Originally posted by Robtard
So to fix your ignorance you went back a few pages and found when I noted the timeline. Glad I could help you learn something today, Surt.As noted, you don't get to decide when precedent expires. Also of note, courts routinely site very old rulings in modern proceedings.
So the last time the republicans did this was decades before we even had the Wright Brothers did their thing with airplanes.
Yeah man, that is a total "gotcha".
Originally posted by Newjak
Honestly because the same people who say choose another word will just find another distraction argument to take it's place because the people that use don't really care about the argument itself it's just there to keep the conversation from moving to a fact the person using the distraction argument doesn't like.
Hey you could be right or you could be wrong.
What does it hurt to try? Just choose another term. I have already called Mitch a weasel. As long as your term is accurate it shouldn't be a problem.
How about we just say "they played hardball" ? It's a term we are both agreeing on.
And forgive me but you speak of distractions but isn't it kind of weasel-ish to say that given this entire "republicans did it too" is a distraction?
Originally posted by Robtard
@surt Reality does not care about your arbitrary rules, surt.
Lol I'm not sure why you're like this. I didn't say there was a rule, just like I didn't say there is anything stopping dems from packing the courts if they can enough political power.
Let me be very clear on what I mean: I do not think something Republicans did 150 years ago somehow justifies what Dems want to do in the here and now.
Let me be even more clear: While Dems could pack the court if they win the WH, etc. this would backfire. That is what I think. It's not about what can be done, but about what should be done.
Originally posted by Surtur
Lol I'm not sure why you're like this. I didn't say there was a rule, just like I didn't say there is anything stopping dems from packing the courts if they can enough political power.Let me be very clear on what I mean: I do not think something Republicans did 150 years ago somehow justifies what Dems want to do in the here and now.
Okay, your feelings on the subject have been noted.
Originally posted by Surtur
I found what he said makes more sense than a decent amount of things coming out of the mouth of leftists these days.
Strange, they react rather strongly when other people don't use the proper words to describe what is being talked about.
I guess it's only ok when they do it.
Originally posted by Robtard
Okay, your feelings on the subject have been noted.
Yep and while we are noting how I feel, I feel I have to point out if the Republicans wanted to do something shady(but not against the rules) and were using something democrats did centuries ago to justify it you'd react the same way.
Fun fact I just learned. Do you guys know why there are 9 Supreme Court justices? They picked that number because at the time there were 9 judicial circuits. There are now 12. Do if the dems do expand the court they could aim for 12 seats saying that they’re staying true to the vision of the founders when they decided on 9 seats.
At least that’s a better argument to the public than “the republicans made us do this terrible thing you all hate. Blame them”.