General Discussion

Enthusiast

(50,983 posts)

70. They look for any excuse to move to the right (corporate).

Reply to HereSince1628 (Reply #7)

Fri Apr 29, 2016, 06:52 AM

Apr 2016

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

98 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

A Moment that Made Me Sick Today [View all] Chasstev365 Apr 2016 OP

Unfortunately, "Democrat" does not mean what it used to mean. IMO and all that. djean111 Apr 2016 #1

Exactly- the label has lost value demwing Apr 2016 #3

A badge of courage these days. imho. SammyWinstonJack Apr 2016 #45

I Always Say liberalmike27 Apr 2016 #89

OH it's a very valuable label, the Plutocrats pay a lot for it because it makes them so much more Dustlawyer Apr 2016 #78

Agree 100%. 840high Apr 2016 #37

There is only neodemocrats and batshit republicans. onecaliberal Apr 2016 #2

Now if you were reviewing with students on a constition test then you do know judges have to be Thinkingabout Apr 2016 #4

Fair Point but Chasstev365 Apr 2016 #8

^^^this^^^ SalviaBlue Apr 2016 #11

This was a year of 55 republicans in congress, yes some Democrats voted for Thinkingabout Apr 2016 #15

That because he's a Corpratist before he's a Conservative. Volaris Apr 2016 #62

Roberts and Alito was confirmed on 2006, Senate makeup was 55 republicans and a Republican Thinkingabout Apr 2016 #16

So they didn't have the votes without Democratic support. Shame on the Dems for not ... Scuba Apr 2016 #17

55 republicans and a Republican President rpannier Apr 2016 #81

BINGO! Nailed it. floriduck Apr 2016 #40

You just found and pushed the squirm, twist, and make shit up button. Phlem Apr 2016 #46

Alito, Thomas, Scalia would be examples of Democratic Senate confirmations. nt Gore1FL Apr 2016 #9

In 2006 the Senate had 55 Republicans, this would be a Republican Majority. Thinkingabout Apr 2016 #36

I stand corrected. You were only proven wrong twice instead of three times. nt Gore1FL Apr 2016 #48

More fuzzy math. Thinkingabout Apr 2016 #55

OK if you say so, Scalia and Thomas were all totally elected by GOP Senate Majorities... Gore1FL Apr 2016 #58

Justices are not elected for SC. Thinkingabout Apr 2016 #60

Yes they are nominated and approved. You are still demonstrably incorrect in your first assertion. Gore1FL Apr 2016 #79

It is a confirmation not an election. Research the process, it is a good lesson. Thinkingabout Apr 2016 #80

I acknowledged the semantic issue. On the actual point, I am still right. You are still wrong Gore1FL Apr 2016 #83

How was I wrong, the fact there were 55 republicans in the Senate in 2006? Thinkingabout Apr 2016 #85

William Rehnquist and Clarence Thomas were not all approved by the Senate in 2006. Gore1FL Apr 2016 #87

Don't drag in other times, I was not talking about any other than Roberts and Alito, now these two Thinkingabout Apr 2016 #91

Your hypothesis has been disproved. Gore1FL Apr 2016 #96

It does not work the same with a Republican nominating to Democrats. pscot Apr 2016 #33

Another reason that the GOP controls and defines the national debate guillaumeb Apr 2016 #5

I would say this is the MAIN reason. SalviaBlue Apr 2016 #12

I would say the .01% owns the entire media. Enthusiast Apr 2016 #68

Democrats are the Centrists now Gore1FL Apr 2016 #6

Heck, today's Democrats are to the right of Eisenhower Republicans angstlessk Apr 2016 #19

Today's Democratic Party establishment not the rank and file. Enthusiast Apr 2016 #69

Enough rank and file blindly follow anything stamped "Democrat," "Democratic", or "DNC" though. Gore1FL Apr 2016 #84

When the Democratic Party moved right, it left a vacuum on the left. Thirties Child Apr 2016 #39

The democratic party has become quite sensitive to the needs of politicians running in HereSince1628 Apr 2016 #7

Those districts aren't really as conservative as the pols would have us believe ... Scuba Apr 2016 #21

That doesn't surprise me, I've read things about politicians being more conservative than the US pop HereSince1628 Apr 2016 #23

Bingo! Scuba Apr 2016 #27

Of course, they're more conservative as 1%ers! TexasMommaWithAHat Apr 2016 #29

But dems are not uniformly good on social issues, even individual dems aren't uniformly good. HereSince1628 Apr 2016 #30

They look for any excuse to move to the right (corporate). Enthusiast Apr 2016 #70

When economic power moved South across the late 60's and 70's HereSince1628 Apr 2016 #77

You weren't reasonably happy with the Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer Nye Bevan Apr 2016 #10

Why does your tone always sounderstand so negative? Chasstev365 Apr 2016 #20

It's certainly less "negative" to name 3 Democratic appointees to the SCOTUS that I am happy about Nye Bevan Apr 2016 #24

Please don't repond to any of my posts and I will do the same with yours. Chasstev365 Apr 2016 #25

If I feel I have a salient point to make in response to any of your posts I will do so. Nye Bevan Apr 2016 #26

Wow! Someone sure thinks highly of herself! Ignore it is! Chasstev365 Apr 2016 #28

Sounderstood (nt) Nye Bevan Apr 2016 #34

your going to be putting a lot on ignore for now. Phlem Apr 2016 #47

Huge +1! Enthusiast Apr 2016 #71

Add me, please. nt awoke_in_2003 Apr 2016 #90

Some people just want to watch the world burn dlwickham Apr 2016 #51

Oooops!!! You knocked over the OPs strawman ... and then it goes badly down thread. JoePhilly Apr 2016 #52

This message was self-deleted by its author Matt_R Apr 2016 #65

You are correct... 2naSalit Apr 2016 #13

Yeah Visionary Apr 2016 #14

In theory Egnever Apr 2016 #18

Agree. The framers did not intend that the SC be politicized spooky3 Apr 2016 #74

K&R. JDPriestly Apr 2016 #22

Huge +1! Enthusiast Apr 2016 #72

I don't know.... Victor_c3 Apr 2016 #75

You are thinking too hard on peripheral issues Elmer S. E. Dump Apr 2016 #31

When I taught the Constitution to my H. S. seniors... Bigmack Apr 2016 #32

Have you all forgotten? AlbertCat Apr 2016 #35

It's no longer "Democrat" ... Jopin Klobe Apr 2016 #38

More to do with who listens to what. ffr Apr 2016 #41

Wow I disagree dreamnightwind Apr 2016 #82

The Democrats ran from liberal accomplishments LiberalElite Apr 2016 #42

If the Notorious RBG were here to respond, forest444 Apr 2016 #43

They both appoint Corporatist Judges. Because when those trade agreements which cede Skwmom Apr 2016 #44

today the sc approved a new rule that will allow warrants that cover millions questionseverything Apr 2016 #54

Liberal, moderate, and conservatives have become just labels to cover up corporatism. Skwmom Apr 2016 #95

It was Eisenhower who appointed Earl Warren dflprincess Apr 2016 #49

Eisenhower also used a recess appointment NewJeffCT Apr 2016 #94

For that to happen, liberals would have to take back control of the party... JHB Apr 2016 #50

The Republicans have a TV channel to spout propaganda 24 hours a day. Kablooie Apr 2016 #53

Decisions for both of the specific cases you mentioned were written by Republican appointees sl8 Apr 2016 #56

Why? one word. zeemike Apr 2016 #57

If it's any consolation few of those students will ever figure out you were bullshitting them. pa28 Apr 2016 #59

Warren was the author of Brown (appointed by Eisenhower, republican Gov. of Calif) Hamlette Apr 2016 #61

Clinton pushed the party to the right. Lunabell Apr 2016 #63

Yep, and it's why I can't honestly buy the vote for Hillary because of the appointments to Unicorn Apr 2016 #64

Each party appoints as far to the right or left as they think they can get approved by the Senate. pnwmom Apr 2016 #66

Bull Shit! is correct. Enthusiast Apr 2016 #67

Sure.....and here on THIS site.. LisaM Apr 2016 #73

You're exactly right. Vinca Apr 2016 #76

ABSOLUTELY!!!! KPN Apr 2016 #86

That is true RoccoR5955 Apr 2016 #88

Bill Clinton appointees were super liberal. I think Obama's are as well La Lioness Priyanka Apr 2016 #92

Nah, GOP ran the debate because of Brown, Voting Rights Act and LBJ. wildeyed Apr 2016 #93

yes, this grasswire Apr 2016 #97

Rush Limbaugh and his ilk made the Democrats afraid to be true liberals. Initech Apr 2016 #98