Justice Breyer to retire

a reply to: Bloodworth

Because they don’t want black democrats crying about more broken promises 🙄

As the real racists and party of the confederacy, democrats have no right to even discuss such matters. It’s why I ignore them completely. I can’t (unfortunately) shut them up, but I can ignore and discard them at will

Appoint Kamala Harris as SCOTUS
Appoint HRC as VP
Senate impeaches Biden
HRC becomes POTUS
HRC vs 45 in 2024

Man, this is a bad Netflix movie script....

originally posted by: matafuchs
Appoint Kamala Harris as SCOTUS
Appoint HRC as VP
Senate impeaches Biden
HRC becomes POTUS
HRC vs 45 in 2024

Man, this is a bad Netflix movie script....

Harris wouldn't get confirmed.

Has already disqualified herself.

Will be hilarious if they try though.

a reply to: Imperator2

You don't need to be qualified when the party line determines your decision.

originally posted by: Ghostsdogood

originally posted by: putnam6

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
They should nominate Michelle Obama. Wouldn't that piss off Republicans. Better yet, nominate President Obama or AOC.

"Wouldn't that piss off Republicans"

Ironically that's been the DNC's only motivation since Carter...

well that and enriching themselves and playing the race and sexism card

Would be difficult to nominate someone who lost her license to practice law (for life) due to dishonest and corrupt behavior, even for democrats.

moochelle wasn't ever on the list.

I'm pretty sure since the post refers to Jimmy Carter and the 70's it's about broad generalities. Unless you think neither side does stuff to piss the other side off.

originally posted by: putnam6

originally posted by: Ghostsdogood

originally posted by: putnam6

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
They should nominate Michelle Obama. Wouldn't that piss off Republicans. Better yet, nominate President Obama or AOC.

"Wouldn't that piss off Republicans"

Ironically that's been the DNC's only motivation since Carter...

well that and enriching themselves and playing the race and sexism card

Would be difficult to nominate someone who lost her license to practice law (for life) due to dishonest and corrupt behavior, even for democrats.

moochelle wasn't ever on the list.

I'm pretty sure since the post refers to Jimmy Carter and the 70's it's about broad generalities. Unless you think neither side does stuff to piss the other side off.

Does that make anything I said inaccurate?

No.

Even democrats aren't stupid enough to nominate her.

She has already disqualified herself.

originally posted by: Imperator2

originally posted by: Bloodworth
Why does she have to be black?

Because Democrats do not care about qualifications. Everything is optics and political points.

It should simply be someone who is a qualified fit. I have no problem with picking someone who is favorable to your sides manor political alignment, but race, sex etc.. should not factor in.

On the plus side they must know that the cheating is going to be much harder in some areas for 2022, so they are pushing him out early in anticipation of losing in a major way. If they had any hope of it being a favorable or close election cycle they would not have rushed him out.

The downside to having another dumpster fire of a justice appointed is that they will likely get 20 or 30 years out of the new one. No hope to have them replaced by someone who actually understands and respects the constitution.

Scary mentality

a reply to: Imperator2

Because Democrats do not care about qualifications. Everything is optics and political points.

Same with Ronald Reagan, when he said it's time for a woman on the court and made the campaign promise to appoint a woman to the Supreme Court. Same as when George W Bush promised to replace Thurgood Marshall with another Black man. It's all optics, right?

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Imperator2

Because Democrats do not care about qualifications. Everything is optics and political points.

Same with Ronald Reagan, when he said it's time for a woman on the court and promised to appoint a woman to the Supreme Court. Same as when George W Bush promised to replace Thurgood Marshall with another Black man. It's all optics, right?

I didn't like those remarks either, but at least they were saying something that Americans as a whole were demanding at the time.

joe is just trying to stop his 1860 polling catastrophe by pandering to one of the few demographics that still support him, black women with school aged children.

Can only guess on other potential qualifications for now, since he hasn't disclosed anything other than his intent to nominate a black woman.

Is that his only requirement for the scotus nomination?

Reagan specified many requirements for example, not just gender.

Bush was an idiot, even I won't support what he did.

a reply to: Ghostsdogood

I didn't like those remarks either, but at least they were saying something that Americans as a whole were demanding at the time.

Really? How old were you when Ron Reagan was president? George W Bush? You think you had your finger on pulse of Americans, as a whole" in the 1980's and that they were demanding a woman on the Supreme Court when they couldn't even get the Equal RIghts Amendment passed? Do you think Americans, as a whole were demanding Bush to appoint a black man to replace a black man too?

Just lol.

Also, It sounds like you're skeptical as whether or not there even is a qualified black woman out there to serve as a Supreme Court Justice.

Didnt agree with some of his decisions but overall dont have much angst with the guy think he was decently solid as a justice.

We could do a lot worse than someone like him on the court, hope Biden finds enough testicular fortitude to put a good justice on the court rather than a woke virtue signal. (please note; I dont care about sex, ethnicity, or sexual preference I just want someone that will follow the constitution and settled law first.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Ghostsdogood

I didn't like those remarks either, but at least they were saying something that Americans as a whole were demanding at the time.

Really? How old were you when Ron Reagan was president? George W Bush? You think you had your finger on pulse of Americans, as a whole" in the 1980's and that they were demanding a woman on the Supreme Court when they couldn't even get the Equal RIghts Amendment passed? Do you think Americans, as a whole were demanding Bush to appoint a black man to replace a black man too?

Just lol.

Also, It sounds like you're skeptical as whether or not there even is a qualified black woman out there to serve as a Supreme Court Justice.

Old enough to have been paying attention to politics.

And to meet Reagan several times.

But nobody needed any special skills to take the pulse of the country back then, it was well before democrats completely destroyed the msm.

democrats only controlled 90% of msm back then.

Until relatively recently, we had the most honest and free press the world has ever seen (even with its many warts), but msm is the first thing that fascist democrats targeted after the education system.


I have no idea if there is a qualified black woman or not, or even what biden considers qualified (besides being black and female) but there are very few at the top of the legal profession, so why limit yourself to maybe 1% (at best) of the top legal minds available?

1860 polling is why biden self-politicized this nomination.

Nothing else.

a reply to: Ghostsdogood

LOL
Okay Boomer. If you say so.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Ghostsdogood

LOL
Okay Boomer. If you say so.

Ouch, that really hurts.

Not.


Don't you have an antifa group to support somewhere?


Oh, and please stay the fk off my yard.

originally posted by: Ghostsdogood

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Ghostsdogood

I didn't like those remarks either, but at least they were saying something that Americans as a whole were demanding at the time.

Really? How old were you when Ron Reagan was president? George W Bush? You think you had your finger on pulse of Americans, as a whole" in the 1980's and that they were demanding a woman on the Supreme Court when they couldn't even get the Equal RIghts Amendment passed? Do you think Americans, as a whole were demanding Bush to appoint a black man to replace a black man too?

Just lol.

Also, It sounds like you're skeptical as whether or not there even is a qualified black woman out there to serve as a Supreme Court Justice.

Old enough to have been paying attention to politics.

And to meet Reagan several times.

But nobody needed any special skills to take the pulse of the country back then, it was well before democrats completely destroyed the msm.

democrats only controlled 90% of msm back then.

Until relatively recently, we had the most honest and free press the world has ever seen (even with its many warts), but msm is the first thing that fascist democrats targeted after the education system.


I have no idea if there is a qualified black woman or not, or even what biden considers qualified (besides being black and female) but there are very few at the top of the legal profession, so why limit yourself to maybe 1% (at best) of the top legal minds available?

1860 polling is why biden self-politicized this nomination.

Nothing else.

Not that I doubt you but...

Where did you meet Reagan several times? and when?

originally posted by: Ghostsdogood

originally posted by: putnam6

originally posted by: Ghostsdogood

originally posted by: putnam6

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
They should nominate Michelle Obama. Wouldn't that piss off Republicans. Better yet, nominate President Obama or AOC.

"Wouldn't that piss off Republicans"

Ironically that's been the DNC's only motivation since Carter...

well that and enriching themselves and playing the race and sexism card

Would be difficult to nominate someone who lost her license to practice law (for life) due to dishonest and corrupt behavior, even for democrats.

moochelle wasn't ever on the list.

I'm pretty sure since the post refers to Jimmy Carter and the 70's it's about broad generalities. Unless you think neither side does stuff to piss the other side off.

Does that make anything I said inaccurate?

No.

Even democrats aren't stupid enough to nominate her.

She has already disqualified herself.

Again my post said nothing about who they may or may not nominate, only the DNC generally enjoys pissing off the Republicans any chance they get.

Perhaps in your zeal to get a zinger in you completely missed that it was another poster that suggested Michelle Obama and now you are coming across as

originally posted by: putnam6

originally posted by: Ghostsdogood

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: Ghostsdogood

I didn't like those remarks either, but at least they were saying something that Americans as a whole were demanding at the time.

Really? How old were you when Ron Reagan was president? George W Bush? You think you had your finger on pulse of Americans, as a whole" in the 1980's and that they were demanding a woman on the Supreme Court when they couldn't even get the Equal RIghts Amendment passed? Do you think Americans, as a whole were demanding Bush to appoint a black man to replace a black man too?

Just lol.

Also, It sounds like you're skeptical as whether or not there even is a qualified black woman out there to serve as a Supreme Court Justice.

Old enough to have been paying attention to politics.

And to meet Reagan several times.

But nobody needed any special skills to take the pulse of the country back then, it was well before democrats completely destroyed the msm.

democrats only controlled 90% of msm back then.

Until relatively recently, we had the most honest and free press the world has ever seen (even with its many warts), but msm is the first thing that fascist democrats targeted after the education system.


I have no idea if there is a qualified black woman or not, or even what biden considers qualified (besides being black and female) but there are very few at the top of the legal profession, so why limit yourself to maybe 1% (at best) of the top legal minds available?

1860 polling is why biden self-politicized this nomination.

Nothing else.

Not that I doubt you but...

Where did you meet Reagan several times? and when?

1st time, Iceland (shared an MRE 'meal' with him and staff after kgb attempted to poison the American delegation)

2nd & 3rd times before 41's inauguration (just greetings)

4th time when he personally greeted those who barely escapped being ccp hostages as former potus at Andrews shortly after arrival.

(He was in tears as he spoke to each of us, and potus Bush couldn't leave the Whitehouse at the time due to ccp, so we got Quayle & Reagan)

originally posted by: putnam6

originally posted by: Ghostsdogood

originally posted by: putnam6

originally posted by: Ghostsdogood

originally posted by: putnam6

originally posted by: MiddleInsite
They should nominate Michelle Obama. Wouldn't that piss off Republicans. Better yet, nominate President Obama or AOC.

"Wouldn't that piss off Republicans"

Ironically that's been the DNC's only motivation since Carter...

well that and enriching themselves and playing the race and sexism card

Would be difficult to nominate someone who lost her license to practice law (for life) due to dishonest and corrupt behavior, even for democrats.

moochelle wasn't ever on the list.

I'm pretty sure since the post refers to Jimmy Carter and the 70's it's about broad generalities. Unless you think neither side does stuff to piss the other side off.

Does that make anything I said inaccurate?

No.

Even democrats aren't stupid enough to nominate her.

She has already disqualified herself.

Again my post said nothing about who they may or may not nominate, only the DNC generally enjoys pissing off the Republicans any chance they get.

Perhaps in your zeal to get a zinger in you completely missed that it was another poster that suggested Michelle Obama and now you are coming across as

Perhaps.

But was anything I said inaccurate?

No.

Has to be black Female.....how do people condone this thinking?

a reply to: Bloodworth

Typical democrat racism

But, let them who cares. Does anyone here actually think this court will matter much longer?

We’re in the final days as a country. The experiment is over. It was a failure. Turns out that non homogeneous groups of people can only get along when they all agree to BUTT OUT, stop being rude and invasive and mind their own business!

But with California believing it should be able to impose their will on WV/GA/TX merely because they cram a bunch of idiots into tight spaces it’s clear there is no future

So, we should prevent them from having another talking point by conducting the advice/consent required