Debate Now The case for expanding the Supreme Court

[Rumpole]

no we are not,,

You've provided nothing to support your claim. I've provided an extensive argument to refute it.

Your claim is therefore dismissed.

 

[progressive hunter]

You've provided nothing to support your claim. I've provided an extensive argument to refute it.

Your claim is therefore dismissed.

reality and 240 yrs of american history prove me right,,

 

[Cellblock2429]

That you haven't come across a dictionary before doesn't mean you get to have your own meaning for words.

Democracy is a system of government in which people choose their rulers by voting for them in elections.​

[...]​

Synonyms: self-government, republic, commonwealth, autonomy​

/——/ We don’t vote for president. We vote for the Electors who vote for president. Democracy is mob rule. A Republic protects the rights of minorities.

 

[Rumpole]

No, you're whining...The court re-balanced via lawful means and you just don't like the result.

boooohoooo

Your claim of not liking a result is meaningless. Who among us hasn't seen a law enacted in which we didn't like the result? So, we elect those who will enact laws to change it more to our liking. That is the essence of democracy.

Accusing someone of 'sniveling' isn't a meaningful argument, it does nothing to move the debate forward.

Can you not see that? When I asked not to post 'disingenuous' comments, that is what I meant. Accusing someone of sniveling or whining is a kind of ad hom, it's an attack on the messenger, not the message. You have thus violated the rule I set forth in the OP.

 

[progressive hunter]

Your claim of not liking a result is meaningless. Who among us hasn't seen a law enacted in which we didn't like the result? So, we elect those who will enact laws to change it more to our liking. That is the essence of democracy.

Accusing someone of 'sniveling' isn't a meaningful argument, it does nothing to move the debate forward.

Can you not see that? When I asked not to post 'disingenuous' comments, that is what I meant. Accusing someone of sniveling or whining is a kind of ad hom, it's an attack on the messenger, not the message. You have thus violated the rule I set forth in the OP.

this whole thread is based on you not liking the results of something,,

 

[Auld Phart]

McConnell deliberately holding up confirmation of Merrick Garland was within the rules? Slamming through that lying whore bitch Garrett, was within the rules? Well, fuck that! We need to stack the court with liberals to even thongs out. Because this is a liberal country!

You think Garland was the first SCOTUS nominee blocked?

He's just the most recent.

 

[Cellblock2429]

You've provided nothing to support your claim. I've provided an extensive argument to refute it.

Your claim is therefore dismissed.

/——-/ We do not directly elect the president, Supreme Court Justices, Federal Judges or a replacement Vice President because we are a Republic.
What country are you from?

 

[Billo_Really]

You think Garland was the first SCOTUS nominee blocked?

He's just the most recent.

Thank you for sharing!

 

[Rumpole]

/——/ We don’t vote for president. We vote for the Electors who vote for president. Democracy is mob rule. A Republic protects the rights of minorities.

the term 'democracy' is a broad term, which includes BOTH direct democracy, AND 'representative democracy'.

The MISTAKE most republicans make these says is to limit their understanding of the term 'democracy' by how it was used by "Plubius" in the Federalist papers. understand that his usage of the term is the PAROCHIAL use, NOT the broad use of the term. Both 'republic' and 'democracy' have parochial (narrow) and broad usages. Know them, understand them, and quit making up shit that isn't true about them.

The term Republic is even broader, it can been government of appointed, OR elected leaders (by any democratic means).

this was extensively covered here:

Dems, don't let Repubs bamboozle you, America IS a democracy.

{Caveat: those who are weaned on soundbites, one liners and snarky quips, who have subsequent short attention spans, ignore this post] This trope has been floundering around the conservative/libertarian circles on the right for some time now, and now Trump has joined the *RNAD regurgitators...

www.usmessageboard.com

 

[Auld Phart]

/——-/ We do not directly elect the president, Supreme Court Justices, Federal Judges or a replacement Vice President because we are a Republic.
What country are you from?

My guess is Britain, from his name a reference to Rumpole of the Baily

 

[Rumpole]

courts are not for representation,, they are for application of the law,,
and SCOTUS is only working with the constitution in our constitutional republic and because of that only constitutional conservatives should be on SCOTUS,,

In other words, you support tyranny on the court.

I don't think that will fly with the electorate, sorry.

Anyway, my view is the opposite, I think liberals on the court adhere to the constitution much better than conservatives. So, using your logic, from a liberal vantage point, then we should eliminate conservatives on the court. Hell, why not go a step further and just ban republicans from society, and ship them all off to Russia, where they like Russians better than democrats.

Hey, I'm just going with your line of thinking and following it through to it's logical conclusion.

 

[Auld Phart]

the term 'democracy' is a broad term, which includes BOTH direct democracy, AND 'representative democracy'.

The MISTAKE most republicans make these says is to limit their understanding of the term 'democracy' by how it was used by "Plubius" in the Federalist papers. understand that his usage of the term is the PAROCHIAL use, NOT the broad use of the term. Both 'republic' and 'democracy' have parochial (narrow) and broad usages. Know them, understand them, and quit making up shit that isn't true about them.

The term Republic is even broader, it can been government of appointed, OR elected leaders (by any democratic means).

this was extensively covered here:

Dems, don't let Repubs bamboozle you, America IS a democracy.

{Caveat: those who are weaned on soundbites, one liners and snarky quips, who have subsequent short attention spans, ignore this post] This trope has been floundering around the conservative/libertarian circles on the right for some time now, and now Trump has joined the *RNAD regurgitators...

www.usmessageboard.com

still linking to one of your other failed threads?

 

[progressive hunter]

the term 'democracy' is a broad term, which includes BOTH direct democracy, AND 'representative democracy'.

The MISTAKE most republicans make these says is to limit their understanding of the term 'democracy' by how it was used by "Plubius" in the Federalist papers. understand that his usage of the term is the PAROCHIAL use, NOT the broad use of the term. Both 'republic' and 'democracy' have parochial (narrow) and broad usages. Know them, understand them, and quit making up shit that isn't true about them.

The term Republic is even broader, it can been government of appointed, OR elected leaders (by any democratic means).

this was extensively covered here:

Dems, don't let Repubs bamboozle you, America IS a democracy.

{Caveat: those who are weaned on soundbites, one liners and snarky quips, who have subsequent short attention spans, ignore this post] This trope has been floundering around the conservative/libertarian circles on the right for some time now, and now Trump has joined the *RNAD regurgitators...

www.usmessageboard.com

it also includes what we are,, a constitutional republic,,,

the problem most libs make today is they dont understand what a constitutional republic is and how it works,,,

sorry I lied,,
libs understand perfectly well what a constitutional republic is and why they are so afraid to of it and to even say the word CONSTITUTION,,

 

[progressive hunter]

In other words, you support tyranny on the court.

I don't think that will fly with the electorate, sorry.

not tyranny if it follows the constitutional laws,,

dont like it change the constitution legally,, not this subversive way youre trying too,,

 

[Rumpole]

/——-/ We do not directly elect the president, Supreme Court Justices, Federal Judges or a replacement Vice President because we are a Republic.
What country are you from?

Was born in Houston, Texas.

some want that to be a 'country'. I disagree.

 

[Cellblock2429]

Your claim of not liking a result is meaningless. Who among us hasn't seen a law enacted in which we didn't like the result? So, we elect those who will enact laws to change it more to our liking. That is the essence of democracy.

Accusing someone of 'sniveling' isn't a meaningful argument, it does nothing to move the debate forward.

Can you not see that? When I asked not to post 'disingenuous' comments, that is what I meant. Accusing someone of sniveling or whining is a kind of ad hom, it's an attack on the messenger, not the message. You have thus violated the rule I set forth in the OP.

/——-/ “So, we elect those who will enact laws to change it more to our liking. That is the essence of democracy.”
And that is the definition of a Republic.

 

[Oddball]

McConnell deliberately holding up confirmation of Merrick Garland was within the rules?

McConnel didn't hold up anything...He refused to put on the calendar is totally within the rules...Too bad for you.

Slamming through that lying whore bitch Garrett, was within the rules? Well, fuck that! We need to stack the court with liberals to even thongs out. Because this is a liberal country!

Back we go to the sniveling!

 

[Rumpole]

not tyranny if it follows the constitutional laws,,

dont like it change the constitution legally,, not this subversive way youre trying too,,

Read the rules, no ad homs. Back up your claims, or offer a solid path of reasoning. You haven't.

No, one judicial philosophy on the court is a kind of judicial tyranny.

You have no clue as to how to debate. vacuous claims are not an argument. Read the rules set forth in the OP.

 

[progressive hunter]

Was born in Houston, Texas.

some want that to be a 'country'. I disagree.

under our constitutional republic texas as well as every other state is in its own way is a country,,

its just that liberals keep fucking with the constitution and claiming we are just one country under one set of rules when we are far from it,,

 

[progressive hunter]

You talk like a cowboy with a tall hat and no cattle.

No, one judicial philosophy on the court is a kind of judicial tyranny.

You have no clue as to how to debate. vacuous claims are not an argument. Read the rules set forth in the OP.

debate ended a long time ago when you started lying and pushing false narratives to meet your sadistic political goals,,,