  137. She was the daughter of Celia (Amster) Bader. Let’s not even go there…

    Ruth Bader Ginsburg Fast Facts

  138. Mitt Romney continues to transition–from clueless to quisling.

    • Replies: @Stan Adams
    @AnotherDad

    He's just shedding the skinsuit.

    , @BB753
    @AnotherDad

    Mitt Romney is far more and worse than that. Here's all the dirt on Romney (apart from being born a Mormon, a masonic luciferian Cult, though admittedly through no fault of his own) :
    https://youtu.be/caxOhKPfy3E

  139. Anon[163] • Disclaimer says:

    Law clerks are a true rubber-hits-the-road problem. In theory a white-shoe law firm could carry a black partner who doesn’t pull his weight. But a Supreme Court or federal appeals court clerk basically finds and filters everything a judge or justice does. They have to be top notch.

    I’d love to know how the one black clerk worked out, and about any other black Supreme Court clerks. Do they completely pull their weight? Are they even really ancestrally black to any meaningful percentage? Or does their presence require a delicate and slightly awkward dance of pretending they are equals while assigning them easier cases and deftly supervising and directing their work? When was Ginsberg’s one black clerk? Early on, and then “Never again!”?

    Some interesting stats here on clerks:

    https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/04/the-supreme-court-is-terrible-at-hiring-diverse-law-clerks-but-neil-gorsuch-is-surprisingly-good-at-it.html

    Hilarilously, another complaint is that clerks come from Harvard and Yale. More school diversity is needed! But I’m sure that any really sharp black law student is going to be at Harvard and Yale, and few black Harvard Law graduates are not good enough to be offered partnerships at New York white shoes, so even Harvard cannot find a full quota of smart black 1Ls each year.

    9 percent of Supreme Court clerks have been Asian … but they are white adjacent … and their personalities are not as good as blacks.

  140. @Peripatetic Commenter
    Leftists not taking it well!

    https://twitter.com/BadBunnyTwitch/status/1307103243953152005

    Replies: @ChrisZ, @Harry Baldwin, @Muggles, @AnotherDad, @U. Ranus

    Nicole is making a perfectly valid point. Ginsburg no doubt assumed her replacement would be chosen by Hillary and that prospect pleased her. She made some very injudicious comments about Trump before the 2016 election.

    Ginsburg had given an interview to The New York Times saying she didn’t “even want to contemplate” the country and court under a President Trump.

    She later called him a “faker” in a separate interview with CNN.

    “He has no consistency about him. He says whatever comes into his head at the moment. He really has an ego. … How has he gotten away with not turning over his tax returns? The press seems to be very gentle with him on that,” she said.

    She later said, “On reflection, my recent remarks in response to press inquiries were ill-advised and I regret making them. Judges should avoid commenting on a candidate for public office. In the future I will be more circumspect.”

    It’s nice that she regretted making those remarks, but she did make them and they reflect very poorly on her self-discipline, judgment, and judicial temperament.

    • Agree: Redman
  141. @Che Blutarsky
    If the Republicans should happen to lose, a week after the election Trump should nominate Merrick Garland. He'd be a damn sight better than what Biden will throw out there. Plus, the irony of the Democrats trying to destroy the guy that they supposedly championed four years earlier would not be lost on many people.

    Replies: @Peterike, @Flip, @Peter D. Bredon, @Harry Baldwin, @Wilkey, @Anonymous

    No, on key issues the liberals on the court march in lockstep, so whether it’s a Ginsburg or a Garland makes no real difference.

  142. @Rosie
    @AnotherDad


    No, it’s still a bad thing.

    You may–or may not–be right about defendant’s sex and jury makeup. (It’s certainly not a ridiculous argument.)

    However, the core point: it’s a political decision. Weighing this sort of psychological/sociological argument and saying “ok, let’s do that” is precisely the job of our representatives
     
    First of all, though I agree with the policy, that doesn't necessarily mean I agree with the manner in which it was achieved.

    However, in these circumstances, I actually do think the judiciary should be involved. The question of whether women should serve on juries is not properly a political question, because it's not really about civil liberties and/or equal rights. It's about due process: the right to a fair trial. That is not a legislative issue. It is a true constitutional issue. If we're going to have single-sex juries, then the jurors ought to be the same gender as the defendant. The idea of an opposite-sex only jury is offensive to the whole idea of trial by a jury of one's peers.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    If we’re going to have single-sex juries, then the jurors ought to be the same gender [sic] as the defendant.

    How are you going to do that without forcing women onto juries? For someone who believed in a woman’s right to her own body, the Notorious RBG was all too ready to lock those bodies up in some stuffy room in some humid courthouse. Against their will. She had more sympathy for the criminal.

    Don’t even get me started on Selective Service…

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Reg Cæsar


    How are you going to do that without forcing women onto juries?
     
    You can't. That's why you have to force them onto juries.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  143. As oft suggested before, Trump’s sensible/decorous option as replacement is Amy Wax

    • Agree: Hibernian
  144. @unit472
    RBG should have stepped down when her pancreatic cancer reappeared. Unlike Jimmy Dean, you cannot speak from beyond the grave and she 'died' months ago. Trump needs to nominate a new Justice and force a vote in the Senate. Its unfortunate that Linda Chavez is not a lawyer ( but there is no Constituional Requirement a Supreme Court Justice must be one) but she is a Republican moderate who is Jewish and is, at 73, not a generational appointee. Nominating her would pose a problem for the Democrats should they try and accuse her of being a rapist or a white supemacist.

    Replies: @Harry Baldwin

    Linda Chavez is a useless RINO. Might as well nominate Mitt Romney.

  145. @Single and Ready to Drop Red Pills
    @Andy

    You just know they had her in zero G plugged into experimental nanotechnology with bat soup chemicals in her veins. I mean, I don’t blame her for wanting to stay alive. But why the hell didn’t she quit in early 2016 knowing she had cancer?

    Replies: @Jasper Been

    To answer your question, it was hubris, as I have been saying on Twitter. Democrats have no one to blame but her for this moment.

  146. @Rosie
    @TimothyS


    They just don’t get tired of losing.
     
    They don't see it as losing.

    Replies: @TimothyS

    If they are opposed to the Trump agenda, you’re certainly correct. However, there are a lot of ‘conservatives’ who appear to perceive a liability in appointing a nominee before the election. There are two potential downsides: a) Displeasing some voters with the particular nominee. b) Changing the balance of tight senate races.
    To both I would say: Delay creates the risk, admittedly small, that Harris will pick the next supreme court seat. The people who support Trump’s agenda already know that nominating supreme court justices is at issue. I don’t believe it will substantially swing that element.
    So either they are not tired of losing, or they are not tired of back-stabbing.

  147. @Currahee
    @Anonymous

    Yes, the abortion people seem convinced that America would be a better place with a greater proportion of BLACKS! Someone who brings two extra BLACKS! into this country must be in agreement with them.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    five biological children

    Yes, the abortion people seem convinced that America would be a better place with a greater proportion of BLACKS!

    And how are your five biological children doing?

    At the last pre-Roe census, America was 87.7% white and 11.1% black. At the last post-Roe census, those figures were 72.4% and 12.6%. They’re bound to be worse when the present one is collated.

    It seems like the “abortion people” were whitening this country, while the “prochoice” folks are doing the opposite.

    Which is not surprising, when you consider that the majority of abortions take the life of a white child.

    Yes, the abortion people seem convinced that America would be a better place with a greater proportion of BLACKS!

    In that case, they agree with the CSA, which left a union that was 85% white for one that was at best 55% so. Foresight in action!

    • Thanks: Anonymousse
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @Reg Cæsar


    At the last pre-Roe census, America was 87.7% white and 11.1% black. At the last post-Roe census, those figures were 72.4% and 12.6%. They’re bound to be worse when the present one is collated.
     
    Yeah, allowing abortion magically caused all that immigration. #Illogic

    And how are your five biological children doing?
     
    You have five children? Congratulations.

    There was a brief period in the mid-2000s where it looked like middle America had some demographic momentum. But birth rates fell during the great recession and kept falling as the economy recovered. Trump doesn't seem to care about this problem; might not even know about it, but he sure does know about the Dow.

    All that bible thumping, anti-abortion sentiment, and statistical illiteracy is simply not providing the demographic and cultural strength it's selling. If it were motivating thots to keep their legs closed and families to have many children, I'd be willing to put up with it even though I'm a fedora-wearing atheist. But it isn't. Middle America is hollowing out. The stuff about Calexit is crazy, all the Democrats have to do is wait a few more election cycles for the brown tide to wash over Texas.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  148. @AnotherDad
    @neutral


    Good riddance.
     
    Exactly.

    Conservatives need to stop being nice and pleasant about these sorts of disagreements. Ginsburg wasn't a Senator, elected and pushing for what she believed was in the interest of her constituents.
    Rather Ginsburg was a judge, who believed she had the right overrule our elected leaders based on her idea of what ought to be and dictate what she believed ought to be law into law.

    Ginsburg was an enemy of our constituton and enemy of republican government, and enemy of self-government, an enemy of the people.

    Replies: @Hibernian

    De mortuis nil nisi bonum, at least for a decent interval. But don’t go overboard with hypocritical praise, like Romney. (Or maybe he really means it.)

  149. @Reg Cæsar
    @ben tillman


    If one is inclined to create an effective power-sharing system for a country of 330MM, one divides the country into 10 parts of 33 million each.
     
    Here you go:



    https://i.imgur.com/zCQ5196.jpg

    Replies: @Richard S, @AnotherDad

    Lol, brilliant!

    Biological-Sailerism tells us which of the successor states would prosper in that scenario and which would decline.

    If the Fed’s Doomsday stockpile was also divvied up equally … it’d be a hell of a round of Civilization 🙂

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Richard S


    Biological-Sailerism tells us which of the successor states would prosper in that scenario and which would decline.
     
    Moynihanism would suggest a vast general improvment. Everyone, including northern Mexico, is now on the Canadian border!
  150. @Corn
    RIP. I hope she didn’t suffer much. Pancreatic cancer sounds like a bad way to go.


    Shit’s gonna get ugly.

    Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard, @AndrewR

    Shit’s gonna get ugly.

    Yup.

    All kinds of, “respectable,” people are already calling for arson, rioting, murder, and more on Twitter.

    • Replies: @anon
    @The Wild Geese Howard

    All kinds of, “respectable,” people are already calling for arson, rioting, murder, and more on Twitter.

    Always good when people reveal their true selves. Screenshots..many, many screenshots.

  151. @Neoconned
    @Wake up

    Recall Mitch McConnell denied Obama his SCOTUS pick....i wonder if Pelosi & company will force Trump to wait for the new yr to get his pick to replace Miss Ginsburg....

    Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard, @Curle, @MarkinLA

    Recall Mitch McConnell denied Obama his SCOTUS pick….i wonder if Pelosi & company will force Trump to wait for the new yr to get his pick to replace Miss Ginsburg….

    The halfway sane portion of the Leftist mob on Twitter is already citing this as a ‘precedent’ that McConnell must observe.

    • Replies: @Mr. Anon
    @The Wild Geese Howard



    Recall Mitch McConnell denied Obama his SCOTUS pick….i wonder if Pelosi & company will force Trump to wait for the new yr to get his pick to replace Miss Ginsburg….
     
    The halfway sane portion of the Leftist mob on Twitter is already citing this as a ‘precedent’ that McConnell must observe.
     
    McConnell should just say that they opposed Garland because he was a bad choice. And then ram through Trump's pick. If the Democrats complain, just tell them "We're only doing what you'd be doing if you had control of the Senate." It's true enough.

    Tell Murkowski and Romney if they don't support him, they get no more help, no more funds, from the GOP, ever. They can become Democrats if they like.

    The only problem is who Trump would pick. His picks so far haven't been stellar - Federalist Society vetted candidates. Maybe he could pick that guy Stickman who just ruled against the lockdown in Pennsylvania, although I don't know much about him otherwise.

  152. Hypothetical question:

    Suppose the presidential election goes to the Supreme Court for decision, as in Bush v. Gore. Now, there are 8 justices (and a ninth will certainly not be confirmed prior to November) — let us assume no one plays the Sandra Day O’Connor role, and the case goes 4-4. What happens next?

    If sufficient electors do not certify a President, what happens? Does it go to the House of Representatives for a vote by state quorum? Does the Congress provide a method by law per Section 3 of the 20th Amendment? Does such a law exist already?

    • Replies: @Wilkey
    @I Have Scinde


    Now, there are 8 justices (and a ninth will certainly not be confirmed prior to November)
     
    Election day is 46 days away. There is no reason to think they can't get a justice confirmed by then. They'd be crazy not to try. A lot of Republican voters would stay home if they don't.

    Replies: @J.Ross, @BB753

    , @Hibernian
    @I Have Scinde

    My understanding is that the ruling of the lower court would stand. There might be multiple states involved and they might be in different Circuits. This might yield different (pro D vs. Pro R) results in different states. It could get very interesting.

  153. @Che Blutarsky
    If the Republicans should happen to lose, a week after the election Trump should nominate Merrick Garland. He'd be a damn sight better than what Biden will throw out there. Plus, the irony of the Democrats trying to destroy the guy that they supposedly championed four years earlier would not be lost on many people.

    Replies: @Peterike, @Flip, @Peter D. Bredon, @Harry Baldwin, @Wilkey, @Anonymous

    If the Republicans should happen to lose, a week after the election Trump should nominate Merrick Garland.

    Even if Republicans should lose, they will have control of Congress for almost two months after the election to confirm whomever they choose. I don’t believe in lame duck sessions, and believe they should be abolished, but that’s the law. Perhaps that in itself would be enough motivation to abolish the lame duck session.

    But Republicans won’t be waiting until after the election to confirm a new justice. Ginsburg has been on her death bed for quite some time, so it’s hard to believe they don’t have a nominee all lined up. There *will* be a confirmation vote before the election because Republicans need to turn out the base, and Supreme Court appointments do that. And the nominee will probably be a woman to (a) avoid more sexual assault allegations, (b) improve GOP prospects with the women’s vote, and (c) encourage RINO senators to support her.

    If the Democrats want to oppose a white woman nominee to SCOTUS then they’re just further working to scare away the white vote for good and forever.

    • Replies: @International Jew
    @Wilkey

    As a precaution, the GOP Senatorial baseball team needs to cancel all practice sessions for now.

    Replies: @Wilkey

    , @PhysicistDave
    @Wilkey

    Wilkey wrote:


    But Republicans won’t be waiting until after the election to confirm a new justice. Ginsburg has been on her death bed for quite some time, so it’s hard to believe they don’t have a nominee all lined up. There *will* be a confirmation vote before the election because Republicans need to turn out the base, and Supreme Court appointments do that.
     
    It looks as if they have lost Murkowski, Romney, and Collins. Leaves it at 50-50: they cannot lose anyone else.

    Pence can break the tie.

    Wilkey also wrote:

    And the nominee will probably be a woman to (a) avoid more sexual assault allegations, (b) improve GOP prospects with the women’s vote, and (c) encourage RINO senators to support her.
     
    Politically, the best pick might be Neomi Rao, an Indian Parsee who converted to Judaism! But her time so far on the bench is pretty short.

    Those in the know claim it will be Amy Coney Barrett. She's very white and will inflame the Left on abortion.

    But if Trump can get it over before election day, I think the Left will have trouble ginning up outrage over a fait accompli. And it will encourage Trump's base.

    Replies: @Wilkey, @Wilkey, @Reg Cæsar

  154. @The Wild Geese Howard
    @Neoconned


    Recall Mitch McConnell denied Obama his SCOTUS pick….i wonder if Pelosi & company will force Trump to wait for the new yr to get his pick to replace Miss Ginsburg….
     
    The halfway sane portion of the Leftist mob on Twitter is already citing this as a 'precedent' that McConnell must observe.

    Replies: @Mr. Anon

    Recall Mitch McConnell denied Obama his SCOTUS pick….i wonder if Pelosi & company will force Trump to wait for the new yr to get his pick to replace Miss Ginsburg….

    The halfway sane portion of the Leftist mob on Twitter is already citing this as a ‘precedent’ that McConnell must observe.

    McConnell should just say that they opposed Garland because he was a bad choice. And then ram through Trump’s pick. If the Democrats complain, just tell them “We’re only doing what you’d be doing if you had control of the Senate.” It’s true enough.

    Tell Murkowski and Romney if they don’t support him, they get no more help, no more funds, from the GOP, ever. They can become Democrats if they like.

    The only problem is who Trump would pick. His picks so far haven’t been stellar – Federalist Society vetted candidates. Maybe he could pick that guy Stickman who just ruled against the lockdown in Pennsylvania, although I don’t know much about him otherwise.

  155. The felicitous timing of her death seems like another “Trump’s luck” kind of thing.

  156. @Peripatetic Commenter
    Leftists not taking it well!

    https://twitter.com/BadBunnyTwitch/status/1307103243953152005

    Replies: @ChrisZ, @Harry Baldwin, @Muggles, @AnotherDad, @U. Ranus

    fuck you Ruth Bader Ginsburg

    Gratitude isn’t high on the list of Woke attributes.

    Without hate they have nothing.

    • Agree: Hibernian
    • Replies: @CJ
    @Muggles

    Without hate they have nothing.

    Sadly, you are right. They live to hate; when the sun comes up they get to hate Trump and the deplorables for another day.

    Happily, your wording reminded me of a song made famous by Clyde McPhatter and Tom Jones:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1802HV11ng

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oi8NXuMW_RA

  157. @Clyde
    There are 3-4-5 traitorous Republican Senators who just might block Trump from appointing a Ginzburg successor. I hope Trump has a few pre-vetted nominees that he and Mitch McConnell can force through in 45 days. Mitch McConnell will be polling all Republican Senators while Dems hold blowout commemorations for the ol abolitionist witch.

    This mess will give more cover to invisible Joe.
    Blame this mess on sickly Ginzborg. The magic juice from Walter Reed finally failed her. She could have resigned any time in the last three years. Ol Witch was obviously trying to outlast Trump.

    Replies: @TomSchmidt, @MEH 0910

  158. A person with an extremely powerful office, to which she was not elected, which she held for life, unaccountable to and irremovable by the electorate, dictating how she will be replaced.

    I’m thinking there’s a term for that kind of government. It’s on the tip of my tongue.

    • Thanks: Coemgen
  159. @Mike_from_SGV
    @Colin Wright

    Yeah, with only 3 months to get it done, Trump has only one shot. No time for a second nomination if the first one is voted down, probably. Any sensible moderate person would be a huge improvement over Bader. He could troll the Dems by nominating a conservative black female, if there is such a thing.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @Thoughts

    • Replies: @Not Raul
    @Almost Missouri

    I doubt that Trump would pick her due to Kasler v. Lockyer.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

  160. @The Wild Geese Howard
    @Corn


    Shit’s gonna get ugly.
     
    Yup.

    All kinds of, "respectable," people are already calling for arson, rioting, murder, and more on Twitter.

    Replies: @anon

    All kinds of, “respectable,” people are already calling for arson, rioting, murder, and more on Twitter.

    Always good when people reveal their true selves. Screenshots..many, many screenshots.

  161. @I Have Scinde
    Hypothetical question:

    Suppose the presidential election goes to the Supreme Court for decision, as in Bush v. Gore. Now, there are 8 justices (and a ninth will certainly not be confirmed prior to November) -- let us assume no one plays the Sandra Day O'Connor role, and the case goes 4-4. What happens next?

    If sufficient electors do not certify a President, what happens? Does it go to the House of Representatives for a vote by state quorum? Does the Congress provide a method by law per Section 3 of the 20th Amendment? Does such a law exist already?

    Replies: @Wilkey, @Hibernian

    Now, there are 8 justices (and a ninth will certainly not be confirmed prior to November)

    Election day is 46 days away. There is no reason to think they can’t get a justice confirmed by then. They’d be crazy not to try. A lot of Republican voters would stay home if they don’t.

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @Wilkey

    This, time to find out if Republican senators are at all serious.

    , @BB753
    @Wilkey

    "There is no reason to think they can’t get a justice confirmed by then. They’d be crazy not to try. A lot of Republican voters would stay home if they don’t."

    That's the plan for the never-Trumpers in Congress, that's 80% of Republicans in the House.

  162. @Hibernian
    @TimothyS

    Start the search now and nominate after the election. Or nominate a moderate to replace a far leftist.

    Replies: @MarkinLA, @Father O'Hara

    You have to cancel out Roberts.

  163. @Neoconned
    @Wake up

    Recall Mitch McConnell denied Obama his SCOTUS pick....i wonder if Pelosi & company will force Trump to wait for the new yr to get his pick to replace Miss Ginsburg....

    Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard, @Curle, @MarkinLA

    Pelosi and company have no say.

  164. @Jim Don Bob

    "My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed."
     
    I'll take words that were never said for $400, Alex.

    Tucker said that reportedly she said this to her grand daughter on her death bed. It's about as believable as some dead jogger's mother talking about how he was trying to turn his life around.

    These people can't even make up lies that would fail in a Hollywood sitcom writers' room.

    Replies: @The Last Real Calvinist

    No one denies that Ginsburg was very intelligent. I can’t imagine her uttering this florid, tacky phrase, even in extremis — ‘my most fervent wish’ belongs on a cross-stitch sampler.

    Also, its content betrays its orgin, i.e. likely from party flack. For example, presidents aren’t ‘installed’.

    It’s so transparently made up as to be a taunt.

    • Agree: HammerJack
    • Replies: @International Jew
    @The Last Real Calvinist

    Ginsburg would have said "that I not be", not "that I will not be".

  165. @Buffalo Joe
    Meanwhile over at the Clinton household, Hillary downs another shot, throws a lamp at Bill and screams..."First Floyd, then Lewis and now Ginsburg. People will be tired of big funerals when I finally kick off."

    Replies: @Buck Ransom, @International Jew

    Not to worry. If RBG’s family cares about Jewish tradition, she’ll be buried as soon as possible. (By sundown of the same day, though Rosh Hashanah might delay that just a bit.) So no endless lying-in-state.

    • Replies: @James O'Meara
    @International Jew

    A tradition that likely has something to do vampires, stakes, sundown, that kinda thing.

    Replies: @Dan Hayes, @Not Raul

    , @Father O'Hara
    @International Jew

    For all we know,she could've died a month ago.

  166. @Neoconned
    @Wake up

    Recall Mitch McConnell denied Obama his SCOTUS pick....i wonder if Pelosi & company will force Trump to wait for the new yr to get his pick to replace Miss Ginsburg....

    Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard, @Curle, @MarkinLA

    The tradition was that in an election year when the President and Senate are in different parties they wait until after the election. It doesn’t apply here but they will pretend it does.

    • Replies: @ScarletNumber
    @MarkinLA

    You are making up this "tradition". Please look up post-hoc rationalization

    Replies: @MarkinLA

  167. @Wilkey
    @Che Blutarsky


    If the Republicans should happen to lose, a week after the election Trump should nominate Merrick Garland.
     
    Even if Republicans should lose, they will have control of Congress for almost two months after the election to confirm whomever they choose. I don't believe in lame duck sessions, and believe they should be abolished, but that's the law. Perhaps that in itself would be enough motivation to abolish the lame duck session.

    But Republicans won't be waiting until after the election to confirm a new justice. Ginsburg has been on her death bed for quite some time, so it's hard to believe they don't have a nominee all lined up. There *will* be a confirmation vote before the election because Republicans need to turn out the base, and Supreme Court appointments do that. And the nominee will probably be a woman to (a) avoid more sexual assault allegations, (b) improve GOP prospects with the women's vote, and (c) encourage RINO senators to support her.

    If the Democrats want to oppose a white woman nominee to SCOTUS then they're just further working to scare away the white vote for good and forever.

    Replies: @International Jew, @PhysicistDave

    As a precaution, the GOP Senatorial baseball team needs to cancel all practice sessions for now.

    • Replies: @Wilkey
    @International Jew


    As a precaution, the GOP Senatorial baseball team needs to cancel all practice sessions for now.
     
    Oh, shit could be about to get real - really real. Enough to make the riots and looting and murder of the last four months look like nothing more than a warm-up act. Political assassinations? I wouldn't be at all surprised. The Left could do just about anything.

    My biggest fear is that a Democratic win in November will only validate and encourage even more of what we've already seen. If the Democrats win a lot of people in this country are in for a very rude awakening about just how far the Left is willing to go.
  168. @International Jew
    @Buffalo Joe

    Not to worry. If RBG's family cares about Jewish tradition, she'll be buried as soon as possible. (By sundown of the same day, though Rosh Hashanah might delay that just a bit.) So no endless lying-in-state.

    Replies: @James O'Meara, @Father O'Hara

    A tradition that likely has something to do vampires, stakes, sundown, that kinda thing.

    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    @James O'Meara

    More likely you don't want a corpse hanging around in the desert!

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    , @Not Raul
    @James O'Meara


    A tradition that likely has something to do vampires, stakes, sundown, that kinda thing.
     
    https://youtu.be/goqj9oWFhMw
  169. @Wilkey
    @I Have Scinde


    Now, there are 8 justices (and a ninth will certainly not be confirmed prior to November)
     
    Election day is 46 days away. There is no reason to think they can't get a justice confirmed by then. They'd be crazy not to try. A lot of Republican voters would stay home if they don't.

    Replies: @J.Ross, @BB753

    This, time to find out if Republican senators are at all serious.

  170. @Rosie
    @Reg Cæsar


    She determined to turn this around, and did so after 18 years. Her colleagues got Louisiana’s opt-in system for women (the same as Florida’s) overturned in the mid-’70s. In 1979, in her last case before (as opposed to aboard) SCOTUS, Missouri’s opt-out system was also overturned.
     
    Well, that's one good thing she did, then. It is completely inappropriate to have an all-male jury in a woman's trial, as it would be to have an all-female jury in a man's trial.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @Reg Cæsar, @Curle, @Anonymous

    “ as it would be to have an all-female jury in a man’s trial.”

    Not if you’re the male and the defendant, you’d love an all female jury. Contrary to popular opinion women really like men and they often express those sentiments by acquitting them even when they are guilty as hell.

    • Replies: @ScarletNumber
    @Curle


    Not if you’re the male and the defendant, you’d love an all female jury.
     
    Only if you are good looking. If you are ugly you want a male jury.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    , @Rosie
    @Curle


    Contrary to popular opinion women really like men and they often express those sentiments by acquitting them even when they are guilty as hell.
     
    Yes, women like men, but no, we're not more likely to acquit. Women are actually more likely to vote guilty at the beginning of deliberations, but more likely to change their mind and vote to acquit during deliberations. Thr result is a wash, unless the jury is overwhelmingly female, in which case, conviction is more likely.

    But fun fact: The jury of six that acquitted Zimmerman (no prize) was all-female, with five White women.
  171. @International Jew
    @Wilkey

    As a precaution, the GOP Senatorial baseball team needs to cancel all practice sessions for now.

    Replies: @Wilkey

    As a precaution, the GOP Senatorial baseball team needs to cancel all practice sessions for now.

    Oh, shit could be about to get real – really real. Enough to make the riots and looting and murder of the last four months look like nothing more than a warm-up act. Political assassinations? I wouldn’t be at all surprised. The Left could do just about anything.

    My biggest fear is that a Democratic win in November will only validate and encourage even more of what we’ve already seen. If the Democrats win a lot of people in this country are in for a very rude awakening about just how far the Left is willing to go.

  172. Couldn’t Trump find a judge who is really above or beyond partisanship? Someone like, say, Eugene Volokh? I suppose that he would have to look at a university, not at the courts – but isn’t this possible?

    • Replies: @J.Ross
    @Stogumber

    Sure he could, but the real issue is that if Trump appointed Moses, the Democrats (and thus the media) would insist that Moses was a neo-Nazi.

  173. Mitt Romney is about to make Benedict Arnold look like a team player.

    there’s a 50-50 chance they can get Trump in a jail cell here, if Democrats strike deals with the right Republican Senators.

    1) correct number of Republicans flat out dead pan stone wall the SC nomination, in exchange for whatever Democrats offer them.

    2) Trump gets totally blown out in the election since the base is now completely demoralized by them not even attempting to put a conservative on SC, and doesn’t show up to vote.

    3) Trump is then arrested in 2021 and charged in New York for (whatever bullshit they want.)

    3b) If need be, the Joe Biden selected Supreme Court Justice votes 5-4 along with Roberts that yes, former Presidents can be charged with (whatever bullshit) and sent to serve 20 years in state prison.

    • LOL: ScarletNumber
  174. @AnotherDad
    Mitt Romney continues to transition--from clueless to quisling.

    Replies: @Stan Adams, @BB753

    He’s just shedding the skinsuit.

  175. @Hibernian
    @TimothyS

    Start the search now and nominate after the election. Or nominate a moderate to replace a far leftist.

    Replies: @MarkinLA, @Father O'Hara

    Huh? Start the search? Knowing Ginsburg has been dying,wouldnt they have several candidates lined up,vetted, practiced,etc?

    Also,Trump was informed of the passing by a reporter. Someone should’ve grabbed him and told him first. He might’ve said something dumb.

    • Agree: HammerJack
  176. anon[316] • Disclaimer says:
    @Curle
    @Colin Wright

    The middle of the road folks got us here.

    Replies: @anon, @nebulafox

    The middle of the road folks got us here.

    For an individual, most of life is business as usual, the middle of the road. But there are times when the individual has to make more fateful decisions and take bigger risks.
    Democracy is being tested. Can the middle of the road average American step up to make the fateful decisions and take the bigger risks?

  177. @James O'Meara
    @International Jew

    A tradition that likely has something to do vampires, stakes, sundown, that kinda thing.

    Replies: @Dan Hayes, @Not Raul

    More likely you don’t want a corpse hanging around in the desert!

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Dan Hayes


    More likely you don’t want a corpse hanging around in the desert!
     
    To quote a notable child molester:


    Tan me hide when I'm dead, Fred
    Tan me hide when I'm dead
    So we tanned his hide when he died, Clyde
    And that's it hangin' on the shed!



    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RviuTfdfArM

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

  178. @Muggles
    @Peripatetic Commenter


    fuck you Ruth Bader Ginsburg
     
    Gratitude isn't high on the list of Woke attributes.

    Without hate they have nothing.

    Replies: @CJ

    Without hate they have nothing.

    Sadly, you are right. They live to hate; when the sun comes up they get to hate Trump and the deplorables for another day.

    Happily, your wording reminded me of a song made famous by Clyde McPhatter and Tom Jones:

  179. @Richard S
    @Reg Cæsar

    Lol, brilliant!

    Biological-Sailerism tells us which of the successor states would prosper in that scenario and which would decline.

    If the Fed’s Doomsday stockpile was also divvied up equally ... it’d be a hell of a round of Civilization :-)

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Biological-Sailerism tells us which of the successor states would prosper in that scenario and which would decline.

    Moynihanism would suggest a vast general improvment. Everyone, including northern Mexico, is now on the Canadian border!

    • LOL: Richard S
  180. @Che Blutarsky
    If the Republicans should happen to lose, a week after the election Trump should nominate Merrick Garland. He'd be a damn sight better than what Biden will throw out there. Plus, the irony of the Democrats trying to destroy the guy that they supposedly championed four years earlier would not be lost on many people.

    Replies: @Peterike, @Flip, @Peter D. Bredon, @Harry Baldwin, @Wilkey, @Anonymous

    If the Republicans should happen to lose, a week after the election Trump should nominate Merrick Garland. He’d be a damn sight better than what Biden will throw out there.

    Garland would probably vote to give anchor babies citizenship. That is the only issue that matters.

  181. @International Jew
    @Buffalo Joe

    Not to worry. If RBG's family cares about Jewish tradition, she'll be buried as soon as possible. (By sundown of the same day, though Rosh Hashanah might delay that just a bit.) So no endless lying-in-state.

    Replies: @James O'Meara, @Father O'Hara

    For all we know,she could’ve died a month ago.

    • LOL: Bardon Kaldian
  182. @Stogumber
    Couldn't Trump find a judge who is really above or beyond partisanship? Someone like, say, Eugene Volokh? I suppose that he would have to look at a university, not at the courts - but isn't this possible?

    Replies: @J.Ross

    Sure he could, but the real issue is that if Trump appointed Moses, the Democrats (and thus the media) would insist that Moses was a neo-Nazi.

  183. @Hapalong Cassidy
    Trump should nominate Ginsburg’s replacement soon. Roberts just can’t be trusted in a disputed election, so they need one more trustworthy conservative. My vote would go to Amul Thapur, who was a finalist the last go around. Besides, it’s a good strategy to get the Dems to attack a non-white nominee.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    My vote would go to Amul Thapur, who was a finalist the last go around. Besides, it’s a good strategy to get the Dems to attack a non-white nominee.

    What is his position on automatic jus solis citizenship? Nothing else matters.

  184. @Peripatetic Commenter
    Leftists not taking it well!

    https://twitter.com/BadBunnyTwitch/status/1307103243953152005

    Replies: @ChrisZ, @Harry Baldwin, @Muggles, @AnotherDad, @U. Ranus

    Nicole is right. Ginsburg’s non-retirement under Obama was arrogant.

    But, of course, it’s the arrogance that is entirely typical of the leftist “activist” law making judge–that their political opinions are oh so special they should be cast into law without regard to the people’s assent. But then that judicial arrogance is precisely what Nicole wants.

    Sometimes getting what you want doesn’t work out as planned.

    • Agree: Buzz Mohawk
  185. @Dan Hayes
    @James O'Meara

    More likely you don't want a corpse hanging around in the desert!

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    More likely you don’t want a corpse hanging around in the desert!

    To quote a notable child molester:

    Tan me hide when I’m dead, Fred
    Tan me hide when I’m dead
    So we tanned his hide when he died, Clyde
    And that’s it hangin’ on the shed!

    • Thanks: Dan Hayes
    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Reg Cæsar

    Has anybody seen Rolf Harris and Manfred Mann in the same room? They claim the same hemisphere and countries on the same ocean as birthplaces. In years ending in zero. Both are alive today. Highly suspicious...


    https://i0.wp.com/120years.net/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/rolf-harris-stylophone_05.jpg

    https://live.staticflickr.com/8326/8080862763_68003fe04d_b.jpg

    Oh, wait...

    https://www2.bfi.org.uk/films-tv-people/4ce2b8db435eb

    https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6900722/fullcredits/

    But it could have been a trick.

  186. @Reg Cæsar
    @ben tillman


    If one is inclined to create an effective power-sharing system for a country of 330MM, one divides the country into 10 parts of 33 million each.
     
    Here you go:



    https://i.imgur.com/zCQ5196.jpg

    Replies: @Richard S, @AnotherDad

    Not actually accurate. Nine Canadas would cover it.

    When i was a kid and took my first trips to Canada in the mid-60s, it’s population was almost exactly a tenth of the US. (US nearing 200m, Canada nearing 20m).

    Just looked it up and they supposedly have 37m people up there. (Their 2016 census counted 35m.) They’ve actually been growing–and genociding themselves with immigration–even faster than the USofA. That’s saying something Maybe they figure they need the body heat?

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @AnotherDad

    Our immigration rate is something like double the usa.

    If president Kamala wins I'm sure you guys will be brought in line with us.

  187. @Eqas65
    @R.G. Camara

    Why should abortion be made illegal? 75% or so of women who have abortions are negroes, and the white women who have abortion are mostly mudsharks.

    I also believe that the occasional non-mudshark white women who have abortions are mostly meth addicts who shouldn’t be having kids anyway.

    I’m always amazed at the number of anti-abortion cuckservatives on UNZ.

    Replies: @Eric Novak, @ken, @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan, @Reg Cæsar

    The overwhelming number of births prevented since Roe v. Wade in 1973 have been white.

    • Replies: @RVBlake
    @Eric Novak

    Yes, in 1975 60% of abortions were by White mothers, 30% by Black. The numbers have been converging over the decades, however, till beginning 2013-2014 a slim majority of abortions are now by Black.
    Source: Johnson Archives/CDC

  188. Justice Ginsburg Dies

    Missing a colon between Justice and Ginsburg.

    • LOL: ThreeCranes
  189. @MarkinLA
    @guest

    You can already impeach judges. It is just nearly impossible.

    Replies: @Diversity Heretic

    The last impeachment of a Supreme Court justice (Samuel Chase) occurred during the administration of Thomas Jefferson. When it failed, President Jefferson characterized the impeachment option as “a scarecrow.”

    One ought not to speak ill of the dead, but my reaction here is that Satan needed help elsewhere.

  190. @Hibernian
    @Anonymous

    When you're a guest in someone's house you speak that way of your host? Stay classy.

    Replies: @AndrewR

    Sailer is a public commentator (on Ron Unz’s site) who allows [some] public comments. This is not his “home” and we are not his “guests.”

    To his credit, he does publish a notable amount of criticism towards him.

  191. @JohnnyWalker123
    https://twitter.com/OregonProgress/status/1307108063212720129

    If Democrats can get 2 additional Senators to object to a vote on a new justice, they can kill this until next year.

    Replies: @Redneck farmer, @Anon

    Let me get this in before anyone else: Mitt Romney never turned down a chance to make things worse for America.

  192. @Andy
    Remarkable that her pancreatic cancer was discovered in 2009. Surviving 11 years with pancreatic cancer, that made her one tough witch

    Replies: @Single and Ready to Drop Red Pills, @Cortes

    My father in law lasted four long, hard, hard years. The late judge must have endured hell.

    • Replies: @BB753
    @Cortes

    "The late judge must have endured hell."

    No, hell is what she's enduring right now in her afterlife.

  193. Already there are threats of terrorism and violence if Republicans attempt to replace Ginsburg…

    Reza Aslan, the former CNN host who once ate human brains and advocated for assaulting Covington teen Nick Sandmann, has tweeted a threat to “burn the entire f-cking thing down” if Republicans try to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

    https://newsla.localad.com/2020/09/19/former-cnn-host-who-once-ate-human-brains-if-they-even-try-to-replace-rbg-we-burn-the-entire-f-cking-thing-down/

    https://thefederalist.com/2020/09/18/after-rbgs-death-left-wing-activists-promise-violence-if-trump-appoints-her-replacement/

  194. @Corn
    RIP. I hope she didn’t suffer much. Pancreatic cancer sounds like a bad way to go.


    Shit’s gonna get ugly.

    Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard, @AndrewR

    Any sympathy I would have for her is negated by the fact she should have retired between 2009 and 2014, when the Dems had both the Senate and the WH. I don’t know what her endgame was but whatever respectable legacy or sympathy she deserved went out the window the last few years. She made an absolute mockery of the Court. Maybe we should thank her for that, actually.

  195. @The Spirit of Enoch Powell
    https://twitter.com/KeithWoodsYT/status/1307116749956014083?s=19

    Replies: @AndrewR

    Lol the tweet is gone. But he’s not wrong

  196. @Almost Missouri
    @Mike_from_SGV

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janice_Rogers_Brown

    Replies: @Not Raul

    I doubt that Trump would pick her due to Kasler v. Lockyer.

    • Replies: @Almost Missouri
    @Not Raul

    That's a reasonable point, but Kasler v. Lockyer (2000) was decided before McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010) "incorporated" the Second Amendment, so it may be doubted that Kasler can be controlling law anymore.

    You may say that the question is not whether the ruling still stands, but the character of the woman who made the ruling. And that is also a reasonable point. But what we like about Brown is that she tends to decide cases based on the law as written, and in 2000, prior to McDonald, Kasler was how the law was written.

    We may end up being disappointed anyway, but judicial nominations, i.e., politics, is the art of the possible, and nominating Robert Bork turned out not to be possible.

    Anyway, this is all castles in the sky. The GOP is almost certainly going with guaranteed-to-cuck Amy Barrett, who is politically ideal for the nomination fight, however judicially dubious. That is, if the Romney-Murkowski wing doesn't suicide the party first.

    Replies: @Hibernian

  197. @Colin Wright
    If Trump is SMART, he will nominate some obvious middle-of-the-roader -- preferably female.

    The Democrats can then make idiots out of themselves opposing the nomination.

    Replies: @Mike_from_SGV, @Curle, @guest, @Not Raul

    Are there any middle-of-the-roaders on Trump’s list of potential nominees?

    https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/09/trump-releases-new-list-of-potential-supreme-court-nominees/

    An endorsement from the Federalist Society seems to be a requirement for Republican judicial appointees.

    • Replies: @Dan Hayes
    @Not Raul

    Trump should be questioning the Federalist Society's advice after the direction Gorsuch seems to be taking!

  198. @James O'Meara
    @International Jew

    A tradition that likely has something to do vampires, stakes, sundown, that kinda thing.

    Replies: @Dan Hayes, @Not Raul

    A tradition that likely has something to do vampires, stakes, sundown, that kinda thing.

  199. @R.G. Camara
    1. There should be at least as many Supreme Court justices as we have Federal Circuits. Which right now is 13 (11 + DC Circuit + Federal Circuit). I would advocate for at least 20.

    2. Requirements that each Circuit be represented by at least one justice who had been a judge or lawyer in that Circuit.

    3. Steve's plan assumes (a) the Supreme Court remains as powerful and involved in everyday life as it has been since the Warren Court; and (b) politicians want to have a balanced, fair court appointment process. The first is not guaranteed, and the second is just plain not true.

    4. Shit is about to get very, very real. The insanity of 2020 is about to pushed to 11. Trump & the Repubs could force a candidate through before election day, and the D's could do nothing but violence. Abortion is their sacrament.

    Replies: @Eqas65, @Anon, @PhysicistDave

    R.G. Camara wrote:

    Shit is about to get very, very real. The insanity of 2020 is about to pushed to 11. Trump & the Repubs could force a candidate through before election day, and the D’s could do nothing but violence. Abortion is their sacrament.

    I wonder. I don’t think the average black in the ghetto really gets that worked up over the Supreme Court: many blacks do feel, rightly or wrongly, that cops are beastly to them. But do they hate the Supreme Court? Or ignore it?

    Similarly for abortion. Are black folks fanatical about abortion? This survey seems to show that blacks are in the middle between Dems and Republicans.

    Of course, the Woke White Left is indeed fanatical about abortion. But it seems to me a lot easier to get random moderates to virtue-signal by saying they support “Black Lives” than by saying they support unlimited abortions.

    In my experience, outside of the crazy Left, most Americans know that abortion is a difficult and tragic issue.

    • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
    @PhysicistDave

    The key to understanding and attempting to predict what BLACKS! will do is to remember that, on average, they do not think very well in the abstract.

    You can't pin them down as a group on the abortion issue, because the issue invites metaphysical speculation. They think, "me don't want baby now," while you think, "the soul begins its Earthly life at conception.

    60,000 years of separate evolution.

    , @R.G. Camara
    @PhysicistDave

    Have you not seen that these riots are organized professionals using random black deaths as excuses?

    RBG's death is just another excuse, and an excuse to dial it up a notch.

    Replies: @PhysicistDave

    , @MarkinLA
    @PhysicistDave

    What has RBG's death got to do with their eternal desire to loot and get something for nothing - absolutely nothing. But it is as good an excuse as any other.

  200. @PhysicistDave
    @R.G. Camara

    R.G. Camara wrote:


    Shit is about to get very, very real. The insanity of 2020 is about to pushed to 11. Trump & the Repubs could force a candidate through before election day, and the D’s could do nothing but violence. Abortion is their sacrament.
     
    I wonder. I don't think the average black in the ghetto really gets that worked up over the Supreme Court: many blacks do feel, rightly or wrongly, that cops are beastly to them. But do they hate the Supreme Court? Or ignore it?

    Similarly for abortion. Are black folks fanatical about abortion? This survey seems to show that blacks are in the middle between Dems and Republicans.

    Of course, the Woke White Left is indeed fanatical about abortion. But it seems to me a lot easier to get random moderates to virtue-signal by saying they support "Black Lives" than by saying they support unlimited abortions.

    In my experience, outside of the crazy Left, most Americans know that abortion is a difficult and tragic issue.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @R.G. Camara, @MarkinLA

    The key to understanding and attempting to predict what BLACKS! will do is to remember that, on average, they do not think very well in the abstract.

    You can’t pin them down as a group on the abortion issue, because the issue invites metaphysical speculation. They think, “me don’t want baby now,” while you think, “the soul begins its Earthly life at conception.

    60,000 years of separate evolution.

  201. @JohnnyWalker123
    https://twitter.com/OregonProgress/status/1307108063212720129

    If Democrats can get 2 additional Senators to object to a vote on a new justice, they can kill this until next year.

    Replies: @Redneck farmer, @Anon

    You can pry at least one of them loose by nominating a conservative judge who happens to be a personal friend of Romney’s, for example. Even Romney would have a hard time eeling out of that one.

  202. @Wilkey
    @Che Blutarsky


    If the Republicans should happen to lose, a week after the election Trump should nominate Merrick Garland.
     
    Even if Republicans should lose, they will have control of Congress for almost two months after the election to confirm whomever they choose. I don't believe in lame duck sessions, and believe they should be abolished, but that's the law. Perhaps that in itself would be enough motivation to abolish the lame duck session.

    But Republicans won't be waiting until after the election to confirm a new justice. Ginsburg has been on her death bed for quite some time, so it's hard to believe they don't have a nominee all lined up. There *will* be a confirmation vote before the election because Republicans need to turn out the base, and Supreme Court appointments do that. And the nominee will probably be a woman to (a) avoid more sexual assault allegations, (b) improve GOP prospects with the women's vote, and (c) encourage RINO senators to support her.

    If the Democrats want to oppose a white woman nominee to SCOTUS then they're just further working to scare away the white vote for good and forever.

    Replies: @International Jew, @PhysicistDave

    Wilkey wrote:

    But Republicans won’t be waiting until after the election to confirm a new justice. Ginsburg has been on her death bed for quite some time, so it’s hard to believe they don’t have a nominee all lined up. There *will* be a confirmation vote before the election because Republicans need to turn out the base, and Supreme Court appointments do that.

    It looks as if they have lost Murkowski, Romney, and Collins. Leaves it at 50-50: they cannot lose anyone else.

    Pence can break the tie.

    Wilkey also wrote:

    And the nominee will probably be a woman to (a) avoid more sexual assault allegations, (b) improve GOP prospects with the women’s vote, and (c) encourage RINO senators to support her.

    Politically, the best pick might be Neomi Rao, an Indian Parsee who converted to Judaism! But her time so far on the bench is pretty short.

    Those in the know claim it will be Amy Coney Barrett. She’s very white and will inflame the Left on abortion.

    But if Trump can get it over before election day, I think the Left will have trouble ginning up outrage over a fait accompli. And it will encourage Trump’s base.

    • Replies: @Wilkey
    @PhysicistDave


    t looks as if they have lost Murkowski, Romney, and Collins. Leaves it at 50-50: they cannot lose anyone else.
     
    Not that I would doubt that Romney could say something so traitorous and stupid, but the claim about Romney not voting for confirmation prior to the inauguration comes, sfaik, from Jim Dabakis, the former head of the state Democratic Party in Utah, and a notorious rabble rouser and liar. Why Dabakis would have access to such information, unless Romney is prepared to switch parties, is a mystery.

    Romney is prepared to snub Trump in many ways - lots of people don’t like Trump; I don’t like Trump - but I don’t see him for a minute opposing a Trump Supreme Court nominee. Romney is an aristocrat who wants to pass on the family political dynasty to one or more of his five sons. Voting against a Republican SCOTUS nominee would be effectively kill that dynasty. If you think Romney is prepared to do that then you really don’t understand his arrogance. Unless (a big unless) Romney’s heirs are prepared to fully join the Left and (one assumes) put Utah and the Mormon Church behind them. Possible, but not likely.
    , @Wilkey
    @PhysicistDave


    t looks as if they have lost Murkowski, Romney, and Collins. Leaves it at 50-50: they cannot lose anyone else.
     
    Not that I would doubt that Romney could say something so traitorous and stupid, but the claim about Romney not voting for confirmation prior to the inauguration comes, sfaik, from Jim Dabakis, the former head of the state Democratic Party in Utah, and a notorious rabble rouser and liar. Why Dabakis would have access to such information, unless Romney is prepared to switch parties, is a mystery.

    Romney is prepared to snub Trump in many ways - lots of people don’t like Trump; I don’t like Trump - but I don’t see him for a minute opposing a Trump Supreme Court nominee. Romney is an aristocrat who wants to pass on the family political dynasty to one or more of his five sons. Voting against a Republican SCOTUS nominee would be effectively kill that dynasty. If you think Romney is prepared to do that then you really don’t understand his arrogance. Unless (a big unless) Romney’s heirs are prepared to fully join the Left and (one assumes) put Utah and the Mormon Church behind them. Possible, but not likely.
    , @Reg Cæsar
    @PhysicistDave


    Pence can break the tie.
     
    You know what tie the VP can't break? The Senate's vote for his own office should the election be thrown there, as in 1836. Let's hope it doesn't come to that.

    The incumbent VP has the job of announcing his victory (2013-- Biden-- 2005, 1997, 1985, etc), promotion (1989, 1837, 1801, 1797), or loss (2001, 1993, 1981, 1969, 1961, 1933, etc).

    VP Sherman escaped announcing the worst loss ever by dying in 1912. Not sure who did the honors in 1913, but here's a picture:


    https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/resources/graphic/xlarge/1913CountingElectoralBallot.jpg

    Let's hope he can call out his own name, as Biden called Pence's in 2017. Otherwise, it'll be "Honi soit Kamala Pence".

  203. Out of 119, 1 black, 12% minorities. But out of 88% whites, how many Jews ?

    I heard that her law clerks were 75% Jews but someone must have done the estimation as names are public.

  204. @Not Raul
    @Colin Wright

    Are there any middle-of-the-roaders on Trump's list of potential nominees?

    https://www.scotusblog.com/2020/09/trump-releases-new-list-of-potential-supreme-court-nominees/

    An endorsement from the Federalist Society seems to be a requirement for Republican judicial appointees.

    Replies: @Dan Hayes

    Trump should be questioning the Federalist Society’s advice after the direction Gorsuch seems to be taking!

    • Agree: Not Raul
  205. Jeff Sessions

    • Replies: @Buck Ransom
    @North Carolina Resident

    Ann Coulter

  206. Didn’t a smart commentator here predict RBG’s death about two months ago? I think he called it in two months.

    • Replies: @Daniel Williams
    @Foreign Expert

    Must have been a really smart commentor; like, with brains bulging out of his giant skull. Who else could have foreseen the death of an 87-year-old with actively metastasizing cancer?

    Or maybe he was on that spice from Dune?

  207. @vinteuil
    Two Words: Josh Hawley.

    Replies: @Twinkie, @Hibernian, @AnotherDad, @Unladen Swallow, @Pericles

    I’d like to hear who Alito and Thomas would like to see on the bench.

    (As a bonus, it would also be extremely diverse to consider their opinions.)

  208. @Intelligent Dasein
    This is not going to be a big deal whatsoever. Everybody is going to yawn and forget it. It's not part of the narrative the Leftists have been propounding these last six months. They've already decreed that the election is going to be about BLM, and they won't be able to change that horse in mid-stream.

    Death is far too real and sober a thing for Leftists, who don't do real and sober.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Ed

    I disagree. The forces arrayed against us use a multi-pronged approach. Death by a thousand cuts.

    Ginsburg will receive memorial accolades all out of proportion to her role. She was not even the first female Supreme Court justice. Sandra Day O’Connor was, and she was nominated by Ronald Reagan. Any services to Ginsburg should rightly be less than those to O’Connor, which I can’t even remember and were not that big.

    You say,

    Death is far too real and sober a thing for Leftists, who don’t do real and sober.

    and you might be right, but that is not the point. They will use anything they can to further their causes, even death. In fact, when death is something they keep distant, it is a thing they can use without conscience. And they will, right now.

  209. @Buffalo Joe
    Heading should read: " Ginsburg's clerks find it impossible to cover the smell and admit RBG died months ago."

    Replies: @Pericles

    E.A. Poe, The Facts in the Case of R.B. Ginsburg.

  210. @AnotherDad
    @Reg Cæsar

    Not actually accurate. Nine Canadas would cover it.

    When i was a kid and took my first trips to Canada in the mid-60s, it's population was almost exactly a tenth of the US. (US nearing 200m, Canada nearing 20m).

    Just looked it up and they supposedly have 37m people up there. (Their 2016 census counted 35m.) They've actually been growing--and genociding themselves with immigration--even faster than the USofA. That's saying something Maybe they figure they need the body heat?

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Our immigration rate is something like double the usa.

    If president Kamala wins I’m sure you guys will be brought in line with us.

  211. You guys now have a 5-3 Supreme Court with a Republican at the top spot. Time to dunk on the leftists.

    • Replies: @GeneralRipper
    @Pericles

    Exactly.

    Of course the Gay Old Party pretty much exists as "controlled opposition", so I wouldn't count on that.

  212. @The Spirit of Enoch Powell
    She was taken on the Jewish new year as well, very good timing. The year 5780 has begun with a bang!


    Somewhat unrelated, this is an interesting comment by Trump

    https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1307124621389463553?s=19

    Replies: @ThreeCranes, @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan

    The uneasy laughter from the crowd as Trump says, “You have good genes.” As though they are not comfortable with admitting that genetics count, that there could be some truth in the notion that not all people are created equal and that they came out on top in the genetic lottery, as though that thought will lead, inexorably, to Nazism and the gas chambers and so must be orphaned.

    Yet everyone in the crowd, if cornered, would fight for their children in preference to the survival of the invading Somalian’s children. It’s this reticence to own their own feelings that divides a white person internally and makes them, in their own introspective eyes, hypocrites and therefore , objectively now, vulnerable to manipulation by other races. Poor whites. They don’t realize that other races don’t understand white’s internal awareness of their own hypocrisy–because other races, for the most part, are incapable of introspection and so cannot imagine what goes on in a white person’s mind–but those other races can smell white’s tentativeness and have an instinct for exploiting it.

    An honest person doesn’t stand a chance in a battle with a dishonest person. A civilized person doesn’t stand a chance against an animal.

    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @ThreeCranes


    It’s this reticence to own their own feelings that divides a white person internally and makes them, in their own introspective eyes, hypocrites and therefore , objectively now, vulnerable to manipulation by other races.
     
    Can you explain how under your theory that makes them vulnerable to manipulation?
  213. @Rosie
    @Anon


    The white left loves black abortions because they personally detest blacks.
     
    I have thought a great deal about this question, and still I feel uncertain. There is no doubt that they act as if they detest blacks; they avoid them like the plague. On the other hand, I think at least some of them think that bad whites are to blame for anything that is wrong with underclass blacks.

    Replies: @ThreeCranes

    They like them one at a time, in small doses, as the only black kid in their overwhelmingly white class. And that’s how they fondly reminisce about them and hide their own true feelings from themselves. But don’t ever point this out to them and force them to confront their own rationalizing. They’re brittle on that score. It takes real sacrifice and work to maintain illusions, dammit!

  214. @Intelligent Dasein
    This is not going to be a big deal whatsoever. Everybody is going to yawn and forget it. It's not part of the narrative the Leftists have been propounding these last six months. They've already decreed that the election is going to be about BLM, and they won't be able to change that horse in mid-stream.

    Death is far too real and sober a thing for Leftists, who don't do real and sober.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @Ed

    This will galvanize both sides. ActBlue has raised record amounts these past few hours. Suddenly GOP senators in places like NC and even AZ have life in their re-election battles.

  215. @Peripatetic Commenter
    Leftists not taking it well!

    https://twitter.com/BadBunnyTwitch/status/1307103243953152005

    Replies: @ChrisZ, @Harry Baldwin, @Muggles, @AnotherDad, @U. Ranus

    fuck you for not retiring under Obama

    Obama would have replaced her with a Democrat, but would he have replaced her with a Jew? She couldn’t be sure.

    • Replies: @hOUSTON 1992
    @U. Ranus

    Obama appointed Kagan to the SCOTUS, so that the court could enjoy a continuity of Jewesses. But that appointment was not enough to appease her ethnocentrism. I think she wanted the 1st female president , HRC, to appoint her successor.

  216. @Anon7
    What if Trump decides to leave it open until after the election? How would the current eight-person SCOTUS vote on the different questions that might arise in a contested election?

    Replies: @Ed

    Trump will nominate someone, reports are saying as early as next week or after Ginsberg is buried.

    The question is McConnell may not have the vote for a pre-election confirmation. Murkowski is a no, Collins is mum but most predict she won’t go for it. Romney is mum but most think he’s a no. McSalley came out with a firm yes.

    I’m not sure what Gardner does but he usually sticks with the party. They might be able to get it through before E-day but there’s an argument for keeping it open to spur conservative turnout.

    • Replies: @Jack D
    @Ed


    early as next week or after Ginsberg is buried.
     
    Jewish custom calls for prompt burial (although not on the Sabbath or on a Jewish holy day). Therefore it will probably be on Monday, although the date has not been announced. It has been announced that the interment will be private. Ginsburg will be buried alongside her husband at Arlington National Cemetery. Those hoping for a George Floyd style extravaganza will be disappointed although there may be some sort of memorial service. The Ginsburg family are not the kind of people who would flout social distancing recommendations.

    Replies: @Pericles

  217. @AnotherDad
    Mitt Romney continues to transition--from clueless to quisling.

    Replies: @Stan Adams, @BB753

    Mitt Romney is far more and worse than that. Here’s all the dirt on Romney (apart from being born a Mormon, a masonic luciferian Cult, though admittedly through no fault of his own) :

  218. @Wilkey
    @I Have Scinde


    Now, there are 8 justices (and a ninth will certainly not be confirmed prior to November)
     
    Election day is 46 days away. There is no reason to think they can't get a justice confirmed by then. They'd be crazy not to try. A lot of Republican voters would stay home if they don't.

    Replies: @J.Ross, @BB753

    “There is no reason to think they can’t get a justice confirmed by then. They’d be crazy not to try. A lot of Republican voters would stay home if they don’t.”

    That’s the plan for the never-Trumpers in Congress, that’s 80% of Republicans in the House.

  219. This could be The Pelican Brief, if President Trump nominates a conservative judge and the conservative judge is approved by the Senate.

    Can you imagine. Some would be unhappy. OK. So a conservative judge may not be murdered in a porn theater as in the Pelican Brief.

    Now, suppose that the Democrats win. And a liberal judge like William O Douglas were approved. No sexual harassment there- Douglas was a liberal.

    This was meant as a joke.

    Edward Manfredonia

  220. @usNthem
    @Buck Ransom

    I wouldn’t say heavenly choir - more like the one downstairs...

    Replies: @G. Poulin

    Don’t think they have a choir down there. They have a very loud metal band, and the worse part is, they’re not even good.

    • LOL: Hibernian
  221. @Cortes
    @Andy

    My father in law lasted four long, hard, hard years. The late judge must have endured hell.

    Replies: @BB753

    “The late judge must have endured hell.”

    No, hell is what she’s enduring right now in her afterlife.

    • Agree: GeneralRipper
  222. I thought she was already dead? Serious question: I thought she hadn’t been seen in public for months.

    Perfect timing, for both sides: let’s not forget that this will greatly energise the Democrat base, and boost their turnout and grassroots funding – as well as granting cover to non-grassroots funding.

  223. @Anon
    @Anonymous

    You do realize that without the right to life we can’t really base other rights, such as the right to property or to freedom of conscience, of speech, of association? It all comes down to majority consensus.. which right now looks more and more like mass cultural suicide. It’s a matter of principle.

    Replies: @Hibernian, @TTSSYF, @Jack D

    Right to life is not a Catholic only issue. An Evangelical theologian, Harold O. J. Brown, made sure of that following Roe. Many Evangelicals at that time were reluctant to get involved in the pro-life cause because at the time its leadership was heavily Catholic. This is not to say that they approved of abortion or the decision. The Southern Baptist Convention had liberal leadership at the time and those leaders were at least mushy on the issue.

  224. @tr
    Tsar Bomba level.

    Replies: @Paul Jolliffe

    Gotta love an I-Steve comment that works the Cold War into anything.

    (I doubt that ducking helped the pilot much . . . )

  225. @indocon
    @TimothyS

    Not that simple, a few minutes earlier there was a statement from somebody saying that Romney would not vote on any nominee in current congress, then his spokeswomen issued a statement denying denying that he said that.

    Behind the scene these Republican critters are seeing what we all are seeing, I think you will see them fall in line.

    Replies: @Hibernian

    The days when nobody would vote against a colleague are over. The Senator nominated would look bad and and provide ammunition for the other side, if he didn’t recuse himself. This would be an obvious Hobson’s choice. Then there’s the chance that, in the event that the nomination was successful, the Repubs would lose the Senate seat in the special election to replace him. There’s no state so red that it could be assumed this couldn’t happen. Look at what happened in Alabama. These things are probably part of the reason why Hawley and Cruz said they didn’t want it.

  226. @MarkinLA
    @Neoconned

    The tradition was that in an election year when the President and Senate are in different parties they wait until after the election. It doesn't apply here but they will pretend it does.

    Replies: @ScarletNumber

    You are making up this “tradition”. Please look up post-hoc rationalization

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    @ScarletNumber

    I realize that it is BS. However, I think it was first pulled on a Republican as a rational for why the Dems didn't vote. When McConnell used it in Obama's last year, it became a tradition and the left screamed.

  227. @Curle
    @Rosie

    “ as it would be to have an all-female jury in a man’s trial.”

    Not if you’re the male and the defendant, you’d love an all female jury. Contrary to popular opinion women really like men and they often express those sentiments by acquitting them even when they are guilty as hell.

    Replies: @ScarletNumber, @Rosie

    Not if you’re the male and the defendant, you’d love an all female jury.

    Only if you are good looking. If you are ugly you want a male jury.

    • LOL: Bardon Kaldian
    • Replies: @Anonymous
    @ScarletNumber


    Only if you are good looking. If you are ugly you want a male jury.
     
    Is this true?
  228. @I Have Scinde
    Hypothetical question:

    Suppose the presidential election goes to the Supreme Court for decision, as in Bush v. Gore. Now, there are 8 justices (and a ninth will certainly not be confirmed prior to November) -- let us assume no one plays the Sandra Day O'Connor role, and the case goes 4-4. What happens next?

    If sufficient electors do not certify a President, what happens? Does it go to the House of Representatives for a vote by state quorum? Does the Congress provide a method by law per Section 3 of the 20th Amendment? Does such a law exist already?

    Replies: @Wilkey, @Hibernian

    My understanding is that the ruling of the lower court would stand. There might be multiple states involved and they might be in different Circuits. This might yield different (pro D vs. Pro R) results in different states. It could get very interesting.

  229. @Curle
    @Colin Wright

    The middle of the road folks got us here.

    Replies: @anon, @nebulafox

    I agree.

    Signed,

    Former Middle of the Road guy.

  230. @Eric Novak
    @Eqas65

    The overwhelming number of births prevented since Roe v. Wade in 1973 have been white.

    Replies: @RVBlake

    Yes, in 1975 60% of abortions were by White mothers, 30% by Black. The numbers have been converging over the decades, however, till beginning 2013-2014 a slim majority of abortions are now by Black.
    Source: Johnson Archives/CDC

  231. @Reg Cæsar
    @Rosie


    If we’re going to have single-sex juries, then the jurors ought to be the same gender [sic] as the defendant.
     
    How are you going to do that without forcing women onto juries? For someone who believed in a woman's right to her own body, the Notorious RBG was all too ready to lock those bodies up in some stuffy room in some humid courthouse. Against their will. She had more sympathy for the criminal.

    Don't even get me started on Selective Service...

    Replies: @Rosie

    How are you going to do that without forcing women onto juries?

    You can’t. That’s why you have to force them onto juries.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Rosie



    How are you going to do that without forcing women onto juries?
     
    You can’t. That’s why you have to force them onto juries.
     
    So you're anti-choice.

    Replies: @Rosie

  232. @Not Raul
    @Almost Missouri

    I doubt that Trump would pick her due to Kasler v. Lockyer.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri

    That’s a reasonable point, but Kasler v. Lockyer (2000) was decided before McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010) “incorporated” the Second Amendment, so it may be doubted that Kasler can be controlling law anymore.

    You may say that the question is not whether the ruling still stands, but the character of the woman who made the ruling. And that is also a reasonable point. But what we like about Brown is that she tends to decide cases based on the law as written, and in 2000, prior to McDonald, Kasler was how the law was written.

    We may end up being disappointed anyway, but judicial nominations, i.e., politics, is the art of the possible, and nominating Robert Bork turned out not to be possible.

    Anyway, this is all castles in the sky. The GOP is almost certainly going with guaranteed-to-cuck Amy Barrett, who is politically ideal for the nomination fight, however judicially dubious. That is, if the Romney-Murkowski wing doesn’t suicide the party first.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @Almost Missouri


    guaranteed-to-cuck Amy Barrett,
     
    She's a serious practicing Catholic.
  233. @ScarletNumber
    @MarkinLA

    You are making up this "tradition". Please look up post-hoc rationalization

    Replies: @MarkinLA

    I realize that it is BS. However, I think it was first pulled on a Republican as a rational for why the Dems didn’t vote. When McConnell used it in Obama’s last year, it became a tradition and the left screamed.

  234. @Curle
    @Rosie

    “ as it would be to have an all-female jury in a man’s trial.”

    Not if you’re the male and the defendant, you’d love an all female jury. Contrary to popular opinion women really like men and they often express those sentiments by acquitting them even when they are guilty as hell.

    Replies: @ScarletNumber, @Rosie

    Contrary to popular opinion women really like men and they often express those sentiments by acquitting them even when they are guilty as hell.

    Yes, women like men, but no, we’re not more likely to acquit. Women are actually more likely to vote guilty at the beginning of deliberations, but more likely to change their mind and vote to acquit during deliberations. Thr result is a wash, unless the jury is overwhelmingly female, in which case, conviction is more likely.

    But fun fact: The jury of six that acquitted Zimmerman (no prize) was all-female, with five White women.

  235. Anonymous[305] • Disclaimer says:
    @Reg Cæsar
    @Currahee



    five biological children
     
    Yes, the abortion people seem convinced that America would be a better place with a greater proportion of BLACKS!
     
    And how are your five biological children doing?

    At the last pre-Roe census, America was 87.7% white and 11.1% black. At the last post-Roe census, those figures were 72.4% and 12.6%. They're bound to be worse when the present one is collated.

    It seems like the "abortion people" were whitening this country, while the "prochoice" folks are doing the opposite.

    Which is not surprising, when you consider that the majority of abortions take the life of a white child.


    Yes, the abortion people seem convinced that America would be a better place with a greater proportion of BLACKS!
     
    In that case, they agree with the CSA, which left a union that was 85% white for one that was at best 55% so. Foresight in action!

    Replies: @Anonymous

    At the last pre-Roe census, America was 87.7% white and 11.1% black. At the last post-Roe census, those figures were 72.4% and 12.6%. They’re bound to be worse when the present one is collated.

    Yeah, allowing abortion magically caused all that immigration. #Illogic

    And how are your five biological children doing?

    You have five children? Congratulations.

    There was a brief period in the mid-2000s where it looked like middle America had some demographic momentum. But birth rates fell during the great recession and kept falling as the economy recovered. Trump doesn’t seem to care about this problem; might not even know about it, but he sure does know about the Dow.

    All that bible thumping, anti-abortion sentiment, and statistical illiteracy is simply not providing the demographic and cultural strength it’s selling. If it were motivating thots to keep their legs closed and families to have many children, I’d be willing to put up with it even though I’m a fedora-wearing atheist. But it isn’t. Middle America is hollowing out. The stuff about Calexit is crazy, all the Democrats have to do is wait a few more election cycles for the brown tide to wash over Texas.

    • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @Anonymous


    Yeah, allowing abortion magically caused all that immigration. #Illogic
     
    Just because correlation doesn't necessarily mean causation, doesn't imply there is no connection.

    Two phenomena neither of which cause the other could very well be the results of a common third factor. That your car is stuck in the driveway one morning in February didn't cause the neighborhood school to close, but the two are closely connected. Jung called this "synchronicity".

    Compare the NARAL, NOW, and NRLC ratings with those of NumbersUSA, and report back to us.
  236. @personfellowindividual
    God bless the lady, and thanks to her for her service. Now let the blood-bath commence.

    Replies: @Steve in Greensboro, @GeneralRipper

    Too late, her Daddy already greeted her at the gates of Hell…lol

  237. @Altai
    For all it's faults, if one is inclined to create an effective power-sharing system for a country of 330m, then allocating justices to fill specific ethnic or racial slots (As opposed to the current system of just endlessly appointing Catholic and Jewish justices pretending it's 1920 and know-nothings are roaming the streets) the supreme court is one thing that works. But this would require the white or white protestant justices to think of themselves as such and also for their numbers to be greater than 0.

    Replies: @ben tillman, @Gordo

    Making your country a giant Singapore would be preferable to Bosnia or Brazil. Less Bloodshed.

  238. @Eqas65
    @R.G. Camara

    Why should abortion be made illegal? 75% or so of women who have abortions are negroes, and the white women who have abortion are mostly mudsharks.

    I also believe that the occasional non-mudshark white women who have abortions are mostly meth addicts who shouldn’t be having kids anyway.

    I’m always amazed at the number of anti-abortion cuckservatives on UNZ.

    Replies: @Eric Novak, @ken, @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan, @Reg Cæsar

    Because it’s evil you piece of crap. You are as malevolent as the black dude laughing at cops getting shot.

  239. @Pericles
    You guys now have a 5-3 Supreme Court with a Republican at the top spot. Time to dunk on the leftists.

    Replies: @GeneralRipper

    Exactly.

    Of course the Gay Old Party pretty much exists as “controlled opposition”, so I wouldn’t count on that.

  240. I’m sure when SCOTUS grants cert on RBG’s request, Chief Justice Roberts will vote with the other four in its favour. Thomas will right the minority dissent. RBG’s dying wish will become the law of the land.

  241. @njguy73
    @Jimbo in OPKS


    I am a little to the right of ... Why is the Attila comparison used? Fifth-century Hunnish depredations on the Roman Empire were the work of an overpowerful executive pursuing a policy of economic redistribution in an atmosphere of permissive social mores. I am a little to the right of Rush Limbaugh. I'm so conservative that I approve of San Francisco City Hall marriages, adoption by same-sex couples, and New Hampshire's recently ordained Episcopal bishop. Gays want to get married, have children, and go to church. Next they'll be advocating school vouchers, boycotting HBO, and voting Republican.

     

    P. J. O'Rourke, 2004

    https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2004/07/i-agree-with-me/303373/

    Replies: @68W58

    PJ (who I once really admired) is so conservative that he voted for Hillary in 2016.

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    @68W58

    O'Rourke was anti-Trump since forever. He was funny once, in "Eat The Rich" days. During the 2016 campaign he was all over the BBC/Guardian doing his "Trump is your drunk uncle" stuff.

    https://www.salon.com/2015/09/24/p_j_orourke_on_why_trump_will_collapse_ann_coulters_a_fraud_and_how_national_lampoon_created_modern_comedy/

  242. @Anon
    @Anonymous

    You do realize that without the right to life we can’t really base other rights, such as the right to property or to freedom of conscience, of speech, of association? It all comes down to majority consensus.. which right now looks more and more like mass cultural suicide. It’s a matter of principle.

    Replies: @Hibernian, @TTSSYF, @Jack D

    Spontaneous abortions occur naturally and not infrequently. I don’t see why choosing to have an abortion in the very early stages of pregnancy, before the cells have differentiated sufficiently, should be disallowed. I think it should be illegal after a certain number of weeks.

    • Replies: @ken
    @TTSSYF

    "Spontaneous abortions occur naturally and not infrequently." What's the point? Are dying from a heart attack or being shot in the head of the same moral equivalence?

  243. @North Carolina Resident
    Jeff Sessions

    Replies: @Buck Ransom

    Ann Coulter

  244. @Mike_from_SGV
    @Colin Wright

    Yeah, with only 3 months to get it done, Trump has only one shot. No time for a second nomination if the first one is voted down, probably. Any sensible moderate person would be a huge improvement over Bader. He could troll the Dems by nominating a conservative black female, if there is such a thing.

    Replies: @Almost Missouri, @Thoughts

    It would be a cool f-u if Trump took all the names of the Black Female Police Chiefs who have stepped down over mistreatment due to BLM and put them in his next administration.

    As far as the Supreme Court, we need to stop looking for a Black Savior and put up a Strong, Conservative, Hetero White Based Christian Dude

    Trump really should make it a priority to identify all of the people screwed by BLM and Soros…I’d get all of those people on my ship…The L.A. DA Steve mentions all the time, all the black police chief women who resigned, all of those people are deserving of Support…and they seem to be smart and have invaluable experience as well.

  245. @PhysicistDave
    @Wilkey

    Wilkey wrote:


    But Republicans won’t be waiting until after the election to confirm a new justice. Ginsburg has been on her death bed for quite some time, so it’s hard to believe they don’t have a nominee all lined up. There *will* be a confirmation vote before the election because Republicans need to turn out the base, and Supreme Court appointments do that.
     
    It looks as if they have lost Murkowski, Romney, and Collins. Leaves it at 50-50: they cannot lose anyone else.

    Pence can break the tie.

    Wilkey also wrote:

    And the nominee will probably be a woman to (a) avoid more sexual assault allegations, (b) improve GOP prospects with the women’s vote, and (c) encourage RINO senators to support her.
     
    Politically, the best pick might be Neomi Rao, an Indian Parsee who converted to Judaism! But her time so far on the bench is pretty short.

    Those in the know claim it will be Amy Coney Barrett. She's very white and will inflame the Left on abortion.

    But if Trump can get it over before election day, I think the Left will have trouble ginning up outrage over a fait accompli. And it will encourage Trump's base.

    Replies: @Wilkey, @Wilkey, @Reg Cæsar

    t looks as if they have lost Murkowski, Romney, and Collins. Leaves it at 50-50: they cannot lose anyone else.

    Not that I would doubt that Romney could say something so traitorous and stupid, but the claim about Romney not voting for confirmation prior to the inauguration comes, sfaik, from Jim Dabakis, the former head of the state Democratic Party in Utah, and a notorious rabble rouser and liar. Why Dabakis would have access to such information, unless Romney is prepared to switch parties, is a mystery.

    Romney is prepared to snub Trump in many ways – lots of people don’t like Trump; I don’t like Trump – but I don’t see him for a minute opposing a Trump Supreme Court nominee. Romney is an aristocrat who wants to pass on the family political dynasty to one or more of his five sons. Voting against a Republican SCOTUS nominee would be effectively kill that dynasty. If you think Romney is prepared to do that then you really don’t understand his arrogance. Unless (a big unless) Romney’s heirs are prepared to fully join the Left and (one assumes) put Utah and the Mormon Church behind them. Possible, but not likely.

  246. @PhysicistDave
    @Wilkey

    Wilkey wrote:


    But Republicans won’t be waiting until after the election to confirm a new justice. Ginsburg has been on her death bed for quite some time, so it’s hard to believe they don’t have a nominee all lined up. There *will* be a confirmation vote before the election because Republicans need to turn out the base, and Supreme Court appointments do that.
     
    It looks as if they have lost Murkowski, Romney, and Collins. Leaves it at 50-50: they cannot lose anyone else.

    Pence can break the tie.

    Wilkey also wrote:

    And the nominee will probably be a woman to (a) avoid more sexual assault allegations, (b) improve GOP prospects with the women’s vote, and (c) encourage RINO senators to support her.
     
    Politically, the best pick might be Neomi Rao, an Indian Parsee who converted to Judaism! But her time so far on the bench is pretty short.

    Those in the know claim it will be Amy Coney Barrett. She's very white and will inflame the Left on abortion.

    But if Trump can get it over before election day, I think the Left will have trouble ginning up outrage over a fait accompli. And it will encourage Trump's base.

    Replies: @Wilkey, @Wilkey, @Reg Cæsar

    t looks as if they have lost Murkowski, Romney, and Collins. Leaves it at 50-50: they cannot lose anyone else.

    Not that I would doubt that Romney could say something so traitorous and stupid, but the claim about Romney not voting for confirmation prior to the inauguration comes, sfaik, from Jim Dabakis, the former head of the state Democratic Party in Utah, and a notorious rabble rouser and liar. Why Dabakis would have access to such information, unless Romney is prepared to switch parties, is a mystery.

    Romney is prepared to snub Trump in many ways – lots of people don’t like Trump; I don’t like Trump – but I don’t see him for a minute opposing a Trump Supreme Court nominee. Romney is an aristocrat who wants to pass on the family political dynasty to one or more of his five sons. Voting against a Republican SCOTUS nominee would be effectively kill that dynasty. If you think Romney is prepared to do that then you really don’t understand his arrogance. Unless (a big unless) Romney’s heirs are prepared to fully join the Left and (one assumes) put Utah and the Mormon Church behind them. Possible, but not likely.

  247. @Anonymous
    I would not get too excited about this development if Ginsberg's replacement is Amy Comey Barrett.
    From Wiki: Comey Barrett has "seven children: five biological children and two children adopted from Haiti."
    She sounds like a mushy-minded bleating heart type for whom "conservatism" is all about abortion, abortion, abortion (she's a practicing Catholic). When it comes to heritage Americans and upholding their interests, I'm very suspicious about her bona fides (although I could be wrong).

    Replies: @Currahee, @Anon, @ben tillman, @Eqas65, @Paul Mendez, @Alexander Turok

    (she’s a practicing Catholic).

    More like she’s a heretical Catholic. She belongs to an ecumenical, communal group called “People of Praise” that ignores the centrality of the Mass and Mary’s role as mother of the Church in Catholicism.

  248. @Colin Wright
    Ding Dong the witch is dead.

    Replies: @Wilkey

    There’s something to be said for being gracious to the deceased, recently or otherwise. But Ginsburg clung bitterly to her SCOTUS seat through multiple health crises. She should have and could have retired in 2013/2014, when Obama was president and the Dems controlled the Senate. Even then she was already in her 80s and had spent 20 years on the Court. But she refused, Republicans will get to replace her and Democrats will get to spend a crucial presidential election season reinforcing to white women why they shouldn’t support Democrats, after having spent the last four months inciting riots and yammering on about white privilege and abolishing the police.

    Trump really is no Hitler. He is more like Forrest Gump. One political gift after another keeps falling into his lap, little of it through any merit of his own.

    • Disagree: TTSSYF
  249. @Eqas65
    @R.G. Camara

    Why should abortion be made illegal? 75% or so of women who have abortions are negroes, and the white women who have abortion are mostly mudsharks.

    I also believe that the occasional non-mudshark white women who have abortions are mostly meth addicts who shouldn’t be having kids anyway.

    I’m always amazed at the number of anti-abortion cuckservatives on UNZ.

    Replies: @Eric Novak, @ken, @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan, @Reg Cæsar

    Away with thou, Satan!

  250. @Anonymous
    I would not get too excited about this development if Ginsberg's replacement is Amy Comey Barrett.
    From Wiki: Comey Barrett has "seven children: five biological children and two children adopted from Haiti."
    She sounds like a mushy-minded bleating heart type for whom "conservatism" is all about abortion, abortion, abortion (she's a practicing Catholic). When it comes to heritage Americans and upholding their interests, I'm very suspicious about her bona fides (although I could be wrong).

    Replies: @Currahee, @Anon, @ben tillman, @Eqas65, @Paul Mendez, @Alexander Turok

    Opinions on social issues in America can be classified with a 2D political spectrum in accordance with double horseshoe theory, the quadrants of which are:

    1. Prohibiting abortion would strengthen the traditional social structure of the West, and that’s great!
    2. Prohibiting abortion would strengthen the traditional social structure of the West, and that’s terrible!
    3. Prohibiting abortion would weaken the traditional social structure of the West, and that’s great!
    4. Prohibiting abortion would weaken the traditional social structure of the West, and that’s terrible!

    Most people are only familiar with quadrants 1 and 2. We here at Unz are familiar with 4. because that demographic is well-represented here. Amy Comey Barrett seems to be situated between quadrants 1 and 3. She’s not going full-on critical race theory like many younger evangelicals, and probably upholds her religion’s traditional teachings with regards to marriage and divorce. But she might be the kind of person who, like the Pope, would look forward to replacing the traditional people of the West with other groups more receptive to the preaching.

    We should have a compromise where we have a constitutional amendment saying that nobody can be nominated or approved until Jan 21 and the court will be restricted to 9 members. If we had high-energy politicians we’d be able to rush it through Congress and then get it through 3/4ths of the legislatures before the election. Unfortunately, we have a low-energy political system and so we’re gonna have 4 judges added next year, then 8 some election cycles later, then 16, and eventually we’ll all wind up there.

  251. @Eqas65
    @Anonymous

    Barrett would be a nightmare.

    The anti-abortion lunatics are all negroid lovers. Have you ever seen their signs whining about how many negroes are aborted?

    Replies: @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan, @Etruscan Film Star

    All right wingers who support abortion (and the lockdowns) are immensely short-sighted morons. Taking away the ability of dumb females and unscrupulous males to avoid the consequences of whoring will do drastically more to benefit society than a marginal fall in the number of blacks.

    • Agree: GeneralRipper
  252. @The Spirit of Enoch Powell
    She was taken on the Jewish new year as well, very good timing. The year 5780 has begun with a bang!


    Somewhat unrelated, this is an interesting comment by Trump

    https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1307124621389463553?s=19

    Replies: @ThreeCranes, @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan

    Good genes in Minnesota

  253. @Anonymouse
    Ah so! Through the agency of cosmic indifference, Ruth Bader Ginsburg went to the same high school as I - James Madison H.S. in Brooklyn NY. As she was 1 year older than I am, our enrollment there probably overlapped.

    Replies: @Father O'Hara, @Bardon Kaldian

    I thought she went to the same high school with James Madison.

  254. @Foreign Expert
    Didn’t a smart commentator here predict RBG’s death about two months ago? I think he called it in two months.

    Replies: @Daniel Williams

    Must have been a really smart commentor; like, with brains bulging out of his giant skull. Who else could have foreseen the death of an 87-year-old with actively metastasizing cancer?

    Or maybe he was on that spice from Dune?

  255. @Eqas65
    @Anonymous

    Barrett would be a nightmare.

    The anti-abortion lunatics are all negroid lovers. Have you ever seen their signs whining about how many negroes are aborted?

    Replies: @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan, @Etruscan Film Star

    Race realism dissolves as soon as the subject of abortion comes up.

  256. @U. Ranus
    @Peripatetic Commenter


    fuck you for not retiring under Obama
     
    Obama would have replaced her with a Democrat, but would he have replaced her with a Jew? She couldn't be sure.

    Replies: @hOUSTON 1992

    Obama appointed Kagan to the SCOTUS, so that the court could enjoy a continuity of Jewesses. But that appointment was not enough to appease her ethnocentrism. I think she wanted the 1st female president , HRC, to appoint her successor.

  257. @hooodathunkit

    "My most fervent wish is that I will not be replaced until a new president is installed." --RB Ginsburg
     
    Unfortunate wording. I can understand not nominating until after the election, but if Trump wins over Dementia Guy™ it should be going ahead regardless of what her fervent wishes are.

    Personally wouldn't mind seeing a nomination now, BLM and its commies have had their run; and now it's L&E time.

    Replies: @James O'Meara, @Jack D

    The Dems (this includes Ginsburg (or at least her granddaughter – who knows if she actually said this) ) keep saying “new president” because they are trying to use Mitch McConnell’s words against him. In 2016, McConnell said (and this is an exact quote):

    “The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new president,”

    Of course in 2016 we were going to get a new president one way or the other. Right now this doesn’t make any sense unless you assume that Trump is certain to lose or that the seat should remain vacant for up to 5 years.

  258. @Ed
    @Anon7

    Trump will nominate someone, reports are saying as early as next week or after Ginsberg is buried.

    The question is McConnell may not have the vote for a pre-election confirmation. Murkowski is a no, Collins is mum but most predict she won’t go for it. Romney is mum but most think he’s a no. McSalley came out with a firm yes.

    I’m not sure what Gardner does but he usually sticks with the party. They might be able to get it through before E-day but there’s an argument for keeping it open to spur conservative turnout.

    Replies: @Jack D

    early as next week or after Ginsberg is buried.

    Jewish custom calls for prompt burial (although not on the Sabbath or on a Jewish holy day). Therefore it will probably be on Monday, although the date has not been announced. It has been announced that the interment will be private. Ginsburg will be buried alongside her husband at Arlington National Cemetery. Those hoping for a George Floyd style extravaganza will be disappointed although there may be some sort of memorial service. The Ginsburg family are not the kind of people who would flout social distancing recommendations.

    • Replies: @Pericles
    @Jack D

    Or things could get exciting. So many people are having a hard time dealing with this loss.

    https://iconicphotos.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/khomenidead2-jpg.jpeg

  259. @Steve in Greensboro
    @personfellowindividual

    God bless her, eh? Perhaps she will be welcomed into Heaven by chorusing flights of cherubim, the spirits of all the babies aborted during her tenure.

    Replies: @bruce county

    That would be a very loud chorus. About 33.6 million cherubs or approximately the population of Canada since she took her seat.

  260. @Anon
    @Anonymous

    You do realize that without the right to life we can’t really base other rights, such as the right to property or to freedom of conscience, of speech, of association? It all comes down to majority consensus.. which right now looks more and more like mass cultural suicide. It’s a matter of principle.

    Replies: @Hibernian, @TTSSYF, @Jack D

    If by “right to life” you mean the total outlawing of abortion, then you are wrong. Under the common law, which is the basis for our system of laws and freedoms, abortion was permitted until the “quickening” . The quickening was the moment when the mother began to feel the fetus kicking, which is somewhere in the range of 14 to 26 weeks. Grand rhetorical statements like yours are just hot air.

    It’s common sense that in the weeks just before birth, when the fetus is viable, it should be considered to be the equivalent of a baby (and we don’t murder babies). OTOH, it’s also common sense that just after the egg and the sperm are united, the embryo is still just a bunch of cells and doesn’t have the same status as a baby and that it’s unfair for the law to forcibly enlist women to be unwanted baby incubators for 9 months. So really this is just a line drawing problem for the law . The law is full of line drawing problems – we allow you to have a glass of wine with dinner but we don’t let you drive after you’ve had a fifth of Scotch. Absolutist approaches to line drawing problems (e.g. Prohibition) usually lead to poor results because real life is lived in shades of gray.

    • Agree: Etruscan Film Star, Lot
    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @Jack D

    Jack, yours is a relatively pro-life stance compared to 95% of the Democratic Party today. Soon to be 100%.

    , @Rosie
    @Jack D


    So really this is just a line drawing problem for the law . The law is full of line drawing problems
     
    Precisely this. An arbitrary line is better than no line when indeed a line is called for. Literally noone thinks an embryo is the moral equivalent of a child, even if they say they do. When you're hoping for a baby, even an early miscarriage is very sad, but noone suggests that we should have a funeral. Is bereavement leave even customary for a wife's miscarriage?

    I am deeply ambivalent about abortion, and frankly would not be sad to see it outlawed, because I suspect that a woman's right to choose as often as not winds up being a man's right to pressure his girlfriend into getting an abortion. Some men even try to use abortion rights as a justification for putting a stop to child support obligations. Well, if women have to (ahem) choose between the right to abortion and the right to child support, I'll choose child support any day of the week and twice on Sunday, thank you very much.

    Replies: @Muggles, @Reg Cæsar

  261. @TTSSYF
    @Anon

    Spontaneous abortions occur naturally and not infrequently. I don't see why choosing to have an abortion in the very early stages of pregnancy, before the cells have differentiated sufficiently, should be disallowed. I think it should be illegal after a certain number of weeks.

    Replies: @ken

    “Spontaneous abortions occur naturally and not infrequently.” What’s the point? Are dying from a heart attack or being shot in the head of the same moral equivalence?

  262. @Jack D
    @Ed


    early as next week or after Ginsberg is buried.
     
    Jewish custom calls for prompt burial (although not on the Sabbath or on a Jewish holy day). Therefore it will probably be on Monday, although the date has not been announced. It has been announced that the interment will be private. Ginsburg will be buried alongside her husband at Arlington National Cemetery. Those hoping for a George Floyd style extravaganza will be disappointed although there may be some sort of memorial service. The Ginsburg family are not the kind of people who would flout social distancing recommendations.

    Replies: @Pericles

    Or things could get exciting. So many people are having a hard time dealing with this loss.

  263. @Almost Missouri
    @Not Raul

    That's a reasonable point, but Kasler v. Lockyer (2000) was decided before McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010) "incorporated" the Second Amendment, so it may be doubted that Kasler can be controlling law anymore.

    You may say that the question is not whether the ruling still stands, but the character of the woman who made the ruling. And that is also a reasonable point. But what we like about Brown is that she tends to decide cases based on the law as written, and in 2000, prior to McDonald, Kasler was how the law was written.

    We may end up being disappointed anyway, but judicial nominations, i.e., politics, is the art of the possible, and nominating Robert Bork turned out not to be possible.

    Anyway, this is all castles in the sky. The GOP is almost certainly going with guaranteed-to-cuck Amy Barrett, who is politically ideal for the nomination fight, however judicially dubious. That is, if the Romney-Murkowski wing doesn't suicide the party first.

    Replies: @Hibernian

    guaranteed-to-cuck Amy Barrett,

    She’s a serious practicing Catholic.

  264. @Jack D
    @Anon

    If by "right to life" you mean the total outlawing of abortion, then you are wrong. Under the common law, which is the basis for our system of laws and freedoms, abortion was permitted until the "quickening" . The quickening was the moment when the mother began to feel the fetus kicking, which is somewhere in the range of 14 to 26 weeks. Grand rhetorical statements like yours are just hot air.

    It's common sense that in the weeks just before birth, when the fetus is viable, it should be considered to be the equivalent of a baby (and we don't murder babies). OTOH, it's also common sense that just after the egg and the sperm are united, the embryo is still just a bunch of cells and doesn't have the same status as a baby and that it's unfair for the law to forcibly enlist women to be unwanted baby incubators for 9 months. So really this is just a line drawing problem for the law . The law is full of line drawing problems - we allow you to have a glass of wine with dinner but we don't let you drive after you've had a fifth of Scotch. Absolutist approaches to line drawing problems (e.g. Prohibition) usually lead to poor results because real life is lived in shades of gray.

    Replies: @Hibernian, @Rosie

    Jack, yours is a relatively pro-life stance compared to 95% of the Democratic Party today. Soon to be 100%.

  265. @Rosie
    @Reg Cæsar


    How are you going to do that without forcing women onto juries?
     
    You can't. That's why you have to force them onto juries.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    How are you going to do that without forcing women onto juries?

    You can’t. That’s why you have to force them onto juries.

    So you’re anti-choice.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Reg Cæsar


    So you’re anti-choice.
     
    I don't see any problem with the idea that women ought to have the right to have an abortion but not have the right to do or refrain from doing any other thing, such as pay taxes, sign up for jury duty, wear clothes in public, obey traffic lights, etc.

    If you oppose abortion, there are perfectly good reasons for doing so, but suggesting that anyone who supports abortion rights is thereby logically bound to excuse women from any sort of legal duty is not one of them.
  266. @Anonymous
    @Reg Cæsar


    At the last pre-Roe census, America was 87.7% white and 11.1% black. At the last post-Roe census, those figures were 72.4% and 12.6%. They’re bound to be worse when the present one is collated.
     
    Yeah, allowing abortion magically caused all that immigration. #Illogic

    And how are your five biological children doing?
     
    You have five children? Congratulations.

    There was a brief period in the mid-2000s where it looked like middle America had some demographic momentum. But birth rates fell during the great recession and kept falling as the economy recovered. Trump doesn't seem to care about this problem; might not even know about it, but he sure does know about the Dow.

    All that bible thumping, anti-abortion sentiment, and statistical illiteracy is simply not providing the demographic and cultural strength it's selling. If it were motivating thots to keep their legs closed and families to have many children, I'd be willing to put up with it even though I'm a fedora-wearing atheist. But it isn't. Middle America is hollowing out. The stuff about Calexit is crazy, all the Democrats have to do is wait a few more election cycles for the brown tide to wash over Texas.

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Yeah, allowing abortion magically caused all that immigration. #Illogic

    Just because correlation doesn’t necessarily mean causation, doesn’t imply there is no connection.

    Two phenomena neither of which cause the other could very well be the results of a common third factor. That your car is stuck in the driveway one morning in February didn’t cause the neighborhood school to close, but the two are closely connected. Jung called this “synchronicity”.

    Compare the NARAL, NOW, and NRLC ratings with those of NumbersUSA, and report back to us.

  267. @Eqas65
    @R.G. Camara

    Why should abortion be made illegal? 75% or so of women who have abortions are negroes, and the white women who have abortion are mostly mudsharks.

    I also believe that the occasional non-mudshark white women who have abortions are mostly meth addicts who shouldn’t be having kids anyway.

    I’m always amazed at the number of anti-abortion cuckservatives on UNZ.

    Replies: @Eric Novak, @ken, @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan, @Reg Cæsar

    I’m always amazed at the number of anti-abortion cuckservatives on UNZ.

    What is the moral difference between dispatching an embryotic Negro and dispatching an adult one? An open hunting season on the the latter would be much more effective than the present one on the former is proving to be.

    Indeed, the forced abortions that so horrify Hillary in countries like China would work, too, especially if combined with hysterectomies.

    You clearly believe the ends justify the means, so you have no argument against these tactics, other than the cuckish one that they’re unpopular and won’t pass.

    To paraphrase the teenage Mr Altman,

    Genocide is painless, it brings on many changes, and you can take or leave it if you please.

    • Replies: @GeneralRipper
    @Reg Cæsar


    Indeed, the forced abortions that so horrify Hillary in countries like China would work, too, especially if combined with hysterectomies.
     
    You can NEVER take anything filth like Hillary Clinton say at face value.

    Years ago Molly Yard, President of NOW had no problem with forced abortions.

    https://www.liveaction.org/news/national-organization-women-china-one-child/

    So much for "Choice"
  268. @PhysicistDave
    @R.G. Camara

    R.G. Camara wrote:


    Shit is about to get very, very real. The insanity of 2020 is about to pushed to 11. Trump & the Repubs could force a candidate through before election day, and the D’s could do nothing but violence. Abortion is their sacrament.
     
    I wonder. I don't think the average black in the ghetto really gets that worked up over the Supreme Court: many blacks do feel, rightly or wrongly, that cops are beastly to them. But do they hate the Supreme Court? Or ignore it?

    Similarly for abortion. Are black folks fanatical about abortion? This survey seems to show that blacks are in the middle between Dems and Republicans.

    Of course, the Woke White Left is indeed fanatical about abortion. But it seems to me a lot easier to get random moderates to virtue-signal by saying they support "Black Lives" than by saying they support unlimited abortions.

    In my experience, outside of the crazy Left, most Americans know that abortion is a difficult and tragic issue.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @R.G. Camara, @MarkinLA

    Have you not seen that these riots are organized professionals using random black deaths as excuses?

    RBG’s death is just another excuse, and an excuse to dial it up a notch.

    • Replies: @PhysicistDave
    @R.G. Camara

    R.G. Camara asked me:


    Have you not seen that these riots are organized professionals using random black deaths as excuses?
     
    Yes, I have. The people behind the riots are "Woke" white racist scum who do not give a damn about black lives. And that really angers me, since I do care about the lives of my fellow citizens, whatever their race.
  269. @Reg Cæsar
    @Eqas65


    I’m always amazed at the number of anti-abortion cuckservatives on UNZ.
     
    What is the moral difference between dispatching an embryotic Negro and dispatching an adult one? An open hunting season on the the latter would be much more effective than the present one on the former is proving to be.

    Indeed, the forced abortions that so horrify Hillary in countries like China would work, too, especially if combined with hysterectomies.

    You clearly believe the ends justify the means, so you have no argument against these tactics, other than the cuckish one that they're unpopular and won't pass.

    To paraphrase the teenage Mr Altman,

    Genocide is painless, it brings on many changes, and you can take or leave it if you please.

    Replies: @GeneralRipper

    Indeed, the forced abortions that so horrify Hillary in countries like China would work, too, especially if combined with hysterectomies.

    You can NEVER take anything filth like Hillary Clinton say at face value.

    Years ago Molly Yard, President of NOW had no problem with forced abortions.

    https://www.liveaction.org/news/national-organization-women-china-one-child/

    So much for “Choice”

  270. @Reg Cæsar
    @Rosie



    How are you going to do that without forcing women onto juries?
     
    You can’t. That’s why you have to force them onto juries.
     
    So you're anti-choice.

    Replies: @Rosie

    So you’re anti-choice.

    I don’t see any problem with the idea that women ought to have the right to have an abortion but not have the right to do or refrain from doing any other thing, such as pay taxes, sign up for jury duty, wear clothes in public, obey traffic lights, etc.

    If you oppose abortion, there are perfectly good reasons for doing so, but suggesting that anyone who supports abortion rights is thereby logically bound to excuse women from any sort of legal duty is not one of them.

    • Agree: Muggles
  271. • Replies: @Reg Cæsar
    @MEH 0910

    What's most impressive is the variety of schools whence his potential nominations received their law degrees. Everyone on today's Court went to Yale or Harvard. Only two on Wikipedia's list went to Harvard, and none to Yale.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_Supreme_Court_candidates#Possible_nominees

    No, they went to the likes of Northwestern, Chicago, Notre Dame, Stanford, Boalt Hall (Berkeley), Duke, Kansas... Kansas!

    Now that's my kind of diversity. In addition, his female picks are quite attractive for ladies not far on either side of 50. Never mind a Court that looks like America; how about a Court that America would want to look at?

    Replies: @MarkinLA, @Hibernian

    , @MEH 0910
    @MEH 0910

    https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1307509813425905666

    Replies: @MEH 0910

  272. @Jack D
    @Anon

    If by "right to life" you mean the total outlawing of abortion, then you are wrong. Under the common law, which is the basis for our system of laws and freedoms, abortion was permitted until the "quickening" . The quickening was the moment when the mother began to feel the fetus kicking, which is somewhere in the range of 14 to 26 weeks. Grand rhetorical statements like yours are just hot air.

    It's common sense that in the weeks just before birth, when the fetus is viable, it should be considered to be the equivalent of a baby (and we don't murder babies). OTOH, it's also common sense that just after the egg and the sperm are united, the embryo is still just a bunch of cells and doesn't have the same status as a baby and that it's unfair for the law to forcibly enlist women to be unwanted baby incubators for 9 months. So really this is just a line drawing problem for the law . The law is full of line drawing problems - we allow you to have a glass of wine with dinner but we don't let you drive after you've had a fifth of Scotch. Absolutist approaches to line drawing problems (e.g. Prohibition) usually lead to poor results because real life is lived in shades of gray.

    Replies: @Hibernian, @Rosie

    So really this is just a line drawing problem for the law . The law is full of line drawing problems

    Precisely this. An arbitrary line is better than no line when indeed a line is called for. Literally noone thinks an embryo is the moral equivalent of a child, even if they say they do. When you’re hoping for a baby, even an early miscarriage is very sad, but noone suggests that we should have a funeral. Is bereavement leave even customary for a wife’s miscarriage?

    I am deeply ambivalent about abortion, and frankly would not be sad to see it outlawed, because I suspect that a woman’s right to choose as often as not winds up being a man’s right to pressure his girlfriend into getting an abortion. Some men even try to use abortion rights as a justification for putting a stop to child support obligations. Well, if women have to (ahem) choose between the right to abortion and the right to child support, I’ll choose child support any day of the week and twice on Sunday, thank you very much.

    • Replies: @Muggles
    @Rosie


    Well, if women have to (ahem) choose between the right to abortion and the right to child support, I’ll choose child support any day of the week and twice on Sunday, thank you very much.
     
    The problem with this logic is that "the right to child support" is just that, some notional legal "right."

    Despite fairly draconian laws about collecting it, very few underclass unwed mothers receive full child support from the fathers of these children.

    Why? Daddy is in prison, jail, back to the home country, on welfare, remarried and broke or simply vanished. Or baby mama lives with daddy but makes all of the legal income. So daddy skates.

    These barely wanted or unwanted children end up on the public dime. Economists call this an "externality" where your actions end up foisting costs upon others who have no say.

    If all welfare children were put up for adoption (mandatory) you'd see change. Of course POC babies might be a surplus commodity. Then orphanages. Which are out of fashion.

    Imagine if the welfare babies now grown up (sorta) killing each other in S. Chicago had been raised in decent orphanages with strict discipline and enforced educational attendance, church going, etc.

    Fewer for-welfare children and the ones who born anyway have at least the 19th century chance of becoming responsible adults. Not perfect, but something.

    Personally I find abortion morally suspect but it isn't my choice. Feral children are the alternative.

    Replies: @Rosie

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @Rosie


    Well, if women have to (ahem) choose between the right to abortion and the right to child support, I’ll choose child support any day of the week and twice on Sunday, thank you very much.
     
    Pregnancy itself constitutes child support. The original variety. Take it away, and...

    Support is more than money. Sometimes it's tucking the kids into bed.
  273. …I suspect that a woman’s right to choose as often as not winds up being a man’s right to pressure his girlfriend into getting an abortion.

    This.

  274. @Rosie
    @Jack D


    So really this is just a line drawing problem for the law . The law is full of line drawing problems
     
    Precisely this. An arbitrary line is better than no line when indeed a line is called for. Literally noone thinks an embryo is the moral equivalent of a child, even if they say they do. When you're hoping for a baby, even an early miscarriage is very sad, but noone suggests that we should have a funeral. Is bereavement leave even customary for a wife's miscarriage?

    I am deeply ambivalent about abortion, and frankly would not be sad to see it outlawed, because I suspect that a woman's right to choose as often as not winds up being a man's right to pressure his girlfriend into getting an abortion. Some men even try to use abortion rights as a justification for putting a stop to child support obligations. Well, if women have to (ahem) choose between the right to abortion and the right to child support, I'll choose child support any day of the week and twice on Sunday, thank you very much.

    Replies: @Muggles, @Reg Cæsar

    Well, if women have to (ahem) choose between the right to abortion and the right to child support, I’ll choose child support any day of the week and twice on Sunday, thank you very much.

    The problem with this logic is that “the right to child support” is just that, some notional legal “right.”

    Despite fairly draconian laws about collecting it, very few underclass unwed mothers receive full child support from the fathers of these children.

    Why? Daddy is in prison, jail, back to the home country, on welfare, remarried and broke or simply vanished. Or baby mama lives with daddy but makes all of the legal income. So daddy skates.

    These barely wanted or unwanted children end up on the public dime. Economists call this an “externality” where your actions end up foisting costs upon others who have no say.

    If all welfare children were put up for adoption (mandatory) you’d see change. Of course POC babies might be a surplus commodity. Then orphanages. Which are out of fashion.

    Imagine if the welfare babies now grown up (sorta) killing each other in S. Chicago had been raised in decent orphanages with strict discipline and enforced educational attendance, church going, etc.

    Fewer for-welfare children and the ones who born anyway have at least the 19th century chance of becoming responsible adults. Not perfect, but something.

    Personally I find abortion morally suspect but it isn’t my choice. Feral children are the alternative.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Muggles


    If all welfare children were put up for adoption (mandatory) you’d see change.
     
    As a welfare baby now all grown up, I am very grateful that the state didn't forcibly remove me from my mother's care.

    Cruelty is sometimes cheaper than humanity. Fortunately, we have the technology to be fair to taxpayers and humane to unwed mothers at the same time. There is long-term, idiot-proof birth control, and any society with the will to impose mandatory adoption would certainly have the will to condition welfare on placement of an intrauterine device for contraception.

    Imagine if the welfare babies now grown up (sorta) killing each other in S. Chicago had been raised in decent orphanages with strict discipline and enforced educational attendance, church going, etc.
     
    Welfare doesn't necessarily lead to those results. You are confusing policy problems with demographic problems, a surprisingly common error around these parts.

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @Muggles

  275. @Reg Cæsar
    @Dan Hayes


    More likely you don’t want a corpse hanging around in the desert!
     
    To quote a notable child molester:


    Tan me hide when I'm dead, Fred
    Tan me hide when I'm dead
    So we tanned his hide when he died, Clyde
    And that's it hangin' on the shed!



    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RviuTfdfArM

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar

    Has anybody seen Rolf Harris and Manfred Mann in the same room? They claim the same hemisphere and countries on the same ocean as birthplaces. In years ending in zero. Both are alive today. Highly suspicious…


    Oh, wait…

    https://www2.bfi.org.uk/films-tv-people/4ce2b8db435eb

    https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6900722/fullcredits/

    But it could have been a trick.

  276. @Rosie
    @Jack D


    So really this is just a line drawing problem for the law . The law is full of line drawing problems
     
    Precisely this. An arbitrary line is better than no line when indeed a line is called for. Literally noone thinks an embryo is the moral equivalent of a child, even if they say they do. When you're hoping for a baby, even an early miscarriage is very sad, but noone suggests that we should have a funeral. Is bereavement leave even customary for a wife's miscarriage?

    I am deeply ambivalent about abortion, and frankly would not be sad to see it outlawed, because I suspect that a woman's right to choose as often as not winds up being a man's right to pressure his girlfriend into getting an abortion. Some men even try to use abortion rights as a justification for putting a stop to child support obligations. Well, if women have to (ahem) choose between the right to abortion and the right to child support, I'll choose child support any day of the week and twice on Sunday, thank you very much.

    Replies: @Muggles, @Reg Cæsar

    Well, if women have to (ahem) choose between the right to abortion and the right to child support, I’ll choose child support any day of the week and twice on Sunday, thank you very much.

    Pregnancy itself constitutes child support. The original variety. Take it away, and…

    Support is more than money. Sometimes it’s tucking the kids into bed.

  277. @MEH 0910
    https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1307434532770119682
    https://twitter.com/peterbakernyt/status/1307374803536445443

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @MEH 0910

    What’s most impressive is the variety of schools whence his potential nominations received their law degrees. Everyone on today’s Court went to Yale or Harvard. Only two on Wikipedia’s list went to Harvard, and none to Yale.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_Supreme_Court_candidates#Possible_nominees

    No, they went to the likes of Northwestern, Chicago, Notre Dame, Stanford, Boalt Hall (Berkeley), Duke, Kansas… Kansas!

    Now that’s my kind of diversity. In addition, his female picks are quite attractive for ladies not far on either side of 50. Never mind a Court that looks like America; how about a Court that America would want to look at?

    • Replies: @MarkinLA
    @Reg Cæsar

    No women, no Jews should be the most important criteria. What female justice has been better than worthless?

    , @Hibernian
    @Reg Cæsar

    If we switch our focus from the list to his two picks so far, both of them were Ivy Leaguers, and so is Lagoa. Coney Barrett is not, she's a Notre Dame Law graduate.

  278. @MEH 0910
    https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1307434532770119682
    https://twitter.com/peterbakernyt/status/1307374803536445443

    Replies: @Reg Cæsar, @MEH 0910

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
    @MEH 0910

    https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/1308596817769234432

    Replies: @MEH 0910

  279. @Muggles
    @Rosie


    Well, if women have to (ahem) choose between the right to abortion and the right to child support, I’ll choose child support any day of the week and twice on Sunday, thank you very much.
     
    The problem with this logic is that "the right to child support" is just that, some notional legal "right."

    Despite fairly draconian laws about collecting it, very few underclass unwed mothers receive full child support from the fathers of these children.

    Why? Daddy is in prison, jail, back to the home country, on welfare, remarried and broke or simply vanished. Or baby mama lives with daddy but makes all of the legal income. So daddy skates.

    These barely wanted or unwanted children end up on the public dime. Economists call this an "externality" where your actions end up foisting costs upon others who have no say.

    If all welfare children were put up for adoption (mandatory) you'd see change. Of course POC babies might be a surplus commodity. Then orphanages. Which are out of fashion.

    Imagine if the welfare babies now grown up (sorta) killing each other in S. Chicago had been raised in decent orphanages with strict discipline and enforced educational attendance, church going, etc.

    Fewer for-welfare children and the ones who born anyway have at least the 19th century chance of becoming responsible adults. Not perfect, but something.

    Personally I find abortion morally suspect but it isn't my choice. Feral children are the alternative.

    Replies: @Rosie

    If all welfare children were put up for adoption (mandatory) you’d see change.

    As a welfare baby now all grown up, I am very grateful that the state didn’t forcibly remove me from my mother’s care.

    Cruelty is sometimes cheaper than humanity. Fortunately, we have the technology to be fair to taxpayers and humane to unwed mothers at the same time. There is long-term, idiot-proof birth control, and any society with the will to impose mandatory adoption would certainly have the will to condition welfare on placement of an intrauterine device for contraception.

    Imagine if the welfare babies now grown up (sorta) killing each other in S. Chicago had been raised in decent orphanages with strict discipline and enforced educational attendance, church going, etc.

    Welfare doesn’t necessarily lead to those results. You are confusing policy problems with demographic problems, a surprisingly common error around these parts.

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    @Rosie

    Children in state "care" end up in homeless shelters, prison, mental hospital.


    "we have the technology to be fair to taxpayers and humane to unwed mothers at the same time"

    But we don't have the will to say that it's shameful to have babies with no father, alas.


    If twenty pounds could buy the globe
    It's this I'd never do, sir.
    Or were my kin as poor as Job
    I would not raise 'em so, sir.
    If I lay with you this night
    We'd get a young child together
    And you'd be gone ere the nine months end
    And then where should I find a father?
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHWSFQJQn0k
    , @Muggles
    @Rosie


    There is long-term, idiot-proof birth control, and any society with the will to impose mandatory adoption would certainly have the will to condition welfare on placement of an intrauterine device for contraception.
     
    I'm not sure that would be more acceptable than mandatory adoption or orphanages. These devices can be removed so unless you do mandatory regular exams or sterilizations you would still have this problem. These seem worse than adoptions/orphanages. If the mothers later demonstrate financial capability/responsibility you could return the children (depending on age, etc.) from orphanages.

    I was suggesting this only for welfare mothers who aren't receiving financial child support from the fathers. Not everyone on welfare with a child. It is particularly a problem when mothers continue to add children w/o the financial means or collecting necessary payments from the fathers. If they still qualify for govt. welfare, that's okay.

    Not sure what you mean by "demographic." It is a problem regardless of race. Also, I suspect that of the perps and victims in S. Chicago of the weekend carnage, close to 100% were from unwed mothers on welfare. Not all in that situation become gangsters of course. But the current financial incentive for financially irresponsible motherhood/fatherhood needs fixing. I agree that being raised by one's biological mother (and father) is highly desirable.

    Replies: @Rosie

  280. @The Last Real Calvinist
    @Jim Don Bob

    No one denies that Ginsburg was very intelligent. I can't imagine her uttering this florid, tacky phrase, even in extremis -- 'my most fervent wish' belongs on a cross-stitch sampler.

    Also, its content betrays its orgin, i.e. likely from party flack. For example, presidents aren't 'installed'.

    It's so transparently made up as to be a taunt.

    Replies: @International Jew

    Ginsburg would have said “that I not be”, not “that I will not be”.

  281. Hibernian (Item #264)
    Amy Barrett has adopted two Haitian children. This shows she is a do-gooder which would be unfortunately reflected in weak-kneed Supreme Court judgements.

  282. @ConservaWhig
    Before: The Most Important Election Of Our Lifetime

    Now: The Most Important Election Of Anyone's Lifetime Ever

    Replies: @Buck Ransom, @BenKenobi, @Ray Caruso

    Not really. There have been many more important U.S. presidential elections than this one. One of them, surely, was the 1964 election. Had Barry Goldwater defeated the execrable Lyndon Baines Johnson instead of being creamed by him in a wave of ridiculous sentimentality about the assassinated John Kennedy, there might not have been a 1965 Immigration Act and the consequent transformation of America into a Third World “diversity” zoo. TitanicNation hit the iceberg a while ago—in fact, it has really hit several icebergs, the 1965 Immigration Act being only one of them. This election is the equivalent of a bid to keep the pumps working for another 20 minutes. Even if it succeeds, the ship is still going to sink into the dark abyss, and soon.

  283. @PhysicistDave
    @Wilkey

    Wilkey wrote:


    But Republicans won’t be waiting until after the election to confirm a new justice. Ginsburg has been on her death bed for quite some time, so it’s hard to believe they don’t have a nominee all lined up. There *will* be a confirmation vote before the election because Republicans need to turn out the base, and Supreme Court appointments do that.
     
    It looks as if they have lost Murkowski, Romney, and Collins. Leaves it at 50-50: they cannot lose anyone else.

    Pence can break the tie.

    Wilkey also wrote:

    And the nominee will probably be a woman to (a) avoid more sexual assault allegations, (b) improve GOP prospects with the women’s vote, and (c) encourage RINO senators to support her.
     
    Politically, the best pick might be Neomi Rao, an Indian Parsee who converted to Judaism! But her time so far on the bench is pretty short.

    Those in the know claim it will be Amy Coney Barrett. She's very white and will inflame the Left on abortion.

    But if Trump can get it over before election day, I think the Left will have trouble ginning up outrage over a fait accompli. And it will encourage Trump's base.

    Replies: @Wilkey, @Wilkey, @Reg Cæsar

    Pence can break the tie.

    You know what tie the VP can’t break? The Senate’s vote for his own office should the election be thrown there, as in 1836. Let’s hope it doesn’t come to that.

    The incumbent VP has the job of announcing his victory (2013– Biden– 2005, 1997, 1985, etc), promotion (1989, 1837, 1801, 1797), or loss (2001, 1993, 1981, 1969, 1961, 1933, etc).

    VP Sherman escaped announcing the worst loss ever by dying in 1912. Not sure who did the honors in 1913, but here’s a picture:

    Let’s hope he can call out his own name, as Biden called Pence’s in 2017. Otherwise, it’ll be “Honi soit Kamala Pence”.

  284. @68W58
    @njguy73

    PJ (who I once really admired) is so conservative that he voted for Hillary in 2016.

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon

    O’Rourke was anti-Trump since forever. He was funny once, in “Eat The Rich” days. During the 2016 campaign he was all over the BBC/Guardian doing his “Trump is your drunk uncle” stuff.

    https://www.salon.com/2015/09/24/p_j_orourke_on_why_trump_will_collapse_ann_coulters_a_fraud_and_how_national_lampoon_created_modern_comedy/

  285. @Rosie
    @Muggles


    If all welfare children were put up for adoption (mandatory) you’d see change.
     
    As a welfare baby now all grown up, I am very grateful that the state didn't forcibly remove me from my mother's care.

    Cruelty is sometimes cheaper than humanity. Fortunately, we have the technology to be fair to taxpayers and humane to unwed mothers at the same time. There is long-term, idiot-proof birth control, and any society with the will to impose mandatory adoption would certainly have the will to condition welfare on placement of an intrauterine device for contraception.

    Imagine if the welfare babies now grown up (sorta) killing each other in S. Chicago had been raised in decent orphanages with strict discipline and enforced educational attendance, church going, etc.
     
    Welfare doesn't necessarily lead to those results. You are confusing policy problems with demographic problems, a surprisingly common error around these parts.

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @Muggles

    Children in state “care” end up in homeless shelters, prison, mental hospital.

    “we have the technology to be fair to taxpayers and humane to unwed mothers at the same time”

    But we don’t have the will to say that it’s shameful to have babies with no father, alas.

    If twenty pounds could buy the globe
    It’s this I’d never do, sir.
    Or were my kin as poor as Job
    I would not raise ’em so, sir.
    If I lay with you this night
    We’d get a young child together
    And you’d be gone ere the nine months end
    And then where should I find a father?

  286. @ThreeCranes
    @The Spirit of Enoch Powell

    The uneasy laughter from the crowd as Trump says, "You have good genes." As though they are not comfortable with admitting that genetics count, that there could be some truth in the notion that not all people are created equal and that they came out on top in the genetic lottery, as though that thought will lead, inexorably, to Nazism and the gas chambers and so must be orphaned.

    Yet everyone in the crowd, if cornered, would fight for their children in preference to the survival of the invading Somalian's children. It's this reticence to own their own feelings that divides a white person internally and makes them, in their own introspective eyes, hypocrites and therefore , objectively now, vulnerable to manipulation by other races. Poor whites. They don't realize that other races don't understand white's internal awareness of their own hypocrisy--because other races, for the most part, are incapable of introspection and so cannot imagine what goes on in a white person's mind--but those other races can smell white's tentativeness and have an instinct for exploiting it.

    An honest person doesn't stand a chance in a battle with a dishonest person. A civilized person doesn't stand a chance against an animal.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    It’s this reticence to own their own feelings that divides a white person internally and makes them, in their own introspective eyes, hypocrites and therefore , objectively now, vulnerable to manipulation by other races.

    Can you explain how under your theory that makes them vulnerable to manipulation?

  287. @ScarletNumber
    @Curle


    Not if you’re the male and the defendant, you’d love an all female jury.
     
    Only if you are good looking. If you are ugly you want a male jury.

    Replies: @Anonymous

    Only if you are good looking. If you are ugly you want a male jury.

    Is this true?

  288. @Rosie
    @Muggles


    If all welfare children were put up for adoption (mandatory) you’d see change.
     
    As a welfare baby now all grown up, I am very grateful that the state didn't forcibly remove me from my mother's care.

    Cruelty is sometimes cheaper than humanity. Fortunately, we have the technology to be fair to taxpayers and humane to unwed mothers at the same time. There is long-term, idiot-proof birth control, and any society with the will to impose mandatory adoption would certainly have the will to condition welfare on placement of an intrauterine device for contraception.

    Imagine if the welfare babies now grown up (sorta) killing each other in S. Chicago had been raised in decent orphanages with strict discipline and enforced educational attendance, church going, etc.
     
    Welfare doesn't necessarily lead to those results. You are confusing policy problems with demographic problems, a surprisingly common error around these parts.

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon, @Muggles

    There is long-term, idiot-proof birth control, and any society with the will to impose mandatory adoption would certainly have the will to condition welfare on placement of an intrauterine device for contraception.

    I’m not sure that would be more acceptable than mandatory adoption or orphanages. These devices can be removed so unless you do mandatory regular exams or sterilizations you would still have this problem. These seem worse than adoptions/orphanages. If the mothers later demonstrate financial capability/responsibility you could return the children (depending on age, etc.) from orphanages.

    I was suggesting this only for welfare mothers who aren’t receiving financial child support from the fathers. Not everyone on welfare with a child. It is particularly a problem when mothers continue to add children w/o the financial means or collecting necessary payments from the fathers. If they still qualify for govt. welfare, that’s okay.

    Not sure what you mean by “demographic.” It is a problem regardless of race. Also, I suspect that of the perps and victims in S. Chicago of the weekend carnage, close to 100% were from unwed mothers on welfare. Not all in that situation become gangsters of course. But the current financial incentive for financially irresponsible motherhood/fatherhood needs fixing. I agree that being raised by one’s biological mother (and father) is highly desirable.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Muggles


    Not sure what you mean by “demographic.” It is a problem regardless of race.
     
    I wish White women would have more children, even if they have to rely on public assistance to do so.

    I’m not sure that would be more acceptable than mandatory adoption or orphanages. These devices can be removed so unless you do mandatory regular exams or sterilizations you would still have this problem.
     
    You are assuming that out-of-wedlock births are planned. I don't think White women deliberately get pregnant to get welfare, and if indeed they are doing this, that says more about elite treachery in destroying our economy than anything else IMO.
  289. @Rosie
    @Reg Cæsar


    She determined to turn this around, and did so after 18 years. Her colleagues got Louisiana’s opt-in system for women (the same as Florida’s) overturned in the mid-’70s. In 1979, in her last case before (as opposed to aboard) SCOTUS, Missouri’s opt-out system was also overturned.
     
    Well, that's one good thing she did, then. It is completely inappropriate to have an all-male jury in a woman's trial, as it would be to have an all-female jury in a man's trial.

    Replies: @AnotherDad, @Reg Cæsar, @Curle, @Anonymous

    Rosie, was Justice Ginsburg a personal hero of yours?

    • Replies: @Rosie
    @Anonymous


    Rosie, was Justice Ginsburg a personal hero of yours?
     
    No, but the more people like you talk about her, the more I like her.
  290. @Anonymous
    @Rosie

    Rosie, was Justice Ginsburg a personal hero of yours?

    https://twitter.com/sairarahman/status/1307313810668052482

    Replies: @Rosie

    Rosie, was Justice Ginsburg a personal hero of yours?

    No, but the more people like you talk about her, the more I like her.

  291. @Muggles
    @Rosie


    There is long-term, idiot-proof birth control, and any society with the will to impose mandatory adoption would certainly have the will to condition welfare on placement of an intrauterine device for contraception.
     
    I'm not sure that would be more acceptable than mandatory adoption or orphanages. These devices can be removed so unless you do mandatory regular exams or sterilizations you would still have this problem. These seem worse than adoptions/orphanages. If the mothers later demonstrate financial capability/responsibility you could return the children (depending on age, etc.) from orphanages.

    I was suggesting this only for welfare mothers who aren't receiving financial child support from the fathers. Not everyone on welfare with a child. It is particularly a problem when mothers continue to add children w/o the financial means or collecting necessary payments from the fathers. If they still qualify for govt. welfare, that's okay.

    Not sure what you mean by "demographic." It is a problem regardless of race. Also, I suspect that of the perps and victims in S. Chicago of the weekend carnage, close to 100% were from unwed mothers on welfare. Not all in that situation become gangsters of course. But the current financial incentive for financially irresponsible motherhood/fatherhood needs fixing. I agree that being raised by one's biological mother (and father) is highly desirable.

    Replies: @Rosie

    Not sure what you mean by “demographic.” It is a problem regardless of race.

    I wish White women would have more children, even if they have to rely on public assistance to do so.

    I’m not sure that would be more acceptable than mandatory adoption or orphanages. These devices can be removed so unless you do mandatory regular exams or sterilizations you would still have this problem.

    You are assuming that out-of-wedlock births are planned. I don’t think White women deliberately get pregnant to get welfare, and if indeed they are doing this, that says more about elite treachery in destroying our economy than anything else IMO.

  292. @PhysicistDave
    @R.G. Camara

    R.G. Camara wrote:


    Shit is about to get very, very real. The insanity of 2020 is about to pushed to 11. Trump & the Repubs could force a candidate through before election day, and the D’s could do nothing but violence. Abortion is their sacrament.
     
    I wonder. I don't think the average black in the ghetto really gets that worked up over the Supreme Court: many blacks do feel, rightly or wrongly, that cops are beastly to them. But do they hate the Supreme Court? Or ignore it?

    Similarly for abortion. Are black folks fanatical about abortion? This survey seems to show that blacks are in the middle between Dems and Republicans.

    Of course, the Woke White Left is indeed fanatical about abortion. But it seems to me a lot easier to get random moderates to virtue-signal by saying they support "Black Lives" than by saying they support unlimited abortions.

    In my experience, outside of the crazy Left, most Americans know that abortion is a difficult and tragic issue.

    Replies: @Buzz Mohawk, @R.G. Camara, @MarkinLA

    What has RBG’s death got to do with their eternal desire to loot and get something for nothing – absolutely nothing. But it is as good an excuse as any other.

  293. @Reg Cæsar
    @MEH 0910

    What's most impressive is the variety of schools whence his potential nominations received their law degrees. Everyone on today's Court went to Yale or Harvard. Only two on Wikipedia's list went to Harvard, and none to Yale.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_Supreme_Court_candidates#Possible_nominees

    No, they went to the likes of Northwestern, Chicago, Notre Dame, Stanford, Boalt Hall (Berkeley), Duke, Kansas... Kansas!

    Now that's my kind of diversity. In addition, his female picks are quite attractive for ladies not far on either side of 50. Never mind a Court that looks like America; how about a Court that America would want to look at?

    Replies: @MarkinLA, @Hibernian

    No women, no Jews should be the most important criteria. What female justice has been better than worthless?

  294. @Reg Cæsar
    @MEH 0910

    What's most impressive is the variety of schools whence his potential nominations received their law degrees. Everyone on today's Court went to Yale or Harvard. Only two on Wikipedia's list went to Harvard, and none to Yale.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_Supreme_Court_candidates#Possible_nominees

    No, they went to the likes of Northwestern, Chicago, Notre Dame, Stanford, Boalt Hall (Berkeley), Duke, Kansas... Kansas!

    Now that's my kind of diversity. In addition, his female picks are quite attractive for ladies not far on either side of 50. Never mind a Court that looks like America; how about a Court that America would want to look at?

    Replies: @MarkinLA, @Hibernian

    If we switch our focus from the list to his two picks so far, both of them were Ivy Leaguers, and so is Lagoa. Coney Barrett is not, she’s a Notre Dame Law graduate.

  295. @Clyde
    Sen. Susan Collins
    Sen. Chuck Grassley
    Sen. Lisa Murkowski
    Sen. Mitt Romney

    Twitter says they will negate Trump-McConnell by refusing to vote until 2021

    Replies: @Hibernian, @MEH 0910, @MEH 0910

  296. @Clyde
    Sen. Susan Collins
    Sen. Chuck Grassley
    Sen. Lisa Murkowski
    Sen. Mitt Romney

    Twitter says they will negate Trump-McConnell by refusing to vote until 2021

    Replies: @Hibernian, @MEH 0910, @MEH 0910


    [MORE]

  297. @MEH 0910
    @MEH 0910

    https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1307509813425905666

    Replies: @MEH 0910

    • Replies: @MEH 0910
    @MEH 0910

    https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1309588919256834057

  298. @MEH 0910
    @MEH 0910

    https://twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/1308596817769234432

    Replies: @MEH 0910

  299. @R.G. Camara
    @PhysicistDave

    Have you not seen that these riots are organized professionals using random black deaths as excuses?

    RBG's death is just another excuse, and an excuse to dial it up a notch.

    Replies: @PhysicistDave

    R.G. Camara asked me:

    Have you not seen that these riots are organized professionals using random black deaths as excuses?

    Yes, I have. The people behind the riots are “Woke” white racist scum who do not give a damn about black lives. And that really angers me, since I do care about the lives of my fellow citizens, whatever their race.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS