Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
36 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Ginsburg says she'll serve at least 2 more years (Original Post) Hawaii Hiker Mar 2013 OP
Yep, she should take a clue from the Pope. n/t Cleita Mar 2013 #1
If nature lets her, fine DFW Mar 2013 #2
I agree, and she will do more for progressive cause still_one Mar 2013 #3
She'll hurt the progressive cause if we have fewer Senators in the next Congress, pnwmom Mar 2013 #11
On what basis do you say we will have fewer senators? It is a 6 year term, and we won some red still_one Mar 2013 #17
Little words can be important to meaning. Little words like "IF." pnwmom Mar 2013 #18
24 Rs are up for reelection in 2014, and 9 D's. That is all I was pointing out /nt still_one Mar 2013 #19
There are no guarantees in life except pnwmom Mar 2013 #21
understand your point still_one Mar 2013 #22
Your figures are really off. former9thward Mar 2013 #36
She says AT LEAST. She's not planning on early 2015. pnwmom Mar 2013 #9
We might not have a Democratic Senate in 2015 Hippo_Tron Mar 2013 #13
The GOP will not allow any appointment by Obama Kelvin Mace Mar 2013 #4
I think they'll allow an appointment if its replacing her or Breyer Hawaii Hiker Mar 2013 #5
Not to worry. He'll find a Republican centrist, which they Cleita Mar 2013 #7
You can't really filibuster a Supreme Court nominee for ideological reasons Hippo_Tron Mar 2013 #14
I wish I could be as confident as you Kelvin Mace Mar 2013 #16
Ginsberg is selfish. PERIOD. aaaaaa5a Mar 2013 #6
A Harvard Law Professor said what you just said - in 2011 Hawaii Hiker Mar 2013 #8
Outstanding article. And dead on accurate. aaaaaa5a Mar 2013 #12
I don't think its because Democrats are not as savvy Hawaii Hiker Mar 2013 #15
Republicans play to win...Democrats play to play CincyDem Mar 2013 #26
So that's why Rehnquist died while Bush was president? bornskeptic Mar 2013 #32
I agree. She should have resigned the month he took office. pnwmom Mar 2013 #10
so, 72 days is now two years? uncle ray Mar 2013 #23
You miss the overall point. aaaaaa5a Mar 2013 #25
yes, those magical first two years when Obama got everything he wanted. uncle ray Mar 2013 #34
I think you are nitpicking for no reason and missing the point. aaaaaa5a Mar 2013 #35
I have to say it is sad that this has to be taken into account dsc Mar 2013 #20
Why did you leave out Harding, Coolidge and Hoover? n/t bornskeptic Mar 2013 #33
Additional short article/post below Tx4obama Mar 2013 #24
we gave the SC the power to do what they want, with some of them like Thomas they take advantage Sunlei Mar 2013 #27
She's a prima donna. madaboutharry Mar 2013 #28
That goes for most of them WI_DEM Mar 2013 #31
Ginsberg will step down when she is ready davidpdx Mar 2013 #29
Wonderful! and then we will have a GOP Senate which is a possibility WI_DEM Mar 2013 #30

DFW

(54,437 posts)
2. If nature lets her, fine
Mon Mar 4, 2013, 05:07 PM
Mar 2013

Early 2015 is still almost two years before Obama's second term is up. That's time enough.

Fighting pancreatic cancer is an uphill battle. I'm amazed she's still out there slogging away. My dad had it, and was lucky to last 10 months after diagnosis.

pnwmom

(108,995 posts)
11. She'll hurt the progressive cause if we have fewer Senators in the next Congress,
Mon Mar 4, 2013, 06:36 PM
Mar 2013

which we probably will.

Obama will have an even harder time getting a justice confirmed who's at least somewhat progressive.

still_one

(92,404 posts)
17. On what basis do you say we will have fewer senators? It is a 6 year term, and we won some red
Mon Mar 4, 2013, 10:20 PM
Mar 2013

Last edited Tue Mar 5, 2013, 01:18 AM - Edit history (1)

States in 2012

pnwmom

(108,995 posts)
21. There are no guarantees in life except
Tue Mar 5, 2013, 02:18 AM
Mar 2013

eventually, everyone dies. Even members of SCOTUS.

And if she hangs on to the bitter end, she'll be increasing the odds that her replacement will be appointed by a Rethug.

pnwmom

(108,995 posts)
9. She says AT LEAST. She's not planning on early 2015.
Mon Mar 4, 2013, 06:31 PM
Mar 2013

She could easily wait till it's too late for Obama to replace her.

Hawaii Hiker

(3,166 posts)
5. I think they'll allow an appointment if its replacing her or Breyer
Mon Mar 4, 2013, 05:32 PM
Mar 2013

BUT there will be a WW III confirmation battle if President Obama gets to replace Scalia, Thomas, or Kennedy...

Hippo_Tron

(25,453 posts)
14. You can't really filibuster a Supreme Court nominee for ideological reasons
Mon Mar 4, 2013, 07:55 PM
Mar 2013

As much as Republicans are keen on obstructing, they know that filibustering a Supreme Court nominee for ideological reasons would force the hand of the Majority Leader to make rule changes. Reid is a spineless wimp in that department, of course, but the direction of the court for the next 2 decades is a big stake that even his hand would be forced.

aaaaaa5a

(4,667 posts)
6. Ginsberg is selfish. PERIOD.
Mon Mar 4, 2013, 05:41 PM
Mar 2013


She is not in good health. Her position is too important to be risked like that. Personally, she should have dropped off the court during Obama's first two years when we had a 60 seat majority.

We ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE 55 Senators in the 2015 Congress. By delaying the inevitable, she puts everything we fight for in unnecessary jeopardy.

I use to have a lot of respect for Ginsberg. But seeing how she has handled this over the last few years, I now understand that it is all about her...... and not the causes we are suppose to be fighting for.

aaaaaa5a

(4,667 posts)
12. Outstanding article. And dead on accurate.
Mon Mar 4, 2013, 06:42 PM
Mar 2013


This is why we lose so often. We are not as politically savvy as the GOP. I fear both Breyer and Ginsburg will hold on too long. And people most remember, even with a Hillary Clinton Presidency in 2016, if the Senate is GOP, their replacements will not be of equal value.

Can anyone say "blue dog?"


Both of them are selfish.

Since we had the 60 seat majority in Obama's first term, every single day they remain on that court, the court moves further to the right. I hope they are happy.

Hawaii Hiker

(3,166 posts)
15. I don't think its because Democrats are not as savvy
Mon Mar 4, 2013, 08:45 PM
Mar 2013

its just that Democrats are too nice, they always want to be the Republicans buddy instead of treating them like the enemy...

CincyDem

(6,386 posts)
26. Republicans play to win...Democrats play to play
Tue Mar 5, 2013, 09:01 AM
Mar 2013


It always seems that Repubs are focused on the end goal and rarely waiver in the steps. At the same time, Democrats usually seem to worry about everything and anything in every step, so much so that we're still at the starting gate arguing about why color running shoes we're going to wear while the Repubs are halfway around the track.

It seems to me that it's been a long time since we've had a "predatory" democratic leader - one who is willing to do whatever it takes to drive a progressive agenda, not just work to slow a conservative agenda.

bornskeptic

(1,330 posts)
32. So that's why Rehnquist died while Bush was president?
Tue Mar 5, 2013, 11:51 AM
Mar 2013

Because, as a savvy Republican, we wanted to make sure that a Republican replaced him? Pretty shrewd!

pnwmom

(108,995 posts)
10. I agree. She should have resigned the month he took office.
Mon Mar 4, 2013, 06:32 PM
Mar 2013

She's not irreplaceable, and the longer she waits, the less likely we'll get someone decent in to replace her.

aaaaaa5a

(4,667 posts)
25. You miss the overall point.
Tue Mar 5, 2013, 08:49 AM
Mar 2013

She should have dropped off the court. It would have been easier to find a younger, more fit replacement for her during Obama's first 2 years.


The longer she waits, the more difficult it will be replacing her. And as another poster has pointed out, winning the WH 3 consecutive years has rarely been done. What if we lose the WH in 2016? We could be looking at a court 6-3 or 7-2 against us for another generation.

Like I said before, she is selfish. When you get into positions of this importance, you have to think about issues beyond your personal ego. Sadly, she is clearly incapable of doing that.

uncle ray

(3,157 posts)
34. yes, those magical first two years when Obama got everything he wanted.
Tue Mar 5, 2013, 12:49 PM
Mar 2013

yeah, i GOT that.

I have no problem with you offering your opinion on RBG's ego. i am pointing out that you are making up your own facts and timeline.

aaaaaa5a

(4,667 posts)
35. I think you are nitpicking for no reason and missing the point.
Tue Mar 5, 2013, 12:53 PM
Mar 2013


Anyone who values the importance of the court knows it would have been better for her to drop off years ago. And the longer she waits, the more difficult it will be to get a suitable replacement in place.

dsc

(52,166 posts)
20. I have to say it is sad that this has to be taken into account
Tue Mar 5, 2013, 01:59 AM
Mar 2013

but it does. It is hard to get 3 terms in a row for a party. In the early history you had the six terms from Jefferson through Monroe, but that was due as much to the collapse of the opposition party as it was to the success of the winning party. Then you have the Jackson - Van Buren era. After that it took until the post civil war era (Grant, Hayes, Garfield, Arthur). Then the early 20th century (McKinley, Roosevelt, Taft). Finally Depression and WW2 (Roosevelt Truman). Nearly all of those periods resulted from the utter collapse of the opposing party, the opposing party being on the wrong side of civil war, FDR's singular charisma. Only the Reagan, Bush 12 year hold was a normal type thing. Counting on Obama being followed by a Democrat is risky.

Tx4obama

(36,974 posts)
24. Additional short article/post below
Tue Mar 5, 2013, 05:11 AM
Mar 2013

Ruth Bader Ginsburg: No Plans To Step Down From Supreme Court Yet

The thought of retirement is on Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's mind, she told The New Yorker's Jeffrey Toobin in an interview for an upcoming profile. But while she's clearly contemplating the timing of her departure, the 79-year-old cancer survivor says she won't be going anywhere just yet.

"There will come a point when I -- It's not this year. You can never tell when you're my age," Ginsburg said. "But, as long as I think I have the candlepower, I will do it. And I figure next year for certain. After that, who knows?"

Ginsburg will turn 80 later this month, and despite battling through two bouts of cancer, has never missed a day on the bench in her nearly 20 years of service. She's maintained that she won't step aside as long as her health allows her to serve to the fullest ability.

“I will stay in this job as long as I can do it full steam,” Ginsburg said last month during a speech before the San Diego Association of Business Trial Lawyers. She repeated this pledge to Toobin.

One of the court's four liberal-leaning justices, Ginsburg also told Toobin that the party of the president would play into her decision about stepping down, perhaps suggesting that she'd retire at some point during President Barack Obama's second term.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/04/ruth-bader-ginsburg_n_2805931.html



Sunlei

(22,651 posts)
27. we gave the SC the power to do what they want, with some of them like Thomas they take advantage
Tue Mar 5, 2013, 09:19 AM
Mar 2013

of the position.

Lets hope Ginsburg has 20 years of service left in her, lives to be a healthy 108

And the SC GOP buddies have their frequent Koch funded lovely resort meetings under the global warming massive extreme weather lightning storms.

madaboutharry

(40,220 posts)
28. She's a prima donna.
Tue Mar 5, 2013, 09:33 AM
Mar 2013

She loves being important, being followed around by the Secret Service, having the title and the perks. I have no respect for her. She has been a great Supreme Court Justice and the country is a better place for her service, but she needs to step down and allow President Obama to appoint someone who can serve and help shape the court for decades to come.

WI_DEM

(33,497 posts)
30. Wonderful! and then we will have a GOP Senate which is a possibility
Tue Mar 5, 2013, 11:04 AM
Mar 2013

she should resign while the Senate and its committees are in Dem hands.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Ginsburg says she'll serv...