SuzukiSavage.com /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Shallow reasoning or poor sport? /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1458486541 Message started by raydawg on 03/20/16 at 08:09:01

Title: Shallow reasoning or poor sport? Post by raydawg on 03/20/16 at 08:09:01 I have read the comments of Biden re: SC nominee, when the shoe was on the other foot, and yes, hypocrisy no knows boundaries..... However, when is this "getting even" mentality by the parties going to change, if ever? Is this bullchit not part of why we have people supporting Trump? Anyway, why is Merrick Garland not a consideration for the SC? You can find lots of good reports of him, and he has the extremes and fringe of the parties both agreeing he is not their Judge, which means to me then he might be a very good pick.... Can someone explain why he should not get a fair hearing and considerations?

Title: Re: Shallow reasoning or poor sport? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 03/20/16 at 09:55:48 I'll hafta look at the guy, but, the Getting Even thing is just shadow boxing. There's no Real rivalry between the parties. It's All for the Establishment, not the People. Were there Truly a separation of ideology, we would see legislation repealed after the voters got fed up with the B.S.and voted the bums out. Please note, when a Particularly controversial piece of legislation comes up now, they All step back, wring their hands, and, with much fanfare, they put aside their Differences and, bilaterally, For the Good of the People, make the Hard  choices. Why? Because neither party wants to be blamed for the results. How many Former congressmen live in poverty? Just what IS the cost of Not being reelected? How many times do we see people who were in D.C. go to work for a company that they Were in a position to oversee when they were an elected Representative? Anything you have on this guy that would make me like him, or not, post links.

Title: Re: Shallow reasoning or poor sport? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 03/20/16 at 09:59:41 Didn't take long Garland's vote called for a review of the court's ruling, which invalidated the handgun ban. All 10 judges would have been a part of that decision. He has no grasp of the constitution or freedom.

Title: Re: Shallow reasoning or poor sport? Post by Serowbot on 03/20/16 at 10:14:23 Rep's are hoping for a hail Mary miracle. Odds are,.. Hillary will be next, and this bird in the hand will be taken away... Congress 2016?.. toss Up or Worse: 18 Rep, 4 Dem If things go as expected... there will be a much more Liberal nominee to come.

Title: Re: Shallow reasoning or poor sport? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 03/20/16 at 10:42:37 Yeah, odds are, I was right, when Obama was selected. Which would, for the astute, create some questions about the system.

Title: Re: Shallow reasoning or poor sport? Post by raydawg on 03/20/16 at 11:21:31 7E687F627A6F62790D0 wrote: Rep's are hoping for a hail Mary miracle. Odds are,.. Hillary will be next, and this bird in the hand will be taken away... Congress 2016?.. toss Up or Worse: 18 Rep, 4 Dem If things go as expected... there will be a much more Liberal nominee to come. Not so sure..... The Clinton's are about themselves. She would never seat a judge who might take away her power of self. They would be happy as a Monarchy. Remember triangulation.....??? Keeps them playing the ends, against the middle, to their bidding. Watch and see.

Title: Re: Shallow reasoning or poor sport? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 03/20/16 at 11:58:34 Loading up the bench to back up the administration isn't giving up power. She is happy to have robe wearing cohorts to assist in her efforts.

Title: Re: Shallow reasoning or poor sport? Post by raydawg on 03/20/16 at 12:19:13 7B646265787F4E7E4E76646823110 wrote: Loading up the bench to back up the administration isn't giving up power. She is happy to have robe wearing cohorts to assist in her efforts. I think you are not looking at it correctly. Look, it took a little kid to tell the king he was butt-azzed nekked  ;D It is poor judgement, not wise, to seek from one source. Remember the Clinton's sought out Richard Morris ( won't let me use his name DicX )  to advise them of what their own beliefs did not avail. She knows her only real chance to be elected was to tap the democrats for a ride, not that she will govern to their demands. It will be her own welfare and legacy that TRUMPS  ;D

Title: Re: Shallow reasoning or poor sport? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 03/20/16 at 13:42:47 I'm sure that from your perspective, knowing what you know, how things connect, you believe that was somehow informative and somehow gonna change my perspective, but I don't follow, at all. How does any of that keep Hillary from using the Bench to further her ability to drive policy? Why would anyone turn away from a known and proven tactic? Doesn't make sense. Like Not taking the armed goons with you to a brawl. She wouldn't be giving up power, it would just be more. Yeah, it would be power, Not straight from her office, and I think I get where you're coming from, that she would want the dictatorial powers and everything done To America was Done by Her, but I think she understands how it works and the end goal means utilizing every tool in the toolbox. She would send the military, not go kill everyone. She would use the court, Just my opinion. Explain why otherwise.

Title: Re: Shallow reasoning or poor sport? Post by raydawg on 03/20/16 at 15:04:09 56494F4855526353635B49450E3C0 wrote: I'm sure that from your perspective, knowing what you know, how things connect, you believe that was somehow informative and somehow gonna change my perspective, but I don't follow, at all. How does any of that keep Hillary from using the Bench to further her ability to drive policy? Why would anyone turn away from a known and proven tactic? Doesn't make sense. Like Not taking the armed goons with you to a brawl. She wouldn't be giving up power, it would just be more. Yeah, it would be power, Not straight from her office, and I think I get where you're coming from, that she would want the dictatorial powers and everything done To America was Done by Her, but I think she understands how it works and the end goal means utilizing every tool in the toolbox. She would send the military, not go kill everyone. She would use the court, Just my opinion. Explain why otherwise. Let me try this explanation..... If a "present" court is lock, stop, and barrel in agreement on any given issue, it would be an absolute. Clinton does not like absolutes, in leaves them less wiggle room if they need to alter, what it was they said, or did, if it doesn't further her own need. With a divided court, it is to her advantage then, as an excuse why something did, or didn't get done. This lady is conniving and manipulating, way more than LBJ even..... And to her I bet she thinks all things are fair, if it gets her what she wants, for the moment. Is that any better?

Title: Re: Shallow reasoning or poor sport? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 03/20/16 at 15:36:39 Considering the long history of presidents trying to stack the court so that one side always gets its way, I can't agree with you, but, at least that makes your thinking understandable. It's a bit convoluted even for me.

Title: Re: Shallow reasoning or poor sport? Post by raydawg on 03/20/16 at 16:18:24 If she stacked the court, and all were in agreement AT FIRST, it would indeed make her better able to circumvent the other branch. But these folks are pretty much all egoistical and in compition with each other, we all like to think we are right, etc. but that power will corrupt, and once corrupted it will devour others before itself. She won't like be told no, they won't like the impingement upon their turf.... It's a very simple study of ego, where their can only be one top dawg.... Even the biggest ship in the world will tilt and sink if it's loading of its cargo is to only one side It's sorta why we have two party system, and you never hear them say we only need one, why? It's because upon failure you can blame the other as the reason why.

Title: Re: Shallow reasoning or poor sport? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 03/20/16 at 16:45:17 Looks like we are going to have to agree to disagree. They aren't calling for a One party system, but it looks like one. As for the Have someone to blame idea, that has merit. But, stuff doesn't get to the SC like legislation through congress. The SC has been being stacked for ever. She is gonna do the same. I'm pretty sure it's just a waiting game,, We can see who is right.

Title: Re: Shallow reasoning or poor sport? Post by raydawg on 03/20/16 at 18:35:34 786761667B7C4D7D4D75676B20120 wrote: Looks like we are going to have to agree to disagree. They aren't calling for a One party system, but it looks like one. As for the Have someone to blame idea, that has merit. But, stuff doesn't get to the SC like legislation through congress. The SC has been being stacked for ever. She is gonna do the same. I'm pretty sure it's just a waiting game,, We can see who is right. Gotcha.....agreed  ;D But one final observation/thought. Trump is only where he is BECAUSE people are really pizzed. As with Perot, and the Tea Party, they are pizzed at what the SC is doing to advance a minority (cause) without  equal considerations. Case in point: Affirmative action. On its own merit, trying to give an opportunity to those who really have had a bad time of it, by giving them a chance at education and a way out and up.... Can't fault that thinking or motivation, HOWEVER, what about the guy who could NOT get into higher education because of financial circumstance, and would have academically won that scholarship if all things were equal, but didn't because the spot went to a lessor academically capable person who won it on race only considerations. How then can that system, that has been adversely effecting a race, be satisfied with using discrimination, to implement a so called repair? It's not. Bernie is right, we need schools available to everyone who wants it. But that would require the universities, etc, to not operate on profit, etc, and again, we are back to money. Anyway, the anger will grow, it will not abate, and Hillary is keen on knowing she has to appeal and appease this mob too, or else. It will forevermore be a part of the political landscape, and as social media grows, and it will, as dinosaurs like me fade away to oblivion, the youngsters will become more demanding about openness to what these hacks are pulling off, without gathering their information from a propagandizing media.

Title: Re: Shallow reasoning or poor sport? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 03/20/16 at 18:39:31 I think rib eye steaks should be given to everyone who wants one. See how dumb that looks.

Title: Re: Shallow reasoning or poor sport? Post by raydawg on 03/20/16 at 18:49:19 706F696E73744575457D6F63281A0 wrote: I think rib eye steaks should be given to everyone who wants one. See how dumb that looks. No, only to the dumb ones who don't know how to fish  ;D

Title: Re: Shallow reasoning or poor sport? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 03/20/16 at 19:08:04 You want school? Go. How many unemployed people who are college grads do we need? You know how many waiters I've met, who Have degrees? Look around. What percentage of the population Need a degree? College is totally oversold. Since the government got into the college loan business, we saw tuition soar higher than inflation. According to Gordon Wadsworth, author of The College Trap, “…if the cost of college tuition was $10,000 in 1986, it would now cost the same student over $21,500 if education had increased as much as the average inflation rate but instead education is $59,800 or over 2 ½ times the inflation rate.”Mar 24, 2012 College Costs Out Of Control - Forbes Forbes › sites › college-costs-are-soaring Feedback About this result • College Tuition in the U.S. Again Rises Faster Than Inflation ... Bloomberg › news › articles › college-tui... Nov 12, 2014 - College prices in the U.S. have again increased faster than the rate of inflation, extending a ... College Costs Out Of Control - Forbes Forbes › sites › college-costs-are-soaring Mar 24, 2012 - According to Gordon Wadsworth, author of The College Trap, “…if the cost of college tuition was $10,000 in 1986, it would now cost the same student over $21,500 if education had increased as much as the average inflation rate but instead education is $59,800 or over 2 ½ times the inflation rate.” Tuition and Fees and Room and Board over Time, 1975-76 to 2015 ... The College Board › trends Published tuition and fees increased at about the same rate in current dollars in 2015-16 ... July 2014 and July 2015, the inflation-adjusted increase was larger in 2015-16. ... Average published tuition and fees at public four-year colleges and ... Why college costs are so high and rising - CNBC.com CNBC › 2015/06/16 › why-college-costs... Jun 16, 2015 - Why does a college degree cost so much? ... "If you look at the long-term trend, [ college tuition] has been rising almost six percent above the rate of inflation," said Ray Franke, ..... Trade school vs. college: here's what to know. College Board Says Tuition Rose Faster Than Inflation Again This ... Time Magazine › money › college-board...

SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved.