The Amateur Message Boards of the World Famous VoyeurWeb

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has not changed her tune on retirement in the past year, saying Wednesday she plans to stay for “a while.”

"My answer is, I will do this job as long as I can do it full steam,"
Some liberals have urged her to retire so President Obama could nominate a successor while Democrats control the Senate.

When asked if the politics of naming a successor should factor into her decision, she said, "All I can say, I am still here and likely to remain for a while."

I told you, she's a typical liberal, it's ALL about HER. Liberals will screw liberals when it comes to THEM. Obama is screwed in gaining control of the Supreme Court, unless...she suffers an accident and can't go on. Will Obama go that far for his agenda???

You mean, like Boehner and Bachmann screwed Issa?

Ginsburg's recent statements regarding Hobby Lobby decision were simply senile.
How in the hell can she lump all birth control into one group when discussing the decision, when the decision was only regarding certain specific types.....the ones that induce miscarriage.

Besides....her chair is too big for her. She looks like a kid with progeria.... :lol:

"How in the hell can she lump all birth control into one group when discussing the decision, when the decision was only regarding certain specific types.....the ones that induce miscarriage."-tvd


Maybe she could do that because on July 1st, the Supreme Court ordered lower courts to rehear any cases where companies had sought to deny coverage for any type of contraception, not just the specific types Hobby Lobby was opposed to.
And the decision only applies to "closely held" corporations, right?
In other words, most of the corporations in the U.S..

What happens when Catholics refuse to pay for any contraception whatsoever because they find it "morally repugnant"?
Ginsburg said that this decision granted corporations a "minefield" of rights, more rights than individual humans have, and she is probably right about that. We'll soon see.

Interesting take on this...but in actuality, your take is based on an "extrapolated" or assumed view on what might happen, not what actually has happened.
It might never materialize that way, it might...we don't know, and I think Ginsburg should speak on the ruling, not what might or might not happen as a result of the ruling.

On a related subject....how in the hell did this country evolve from a system of ---- We the employer offer as a benefit, to attract the best talent, health benefits paid for by the company ---- TO ---You the employer MUST provide health benefits, and they MUST meet our (government) standards....

How in the HELL could this happen? A corporation should have the discretion to provide or not provide benefits...and if an employee wants to go elsewhere to find job WITH benefits...so be it. The market will self adjust because the best talent will do just that...go where benefits are offered.

This government has way overstepped....from benefits, to home loans, to student loans....shit, everything they touch.

What in the hell is the government doing making student loans anyway? They have no business inserting themselves in that market. Leave it to private lenders. Now that the government is involved, look at skyrocketing tuition costs, look at defaulted loans, look at how screwed it is since the government got involved.

It is sad to see Clownlicker trying to discuss litigation.

Only the TV show "Sea Hunt" had more people in over their heads as Clownlacker is.

Ginsburg said that this decision granted corporations a "minefield" of rights, more rights than individual humans have, and she is probably right about that. We'll soon see.

A minefield of rights to the corporations, what does the old senile fart mean by that?

A person who asks for a job from a corporation doesn't have the right to "force" the corporation to provide more benefits than they're offering for the position. If the person doesn't like the benefits and compensation the corporation is offering, the only right the person has it not to take the job.

Carlos

It is sad to see that, once again, johnforbes has nothing.

He can't refute a single thing I said, as always.

johnforbes is an intellectually impotent douche.

Lloyd Bridges in "Sea Hunt" was in over his head a lot, but he was a diver.

Clownlicker is in over his head far more.

RealJustme wrote:

Ginsburg said that this decision granted corporations a "minefield" of rights, more rights than individual humans have, and she is probably right about that. We'll soon see.

A minefield of rights to the corporations, what does the old senile fart mean by that?

A person who asks for a job from a corporation doesn't have the right to "force" the corporation to provide more benefits than they're offering for the position. If the person doesn't like the benefits and compensation the corporation is offering, the only right the person has it not to take the job.

Carlos

Well that's true from a narrow point of view, but hobby lobby's compensation program will become less competitive and that's their problem...

When you look at the bigger picture as Ginsburg notes. If a business claims that homosexuality violates their religious freedom, then according to the logic of the conservative judges, it would be violation of their religious freedom of expression to hire a homosexual. And it would be a violation of the law to reject an applicant because of sexual orientation.

Go figure... :roll:

johnforbes claims to have a law degree and yet he is unable to discuss the law.

It appears johnforbes took the place of some far more qualified affirmative action student who wouldn't have let it go to waste.



Quien es mas macho?
David Jansen, Lloyd Bridges, o Jack Lord?

Lloyd Bridges es muy macho!


Quien es mas macho?
johnforbes o Paul Lynde?

Paul Lynde es obviamente mas macho.

When you look at the bigger picture as Ginsburg notes. If a business claims that homosexuality violates their religious freedom, then according to the logic of the conservative judges, it would be violation of their religious freedom of expression to hire a homosexual.

False, gays have more rights than you do when it comes to applying for a job...assuming you're a straight male. They are a protected class, but even they can't sue if they decline a job offer based upon the benefits.

RealJustme wrote:

When you look at the bigger picture as Ginsburg notes. If a business claims that homosexuality violates their religious freedom, then according to the logic of the conservative judges, it would be violation of their religious freedom of expression to hire a homosexual.

False, gays have more rights than you do when it comes to applying for a job...assuming you're a straight male. They are a protected class, but even they can't sue if they decline a job offer based upon the benefits.

The owners of Hobby Lobby are fundamentalist Christians are they not?

Homosexuality goes against the Christian faith...does it not?

Then if they are required to hire homosexuals...then is not a violation of their religious freedom of expression???

According to the logic of the supreme court conservatives....

The owners of Hobby Lobby are fundamentalist Christians are they not?

Homosexuality goes against the Christian faith...does it not?

Then if they are required to hire homosexuals...then is not a violation of their religious freedom of expression???

Dude come into the 21st century. Hobby Lobby has gays working for them, because those gays accepted the job offers. They don't give a damn about the employees' private lives, they just don't want their private lives to dictate how they run their business.

RealJustme wrote:

The owners of Hobby Lobby are fundamentalist Christians are they not?

Homosexuality goes against the Christian faith...does it not?

Then if they are required to hire homosexuals...then is not a violation of their religious freedom of expression???

Dude come into the 21st century. Hobby Lobby has gays working for them, because those gays accepted the job offers. They don't give a damn about the employees' private lives, they just don't want their private lives to dictate how they run their business.

So you're telling me work place discrimination doesn't exist?

Or that employers don't google job candidates?

Dude, you may need to come into the 21st century.............

So you're telling me work place discrimination doesn't exist?

Sure it does, any time a business says they support affirmative action straight white males are being discriminated against.

Welcome to the 21st Century dude!

Carlos

Clownhacker's favorite web site for home design is Hobby Slobby.

Ah, the ruffle of taffeta and the preening prance of typing with a discernible lisp of effete and effeminate effrontery can only mean Forbes has arrived in his pink Mustang and is in the house once again seeking out JustFreedManMe's minuscule scepter to validate their co-rule of the clueless conservative cadre. Hopefully Forbes won't get his satin slippers too dirty as he rounds the bases and heads for JustFreedManMe's nappy dugout in the circular reading room.

In Grog's library, the volume out on the table is:

Valley of the Dolts: The Saga of Grog

And on Forbes' bedside table, amidst various dildos and spent jars of anal lube, is Forbes' own greasy and sticky-paged autobiography "Queen Ladyboy."

As we have all noted previously, Grog is incapable of political discussion, and incapable of posting without including his own deviant homo babble.

On Grog's bedside table, next to the spectacles and the fifth of cheap whiskey, is the celebrated Margaret Michell book, Gone With the Windy Bozo: The Biography of Grog.

Forbes complains about something he promptly turns around and does. He also frequently does something he complains about.

No wonder he's a Republican.

"All I can say, I am still here and likely to remain for a while."

I'd say Barry is the least of her worries....Risk Factors: Colon Cancer, Pancreatic Cancer

http://www.nndb.com/people/679/000023610/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

As we have all noted previously, Grog is incapable of political discussion, and incapable of posting without including his own deviant homo babble.

On Grog's bedside table, next to the spectacles and the fifth of cheap whiskey, is the celebrated Margaret Michell book, Gone With the Windy Bozo: The Biography of Grog.

If Ginsburg doesn't step down prior to the coming elections to insure Obama can put in who wants, she had better double her security. Obama has an agenda, he won't risk his conservative replacement putting a conservative in her place when she finally does step down. Democrats will lose the Senate, they can't risk losing the Supreme Court.

It's a faint hope I admit. But perhaps even a bed wetting liberal milk sop like Ginsburg could be experiencing reservations about letting someone so incompetent and unqualified as the Dear Leader nominate another justice to the SC.

We never know what goes on behind the scenes during deliberations, conversations and the interactions between the various justices. Perhaps The Honorable Mrs. Ginsburg is so put off by the ravings and blather of the two silly twats the Dear Leader has already nominated that she is unwilling to further contribute to the downfall of the nation by resigning and allowing the nappy headed, jug eared Marxist idiot to pull another loser out of his ass.

Nah....

Obama could nominate an illegal immigrant to be on the Supreme Court.

Silly matters such as citizenship surely wouldn't concern the Dear Leader?

Obama may be an illegal himself !

Obama could nominate an illegal immigrant to be on the Supreme Court.

You can bet it would be a young brain dead liberal ugly bimbo. You may ask why young? So that she could hold that needed liberal position on the court for several more years. If Ginsburg steps down it'll probably be Michelle's college room mate who gets the position. She's young (-50), she black, she's corrupt, she's ultra liberal, she's anti-white and she would further Obama's agenda long after he's out of office. Besides she made over $40 million in salary and bonuses procuring the Obamacare website contract for the company she works for out of Canada. Now what are the chances of a an old law school roommate of Michelle's getting that contract?

That room mate is at this very moment having her school records sealed.

johnforbes wrote:Clownhacker's favorite web site for home design is Hobby Slobby.

John Forbes is lucky to get sloppy seconds...

First Lady Michelle Obama’s Princeton classmate is a top executive at the company that earned the contract to build the failed Obamacare website.Toni Townes-Whitley, Princeton class of ’85, is senior vice president at CGI Federal, which earned the no-bid contract to build the Obamacare enrollment website at Healthcare.gov. CGI Federal is the U.S. arm of a Canadian company. Townes-Whitley and her Princeton classmate Michelle Obama are both members of the Association of Black Princeton Alumni and once shared an apartment.

WOW what are the odds of that? Notice Michelle Obama is a member of the Black Princeton Alumni, wonder what Michelle would say about Princeton having a White Princeton Alumni? I'm betting she would go ape shit calling that Alumni racist.