Senate Republicans must block Biden Supreme Court Nominee

[DieHardBrownsFan]

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/senate-republicans-block-biden-supreme-court-nominee-matthew-whitaker

[Westside Steve]

I'm not sure they can.

WSS

[Axe]

Calling Joe Manchin

[cccjwh]

Why does she not like beer?

[Vambo]

1 hour ago, cccjwh said:

Why does she not like beer?

Biden SCOTUS Judge Jackson pick's 'long record' of letting child porn offenders 'off the hook'

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/sen-hawley-warns-long-record-biden-scotus-pick-letting-child-porn-offenders-off-hook

While she has been on the bench, Judge Jackson, every case of child porn offenders in front of her given defendant lenient sentences lower than what the federal guidelines recommend and lower than what the federal prosecutors have sought. Did it case after case and going back to her time on the sentencing commission, before she was on the bench. …

She wanted to eliminate the current mandatory minimum sentence for child porn offenders as far back as law school she talked about whether child sex offender registries are even constitutional. This is somebody I think who has a lot of issues when it comes to being lenient with criminals. Soft on crime and I just want to know is this a person who is going to protect our kids or who is going to protect child sex predators. We need to get those answers.

 

 

[calfoxwc]

the left is using the race card already. only stupid people can buy that.

odd, they didn't use the racist slur on those who tried to destroy Kavanaugh.....

 

[Vambo]

On 3/21/2022 at 9:42 AM, cccjwh said:

Why does she not like beer?

Politics18 mins ago

Ketanji Brown Jackson serves on board of school that promotes critical race theory

[JAFBF]

On 3/21/2022 at 6:55 AM, Vambo said:

Biden SCOTUS Judge Jackson pick's 'long record' of letting child porn offenders 'off the hook'

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/sen-hawley-warns-long-record-biden-scotus-pick-letting-child-porn-offenders-off-hook

While she has been on the bench, Judge Jackson, every case of child porn offenders in front of her given defendant lenient sentences lower than what the federal guidelines recommend and lower than what the federal prosecutors have sought. Did it case after case and going back to her time on the sentencing commission, before she was on the bench. …

She wanted to eliminate the current mandatory minimum sentence for child porn offenders as far back as law school she talked about whether child sex offender registries are even constitutional. This is somebody I think who has a lot of issues when it comes to being lenient with criminals. Soft on crime and I just want to know is this a person who is going to protect our kids or who is going to protect child sex predators. We need to get those answers.

 

 

 

 

 

Just a coincidence   .   .   .  

[MLD Woody]

Oh lord he brought in pizza gate

[nickers]

When I think of WOODY.... This comes to mind...

 

 

 

[cccjwh]

Wow you guys really have nothing. Maybe talk about CRT or something?

[Vambo]

38 minutes ago, cccjwh said:

Wow you guys really have nothing. Maybe talk about CRT or something?

[cccjwh]

Supreme Court Nominee Jackson's Support Tied for Highest (gallup.com)

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Initial public support for judge Ketanji Brown Jackson's confirmation to the Supreme Court ties as the highest Gallup has measured for any recent nominee. Fifty-eight percent of Americans say the Senate should vote in favor of Jackson serving on the Supreme Court. Only current Chief Justice John Roberts, at 59% in 2005, had a level of support on par with that for Jackson. Most other nominees had support in the low 50% range, with five below that mark.

[Vambo]

50 minutes ago, cccjwh said:

Supreme Court Nominee Jackson's Support Tied for Highest (gallup.com)

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- Initial public support for judge Ketanji Brown Jackson's confirmation to the Supreme Court ties as the highest Gallup has measured for any recent nominee. Fifty-eight percent of Americans say the Senate should vote in favor of Jackson serving on the Supreme Court. Only current Chief Justice John Roberts, at 59% in 2005, had a level of support on par with that for Jackson. Most other nominees had support in the low 50% range, with five below that mark.

 

 

Supporter

[calfoxwc]

a lot of the entitled black subculture makes that a given, really.

90 some % vote liberal. Trouble is, they support a black candidate,

and still are not better off after decades and decades.

More and more of that subculture are realizing they have been pandered to with

no results - or worse results. It's all the dems do - self-serving decisions and policies that are just

pandering to people easy to manipulate. I think that is close to running it's course - so they are letting millions

flood across their borders, to give them the vote - and they will start all over again with an ignorant, easy manipulated,

dependent voting block - to maintain their power and control and wealth.

The swamp defends itself by nearly any means necessary. It has to stop.

[cccjwh]

See baby cow gets it. Don't talk about her, talking about immigration. Post about how you don't think black people are smart enough to figure out they are being manipulated by those damn liberals. Talking about Jackson is just a no-win situation for the cultists. 

 

[Vambo]

5 minutes ago, cccjwh said:

See baby cow gets it. Don't talk about her, talking about immigration. Post about how you don't think black people are smart enough to figure out they are being manipulated by those damn liberals. Talking about Jackson is just a no-win situation for the cultists. 

 

[The Cysko Kid]

They're not going to block her. For all democrat foot soldiers' talk of how Republicans stymie Democrats in everything at least some Republicans voted to confirm Obama's appointees. No Democrats voted to confirm Trump's. I was going to say ten X as many repubs voted to confirm Obama's nominees but 10 x 0 is still zero. Just to be clear, Democrats are the obstructionists and then they gaslight everyone about it. 

 

[Axe]

[cccjwh]

2 hours ago, The Cysko Kid said:

They're not going to block her. For all democrat foot soldiers' talk of how Republicans stymie Democrats in everything at least some Republicans voted to confirm Obama's appointees. No Democrats voted to confirm Trump's. I was going to say ten X as many repubs voted to confirm Obama's nominees but 10 x 0 is still zero. Just to be clear, Democrats are the obstructionists and then they gaslight everyone about it. 

 

54 -45 (3 dems voted for Gorsuch) This is what is so great about you guys. The attention to the details. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neil_Gorsuch_Supreme_Court_nomination#:~:text=The Senate confirmed Neil Gorsuch,Donnelly%2C voted to confirm him.

 

[MLD Woody]

3 hours ago, The Cysko Kid said:

They're not going to block her. For all democrat foot soldiers' talk of how Republicans stymie Democrats in everything at least some Republicans voted to confirm Obama's appointees. No Democrats voted to confirm Trump's. I was going to say ten X as many repubs voted to confirm Obama's nominees but 10 x 0 is still zero. Just to be clear, Democrats are the obstructionists and then they gaslight everyone about it. 

 

Well they have to go to a vote to get voted on, right? Blocking the whole process (Garland) removes the ability for there to be any voting...

I think that's a relevant detail among claims of "gaslighting"

 

 

 

But this shit is clearly getting more out of hand and more polarizing. This whole confirmation hearing has just been another opportunity to drum the culture war drum. (And we see some posters in this thread already running to meet the calls of those drums...)

And yes, at this point, fast forward and flip the script and Dems are probably trying to block / slow down the whole thing too

[Westside Steve]

11 minutes ago, MLD Woody said:

Well they have to go to a vote to get voted on, right? Blocking the whole process (Garland) removes the ability for there to be any voting...

I think that's a relevant detail among claims of "gaslighting"

 

 

 

But this shit is clearly getting more out of hand and more polarizing. This whole confirmation hearing has just been another opportunity to drum the culture war drum. (And we see some posters in this thread already running to meet the calls of those drums...)

And yes, at this point, fast forward and flip the script and Dems are probably trying to block / slow down the whole thing too

They should find some lunatic who will pretend  she molested him when he was a child.

Maybe Jussie Smollett is looking for another gig?

WSS

[The Cysko Kid]

1 hour ago, MLD Woody said:

Well they have to go to a vote to get voted on, right? Blocking the whole process (Garland) removes the ability for there to be any voting...

I think that's a relevant detail among claims of "gaslighting"

 

 

 

But this shit is clearly getting more out of hand and more polarizing. This whole confirmation hearing has just been another opportunity to drum the culture war drum. (And we see some posters in this thread already running to meet the calls of those drums...)

And yes, at this point, fast forward and flip the script and Dems are probably trying to block / slow down the whole thing too

Yeah the whole Merrick Garland business was shady. Very shady indeed. No argument there on my part. Personally, if I was Trump, I would have nominated him myself just to watch the circus unfold. 

Also that troll speaks truly. Three Democrats did vote to confirm gorsuch. So I was wrong but that also allows me to put a hard number on it. 14 Republicans voted to confirm Obama's nominees so that makes it easier to say with confidence that 5X as many republicans voted for the confirmation of the nominees of the supposedly most hated president in history who supposedly couldn't get anything done because he supposedly was blocked at every turn. 

But also the Republicans aren't going to block this person from joining the court. I haven't been following it that closely but I'm fairly sure they haven't called her a rapist or a religious fanatic who is itching to take away women's...excuse me, BIRTHING PEOPLE'S rights.  

[MLD Woody]

1 hour ago, The Cysko Kid said:

Yeah the whole Merrick Garland business was shady. Very shady indeed. No argument there on my part. Personally, if I was Trump, I would have nominated him myself just to watch the circus unfold. 

Also that troll speaks truly. Three Democrats did vote to confirm gorsuch. So I was wrong but that also allows me to put a hard number on it. 14 Republicans voted to confirm Obama's nominees so that makes it easier to say with confidence that 5X as many republicans voted for the confirmation of the nominees of the supposedly most hated president in history who supposedly couldn't get anything done because he supposedly was blocked at every turn. 

But also the Republicans aren't going to block this person from joining the court. I haven't been following it that closely but I'm fairly sure they haven't called her a rapist or a religious fanatic who is itching to take away women's...excuse me, BIRTHING PEOPLE'S rights.  

Well, at least we can agree on the first part. If you're trying to play down the Rep's stonewalling Obama, the fact they literally didn't let a justice get nominated for an entire year is a little more telling than just how a vote went. 

WHEN the votes happened is also clearly important. Each year gets more divisive and more stagnant. Opposing party support dropped from Obama to Trump, and then from Trump to Biden, and it will with our next president too. 

Our two-party system is trash

 

The Reps CAN'T block this person, I believe, because Kamala is the tiebreaker. This confirmation hearing is all a big show. Reps will get sound bites to show them fighting the good fight in the fabricated culture way (CRT, etc) and then we'll get a new supreme court judge. 

[Vambo]

2 minutes ago, MLD Woody said:

Well, at least we can agree on the first part. If you're trying to play down the Rep's stonewalling Obama, the fact they literally didn't let a justice get nominated for an entire year is a little more telling than just how a vote went. 

WHEN the votes happened is also clearly important. Each year gets more divisive and more stagnant. Opposing party support dropped from Obama to Trump, and then from Trump to Biden, and it will with our next president too. 

Our two-party system is trash

 

The Reps CAN'T block this person, I believe, because Kamala is the tiebreaker. This confirmation hearing is all a big show. Reps will get sound bites to show them fighting the good fight in the fabricated culture way (CRT, etc) and then we'll get a new supreme court judge. 

6-3 conservative majority

 

Yes, critical race theory is being taught in public schools

by Washington Examiner

 | July 12, 2021 12:01 AM

•  

•  
•  

Print this article https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/yes-critical-race-theory-is-being-taught-in-public-schools

There are plenty of other examples that prove racial essentialism and collective guilt are being taught to young students. In Cupertino, California, an elementary school required third graders to rank themselves according to the “power and privilege” associated with their ethnicities. Schools in Buffalo, New York, taught students that “all white people” perpetuate “systemic racism” and had kindergarteners watch a video of dead black children, warning them about “racist police and state-sanctioned violence.” And in Arizona, the state’s education department sent out an “equity toolkit” to schools that claimed infants as young as 3 months old can start to show signs of racism and “remain strongly biased in favor of whiteness” by age 5.

If that’s not enough evidence, the nation’s largest teachers union outright endorsed the teaching of CRT to public school students in an agenda item it passed last week. The National Education Association vowed to “share and publicize” information “already available on Critical Race Theory — what it is and what it is not” and fight back against legislation that would ban CRT from school curricula.

[calfoxwc]

deja vu all over again - woodpecker with egg on his beak.

[The Cysko Kid]

7 hours ago, MLD Woody said:

Well, at least we can agree on the first part. If you're trying to play down the Rep's stonewalling Obama, the fact they literally didn't let a justice get nominated for an entire year is a little more telling than just how a vote went. 

WHEN the votes happened is also clearly important. Each year gets more divisive and more stagnant. Opposing party support dropped from Obama to Trump, and then from Trump to Biden, and it will with our next president too. 

Our two-party system is trash

 

The Reps CAN'T block this person, I believe, because Kamala is the tiebreaker. This confirmation hearing is all a big show. Reps will get sound bites to show them fighting the good fight in the fabricated culture way (CRT, etc) and then we'll get a new supreme court judge. 

Say you're a possible supreme court justice. Would you rather 

A: be blocked and not even considered in an obvious political move by the opposing party

or 

B: have an entire opposing political party make up a highly damaging false story about your character paying off some psychotic foot soldier to call you a rapist in front of not only your friends and family but the entire world and then double down on it and double down again and again. 

Would you rather be ignored by mitch McConnell or called a rapist to your face by a piece of shit like Corey Booker and you can't even punch his lying doofus face off? One of those things is significantly more scummy than the other. 

 

[Westside Steve]

45 minutes ago, The Cysko Kid said:

Say you're a possible supreme court justice. Would you rather 

A: be blocked and not even considered in an obvious political move by the opposing party

or 

B: have an entire opposing political party make up a highly damaging false story about your character paying off some psychotic foot soldier to call you a rapist in front of not only your friends and family but the entire world and then double down on it and double down again and again. 

Would you rather be ignored by mitch McConnell or called a rapist to your face by a piece of shit like Corey Booker and you can't even punch his lying doofus face off? One of those things is significantly more scummy than the other. 

 

That's easy to answer. Democrats have absolutely no qualms about making up lies and running with them. They know they won't get called out by the media. Why not? By the way I thought Garland should have gotten his hearing and voted down but I didn't realize until he became attorney general what a POS he actually was.

WSS

[MLD Woody]

1 hour ago, The Cysko Kid said:

Say you're a possible supreme court justice. Would you rather 

A: be blocked and not even considered in an obvious political move by the opposing party

or 

B: have an entire opposing political party make up a highly damaging false story about your character paying off some psychotic foot soldier to call you a rapist in front of not only your friends and family but the entire world and then double down on it and double down again and again. 

Would you rather be ignored by mitch McConnell or called a rapist to your face by a piece of shit like Corey Booker and you can't even punch his lying doofus face off? One of those things is significantly more scummy than the other. 

 

I won't attempt to debate you're interpretation of those events. 

All I'm saying is you used hard numbers to back up your point of "gaslighting". In doing that you skipped over one justice not even getting a hearing because one side blocked it, which weakens your argument.

 

Like I said, we'll keep getting more divided and these confirmations will become more and more ridiculous. 

[Westside Steve]

1 hour ago, MLD Woody said:

I won't attempt to debate you're interpretation of those events. 

All I'm saying is you used hard numbers to back up your point of "gaslighting". In doing that you skipped over one justice not even getting a hearing because one side blocked it, which weakens your argument.

 

Like I said, we'll keep getting more divided and these confirmations will become more and more ridiculous. 

That's true especially if nominees are going to be brought up on either side that espouse the furthest left or the furthest right ridiculous bleeding edge of the platforms. And in almost every instance that would be the Democrats.

WSS