Comments by "Harry Mills" (@harrymills2770) on "Justice Anthony Kennedy announces his retirement" video.

  1. +Sam: There are a LOT of people who breathed a huge sigh of relief that it'd be Trump, rather than Clinton, making the next set of SCOTUS appointments. You see it as slipping into the abyss. We see it as clawing our way back OUT of the abyss.
    2
  2. Democrats are mobilizing their poor-sport brigades to character-assassinate whomever Trump appoints. But as Kennedy's retirement is a full month away, there's a good chance their short attention spans will have them off tilting at some other windmill by that time. Also, the ranks of the brigade appear to be thinning, and their fitness for action is flagging.
    2
  3. Vagabond Wastrel: "Right" is so ill-defined these days. You could argue that the so-called Liberal Establishment are now the regressives/reactionaries, and the limited-government, libertarian types - same as ever - represent the true heart of liberalism in America. In whatever age you live, there is always a Lord-Serf hierarchy that tries to assert itself, with the strong preying on the weak to cement their ascendance. In the current era, that dynamic is represented by nanny government and the welfare plantation at home, and the military-industrial complex, CIA and Deep State abroad. I don't like Trump "going easy" on enforcement of the law, but that's one of Obama's many "dithers" that he doesn't need to take head-on. Instead, he's pushing for a more federalist, leave-it-to-the-states position, coupled with calls for legislation to align enforcement with the law. What Obama did, over and over, was flout the law and the constitution any time he had a different opinion. The Chief Executive of the Federal Government MUST be the foremost RESPECTER of the law. Obama did some posturing in that regard, and then did just the opposite, any time he felt like it.
    1
  4. Aardvark 52: He's "relaxed" prosecutions by following Obama's precedent. Once Obama did nothing to challenge laws passed in Washington and Colorado, there was no going back. This is the one GOOD dither I can ascribe to Obama, although I think he should've done something to push the law in the direction of resolving the conflict between what's on the books and what his administration did (or didn't do). As long as the law says one thing and you're doing something different, you're opening up Pandora's box to chaos and general disrespect for the law.
    1
  5. And I think we're seeing, more and more, that there was a general culture of lawless "we're-smarter-and-better-than-everybody-else" attitude up and down the ranks of the Obama misadministration.
    1
  6. it just sucks how the Constitution has been so battered by partisan Dems over the years that Supreme Court (and Appeals Courts) appointments even HAVE this kind of attention. Knowing how the game is played and how it all got kicked off by President-for-Life Roosevelt packing the Supreme Court in a power grab that would've gotten Trump impeached, it's become a fact that whoever sits in the White House has a HUGE amount of control over how the process goes for DECADES. Control over judicial appointments is a big part of why a LOT of people voted against Hillary and for Trump. At least with Trump, they knew it wouldn't be Hillary appointing more activist and bought-off idiots to the bench.
    1
  7. KingofUSA85: I think that it's going to be a while before Democrats take control of Congress or the White House. They went too far down a bat-shit-crazy rabbit hole, and they're still in the double-down-denial stages. It turns out that blacks and hispanics would rather work than have a hand-out - Something we've known for a LONG TIME - and they're red-pilling off the plantation at a ruinous-to-Democrats rate, since social media brought down the Mass Media Wall, much like the Berlin Wall came crashing down almost 30 years ago (Wow! Has it been that long?!). There's currently a big fight (by the noise levels) over control of the Interwebz, but the intellectual and spiritual high ground is held by more libertarian-thinking individuals, and there's just no putting the genie back in the bottle. Old ways of providing and consuming information are going extinct, and they just can't maintain the monopoly. They're TRYING, by seeking to "regulate" platforms such as YouTube and FaceBook, but unlike utilities of the past, people can ALWAYS walk away from YouTube when they're not happy with the platform. The minute I no longer see or hear the voices that I know are out there, I will look elsewhere. YouTube and Google are walking a fine line, here.
    1