Kavanaugh sides with liberals on Planned Parenthood.

[CharlesPhipps]

Are you sure history will look favorably on the latest progressive witch hunt?

Also are you sure your side can control the national narrative forever while chasing away anyone not progressive?

You arre not afriad that you force the Right into the alternative culture that tunes you out completely?

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that Kavanaugh will go down as a accused rapist forever.

Yeah, i am pretty sure he won't.

Well I hope you're wrong. :thumbs up:

[Darth Wedgius]

I wonder if he believes he can go down in history as something other than an accused rapist.

Well, Bill Clinton did.

[CharlesPhipps]

I wonder if he believes he can go down in history as something other than an accused rapist.

Well, Bill Clinton did.

Fair point.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I think in general Americans believe the judiciary to be far more political than it actually is. That goes double for the Supreme Court - that whole 'lifetime appointment' thing means you're accountable to nobody once you're in.

The issues as I've become familiar with them are a bit more controversial than I initially suspected. To that regard it seems that the left is gunning for a strongly progressive front. Not that the implications aren't serious for certain peoples, but yeah the general Americans attention to the judiciary is a bit left of moderate.

[LittleRaven]

To that regard it seems that the left is gunning for a strongly progressive front.

It definitely is, and that's understandable. Over the last 40 years, the Left has had a hard time of it in Congress. They almost never manage enough support to move their agenda legislatively...Obamacare was really the last time they managed it, and even that fell far short of what most people on the Left wanted to see. By contrast, they've scored some big wins in the Supreme Court...Obergefell v. Hodges and Roe v Wade being the crown jewels, though there have been others. Because these rulings had such a profound and immediate effect on the culture, a disturbing number of less-informed voters in both parties tend to view the Court as a sort of 'super-legislature,' where you can push your agenda into law without having to go through the tedious effort of convincing the other side to agree with you.

But of course, the Court is nothing of the sort. While it's rulings can have broad effect, it's scope is actually very narrow, and most of the things both parties want to see simply cannot be accomplished via judicial fiat. This has led to a frankly unhealthy level of obsession with the political leanings of SC justices, when in fact very few partisan hacks manage to make it onto the Court and even when they do, they don't stay that way...because political parties tend to change fairly rapidly and justices tend to serve long terms.

[CharlesPhipps]

The court has always had a massive effect on public rights.

On one hand, you have the legalization of homosexuality (and practice of it) followed by marriage.

On the other hand, you have slavery being allowed North of the Mason Dixie Line by Dredd Scott.

You also have times its ignored like when they told Jackson Natives could keep their land.

[Admiral X]

Part of why I was hoping they'd put a Native on the $20, incidentally.

[CharlesPhipps]

Jackson notably hated the idea of a national bank.

So just about everyone should be against him on the money.

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I could be wrong, but as far as I've learned about indigenous relations with the state, adopting an American Indian on it seems a bit complicated.

When you speak of Indian reservations across the US, they are territories of distinct nations. Not to say that it's not an admiral gesture or anything, but I think there's always been a distinction between United States territory and territory inhabited by a given tribe.

It's like if after the Vietnam War we decided to put Ho Chi Minh on a note or something.

[CharlesPhipps]

I could be wrong, but as far as I've learned about indigenous relations with the state, adopting an American Indian on it seems a bit complicated.

When you speak of Indian reservations across the US, they are territories of distinct nations. Not to say that it's not an admiral gesture or anything, but I think there's always been a distinction between United States territory and territory inhabited by a given tribe.

It's like if after the Vietnam War we decided to put Ho Chi Minh on a note or something.

Technically, they have dual citizenship and many Native Americans have served with distinction in the armed forces. We also have our first Native American Congressman (who is also lesbian) this election and the highest office any have held.

Notably, the Cherokee (the subject of Jackson's Trail of Tears) tried to assimilate and become members of the United States but were rejected because of racism and greed.