Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

941–950 of 1001 posts

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#941

Post by slg »

__blockcipher__ wrote: post #803
michaelmrose wrote: post #717

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really don't believe legitimate criticism is problematic and it is very problematic to call people who speak out an "unhinged mob" Karanaugh's interesting interpretation of the law is enough to give him a hard pass but he also lied under oath.

Probably best to not dig into the details too much since this thread isn't about that, but I personally absolutely understand why they characterized it as an "unhinged mob", given you had a very transparent attempt to fabricate a life-altering rape claim in order to hold up a nomination. I watched every minute of the hearing, read the memo released by Rachel Mitchell (the lawyer hired by the Republicans to ask questi…

>[sexual assault is] not the kind of thing you stay silent about for decades, having never stored any memorandums of the alleged crime

I'm not going to get into any specifics about Kavanaugh, but this is flatly untrue. Plenty of people stay silent about being assaulted. One reason is people like you who will call them liars whenever they come forward.

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#942

Post by Frondo »

rayiner wrote: post #822
blhack wrote: post #780

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious: does anybody seriously think that if the positions were reversed that the Democrats would honor this? Let's say that Biden wins, then Trump runs against him again in 2024. Somebody dies or retires right before the election, do you think the democrats would seriously wait and risk allowing the nomination to be done by Trump? None of these people are in any way signaling their actual virtues. It's all just…

Why would anyone believe Democrats would behave differently after they spent all of last year again threatening to pack the Supreme Court?

If your claim is supported by that article you linked down below, it seems like a big stretch to refer to Democrats as a unified whole ("believe Democrats ... after they") when you're referring to three people, two of whom were engaged in ultimately failed campaigns for the presidency.

It might be more constructive to speak with precision about a claim of such import.

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#943

Post by vinay427 »

koolba wrote: post #845
malwarebytess wrote: post #804

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know what you could call his brand of governance other than pure evil. It's men and women like him who destroy nations and stir violence.

It’s talk like this that truly disgusts me. And it only comes from the left. Anyone in a position of power that effectively promotes opposing views is labeled as pure evil. The more effective, the more evil. Just because your side is losing does not mean the other side is working for Satan. It’s talk like that that leads to violence.

This has nothing to do with conservatism, right-wing politics, or Republican party politics. It has to do with the relationship between political players in a healthy political atmosphere.

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#944

Post by FranzFerdiNaN »

Igelau wrote: post #765
ctdeneen wrote: post #610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But with the internet much more of what you do is visible and more people know about it. What you said could be attacked with "white silence is violence"

Speech isn't violence. Lack of speech isn't violence. People lazily regurgitate these postmodernist bumper sticker phrases and consider themselves informed activists.

Speech is most definitely capable of being violence. Just ask most anyone who was bullied as a child.

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#945

Post by vinay427 »

chillwaves wrote: post #925
gamblor956 wrote: post #723

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Huge caveat: of those 3, only Murkowski actually made her statement after RBG passed. Collins made her statement hypothetically earlier in the campaign, and Grassley made his hypothetical statement back in 2018 during that election cycle. So far, Murkowski is the only confirmed GOP defector, and 4 total defectors are needed to prevent nomination hearings before the election.

3 will be allowed to defect and Pence will be the tie breaking vote. All of this is coordinated, all of this is staged.

Do you have a source for such a direct claim?

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#946

Post by joveian »

WhompingWindows wrote: post #318

Why are there life-terms on the Supreme Court? Doesn't that incentivize the justices to hold on past their prime, dying waiting for a new president or resigning in a politically motivated fashion? And don't life terms create a race to the bottom where younger justices are favored for longer remaining life? Why not 20 year limits?

I suggest the 15 year limit and other requirements in Mexico:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Court_of_Justice_of_th...

I'd add the requirement of at least a year of criminal defense experience since this is almost completely lacking currently and it shows in the horrible decisions the court makes.

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#947

Post by v7p1Qbt1im »

lawnchair_larry wrote: post #879
roenxi wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Although the justices being friends is inevitable, it is not desirable. The justices would be more representative of the people - and probably dispense better justice - if there was an uneasy compromise between them based on basic principles of precedent and law. That isn't a very fun vision of life on the bench - and any system is imperfect - so I don't really advocate that. But the idea that these people are assert…

No, it’s a beautiful thing. The country would be far better off if we treated each other this way. In many other countries, this is the norm. Maybe you can learn something from your elders.

In what democratic country is this the case nowadays? I‘ve lived in a buch of places in Europe and have friends in many more. The divide might not be as pronounced as in the US but it‘s certainly there.

Using me as an anecdotal example, I have acquaintances and a few (loose) friends that are fiscally conservative. I have exactly zero (known) acquaintances or friends that are conservative/regressive with regards to social issues. After all I‘ve seen and experienced in my life I just cannot emphasize with someone that can justify denying women health care or discriminate against race or sexual orientation, for example.

I suppose you could start solving these entrenchments by having millions of desert islands in order to force small groups of people with diametrically opposed viewpoints to endure hardships on them.

On the internet there is no chance. Without seeing the actual person and talking with them for hours it wouldn‘t work. The problem with this method is that it‘s terribly inefficient.

What we need is a sort of enlightened six sense for empathy that makes large groups of people feel the state of mind of other large groups. But barring large scale psychedelic treatments I don‘t see that happening.

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#948

Post by ailun »

tstrimple wrote: post #863
ailun wrote: post #793

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sometimes I read comment sections on conservative websites. They say the exact same thing except with the parties reversed.

Yes, because it's the Democratic party who said that we cannot vote on a Supreme Court nominee during an election year only to 180 four years later. Please, show me all these relevant examples of Democrats being such brazen and open hypocrites. This pseudo intellectual "both sides" non-sense has done as much damage to this country as Republicans slide into fascism has.

I said nothing about both sides being equally wrong, that’s something you projected around my comment. I was sharing a completely true observation. It’s a really common sentiment for people everywhere.

To me, it’s a separate and unrelated idea that partisans on “both sides” have similar thoughts about strategy. It has nothing to do with which side is right about an issue. Don’t you think it’s interesting that there are people who have the exact mirror image of your thoughts? It doesn’t make you curious, or reflective?

Personally, for any sort of meme like this, I’m automatically skeptical of the idea behind it, just because of how often I see it thoughtlessly repeated.

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#949

Post by publicola1990 »

int_19h wrote: post #874
blhack wrote: post #780

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious: does anybody seriously think that if the positions were reversed that the Democrats would honor this? Let's say that Biden wins, then Trump runs against him again in 2024. Somebody dies or retires right before the election, do you think the democrats would seriously wait and risk allowing the nomination to be done by Trump? None of these people are in any way signaling their actual virtues. It's all just…

The reason why this is not transferable to the Democrats, is because they haven't previously refused to hold confirmation hearings for an appointee solely on the basis that there'd be an election later that year. If you're asking whether Democrats would have placed themselves in a similar position in 2016 if the roles were reversed, then the answer is no. I'd expect them to consider the nominee, and quite likely vote…

But Democrats did try to nominate Garland in 2016, so now can they protest if Republicans put up a nominee now? Republican position may be inconsistent between 2020 and 2016, but if Reps now take position taken by Dems in 2016, how can Dems be critical if it?.

Re: Ruth Bader Ginsburg has died

#950

Post by Craighead »

stagehn wrote: post #741
elbigbad wrote: post #592

This won’t happen. I’m a reasonable person and happy to change my mind with evidence, and don’t say this lightly, but the republicans do not give a crud about any of this. They are the most conniving and soulless individuals that exist. This is coming from a recent former republican. I miss George Will’s Republican party.

That's a despicable (let alone false) thing to say and you should be ashamed of yourself.

There is clearly evidence that proves elbigbad's point.
Post reply on HN