dead at 87
rip
shareThat's sad
share
MovieChat Forums > Ruth Bader Ginsburg Discussion > dead at 87
I will not stoop to the level of the Democrats who would rejoice if Justice Kavanaugh died.
RIP.
Hmmm, it seems that you do feel that way, otherwise you wouldn't have made such a backhanded comment.
shareEven though I made a specific point of not making a comment like that.
shareNo, you made a passive aggressive post saying what you aren't going to say. In essence saying it. If you really wanted to make a point of not saying it you would have just said
RIP.
I clearly denounced that kind of rhetoric, you are the one politicizing this
shareAgain, all you had to say was RIP. I haven't said anything about politics. You have.
shareI said RIP as well my heart goes out to her family as well and as you see I have not stooped to how low the left would have gone if the tables were turned
shareHahahaha....there you go again.
It was a simple typo, I’m typing from my phone and auto correct gets me sometimes. And I flat out denounced rhetoric of that sort.
shareBy repeating that you aren't doing it, providing a hypothetical situation to make yourself look like you aren't doing it.
Again, to not have been political, you didn't have to bring up the left or democrats, and just said RIP. If you can't see that, then I'm sorry.
I was just pointing out that hate speech like that would not come from me and I have remained true to my promise.
shareOkay, since you are not getting my point at all, why did you feel that this was the place to point out that you would not be spouting any hate speech? Have you spoken poorly of Justice Bader Ginsberg in the past? Has there been a Justice pass away recently that received a lot of hate on their movie chat page from people you disagree with politically? What reason would you have from bringing up a political party or an ideology if not to make a political statement yourself?
Look, I'm not American and could really care less about your country's obsession with the right and left, I'm just really trying to understand why you would make a political statement and then deny that you are making one?
After the way the left treated justice Kavanaugh it seems it is now acceptable to act that way, I was just promising I would not do that and I haven’t
shareJustice Kavanaugh is still alive is he not? So this point is moot, and you are just trying to get a dig in on your political opponents. Again....RIP totally would have sufficed.
shareWell, your ilk are celebrating Rush Limbaugh's death today. So there ya go.
shareWhat's not to celebrate about a guy who went out of his way to stomp on Americans, harder on weaker or underprivileged Americans. Glad he is gone, wish he had left sooner, and wish Trump had not demeaned the Medal of Freedom by giving it to a guy who would have risen to the top in Hitler's Nazi regime.
shareRIP ... more like BIH. ( Limbaugh )
I standing for "in".
This conversation is hilarious.
shareAlso I believe the word you are looking for is stooped.
shareNo. You didn't. Additionally you're even politicizing it as well as trivializing her demise.
Plus you're projecting as well as attempting to deflect rather than own-up and be honest about it. All in all it is a bad look.
Not at all, just ensuring that there will be a level of respect and decency that the left would never give had it been a conservative who tragically lost their life.
shareYou're right, and I won't deny it. I will hold a victory party the day Trump is ousted/executed/prosecuted/whatever, so long it's very very bad for him. Mitch the bitch, too.
share[–] MovieChatUser497 (4585) 10 hours agoYour constant need to draw attention to yourself by pointing fingers at others should be troubling to you. You do realize that? share
Not at all, just ensuring that there will be a level of respect and decency that the left would never give had it been a conservative who tragically lost their life.
You are completely wrong, all I was doing was promising that I would meet a certain level of civility and compassion which you apparently are not capable of meeting.
shareYou are confusing passive aggression with civility.
shareNope not at all, just trying to establish a minimum level of civility on this thread.
shareI have been incredibly civil to you without disparaging others. You have not.
shareI never asserted you weren’t, I have not disparaged anyone, all I did was ensure that we didn’t turn this discussion political
shareOkay...what do you think happens when you bring up the left, or democrats? Or even the right? Just because you are pretending that you aren't being political, the act of bringing it up makes it political. I think you are just trolling, or being obtuse. I have no beef with you, but I do have a problem with hypocrisy.
shareIt's true though.
shareI'm a democrat and I rejoice in the old hag finally dying. The reality is most old Supreme Court justices whether liberal or conservative don't retire when their minds start to slip instead they just hang-on and hurt the court while doing so. Go watch a case being done at the Supreme Court and you will often see some of the oldest justices zoning out like a middle schooler in class they don't like. Sorry but the simple fact is when you are in your 70's you shouldn't be on the Supreme Court anymore because no matter how smart you were when you were younger your brain is losing steam when you get this old. I mean the FAA doesn't let a commercial pilot fly passengers when they are they old they have to retire at 65, why? Because their making a mistake could impact hundreds of lives, well the Justice on the Court can impact a whole nation so why let senile old fart screw things up just because they don't want to quit... it's like a old fart that shouldn't be driving because they are too old, they don't want to quit but by god they need to.
Ginsburg was one of those old farts that shouldn't have been on the Court and if the only way to get her off is for her to die when I rejoice in that death. In fact it should have come much sooner if she wasn't willing to accept that she was too damned old.
If you are really a "democrat" (notice he put small d) we don't need you. I hear Trump is welcoming dudes like yourself, so good luck with that.
shareI fully believe he's a DemoKKKrat, only a DemoKKKrat would make a post like that. He's all yours kid.
shareYou act as if the Democrats are somehow connected to the KKK... well I didn't know that was a secret. The Democrats were the party for slavery and segregation, which is why it is so funny when black vote straight party Democrat. The ultimate uncle Tom's and too ignorant to know it.
shareWhile I agree that the Democrats very much act like the KKK, I don't appreciate your usage of the phrase "Uncle Tom's" and calling black people "ignorant"
shareWell what would you call someone that support a party that believes in segregation and slavery when you the black person would be the victim of it said slavery and segregation? Uncle Tom is polite, and ignorant is also polite because the accurate description would be fucking ignorant morons.
shareAgain I think you can express your viewpoint in a less demeaning way. You don't want to stoop to the level of the DemoKKKrats.
shareYou assume that any kinder gentler way would actually be understood by the black democrats. No history has been hidden about who the democrats were and are, yet they are still overwhelmingly preferred by blacks in the country so apparently the only way to make them understand how ridiculous it is, is to be Trump like and just tell it like it is.
shareOK well I'm going to leave it at this: I don't approve of your rhetoric and I'm not sure if I want you on my side.
shareWhatever, but on some level you know that what I said was right.
shareNo I don't think it's right to refer to people as "Uncle Toms" no matter which side of the aisle you're on. As for the ignorant comment, some white people are ignorant, some black people are ignorant, assigning the label of "ignorant" on someone just because of their skin color isn't right and I would never tolerate that from anyone I disagreed with. I do agree with how hateful the Democrat party has become but you are taking it too far IMO.
shareThe rapist won't die he's only in his 50s. However there is a good chance he'll be impeached by the new Democratic controlled congress for lying under oath. Biden should then appoint Merrick Garland to replace him. Garland should have been justice already, but was refused by the Reptilians in 2016.
shareLOL first of all he didn't rape anyone (that's Joe Biden's thing), secondly you people have already gone down the road of impeachment and it didn't work out too well for you.
Another promise I can make, in the event that you people do win in November I will not terrorize major cities, burn businesses and send death threats to electors like the Democrats like to do.
There goes another +1 pick for Trump. 3 justices in just his term depending on how fast he fast tracks this after the news.
shareI bet the Republicans once again will not stand together and will find a way to screw this up like they usually do. The reason why evil has been allowed to grow in this country is because the Republicans have allowed it.
shareMitch has already confirmed the pick will happen.
shareSo he's breaking his own "election year rule" about picking a new judge? What a surprise. 😒
shareNot a rule.
shareHe's still a hypocrite.
shareIncorrect. The American people voted in a Republican majority in 2016, and then increased that majority in 2018...they pretty much have a mandate to fill the seat.
Also, I'll just leave this here...
“That’s their job. There’s nothing in the Constitution that says the president stops being president in his last year.”
-RGB regarding Merrick Garland.
Hmm, seems there's plenty of hypocrisy in DC to spread around, eh?
Then they lost the house in 2018. But what does that all have to do with Mitch blocking Obama's pick in 2016 aka the last election year?
I'll leave this here for you:
In March 2016, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell tried to justify denying a vote on Obama’s nomination of DC Circuit Court Judge Merrick Garland to replace Justice Antonin Scalia: “All we are doing is following the long-standing tradition of not fulfilling a nomination in the middle of a presidential year.”
Last year, given the lack of any “long-standing tradition” but anticipating the possibility of an election-year vacancy, McConnell fabricated a different history to justify treating a Trump nominee differently from Obama’s....
Bottom line: there was no historical justification for denying Garland a vote; thus, voting for Trump’s late-2020 nominee is hypocritical.
Source: https://www.brookings.edu/blog/fixgov/2020/09/24/mcconnells-fabricated-history-to-justify-a-2020-supreme-court-vote/
But then gain, look where that super-spreader event did to a lot of attendees and Trump over Barrett.
RIP Justice Ginsberg
shareRIP
shareR.I.P.
share😔
share