What do you think about with current News and Opinions?

Published

Something to understand what nurses think about re the Current News and their opinions!

Specializes in Med-Surg.
3 hours ago, Curious1997 said:

I wouldn't give two hoots if all these people were objective and appropriately appointed. 

Fair enough, that's what's great about our Democracy, you don't have to like how it works and you have a voice. 

Personally, as bitter as the pill was to swallow the justices were indeed democratically appointed in the same manner they all have been for decades.  I'm curious how would do you propose justices be appointed if not by the president and congress?

What burned me more than anything was the process allowed for them to stall Obama's appointee and they railroaded their own appointee at the last minute.  Still that's how it works.

 

2 hours ago, heron said:

I think there are very real questions about the legality of the process ... assertions about suppressed information, for instance. I really hope that someone who knows what they’re doing explores the possibility of impeachment.

I hate to say this went over my head.

Legality of what process?  What part of my post are you referring to?

Specializes in Vents, Telemetry, Home Care, Home infusion.

RIP

ABC News  4/19/21

Walter Mondale, Carter's vice president, dies at 93

Quote

 

MINNEAPOLIS -- Former Vice President Walter F. Mondale, a liberal icon who lost one of the most lopsided presidential elections after bluntly telling voters to expect a tax increase if he won, died Monday. He was 93.

The death of the former senator, ambassador and Minnesota attorney general was announced in a statement from his family. No cause was cited.

 

Decent,  life well lived.... he was the second presidential candidate I voted for due to his selection of Geraldine Ferraro as VP in 1984.

Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
5 hours ago, heron said:

What I’m not getting is how making the court more vulnerable to inappropriate appointments (by vastly increasing the frequency of openings) solves the problem of inappropriate appointments.  How does it work to use a heavily politicized process to neutralize itself? Reminds me of the NRAs argument that the solution to gun violence is more guns. (I don’t buy that one, either) 

Meanwhile, the independence of the judiciary gets significantly damaged ... making the court more vulnerable to political threats when the court doesn’t rule the way the current big dogs want them to rule. Sounds like a disaster in the making to me.

In my view, the current justifications being advanced for expansion have more to do with dictating which political philosophy dominates judicial thinking than with restoring judicial integrity and competence. Gerrymandering in a black dress. Call me an *** if you like, but it’s getting harder to tell the difference between the farmers and the pigs.

We currently are powerless.  In my view they need term limits and impeachment protocol specifics need to be dusted off and updated,. 

Our SCOTUS is currently hanging by a thread.  They have made a couple of very bad judgements in the recent past (IMV) regarding money in politics and voting rights. Kavanaugh gives every indication that he is a chronic inebriant, he's a loose cannon.  This is a dangerous time for our country.  While I understand the concern about abuse, the system is abused and near broken right now.  We cannot do nothing and just pray that the ideologues currently playing footsie with the justices won't do any real damage. 

I don't want to call you anything.  I am open to suggestion.  We must control the current push of the authoritarian social conservative ideology that has gripped our political discourse.  We must operate within the bounds of the law and constitution. 

We cannot do nothing... because our opponent cheats and lies.

Specializes in Hospice.
2 hours ago, Tweety said:

Fair enough, that's what's great about our Democracy, you don't have to like how it works and you have a voice. 

Personally, as bitter as the pill was to swallow the justices were indeed democratically appointed in the same manner they all have been for decades.  I'm curious how would do you propose justices be appointed if not by the president and congress?

What burned me more than anything was the process allowed for them to stall Obama's appointee and they railroaded their own appointee at the last minute.  Still that's how it works.

 

I hate to say this went over my head.

Legality of what process?  What part of my post are you referring to?

Sorry - the appointment process for SJC justices.

 

1 hour ago, toomuchbaloney said:

We currently are powerless.  In my view they need term limits and impeachment protocol specifics need to be dusted off and updated,. 

Our SCOTUS is currently hanging by a thread.  They have made a couple of very bad judgements in the recent past (IMV) regarding money in politics and voting rights. Kavanaugh gives every indication that he is a chronic inebriant, he's a loose cannon.  This is a dangerous time for our country.  While I understand the concern about abuse, the system is abused and near broken right now.  We cannot do nothing and just pray that the ideologues currently playing footsie with the justices won't do any real damage. 

I don't want to call you anything.  I am open to suggestion.  We must control the current push of the authoritarian social conservative ideology that has gripped our political discourse.  We must operate within the bounds of the law and constitution. 

We cannot do nothing... because our opponent cheats and lies.

You vote them out and take the houses as just happened. Then you reshape the broken parts of the system. 

When I'm building a house. Every single bit of my attention goes into, firstly, the basement is level, secondly, the framers gets every wall and openings perfect. If that happens, then the rest is very easy. Windows and doors fit with minimal adjustment and every other sub will not be delayed. 

With the country in my estimation, the primary solution is the Supreme Court and to make it work, it has to be stacked to rule on the bad legislation of voter suppression, Citizens United and abortion. 

Voter suppression is the primary problem. Just make a level playing field with severe penalties to anyone who attempts to get around it. Then get rid of Citizens united so big business cannot influence votes. 

I absolutely cannot see how can anyone object to a level playing field! 

11 hours ago, Curious1997 said:

This is elementary logic. 

Do you appoint a baseball coach for the basketball team? Skillset! 

Do you choose a career criminal to teach Sunday school? Nature! 

This current democratic lot are basically pretty good people. They became good people through education and influences. Such people make good decisions because they find it hard to deviate. 

These are the kinds of people I want working for me. I know if they stacked the Supreme Court, it's not going to be with compromised, corrupted individuals like the last three. They are likely to review the voter laws and create a level playing field. 

What's the matter? Are you afraid of a level playing field? 

What happens when the other side is in control?  They'll shape the court to their preference.  Add justices, subtract justices...the game will continue,  and chaos will ensue.

Not that I'm going to brag about many Republicans,  but I'd still disagree that most Democrats are "pretty good people".  

So, that being said, wouldn't term limits for congress make more sense?

35 minutes ago, Beerman said:

What happens when the other side is in control?  They'll shape the court to their preference.  Add justices, subtract justices...the game will continue,  and chaos will ensue.

Not that I'm going to brag about many Republicans,  but I'd still disagree that most Democrats are "pretty good people".  

So, that being said, wouldn't term limits for congress make more sense?

Absolutely! I think term limits should never be given to anyone. Nor tenureship. Level playing field. 

Do we get tenureship as nurses? Why should professors? Contracts with stipulations and a robust, incorruptible legal system where money is the arbiter of justice! 

Seriously, isn't that the most bollocks thing of all time? The law for sale and we wonder why we are in the state we are in? 

This entire country's problems revolves around a corrupt legal system. Nothing else! Straighten that out and everything else will be affected for the good. It's simple diffusion! 

Just watch Beerman how different this country will be having a stable, relatively honest man at the helm. 

Many things would change if money is taken out of politics. Our political system is no different than those corrupted in other countries by money and influence. If politicians couldn't get paid on the side it wouldn't be beneficial or ideal for grifters. Then, and only then, would we get politicians who actually want to help the people.

1 hour ago, Curious1997 said:

Just watch Beerman how different this country will be having a stable, relatively honest man at the helm. 

Give me a break with the Democrats and Biden being good, decent, honest people.

Democrats cant win and stay in power on the issues.  So they"ve divided us, based on the lie that half of the citizenry is racist.  

Most recent, obvious proof of that is our new president each day spouting off the lie that Georgia's voting laws harken back to the days of Jim Crow.

It doesnt get much more evil then that.

6 minutes ago, Beerman said:

Give me a break with the Democrats and Biden being good, decent, honest people.

Democrats cant win and stay in power on the issues.  So they"ve divided us, based on the lie that half of the citizenry is racist.  

Most recent, obvious proof of that is our new president each day spouting off the lie that Georgia's voting laws harken back to the days of Jim Crow.

It doesnt get much more evil then that.

Well I liken this to you being unable to recognize rotten fruit when you see it and then eating it. 

If you are unable to recognize decent people, it obviously means that you frequently interact with the opposite and I'm pretty sure that you pay a steep price for their indecency. You know that old saying about lying down with dogs? 

2 minutes ago, Curious1997 said:

Well I liken this to you being unable to recognize rotten fruit when you see it and then eating it. 

If you are unable to recognize decent people, it obviously means that you frequently interact with the opposite and I'm pretty sure that you pay a steep price for their indecency. You know that old saying about lying down with dogs? 

Kinda proved my point, didn't ya?  Cant make a argument on the issue. You have to resort to a personal attack on someone you know next to nothing about, because you've been convinced folks like myself are racists.

And, that's how the Democrats operate. 

 

 

 

Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
2 hours ago, Beerman said:

Kinda proved my point, didn't ya?  Cant make a argument on the issue. You have to resort to a personal attack on someone you know next to nothing about, because you've been convinced folks like myself are racists.

And, that's how the Democrats operate. 

 

 

 

We know that you believe and support a well known liar and cheat who incited a violent attack on the capital in order to maintain power after losing the election.  We know that you won't even speak out about that lie about "election integrity". We know that you won't speak out against new laws that were offered because the "election integrity" lie gives them that inspiration.  We know that you were unable to discern the vast majority of Trump's lies when he was lying to us daily. 

Are you a racist?  You certainly have no problem publicly supporting racists or racist's policies.  Didn't your grandma ever tell you that if you lie with dogs you will get fleas? That's what that old saying means...if you promote the lying racists people will begin to think you excuse lying and racism 

+ Join the Discussion