10-27-2020, 04:15 PM
(10-27-2020, 03:59 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: This is why the commission is being discussed. Not even joking. The commission is a way to justify it without it being an overt power grab. They make a recommendation and it seems far more reasonable. It will be used to sway the hand-wringing moderates to their side. The right will continue to call it a power grab, sure, but I'd be willing to bet that the same ones with the Lincoln Project right now would go along with it.
Honestly, if this happens as described I will officially lose my faith in this nation for the first time in my life.
(10-27-2020, 04:01 PM)masterpanthera_t Wrote: I remain unconvinced that this would be tyranny. Admittedly, I have not read all the posts on this thread, and therefore, may have missed your arguments for why this would be a tyrannical move. But as of now, I only see this as your opinion. Considering McConnell's tactics, and the simple justification of "well, I have the power to do it, and it's not illegal, so I will", I don't see in theory why the same argument doesn't suit the packing of the courts, especially given the precedent based justifications that Bmore laid out. EDIT : Also based on Bels' last paragraph in the post above this: end of EDIT. Sort of like how McConnell used some speech from a few years prior as his justification for not holding a hearing on another appointee.
I'm not necessarily saying that I can't see it as tyranny, but perhaps I need to see some arguments put forth for why that is. I'm sort of on two minds as far as McConnell's actions are concerned. I can see that as sort of tyranny as well, but don't necessarily do so. Especially if the only argument for "not tyranny" is "well, it's legal, and I have the power".
Lastly, I'm hoping to hear from your (or any other differing) perspective, on this issue. But by no means do I feel entitled to your time or response. Perhaps I may learn or get more profound in considering the issues due to it. I do see a potential for escalation, an arms race of packing if you will, but other than that, fail to see a specifically tyrannical view, only one of this will lead to eventual troubles because this can become an endless game and not a meaningful exercise. But based on current functioning of Congress, my cynical view is that we're essentially already at a the point of meaningless games, posturing and grandstanding without having a truly functioning Congress which actually does a whole lot for the people, even in comparison to say 30 years ago.
Here's my point in as succinct a manner as possible. McConnell's tactics were underhanded and sleazy, but they were within the framework of the existing rules. He didn't have to change or modify anything. In fact, all he had to do was nothing, which is what he did.
Contrast that with the proposed court packing. Packing the court will require a complete change in legislation. It is changing the rules because they didn't work in your favor and changing them in a way that only benefits you (because no way do they expand the SCOTUS if the GOP keeps hold of the Senate). This is the very essence of tyranny, imposing your will on others outside the framework of the rules. Not that it matters because I'm only one person, but if the Dems pack the court then I will never, ever, in my life ever vote for another Democrat and quite honestly would hope that the end up on the ash heap of history with the Whigs. I'd add that I've never voted GOP in my life.
