supreme court nominee

Topics that do not fit anywhere else. Absolutely NO discussions of religion, race, or immigration!

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton


Topic author
powerboatr
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 2273
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:53 pm
Location: North East Texas

supreme court nominee

#1

Post by powerboatr »

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/ ... index.html

let me say, no matter this judges qualifications, ideals, etc whether are GREAT or TERRIBLE

I was watching cnn as i surf to see who is saying what and how twisted it may become

they completely ruined her past accomplishments or failures with a statement made by the commentator this morning
he stated she has numerous qualifications/requirements that make her the right choice for the court. he then stated the #1 qualification/requirement is that she is a black women.
so being a color and a sex is a qualification/requirement to sit on the bench????? really that seems hmmmmmm whats the word??discriminatory

i have not dug into her political or judicial life , she may be the cats meow or the devil. but they completely destroyed any her accomplishments or failures by placing her on top because she is a black women??? never mind what she may or may not actually stand for.

blew my mind
Proud to have served for over 22 Years in the U.S. Navy Certificated FAA A&P technician since 1996

chasfm11
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 4143
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:01 pm
Location: Northern DFW

Re: supreme court nominee

#2

Post by chasfm11 »

On the plus side, she clerked for Breyer so she isn't totally unfamiliar with the Supreme Court. On the minus side, her nomination to the District court was supported by only Collins, and two other GOP Senators because of her Liberal record.
6/23-8/13/10 -51 days to plastic
Dum Spiro, Spero
User avatar

AF-Odin
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 735
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2009 7:00 pm
Location: Near Fort Cavazos (formerly Hood)

Re: supreme court nominee

#3

Post by AF-Odin »

Probably the most liberal of all of Biden's top three.
AF-Odin
Texas LTC, SSC & FRC Instructor
NRA Pistol, Home Firearms Safety, Personal Protection in the Home Instructor & RSO
NRA & TSRA Life Member

dlh
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 867
Joined: Tue Aug 18, 2015 12:16 pm

Re: supreme court nominee

#4

Post by dlh »

What are her views on the Second Amendment?
My radar is going off and telling me: Ruther Bader Ginsburg reborn---an east coast radical leftist lawyer and judge hostile to the Second Amendment.
Please know and follow the rules of firearms safety.

philip964
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 18015
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:30 pm

Re: supreme court nominee

#5

Post by philip964 »

A quote I saw was that she makes the Supreme Court look more like America.

Male female is 50% each so, currently 3 women 5 men. So yes to look more like America the new Justice should be a woman.

There are currently 6 Caucasian Justices, 1 Black and 1 Hispanic.

By a racial breakdown of America there should be the following justices on the Supreme Court to make them more like America 5.5 Caucasians, 1 Black, 1.7 Hispanics and 0.8 Asian, Native American or Biracial.

Hispanics are not really a race they are really often lumped in with Caucasians. If we added that way White would be 7.2 which it almost is now.

So it would appear we need an Asian, Native American or Biracial woman to make the Supreme Court look more like America.

Adding another Black to the court would over represent Blacks by 100% on the Supreme Court, just like on TV Commercials and the Today Show on NBC.

But Xiden promised a Black woman, so he has proposed a Black woman, even though that is not what America looks like.

Topic author
powerboatr
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 2273
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:53 pm
Location: North East Texas

Re: supreme court nominee

#6

Post by powerboatr »

philip964 wrote: Fri Feb 25, 2022 6:19 pm A quote I saw was that she makes the Supreme Court look more like America.

Male female is 50% each so, currently 3 women 5 men. So yes to look more like America the new Justice should be a woman.

There are currently 6 Caucasian Justices, 1 Black and 1 Hispanic.

By a racial breakdown of America there should be the following justices on the Supreme Court to make them more like America 5.5 Caucasians, 1 Black, 1.7 Hispanics and 0.8 Asian, Native American or Biracial.

Hispanics are not really a race they are really often lumped in with Caucasians. If we added that way White would be 7.2 which it almost is now.

So it would appear we need an Asian, Native American or Biracial woman to make the Supreme Court look more like America.

Adding another Black to the court would over represent Blacks by 100% on the Supreme Court, just like on TV Commercials and the Today Show on NBC.

But Xiden promised a Black woman, so he has proposed a Black woman, even though that is not what America looks like.
excellent analysis ...I would support a native american, that would stir up dems
tv commercials are over the top
but one gets me laughing so hard at the things it does not say
its 2 dudes one black one white clearly over 45 , 2 kids one girl one boy one is white one is black
they need a new car..shows them laying in bed in one variation ...its past ridiculous

i have to read up on her... its just disheartening that to sex and color of skin is a qualification/requirement
Proud to have served for over 22 Years in the U.S. Navy Certificated FAA A&P technician since 1996
User avatar

Rafe
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 2012
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2018 7:43 pm
Location: Htown

Re: supreme court nominee

#7

Post by Rafe »

dlh wrote: Fri Feb 25, 2022 5:26 pm What are her views on the Second Amendment?
My radar is going off and telling me: Ruther Bader Ginsburg reborn---an east coast radical leftist lawyer and judge hostile to the Second Amendment.
I posted a little background this morning here: https://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic ... 0#p1319340. Let's just say that the Brady Bunch is highly optimistic about her.
“Be ready; now is the beginning of happenings.”
― Robert E. Howard, Swords of Shahrazar

K.Mooneyham
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 2574
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 4:27 pm
Location: Vernon, Texas

Re: supreme court nominee

#8

Post by K.Mooneyham »

Rafe wrote: Fri Feb 25, 2022 8:16 pm
dlh wrote: Fri Feb 25, 2022 5:26 pm What are her views on the Second Amendment?
My radar is going off and telling me: Ruther Bader Ginsburg reborn---an east coast radical leftist lawyer and judge hostile to the Second Amendment.
I posted a little background this morning here: https://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic ... 0#p1319340. Let's just say that the Brady Bunch is highly optimistic about her.
Democrats would only nominate someone who is anti-2A, and that's all the reason I need to not want her confirmed to the Court.
User avatar

anygunanywhere
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 7863
Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2005 9:16 am
Location: Richmond, Texas

Re: supreme court nominee

#9

Post by anygunanywhere »

The chief government baby killer nominated another baby killer to the court. Too bad the nominee doesn't understand that her idol babykiller Margaret Sanger intended that killing babies in the womb would be used to eradicate the nominees race.
"When democracy turns to tyranny, the armed citizen still gets to vote." Mike Vanderboegh

"The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." – Ayn Rand

philip964
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 18015
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:30 pm

Re: supreme court nominee

#10

Post by philip964 »

https://apple.news/AInQBpmtiQBahBGavf1Dk-A

So someone asked her to define woman. She replied she was not a biologist.

Now biologists, according to USA Today which appears to be more liberal than either the NYT or WaPO, can’t really say what a woman is.

Who knew we would have this discussion in the new millennium?

I thought this XX vs XY would do it. Or how about has eggs. Or doesn’t have eggs.
Attachments
354E2445-FEA7-49B2-A6DB-0E46CAF183A4.jpeg

philip964
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 18015
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:30 pm

Re: supreme court nominee

#11

Post by philip964 »

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/22/us/p ... tence.html

Interesting coincidence. Judge in Pizzagate federal gun crime and discharge. Gave him 4 years. Prosecutors asked for 4 1/2 years. Much harder on non constitutional gun crime than pedo.

“I hope you understand and see how much people have suffered because of what you did,” Jackson said going on to say “I am truly sorry you find yourself in the position you are in, because you do seem like a nice person who on your own mind was trying to do the right thing. But that does not excuse reckless conduct and the real damage that it caused.” Her words to the gun owner.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/pu ... story.html

philip964
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 18015
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 12:30 pm

Re: supreme court nominee

#12

Post by philip964 »


Topic author
powerboatr
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 2273
Joined: Mon Mar 23, 2009 9:53 pm
Location: North East Texas

Re: supreme court nominee

#13

Post by powerboatr »

philip964 wrote: Fri Mar 25, 2022 11:55 am
and did we ever believe he was going to vote otherwise?

he is still a critter despite his flipping on things
Proud to have served for over 22 Years in the U.S. Navy Certificated FAA A&P technician since 1996

NotRPB
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1351
Joined: Tue May 05, 2015 8:24 am

Re: supreme court nominee

#14

Post by NotRPB »

If she's not a biologist & can't tell what a woman is ... how do we know if a black woman was nominated, if she doesn't know herself?
I agree an Asian or Native American should have been nominated, we've already had black & female on the SCOTUS.
Image
philip964 wrote: Thu Mar 24, 2022 7:05 pm https://apple.news/AInQBpmtiQBahBGavf1Dk-A

So someone asked her to define woman. She replied she was not a biologist.

Now biologists, according to USA Today which appears to be more liberal than either the NYT or WaPO, can’t really say what a woman is.

Who knew we would have this discussion in the new millennium?

I thought this XX vs XY would do it. Or how about has eggs. Or doesn’t have eggs.

wheelgun1958
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1118
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2007 10:40 pm
Location: Flo, TX

Re: supreme court nominee

#15

Post by wheelgun1958 »

If she can't define 'woman', can she define 'black'?
Post Reply

Return to “Off-Topic”