Posted on 08/23/2019 3:41:37 PM PDT by libstripper
That didn't take long.
A former Obama adviser set the stage for a potentially nasty confirmation fight in the Senate next year within an hour of the Supreme Court announcing Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg recently completed three weeks of radiation treatment after doctors found a localized cancerous tumor on her pancreas.
* * *
Ginsburg, who is 86, has battled various illnesses over the last 20 years. The Supreme Court said in a statement Friday that she “tolerated the treatment well" and concluded that there is no evidence of disease elsewhere in her body.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
Once they cross the bridge to violence, it can’t be taken back. It means they have nothing left to lose and it’s win or go down for their lifetimes. It becomes permanent at that point. They no longer will try for the win at the ballot box, they’ve crossed to revolution. At that point, they can be taken down hard, and it can be done openly.
They risk everything if they resort to violence. So they (the Deep State and the Left) must believe that losing the Supreme Court is a terminal event...and they must not believe it is currently lost, which means that Roberts is severely compromised and controlled.
Life expectancy is deceiving since it takes into account deaths in childhood. 40-year olds weren’t ‘old’ in the 1700s, just somewhat rarer than they are now since so many kids didn’t make through their first year.
It was thought by many at the Constitutional Convention that we would not emulate Britain and develop political parties. Washington certainly warned against it but ironically the parties, Democratic-Republican and Federalist started in his own Cabinet. The idea was that we’d all be Americans, first, last, and always, so a lifetime appointment, which would free the appointee from political pressure seemed like a pretty good idea.
Now we have judges/Justices who are democrats, first, last, and always.
Leftist judges as exemplified by RBG don’t make any decision without weighing the politics of it == the written law matters not. If there is any doubt about this just look at her hanging on despite the close proximity of the Grim Reaper. As you said, any reasonable person would have hung up the black robe by now, but not Ruthie!
Only by those looking for an excuse to do it.
RBG was too narcissistic and arrogant for her own good and easily could have let Barry pick a younger libtard jurist if she just retired. At any rate,I hope permanent retirement gets her soon.
Not really Axelrod. Why would you make a statement like that? Violence signaling?
David Axelrod warns Supreme Court vacancy fight could ‘tear this country apart’
_________________
Only if the leftists want to tear the country apart.
Prayers for you brother
No wonder the blackshirt leftists are gathering and masking up for war.
Fly her apart then!
I’d like to know the name of doctor that approved this treatment protocol for a frail, 86 year old women.
Us mere plebes would have been told by our insurance companies and Medicare that such treatments for those of us over 80 are useless, and a waste of resources.
WHY was an exception made for her???
some animals are more equal than others
Democrats have played that card so many times the law of diminishing returns is in effect.
"Look, the first thing for all of us to understand that is we actually have some -- some choices to make about how we want to deal with our own end-of-life care," Mr. Obama replied. After discussing ways "we as a culture and as a society [can start] to make better decisions within our own families and for ourselves," he continued that in general "at least we can let doctors know and your mom know that, you know what? Maybe this isn't going to help. Maybe you're better off not having the surgery, but taking the painkiller."What would Obama say about Ginsburg's care choices?
-PJ
Jimmy Carter beat it.
Well, ya gotta die from something.
Then if each presidential inauguration brought in 2 new justices, the term of each justice would be only 14 years. Fine.OTOH every two-term POTUS would name an outright majority on SCOTUS for his last term and his successor’s first term. Much too democratic, IMHO, to fit in our republican Constitution. So you would probably have to reduce the number of justices named upon each president’s inauguration from 2 to 1 - but then the term in office of each justice goes up to 28, and I think you’ll agree that that’s a bit high.
No, I think the choice would be between 9 and 11, and I favor 11.
And don’t even talk about an even number and the POTUS breaking the tie - that would break the principle of separation of powers, making the POTUS a de facto SCOTUS justice. No go.
But how many actually died around 40?
How many children and babies died, skewing the number down? If 2 two year olds and 2 seventy eight year olds die...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.