1054
Dianne Feinstein dies at 90
(abc7news.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2023
1054 points (99.1% liked)
politics
19107 readers
2000 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I'm getting really sick of these "icons for women in politics" dying from age-related conditions in office.
Every year I watch ~~RGB~~ RBG retroactively destroy her own legacy by having refused to retire when she should have.
Ruth Gator Binsburg?
Red, Green, Blue
DVS - devious. Brilliant!
Well I suppose RGB could have retired under Obama, but we know how McConnell treated Obama's nominees
couldn't Obama have made an appointment while the senate wasn't in session or something? i remember reading something like that, the issue with the democrats in the US as an outside observer is that they want to maintain the facade of playing by the rules so they don't do ahit what's required, Obama should have appointed his nominee and then push on RBG to retire and appoint another, as it stands his failure is letting the US slide into fascism
You're referring to a recess appointment, in which the President can make certain temporary appointments without Congressional approval when Congress is in recess. But in recent times, even when Congress is technically not in session, the majority party keeps members around to gavel in quick sessions every few days so Congress never officially goes into recess.
Obama made some recess appointments anyway, and the matter is still being litigated. I bet nobody will make a substantive recess appointment until this is settled.
https://gai.georgetown.edu/supreme-court-to-decide-what-constitutes-a-senate-recess/
The process is the justice announces retirement (or dies) and then the president appoints a nominee. Perhaps Obama didn't ask RBG to retire prior to 2014, or she refused. The president can't force a change, but just react to one.
The Republican minority prior to 2014 blocked one of Obama's recess appointments, so after 2014, even had RBG announced retirement, it was probably unlikely that a recess appointment would work. I assume at the time, they figured Clinton would be president in 2016 and that RGB could then retire during Clinton's presidency.
Apparently he didn't outright ASK but he did tactfully raise the issue.
She was stubborn though and just wouldn't do it.
Presidential appointments to the Supreme Court still require a congressional hearing and a confirmation vote in the U.S. Senate.
https://newrepublic.com/article/138787/obama-can-put-merrick-garland-supreme-court
Yes, after the recess which it mentions, it goes back to advise and consent. Obama could have forced a committee vote this way, but he would have lost in the end.
Iirc the president can do a temporary appointment. It will last the length of your presidency. But then the next president gets the permanent appointment.
Lol
You have to admit, she was a colorful character.
Yeah, man. Ruth Gader Binsburg
Justice Red Green Blue, compatible with any color synchronization program you run on your desktop.
It better be addressable RGB.
Let's be clear though, she isn't the one causing these evils. That blame lies squarely on Republicans.
I believe there were several things in the last year of Obama's term that should've happened, but because of how sure everyone was that Clinton was going to win, they decided it wouldn't be worth it. I think RBG expected to retire until Clinton. And well, we know how that went.
I also suspect that their personality which led them to becoming trailblazers for women , and refusing to take no for an answer, is why they didn't retire earlier. Their whole thing was not giving into people who didn't want them there. That attitude became detrimental in their old age.
Blaming Republicans for causing evils is like blaming lions for eating other animals. Of course they're going to. Of course. It's up to Democrats, and all the rest of us, to deal with that.
Of course, but the problem is still the lions, and when we have the opportunity to, we should evict them. It is up to us to be the adults in the room. So just shouldn't forget that our first and foremost goal is to get more adults in here.
Republicans aren't an unstoppable force of nature. Republicans overturned Roe. Republicans have made abortions illegal. That is absolutely the Republicans fault.
Democrats should've done more. They should've pushed back harder against the Republicans stealing Garland's seat, and they should've convinced RBG it would be safer for her to retire. I can understand why they didn't, but that doesn't change that they should've.
Let me put it this way, if you don't mind a corny superhero analogy. If innocent people die when villains attack, the heroes did fail to save them, and are responsible for their deaths in a sense. But the villains who actually attacked are far, far more responsible. While chastising the heroes we shouldn't forget to damn the villains, and prepare for a counterattack.