Jump to content

Nominee to US Court of Appeals - Vote Along Party Lines


Hagar

Recommended Posts

This is the hidden content, please

I saw an article about this yesterday.  Didn't think much about it.  Then all this hit me.  Nominee is Amy Barrett, a law professor at Notre Dame.  All the Democrats voted against her.  Why?  Because she's Catholic.  Something she has in common with 6 members of the Supreme Court.  

Now I can understand someone who disagrees with Catholicism on a religious basis, but what has that got to do with her being a Judge?  This is the same party that encourages bringing Islamic Extremists to the US and allow illegal immigrants.  That wants everyone to embrace homosexuality, transgendered, and Paraguay pygmies, and they won't accept a Christian denomination?  There's something wrong with this picture, and it's very ugly, and imo, evil.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, REBgp said:

This is the hidden content, please

I saw an article about this yesterday.  Didn't think much about it.  Then all this hit me.  Nominee is Amy Barrett, a law professor at Notre Dame.  All the Democrats voted against her.  Why?  Because she's Catholic.  Something she has in common with 6 members of the Supreme Court.  

Now I can understand someone who disagrees with Catholicism on a religious basis, but what has that got to do with her being a Judge?  This is the same party that encourages bringing Islamic Extremists to the US and allow illegal immigrants.  That wants everyone to embrace homosexuality, transgendered, and Paraguay pygmies, and they won't accept a Christian denomination?  There's something wrong with this picture, and it's very ugly, and imo, evil.

 

I was told I was evil for my prejudiced ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, new tobie said:

When the rehaticans refused to vote for a supreme court  judge in 2016, they set the standard. Thats all they needed to do is vote, didn't have to vote yes, just vote! that will bite them in the ...........

Weren't they following the BIDEN rule? Why can't you learn?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, new tobie said:

When the rehaticans refused to vote for a supreme court  judge in 2016, they set the standard. Thats all they needed to do is vote, didn't have to vote yes, just vote! that will bite them in the ...........

That was one of worst abuses by Congress I’ve ever seen.  Garland was a good nominee and the Clown show in DC refused to even hold a vote. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, TxHoops said:

That was one of worst abuses by Congress I’ve ever seen.  Garland was a good nominee and the Clown show in DC refused to even hold a vote. 

This was the worst abuse by Congess you have ever seen?  Come on, Man! :)

Anyway, worked out...we got a solid conservative instead of a likely environmental whacko.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TxHoops said:

By environmental whacko, I assume you mean a climate denier. :) 

Not sure about that...he’s made some rulings on “endangered” species that kinda throws up a red flag to me...I’m all about the environment but some go too far, and that goes both ways.

Question...Thomas has been criticized for very rarely dissenting by the left and this guy seems to fit the same mold...would that be a concern for you?  I wouldn’t want a go along guy on either side.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Englebert said:

So the Supreme Court and every other court should ignore every precedent ruling. Hmmm.

That is a an interesting and thoughtful argument.  Although you know it is flawed in the instance discussed. :D 

But to your point, sometimes precedents are ignored, or even overturned.  Ultimately, judges are to follow the law to which they are bound, even if they determine a previous ruling interpreted a law incorrectly in their estimation.  Why else would Roe v Wade still be an issue decades later?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Not sure about that...he’s made some rulings on “endangered” species that kinda throws up a red flag to me...I’m all about the environment but some go too far, and that goes both ways.

Question...Thomas has been criticized for very rarely dissenting by the left and this guy seems to fit the same mold...would that be a concern for you?  I wouldn’t want a go along guy on either side.

I agree with you here as well.  

But my biggest problem with Thomas is that he’s a terrible justice.  I’ve been on record here saying I didn’t agree with much of Rehnquist wrote, but he’s in the SCOTUS HoF in my book.  What I don’t get is why the Pubbies (I see you Nash*) are so supportive of the snoozing justice.  If ever there was a case of affirmative action gone wrong, it’s that clown.  

(My Nash reference isn’t about Thomas - I have no idea of his thoughts on him.  I know Pubbies is his new favorite term.  I’m having a blue and red T-shirt printed as we speak...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TxHoops said:

I agree with you here as well.  

But my biggest problem with Thomas is that he’s a terrible justice.  I’ve been on record here saying I didn’t agree with much of Rehnquist wrote, but he’s in the SCOTUS HoF in my book.  What I don’t get is why the Pubbies (I see you Nash*) are so supportive of the snoozing justice.  If ever there was a case of affirmative action gone wrong, it’s that clown.  

(My Nash reference isn’t about Thomas - I have no idea of his thoughts on him.  I know Pubbies is his new favorite term.  I’m having a blue and red T-shirt printed as we speak...)

You wanna discuss snoozing justices?  Thomas does NOT have an exclusive on that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TxHoops said:

Any other justice who has gone a DECADE without asking a single question?

 

My mistake.  I thought you were referring to snoozing in a literal sense.  It seems as though one particular justice was foolhardy enough to make demeaning public statements about a President.   And you thought only the Prez lacked dignity!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, stevenash said:

My mistake.  I thought you were referring to snoozing in a literal sense.  It seems as though one particular justice was foolhardy enough to make demeaning public statements about a President.   And you thought only the Prez lacked dignity!!

No, he snoozes in the literal sense as well.   And often.  And he’s not yet in his 80s.  At least he’s honest.  He’s on record describing his work ethic as “zero.”  

Again, I have no problem with a balanced court, and have great respect for many conservative justices.  But Thomas is a joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, TxHoops said:

No, he snoozes in the literal sense as well.   And often.  And he’s not yet in his 80s.  At least he’s honest.  He’s on record describing his work ethic as “zero.”  

Again, I have no problem with a balanced court, and have great respect for many conservative justices.  But Thomas is a joke.

Image result for ginsberg sleeping

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, TxHoops said:

And I’ll say it again, Requist and Ginsburg should be an example to us all.  You couldn’t pick out two diametrically opposed individuals politically, but they were best of friends.  They admired each other’s intellect and respected each other in their work.  If only the yo yos across the street could take heed. 

Obviously I meant Scalia.   Another SCOTUS conservative who is a HOF’er in my book. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    46,177
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    Sharpie98
    Newest Member
    Sharpie98
    Joined


×
×
  • Create New...