Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Senate Republicans must block Biden Supreme Court Nominee


Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, Westside Steve said:

We've wasted enough time on this. If you believe that the vast majority Siobhan unwanted pregnancies are due to the failure of contraceptives used properly then you do. Not sure of the numbers and it doesn't matter but I guess that number would be about the same as people who are actually thrown clear of an auto accident and were fortunate not to have been wearing a seatbelt.

WSS

PS it's no abortion anytime for any reason versus Anytime Anyplace for any reason.

contraceptives are not guaranteed - a man and a women are taking that chance. It's their choice, their responsibility if it ends up in a pregnancy. It's like driving too fast on a mountain road, sliding off the gravel, going over the edge of the road and getting badly hurt.

"just sue the car manufacturer". right. on and on and on......

..."it's okay, vote for us and we will make it so it isn't your fault"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Westside Steve said:

We've wasted enough time on this. If you believe that the vast majority Siobhan unwanted pregnancies are due to the failure of contraceptives used properly then you do. Not sure of the numbers and it doesn't matter but I guess that number would be about the same as people who are actually thrown clear of an auto accident and were fortunate not to have been wearing a seatbelt.

WSS

PS it's no abortion anytime for any reason versus Anytime Anyplace for any reason.

I never said "vast majority". Don't typical Steve...

 

And you stated you think the numbers (data, facts) don't matter, so we can save time there. 

 

So what exactly is the "reward"? Are you calling getting an abortion a "reward"?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MLD Woody said:

I never said "vast majority". Don't typical Steve...

 

And you stated you think the numbers (data, facts) don't matter, so we can save time there. 

 

So what exactly is the "reward"? Are you calling getting an abortion a "reward"?

Quick I'm relatively easy procedure to eliminate the bad side effects from irresponsible Behavior. Almost like bankruptcy.

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MLD Woody said:

So the "reward" is getting an abortion in your eyes

 

Alright ....

Yes

I know you'd prefer to pretend it was traumatic. If that were the case it seems like the millions of people you get abortions would have taken a little more percussion. But let's face it at the moment nobody cared.

WSS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

she's also has little use for our 2nd Amendment - she's very anti-gun.

Please...Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson Is Anti-Gun And ...

Common sense dictates that any Supreme Court nominee who did not voice strong support for Biden's anti-gun agenda during these meetings would immediately have been shown the door. Furthermore, Judge Jackson was very well coached on all key Second Amendment issues. During her confirmation hearings, she dodged and sidestepped questions easily.

Obama Supreme Court Nominee Has Anti-Gun Record

Stephen Gutowski • March 16, 2016 3:20 pm SHARE Merrick Garland, President Obama's nominee to replace Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, has a record of opposing gun rights as a federal judge,...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, cccjwh said:

Right, because there is going to be a black woman on the US supreme Court. 

And look who always brings up race....a lefty.

Actually, it's because she has a record of being a liberal activist judge that lets child porn offenders go free and can't define "woman".

But go ahead and make it about race. You're boring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Gorka said:

And look who always brings up race....a lefty.

Actually, it's because she has a record of being a liberal activist judge that lets child porn offenders go free and can't define "woman".

But go ahead and make it about race. You're boring.

Sure, it's the end of our country, because someone you don't agree with is going to supreme court. That she is more than qualify for the job, doesn't matter to you cult members. She isn't part of your cult so it's the end of our country. 

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, cccjwh said:

Sure, it's the end of our country, because someone you don't agree with is going to supreme court. That she is more than qualify for the job, doesn't matter to you cult members. She isn't part of your cult so it's the end of our country. 

 

 

Being a judge does not automatically qualify for the job .  Thats why there are hearings. An activist for one side or the other is grounds for disqualification. 

Unlike what you  demonrats tried to do with Kavanaugh,  we have put in front of your face VALID reasons why her record does not exemplify the character required to be on the  SCOTUS,  yet you'd rather just go with another display of narrowmindedness and ignorance and play the tired "its about race" race  song and dance.

Sadly, your one track mind prohibited you from not even once considered the fact that if a black conservative leaning woman was nominated, that all of us here would be on board.

How about you, yes or no? You'd be on board with a female black conservative leaning judge?

It's not about race you moron.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, cccjwh said:

Sure, it's the end of our country, because someone you don't agree with is going to supreme court. That she is more than qualify for the job, doesn't matter to you cult members. She isn't part of your cult so it's the end of our country. 

 

troll-trolls.gif.b7954a9f9c25404fb87f7d38880345e7.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, cccjwh said:

Right, because there is going to be a black woman on the US supreme Court. 

you're a moron. I guess that makes you feel good about something....

doesn't matter what race she is - she is a leftwing activist liar - she'll promise to defend the Constitution, but

she will rule against it for the left any damn time she is told to.

 

 

As noted below in Article VI, all federal officials must take an oath in support of the Constitution:

 

“The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.”

 

The Constitution does not provide the wording for this oath, leaving that to the determination of Congress. From 1789 until 1861, this oath was, “I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution of the United States.” During the 1860s, this oath was altered several times before Congress settled on the text used today, which is set out at 5 U. S. C. § 3331. This oath is now taken by all federal employees, other than the President:

 

“I, _________, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.”

 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

she isn't smart enough, or not honest enough, to be on our Supreme Court. She's a "judge" and "doesn't remember the Dred Scott decision" ???

damn. that's ignorant.

https://thefederalistpapers.org/us/biden-supreme-court-nominee-says-not-quite-remember-basis-dred-scott-decision

Unqualified Biden Supreme Court Nominee Says She Does Not 'Quite Remember the Basis' for Dred Scott Decision

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Gorka said:

 

Being a judge does not automatically qualify for the job .  Thats why there are hearings. An activist for one side or the other is grounds for disqualification. 

Unlike what you  demonrats tried to do with Kavanaugh,  we have put in front of your face VALID reasons why her record does not exemplify the character required to be on the  SCOTUS,  yet you'd rather just go with another display of narrowmindedness and ignorance and play the tired "its about race" race  song and dance.

Sadly, your one track mind prohibited you from not even once considered the fact that if a black conservative leaning woman was nominated, that all of us here would be on board.

How about you, yes or no? You'd be on board with a female black conservative leaning judge?

It's not about race you moron.

 

Well I guess you want Thomas to step down. Because of his and his wife's activism. Being a douche like Kavanaugh doesn't disqualify you from being a SC justice. I wasn't on here crying about him or the religious nut they put in the court after him. But for you poor snowflakes, Jackson is the end of our country!!!!!  Non Cheetos Jesus, you cult member are sad. Funny, but sad.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, cccjwh said:

Well I guess you want Thomas to step down. Because of his and his wife's activism. Being a douche like Kavanaugh doesn't disqualify you from being a SC justice. I wasn't on here crying about him or the religious nut they put in the court after him. But for you poor snowflakes, Jackson is the end of our country!!!!!  Non Cheetos Jesus, you cult member are sad. Funny, but sad.

 

You really can't help being an idiot can you. . It's quite amusing.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, cccjwh said:

Well I guess you want Thomas to step down. Because of his and his wife's activism. Being a douche like Kavanaugh doesn't disqualify you from being a SC justice. I wasn't on here crying about him or the religious nut they put in the court after him. But for you poor snowflakes, Jackson is the end of our country!!!!!  Non Cheetos Jesus, you cult member are sad. Funny, but sad.

 

200w5.gif.b58d33faffbda67760c2e87723ba38df.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Canton Dawg said:

Political theater is the Kavanaugh hearings.

Was that ever.

Proven lies, no recollection of any details, not a single witness to corroborate anything.

Kavanaugh's only "baggage" was that Trump appointed him.  It was a character assassination by vile demonrats and whatever else it took that would deny a Trump appointee. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TexasAg1969 said:

Lest I be forced to play the H card your buddy Sasse says he's not voting for her.

But I suspect you were talking out your ass when you were pimping him anyway. 😄

WSS

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Westside Steve said:

Lest I be forced to play the H card your buddy Sasse says he's not voting for her.

But I suspect you were talking out your ass when you were pimping him anyway. 😄

WSS

has he avoided talking out of his ass with all his posts?

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...
×
×
  • Create New...