"On reflection, my recent remarks in response to press inquiries were ill-advised and I regret making them," Ginsburg said in a statement Thursday morning. "Judges should avoid commenting on a candidate for public office. In the future I will be more circumspect."
Gullible Jones wrote:Remember how Justice Ginsberg said some negative stuff about Donald Trump, and Trump responded by calling her senile?
Ginsberg just apologized for that.
Yes, really.
http://www.npr.org/2016/07/14/486012897 ... p-comments
WTF? What is the deal with everyone getting held accountable for Trump's stupidity except for Trump himself? The guy has no credentials, a history of horrible business practice, and he lies enough to make Hillary Clinton look downright honest. The only political stances he hasn't waffled on are sexism and racism. Yes Ginsberg was being unseemly, who cares; Trump's entire political presence is unseemly. That such an utter narcissistic slimebag of a man is even being considered for the most powerful office on the planet, is a damn excellent reason to be unseemly.
Stop backing down, dammit. STOP BACKING DOWN. Jesus Christ. There is never, ever a time to play polite patty-cake games with raving megalomaniacs.
Ugh.
(And yes, yes, yes, I know Clinton is awful! I don't care. I don't want to hear about it. She is not talking about ethnic cleansing, and right now, that needs to be enough.)
grapes wrote:
"On reflection, my recent remarks in response to press inquiries were ill-advised and I regret making them," Ginsburg said in a statement Thursday morning. "Judges should avoid commenting on a candidate for public office. In the future I will be more circumspect."
Seems like a reasonable apology
It's the Marbury v Madison of judicial activism
dThumper wrote:She probably should have remained above the fray in the first place and not made those comments. It shows her humility and grace that she offered the apology.
Gullible Jones wrote:@SFC, I think there's a pretty stark difference between being insultingly blunt and committing murder.
And in this case, I think that being insultingly blunt is what's needed. It's completely insane that we have a Republican presidential nominee who's on speaking terms with neo-Nazis, and nobody is allowed to call him what he by all appearances is. It is insane that people are expected to be polite and civil when they are being blatantly threatened.
Seriously, fuck the bipartisan shit. Some items simply should not be allowed on the table in a democracy.
geonuc wrote:But everyone else? Hell yeah, call Trump what he is. I personally prefer 'Cheeto-faced ferret-wearing shitgibbon'.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests