(02-04-2019 10:27 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  She evidently attended a musical event tonight in DC. I haven't seen pics but there are multiple accounts of her appearance at the event. It is good that she made a public appearance.

Strange there were no pics but she supposedly attended the musical rendition of the play about her life. ‘The incredible RBG’ or something like that. If there are no pictures tomorrow it will only increase the mystery if she doesn’t attend the SOTU address.

(02-04-2019 10:27 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  She evidently attended a musical event tonight in DC. I haven't seen pics but there are multiple accounts of her appearance at the event. It is good that she made a public appearance.

(02-05-2019 12:11 AM)SoMs Eagle Wrote:  

(02-04-2019 10:27 PM)mptnstr@44 Wrote:  She evidently attended a musical event tonight in DC. I haven't seen pics but there are multiple accounts of her appearance at the event. It is good that she made a public appearance.

Strange there were no pics but she supposedly attended the musical rendition of the play about her life. ‘The incredible RBG’ or something like that. If there are no pictures tomorrow it will only increase the mystery if she doesn’t attend the SOTU address.

The MSM is using old pictures of Ginsburg in their articles.
If she was really out in public... there would be pics of her by someone. Someone, anyone would have snapped a picture with their phone.
An actual recent photo of her right now would be worth tons of money to CNN and the MSM.

All we have are twitter comments and articles by the MSM.

Here's the performance... not a single mention of her being there by anyone. You think if she was ACTUALLY there, the performers or Host or someone would have made some comment about how great it is to see her. Also... the venue is small, it holds 200 at most, someone should have gotten a photo of her.

However... all that being said. If she was healthy enough to go a musical... she should be healthy enough to attend the SOTU tomorrow.

Yeah, not buying this one. Quick Wapo run another Super Bowl ad to virtue signal your journalistic greatness.

This is why the right has such a bad name.... This entire thread is despicable. Be better. You are better than this.

I agree. Even if she is at the SOTU tonight (which I highly doubt), people here will no doubt claim it's a doppelganger. No doubt the same actress who played Hillary Clinton in 2016.

(02-04-2019 09:31 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Sometimes I feel like I'm talking to a blank wall.

I used to think that way too, but ironically it turns out the reason RBG didn't retire during Obama's presidency was because she didn't like how they treated Sandra Day O'Connor.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019...dency.html

Here is the pertinent part of that interview.

Mary Harris (Slate Reporter) -- I mean, I guess she’s become this feminist icon. And I wonder if it just sort of prevents us from seeing the 85-year-old woman that she is in some ways. A friend of mine who’s a lawyer posted—and I thought this was thoughtful—that there’s this liberal debate of, well, should she have retired while Obama was president? And she was like, you know you’ve got to be careful with that. Because part of feminism is letting people do what they want, and we’ve let these guys work until they’re 90.

Dahlia Lithwick (writer/reporter/lawyer and a Supreme Court expert) -- Well, that’s what she said. One of the things she says in response to that is like, Weird. Nobody was demanding that John Paul Stevens retire. Nobody was demanding that Stephen Breyer retire. So I think she does see this valence of sexism around it. There was this laser focus on why she wasn’t stepping down, and I think that offends her. For what it’s worth anecdotally, a lot of people have said that she watched Sandra Day O’Connor get forced off the court. That’s itself an amazing feminist story that doesn’t get told, right? Where Chief Justice Rehnquist is incredibly sick. And O’Connor’s husband is incredibly sick. So much so that she said, I’m going to have to next year, she said to the chief justice, I’m going to step down so that I can care for my husband.

“I think Ginsburg has said O’Connor was forced off before she was ready. And she could have been on the court for five more years or seven more years.”
So, stop and sit with the fact that male justices don’t retire to care for their ailing spouses. And then this is the kind of the weird feminist bit: Chief Justice William Rehnquist says to her, Actually, no, I’m going to retire next year, so you should go now. And he says to her, Because you can’t have two in the same summer. There’s just a core tradition that two confirmation hearings is too much of a jolt to the public system. So he says to her essentially: Don’t do it next year; I’m going to do it next year; you do it now. She, by the way, I should just add, is at the height of her powers. At this moment, she’s the most important woman in the country. She’s the 5–4 vote. The swing vote. She was Kennedy before Kennedy was Kennedy. So he says step down now.

She steps down. And he dies shortly after. So not only do we end up having two confirmation hearings—boom-boom in a row, we have John Roberts and Alito—but then she ends up having stepped down before she was ready. And the really tragic coda, if you’re counting sort of feminist indignities here, is that within a very, very short time, her husband is institutionalized. He doesn’t recognize her anymore.

I think Ginsburg has said she was forced off before she was ready. And she could have been on the court for five more years or seven more years or whatever. And we don’t know what the world would have looked like. And I think that story is playing in the back of Ginsburg’s head when she’s like, No man is going to tell me it’s my time, because I saw that happen to a person who really, I think, in many ways was her sister at the Supreme Court.

Someone’s gotta be kidding me.

I know Slate is a complete rag, but like? I know, but like YEAAA!

“In the back of Ginsburg’s head when she’s like”...

Is this an “article” from teen vogue or something? I see better writing on here.

Like, ya know, yea? Duh?

(02-05-2019 01:01 AM)q5sys Wrote:  Here's the performance... not a single mention of her being there by anyone. You think if she was ACTUALLY there, the performers or Host or someone would have made some comment about how great it is to see her. Also... the venue is small, it holds 200 at most, someone should have gotten a photo of her.

However... all that being said. If she was healthy enough to go a musical... she should be healthy enough to attend the SOTU tomorrow.

If she was up to a public appearance of some sort, she woulda been at the Kennedy center for a concert or something.

Not a 200 seat auditorium with movable walls and a AA class going on at the same time on the other side.

Hope the Drumpfs list is narrowing.

(02-05-2019 06:49 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  I agree. Even if she is at the SOTU tonight (which I highly doubt), people here will no doubt claim it's a doppelganger. No doubt the same actress who played Hillary Clinton in 2016.

No.

That was clearly H> playing the H> in 2016. I think the play in nine songs then was called

“The BIG fail. Bigly”.


That’s why we have his orangeness in office. You can thank your corrupt side for a lot of that. DWS, Brazille, pedo-desta and the list goes on.

Don’t hate the player, hate YOUR game. Y’all rolled the die thinking it was a lock and it came up snake eyes.

How fitting is that?!?

(02-05-2019 06:58 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  If she was up to a public appearance of some sort, she woulda been at the Kennedy center for a concert or something.

Not a 200 seat auditorium with movable walls and a AA class going on at the same time on the other side.

Hope the Drumpfs list is narrowing.

The performance featured her daughter in law. Maybe you can use a Duh on yourself for that idiotic comment?

(02-05-2019 06:49 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  I agree. Even if she is at the SOTU tonight (which I highly doubt), people here will no doubt claim it's a doppelganger. No doubt the same actress who played Hillary Clinton in 2016.

If she does attend and falls asleep like she did before, will everyone really be thinking, OMG is she dead?

(02-05-2019 06:58 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  Hope the Drumpfs list is narrowing.

Yep. 53 yes votes = no stupid idiot liberals holding up this one.

3 justices and still 6 years to go in office. We might have a Trump majority on the court before its all said and done.

(02-05-2019 06:38 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  This is why the right has such a bad name.... This entire thread is despicable. Be better. You are better than this.

That's rich coming from you. This is what you find despicable???

Yup.

And THAT’s the “wall” I really give the bigger schit about.

Do we need to stop the fence jumpers once and for all after 35+ yrs? Yup.

Do we need more desperately to stop the judicial tyranny/activism of the last near 50 yrs? Yup and yup.

Do both?

Start unpacking the dyno sticks for Rushmore





/snicker

(02-03-2019 10:31 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  BTW, according to the official word from the Supreme Court, Ginsburg is at home recovering and still weighing in on cases from her home office. I'm not sure how anyone here can complain about that (as long as it is true) because President Trump in a new report spends 60 percent of his days in the White House (since the Midterm Elections) in 'Executive Time' (which is a nice name which means basically spending his time in whatever office or room he feels like where he can watch Fox News or other TV shows, read papers, and make an occasional phone call.

Since Nov. 7, the day after the midterm elections, Trump has spent around 297 hours in Executive Time, and for those same schedules, Trump has had about 77 hours scheduled for meetings that include policy planning, legislative strategy and video recordings.

https://www.axios.com/donald-trump-priva...34255.html

And he still kicked but compared to the last 4 presidents -- combined.

Considering all the recent "look at this woman she's a liberal superwoman" stories of RGB's medical treatments, the only thing I am willing to concede is factual is that there is a Supreme Court Justice named Ruth Bader-Ginsburg.

Though considering that the reports claiming there is a Supreme Court Justice named Ruth Bader-Ginsburg include well know fake media purveyors such as CNN..................... who knows?

(02-05-2019 07:09 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  

(02-05-2019 06:58 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  If she was up to a public appearance of some sort, she woulda been at the Kennedy center for a concert or something.

Not a 200 seat auditorium with movable walls and a AA class going on at the same time on the other side.

Hope the Drumpfs list is narrowing.

The performance featured her daughter in law. Maybe you can use a Duh on yourself for that idiotic comment?

Which actually gives more emphasis to the opinion that if RBG was there, the production would have said something. The 'Where's Ruth?' thing has crept into the mainstream at this point. An actual picture or video of her out in public would be gold to the left. With her DIL being part of the production, and all the Where's Ruth stuff, they'd want to highlight how 'strong' she is and how she's doing well.
The whole point of the production is to pay homage to RBG.

If you're doing a production to pay respects to an individual... and that person has been MIA for two months... and that person makes their first public appearance at your event... you're going to say something.

Not leave it up to a faceless MSM outlet to report the news. If she was there they'd have 200 witnesses talking about it all over social media. Instead you have a handful of journalists. A photo of RBG in public would be a massive win for them.

I'm not in the 'I hope she's dead camp'. But one has to be objective about things like this. The left has EVERYTHING to gain and nothing to lose by proof of life.

(02-05-2019 06:38 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  This is why the right has such a bad name.... This entire thread is despicable. Be better. You are better than this.

This is why the right has such a bad name per the left.

The left has a bad name because they not only kill babies both in the womb and after birth but because they also celebrate it.

That's more than despicable. It's evil incarnate.

And unfortunately, I don't know that the left is better than this.

(02-05-2019 06:52 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  

(02-04-2019 09:31 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Sometimes I feel like I'm talking to a blank wall.

I used to think that way too, but ironically it turns out the reason RBG didn't retire during Obama's presidency was because she didn't like how they treated Sandra Day O'Connor.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019...dency.html

Here is the pertinent part of that interview.

Mary Harris (Slate Reporter) -- I mean, I guess she’s become this feminist icon. And I wonder if it just sort of prevents us from seeing the 85-year-old woman that she is in some ways. A friend of mine who’s a lawyer posted—and I thought this was thoughtful—that there’s this liberal debate of, well, should she have retired while Obama was president? And she was like, you know you’ve got to be careful with that. Because part of feminism is letting people do what they want, and we’ve let these guys work until they’re 90.

Dahlia Lithwick (writer/reporter/lawyer and a Supreme Court expert) -- Well, that’s what she said. One of the things she says in response to that is like, Weird. Nobody was demanding that John Paul Stevens retire. Nobody was demanding that Stephen Breyer retire. So I think she does see this valence of sexism around it. There was this laser focus on why she wasn’t stepping down, and I think that offends her. For what it’s worth anecdotally, a lot of people have said that she watched Sandra Day O’Connor get forced off the court. That’s itself an amazing feminist story that doesn’t get told, right? Where Chief Justice Rehnquist is incredibly sick. And O’Connor’s husband is incredibly sick. So much so that she said, I’m going to have to next year, she said to the chief justice, I’m going to step down so that I can care for my husband.

“I think Ginsburg has said O’Connor was forced off before she was ready. And she could have been on the court for five more years or seven more years.”
So, stop and sit with the fact that male justices don’t retire to care for their ailing spouses. And then this is the kind of the weird feminist bit: Chief Justice William Rehnquist says to her, Actually, no, I’m going to retire next year, so you should go now. And he says to her, Because you can’t have two in the same summer. There’s just a core tradition that two confirmation hearings is too much of a jolt to the public system. So he says to her essentially: Don’t do it next year; I’m going to do it next year; you do it now. She, by the way, I should just add, is at the height of her powers. At this moment, she’s the most important woman in the country. She’s the 5–4 vote. The swing vote. She was Kennedy before Kennedy was Kennedy. So he says step down now.

She steps down. And he dies shortly after. So not only do we end up having two confirmation hearings—boom-boom in a row, we have John Roberts and Alito—but then she ends up having stepped down before she was ready. And the really tragic coda, if you’re counting sort of feminist indignities here, is that within a very, very short time, her husband is institutionalized. He doesn’t recognize her anymore.

I think Ginsburg has said she was forced off before she was ready. And she could have been on the court for five more years or seven more years or whatever. And we don’t know what the world would have looked like. And I think that story is playing in the back of Ginsburg’s head when she’s like, No man is going to tell me it’s my time, because I saw that happen to a person who really, I think, in many ways was her sister at the Supreme Court.

Someone’s gotta be kidding me.

I know Slate is a complete rag, but like? I know, but like YEAAA!

“In the back of Ginsburg’s head when she’s like”...

Is this an “article” from teen vogue or something? I see better writing on here.

Like, ya know, yea? Duh?

"They" forced O'Connor to retire to take care of her husband. Really????

(02-05-2019 12:22 PM)q5sys Wrote:  

(02-05-2019 07:09 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  

(02-05-2019 06:58 AM)JMUDunk Wrote:  If she was up to a public appearance of some sort, she woulda been at the Kennedy center for a concert or something.

Not a 200 seat auditorium with movable walls and a AA class going on at the same time on the other side.

Hope the Drumpfs list is narrowing.

The performance featured her daughter in law. Maybe you can use a Duh on yourself for that idiotic comment?

Which actually gives more emphasis to the opinion that if RBG was there, the production would have said something. The 'Where's Ruth?' thing has crept into the mainstream at this point. An actual picture or video of her out in public would be gold to the left. With her DIL being part of the production, and all the Where's Ruth stuff, they'd want to highlight how 'strong' she is and how she's doing well.
The whole point of the production is to pay homage to RBG.

If you're doing a production to pay respects to an individual... and that person has been MIA for two months... and that person makes their first public appearance at your event... you're going to say something.

Not leave it up to a faceless MSM outlet to report the news. If she was there they'd have 200 witnesses talking about it all over social media. Instead you have a handful of journalists. A photo of RBG in public would be a massive win for them.

I'm not in the 'I hope she's dead camp'. But one has to be objective about things like this. The left has EVERYTHING to gain and nothing to lose by proof of life.

That's all logical.

But its also possible she showed her face, looked so bad noone took a picture or introduced her, and then she quickly left.