Sure, Amy Coney Barrett is 10 times better than the creature she is replacing, but we need to look at reality. Why is she Amy "Coney" Barrett and not Amy Barrett? Is she only 1/2 married and still a maiden? She said her adopted kids are the same as her children even though they are not of her flesh and bone. The leader of her religion is against Christianity. Then there is the whole "You have 5 (+2) kids how will you have time to be a SC justice?"

The most outrageous, extreme decision the SC court ever did is the tranny rights at 6 to 3. I guess it will be 5 to 4 now.

The Democrats idea of breaking the Supreme Court by adding and pulling off justices is probably a good idea and would not be the first time Democrats screwed themselves long term. Almost all the nails in America's coffin were put in it by the court like a abortion, dual citizenship, gay marriage, etc. Communists have a point that America is a fake democracy since all the biggest decisions are made by unelected dictators. None would of happened with a court under control. The constitution NEVER said judges have life tenure, it says they stay  "during good Behaviour." Frail, old justices that do not work but have 25 year old clerks do the job are not keeping good behavior. Ginsburg being an example that she did not work more than a few hours a week for the past 15 years.

Why did modern Republican presidents enforce every dopey SC decision unlike Kennedy and Lincoln who ignored their decisions? Even the SC itself says the executive has no obligation to enforce rulings.

I guess we have to look at the bright side and look at the alternative. Just be realistic and not be in the typical Republican talk show host fantasy world.



https://twitter.com/Steve_Sailer/status/1309614123987075072

Quote from: unver on September 26, 2020, 12:02:39 AM
Why is she Amy "Coney" Barrett and not Amy Barrett? Is she only 1/2 married and still a maiden? Then there is the whole "You have 5 (+2) kids how will you have time to be a SC justice?"

I don't understand your  logic. Why would carrying her maiden name in addition to her husband's surname diminish her marital status or bring it into question? Many women with a strong sense of identity and pride in their family name choose to carry both when they get married. It is perfectly legal and socially acceptable. This is the first time I have heard someone make an issue out of a hyphenated surname....WOW!

Also, she seems to be functioning quite well at present looking after her family while sitting as a Judge of U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.

Quote from: unver on September 26, 2020, 12:02:39 AM
Sure, Amy Coney Barrett is 10 times better than the creature she is replacing, but we need to look at reality. Why is she Amy "Coney" Barrett and not Amy Barrett? Is she only 1/2 married and still a maiden? She said her adopted kids are the same as her children even though they are not of her flesh and bone. The leader of her religion is against Christianity. Then there is the whole "You have 5 (+2) kids how will you have time to be a SC justice?"

The most outrageous, extreme decision the SC court ever did is the tranny rights at 6 to 3. I guess it will be 5 to 4 now.

The Democrats idea of breaking the Supreme Court by adding and pulling off justices is probably a good idea and would not be the first time Democrats screwed themselves long term. Almost all the nails in America's coffin were put in it by the court like a abortion, dual citizenship, gay marriage, etc. Communists have a point that America is a fake democracy since all the biggest decisions are made by unelected dictators. None would of happened with a court under control. The constitution NEVER said judges have life tenure, it says they stay  "during good Behaviour." Frail, old justices that do not work but have 25 year old clerks do the job are not keeping good behavior. Ginsburg being an example that she did not work more than a few hours a week for the past 15 years.

Why did modern Republican presidents enforce every dopey SC decision unlike Kennedy and Lincoln who ignored their decisions? Even the SC itself says the executive has no obligation to enforce rulings.

I guess we have to look at the bright side and look at the alternative. Just be realistic and not be in the typical Republican talk show host fantasy world.



https://twitter.com/Steve_Sailer/status/1309614123987075072

I do not understand your anti-Catholicism. I am not Catholic, but have many Catholic friends and they are fine folks. I personally believe the hierarchy of the church is corrupt, not the followers.

People need to stop searching for perfection in an un-perfect world.
The Scalia's and Thomas's are rare individuals, but with enough good conservatives on the bench, nearly all decisions will not go the way of the left and that has the DNC in a panic.

Trump will assuredly get another appointment furthering our grip on a court that thinks itself bigger than life, when in fact, it is us, who gave it the power of final arbiter, when it is not.

Quote from: Solar on September 26, 2020, 06:44:23 AM
People need to stop searching for perfection in an un-perfect world.
The Scalia's and Thomas's are rare individuals, but with enough good conservatives on the bench, nearly all decisions will not go the way of the left and that has the DNC in a panic.

Trump will assuredly get another appointment furthering our grip on a court that thinks itself bigger than life, when in fact, it is us, who gave it the power of final arbiter, when it is not.

Listening to leftist talking heads this morning once again the democrats are over playing their hands. One guy even said she was racist for adopting foreign children. I sure hope they keep this s--t up as they could reverse the so called trend with suburban women.

Quote from: supsalemgr on September 26, 2020, 09:35:55 AM
Listening to leftist talking heads this morning once again the democrats are over playing their hands. One guy even said she was racist for adopting foreign children. I sure hope they keep this s--t up as they could reverse the so called trend with suburban women.

It was the left that gave people the idea that SCOTUS was all mighty and powerful. It will be the Right that brings the court back to where it belongs, as just another branch of our great Republic.
Congress will be doing its job when we take it back.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1310007626156118017

Quote from: Solar on September 26, 2020, 06:44:23 AM
People need to stop searching for perfection in an un-perfect world.
The Scalia's and Thomas's are rare individuals, but with enough good conservatives on the bench, nearly all decisions will not go the way of the left and that has the DNC in a panic.

Trump will assuredly get another appointment furthering our grip on a court that thinks itself bigger than life, when in fact, it is us, who gave it the power of final arbiter, when it is not.

Exactly.  She'll make some rulings that we won't like, and she'll save the fuckin' country with others. 

Quote from: taxed on September 26, 2020, 06:16:33 PM
Exactly.  She'll make some rulings that we won't like, and she'll save the fuckin' country with others.

Yep, it's a crap shoot no matter what. Remember Roberts was promised to us, and so many others, only to turn against what was expected of them.
I may not agree with her on all decisions in her past, but at least there isn't anything that stands out as blatantly unconstitutional.

If she's good, this could be a huge win for us. She's young and attractive and many young girls will look up to her and she could live for decades.
Libs hate long living conservatives.

Quote from: Solar on September 27, 2020, 03:26:52 AM
Yep, it's a crap shoot no matter what. Remember Roberts was promised to us, and so many others, only to turn against what was expected of them.
I may not agree with her on all decisions in her past, but at least there isn't anything that stands out as blatantly unconstitutional.

If she's good, this could be a huge win for us. She's young and attractive and many young girls will look up to her and she could live for decades.
Libs hate long living conservatives.

Roberts just became irrelevant.  Another reason Bush was a bad president.

Folks, sit back and enjoy the moment. I believe Solar posted somewhere this makes Roberts irrelevant. That is the good news. It is time to watch the democrats twist in the wind and make fools of themselves. Example: Senators Blumenthol and Hironmo have stated they will not meet with Barrett. How adult of them. Barret should be very happy she doesn't have to be nice to those a--holes.

Quote from: supsalemgr on September 27, 2020, 05:30:18 AM
Folks, sit back and enjoy the moment. I believe Solar posted somewhere this makes Roberts irrelevant. That is the good news. It is time to watch the democrats twist in the wind and make fools of themselves. Example: Senators Blumenthol and Hironmo have stated they will not meet with Barrett. How adult of them. Barret should be very happy she doesn't have to be nice to those a--holes.

Yep, no more of this "Roberts Sides With The Left", decision shit, now it will be in our favor the rest of the way.