White House candidate Trump calls Justice Ginsburg mentally unfit

a reply to: queenofswords

Spin spin . He said what he said. He's a crybaby AND a bully.
That's your guy. Congrats on you.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: butcherguy

Yeah sure. What ever.
That is just you deflecting again. Can't support your point change the subject.
Have a great day.

No, my point was about the story... when it came out of Mitt Romney and the car carrier, it was noted that Obama ate dog and was proud of it (there's your proof that he isn't Muslim).
Mitt Romney was a cad for safely transporting his dog but Obama was simply fine eating man's best friend.

A side note..... most Americans do not support eating dogs, cats or horses. In fact, there is a petition up on moveon.org to stop it in the US.

a reply to: Sremmos80

Who else should be off since they might not be impartial with trump?
Does that count for those that may have a bias to agree with him?

That's the trouble with Trump. NO ONE is going to be completely "impartial" with him. No one in the world.

You can't stop people from thinking and having opinions. And someone above said she's not allowed to have an opinion!!! on the matter. Should we ask Stephen Hawking? I'm DAMN SURE he would be utterly impartial.......

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: queenofswords

Spin spin . He said what he said. He's a crybaby AND a bully.
That's your guy. Congrats on you.

hahahahaha!! Refusing to read, comprehend, and understand! Congrats on you.

a reply to: queenofswords

How could you possible know?
Please spare me.
You don't know a thing about me.
But pretend you do. Feel better little girl?

When's the last time a Supreme Court Justice criticized a Presidential candidate in public? Obama chastised all of them during one of his first State of the Union speeches, and none of them returned fire.

Ruth GINsberg is getting old and drinks too much. If she wasn't a powerful S.C. Justice, I'd say let her wither away in peace.

a reply to: AboveBoard

She was within her rights to say whatever the heck she wanted about him, about Hillary, about social issues, politics, etc. No one expects SC judges to have no philosophy or political leaning - duh - that's why we call them "liberal" or "conservative" or whatever.

Exactly. You typed out what I was thinking and meant to do but forgot while I was typing it out....

a reply to: xuenchen

She asked for it and had it coming really.

a reply to: carewemust

Ruth GINsberg is getting old and drinks too much.

You wouldn't drink too much if you had to sit in her chair and decide such things as she does?

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: queenofswords

How could you possible know?
Please spare me.
You don't know a thing about me.
But pretend you do. Feel better little girl?

Please. Go take a nap. I'm not in the mood for childish liberal games today. All the whining and pretzel-twisting of facts gives me a headache.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Sremmos80

Who else should be off since they might not be impartial with trump?
Does that count for those that may have a bias to agree with him?

That's the trouble with Trump. NO ONE is going to be completely "impartial" with him. No one in the world.

You can't stop people from thinking and having opinions. And someone above said she's not allowed to have an opinion!!! on the matter. Should we ask Stephen Hawking? I'm DAMN SURE he would be utterly impartial.......

Thing is though Hillary has already demonstrated such a high level of political incompetence and yet Her Majesty Ruth would rather take shots at Trump hoping to help the dingbatess.

Someone show me in Article III the part that says Justices can't have opinions?

Thanks.

originally posted by: queenofswords

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: queenofswords

How could you possible know?
Please spare me.
You don't know a thing about me.
But pretend you do. Feel better little girl?

Please. Go take a nap. I'm not in the mood for childish liberal games today. All the whining and pretzel-twisting of facts gives me a headache.

Just because you type it... doesnt make it so. I see a lot of name calling. Liberal this liberal that. Lump everyone into a group.Some of us will debate the one person without throwing an entire culture under the bus. I think Trump is a lying racist bigot. I dont think conservatives are. See how that works?

a reply to: Logarock

Thing is though Hillary has already demonstrated such a high level of political incompetence and yet Her Majesty Ruth would rather take shots at Trump hoping to help the dingbatess.

I'm laughing so hard at this. I'm picturing Aunt Bea saying it, and it tickled my funny bone.

Ole Bill probably paid Ruth a visit to talk about her great-great-great grandchildren and told her that if Hillary wins, they'll make sure old Ruthie stays in no matter what ridiculous and cringe-worthy statements she makes. Just say something nasty about Trump, and it's a done deal!!

originally posted by: Sremmos80
Ah yes since she bad mouthed Trump she must be mentally unfit! Who in the right mind would ever see anything wrong with the Messiah Donald Trump!?

You totally miss the point like always, which is that a supreme court judge is there to make sure all law conform to the constitution. Bad mouthing g Trump isn't part of that. Especially being a federal judge.

It's not just inappropriate, it's totally out of bounds for a judge like that. But since we all know you hate
Trump, lets just deflect the real issue of a run amok judge and others afraid of losing their meal ticket at your expense and mine.

originally posted by: carewemust
When's the last time a Supreme Court Justice criticized a Presidential candidate in public? Obama chastised all of them during one of his first State of the Union speeches, and none of them returned fire.

Ruth GINsberg is getting old and drinks too much. If she wasn't a powerful S.C. Justice, I'd say let her wither away in peace.

I don't remember it happening in my life time

a reply to: xuenchen

Quick , someone throw some Cold Water on that SCJ , maybe she will just Melt away from her Obvious Guilt of being a Progressive Liberal Tool that does their Biding since she was put on the Supreme Court .

so let me get this straight

trump is snowflaking about someone saying something that wasn't politically correct ?

how delicious

originally posted by: StoutBroux

originally posted by: Sremmos80
Ah yes since she bad mouthed Trump she must be mentally unfit! Who in the right mind would ever see anything wrong with the Messiah Donald Trump!?

So you wouldn't have a problem with Justice Clarence Thomas coming out and slamming Hillary for incompetence as SOS, ignorance of the email scandal and pandering to public for votes? Calling her a pathological liar over most of her adult life, stating she isn't qualified to lead this country let alone run a farming co-op? And then putting his opinion out there every chance he got about what a disgrace she was to the DNC?

Okay then.

He has every right to have that as his opinion, if indeed that were his opinion, and, if anyone can get more than two words out of him, he has every right to say what he wants to about her as long as it isn't slander.

And people could disagree. Some would go after him like the right has gone after Ginsburg. 'Tis the way of things. And if he wasn't slandering but just stating his opinion, he would have EVERY RIGHT to do so.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
Someone show me in Article III the part that says Justices can't have opinions?

Thanks.

I think it says Justices can't have opinions about Trump.

I could be wrong though.