I am here to bury Ruth Bader Ginsberg and not to praise her

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by winn dixie

cdc hates that ruthies cancer was so well known. They couldve added to their covid count!

maybe she got hit with covid and hushed it up.

[Why_Yes_I_Do]

Who said it was her dying wish? Some family member? Someone with an agenda? Sounds like hearsay, unless it was recorded by a credible source. What did she, herself, say on the record about filling a SCOTUS seat in 2016? As I recall, she went full Red-Neck and said: Git 'er Dun.

Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

It may but it, at the same time, can just be a claim to try to rally people to the “dying wish of an icon” , giving words, where there were no words, in essence, the death can be used

not the same but I’m reminded of Jesse Jackson smearing mlk’s blood on his shirt to try to develop a false picture and be mlk’s heir, grabbing cynical advantage of any death

[rexdutchman]

Oh they just forget the important things ( Git'er dun )

[friendly fred]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

Her actions are the reason we will now have another so called “constitutional crisis”.
If she was such a great patriot, why did she hang on until the bitter end? There is only one reason. Her hatred and distain for President Trump.
That attitude will now cause untold mayhem.
Her legacy......Party Hack.

Definately a party hack.

[friendly fred]

Originally Posted by JRLawrence

I feel sad when an 18 year old soldier dies in war, or an innocent kid dies of cancer.

AGREE

I also feel sad when an 87 or a 107 year old dies, sad as the passage of a life well lived.

Ultimate white privilege? Not in anyway, you are completely out of order; and you know it. She was Jewish, and a woman: she had many opportunities denied to her for either or both reasons, and you know it.

I, and most conservative people, disagree with her political thinking. But, if one stops to think about it, there is a justification behind it. While I disagree with the far left opinion of late term abortion, I do agree that women should have a right to decide when they want to have children. I believe that the political involvement with this type of question is inappropriate: it should be a discussion with the medical profession not the political left or right.

The tactic RGB used for the rights of women was to defend the discrimination of men: Such as, men were obligated to serve on juries and women were not.

Today, boys still have to register for the selective service (draft) when they turn 18, women do not. Is that fair to the boys, or just a indication that boys are different from girls?

RGB was correct in much of what she said about the need for women's rights. RGB was wrong when she stuck with the strict every more socialistic leaning of the Democratic Party, that party that is totally different from the Democratic Party of the 1940s and 1950s. But like most people who will vote against Trump this fall, Ruth did not recognize the negative changes in the Democratic Party because she was stuck with it. The Republican pasty needs to have a worthy opposition which can only come after the total collapse of the Democratic Party. The re-election of Trump will bring about many more needed changes for both parties. The Republican Party will survive with whatever the outcome, but the Democratic Party will not survive for long. A swift change in the Democratic Party would be beneficial for a needed pragmatic future, much better than a slow death which would be demanded by those who hold on to power with one hand, clutching to life with the other, while watching death stand over them.

Whatever she claims she had denied her because maybe people didn't want her back then has been so eclipsed by the incredible power she had once Carter put her on the Federal Bench and then Clinton put her on The SCOTUS that she had white privilege².

No one gets everything they want - government should be colorblind.

As long as white people support diversity and affirmative action, the race huslters on both sides will profit.

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by Why_Yes_I_Do

Who said it was her dying wish? Some family member? Someone with an agenda? Sounds like hearsay, unless it was recorded by a credible source. What did she, herself, say on the record about filling a SCOTUS seat in 2016? As I recall, she went full Red-Neck and said: Git 'er Dun.

"Handlers" and their complicit media lapdogs.

If you look at all these "Trump thinks", "McConnell means" and "Republicans threaten" headlines, one hardly sees any prima facia proof of the headlines although they should be readily available.

Its going to be very difficult for Dims to come out against a woman nominee. Nearly impossible to impeach Trump. The Dims still haven't passed a stimulus bill worth signing. The do nothing party.

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by gnadfly

"Handlers" and their complicit media lapdogs.

If you look at all these "Trump thinks", "McConnell means" and "Republicans threaten" headlines, one hardly sees any prima facia proof of the headlines although they should be readily available.

Its going to be very difficult for Dims to come out against a woman nominee. Nearly impossible to impeach Trump. The Dims still haven't passed a stimulus bill worth signing. The do nothing party.

exactly. the press can't throw out negative articles about Trump and the Republicans fast enough. it's the "horror story of the week" freak show. anyone read anything in the last week about that unsubstantiated noise by the Atlantic about Trump supposedly making disparaging comments about the military and not going to visit that cemetery in France 3 years ago? nope. they've moved on to the new "terrifying threat" from Lord Donald .. that he might actually nominate a new justice before the election! oh my! he can't do that!! yes "candidate" Trump can and will. Biden's claim that no "candidate" has ever done so during an election year omits the fact that "candidate" Trump just so happens to be President Trump.



as i said in another post, if "candidate" Obama did this in 2012 the press and the Dems would have asserted his Constitutional right to nominate a justice before the election and of course branded any blowback by Republicans as "unamerican" and of course racist because any criticism of Obama is automatically racist.