March 23, 20223 yr 2 minutes ago, jsdarkstar said: If Liberals are for it, he's against it. His voting record bears that out. More radical then Scalia. Especially for someone who doesn't utter a word in Court. Good, then he actually takes his job of upholding the constitution seriously.
March 23, 20223 yr 1 hour ago, JohnSnowsHair said: how is asking a SC nominee to define a biological sex relevant to their ability to apply the law? It' isn't relevant. But because she won't define it. That means somehow she accepts transgender which the GOP like to discriminate against.
March 23, 20223 yr 18 minutes ago, vikas83 said: LOL - what? Who around Trump did I "like"? Bolton -- never been a fan of the guy's non-stop desire to fight Iran Barr -- really didn't know much about him pre-Trump, but not a fan at all Kelly -- I have no real opinion on him either way Pence -- never been a fan of the religious right Priebus -- I've constantly blamed him for the 2016 primary clown show I think the only hires he made that I sort of liked were Haley and Tillerson. I liked Mattis and Milley
March 23, 20223 yr Haven't been following the confirmation, but if it's good enough for my man here, it's good enough for me:
March 23, 20223 yr 2 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said: I liked Mattis and Milley Wasn't really a huge Mattis fan at first, but came to appreciate him. No real opinion on Milley.
March 23, 20223 yr 14 minutes ago, Kz! said: Good, then he actually takes his job of upholding the constitution seriously. This is a guy who essentially believes that the 14th Amendment shouldn't exist. He's the least Constitutionally minded judge on the bench, and that's putting it lightly.
March 23, 20223 yr 2 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said: Haven't been following the confirmation, but if it's good enough for my man here, it's good enough for me: Typical ishlib
March 23, 20223 yr 1 minute ago, vikas83 said: Wasn't really a huge Mattis fan at first, but came to appreciate him. No real opinion on Milley. Mattis was good in that he understood the importance of a: war fighting, and b: Allies, but that was combined with him not being a war hawk like Bolton.
March 23, 20223 yr 2 minutes ago, Bill said: Mattis was good in that he understood the importance of a: war fighting, and b: Allies, but that was combined with him not being a war hawk like Bolton. Fair enough. I think I misjudged him as more of a hawk than he turned out to be.
March 23, 20223 yr 2 hours ago, vikas83 said: Fair enough. I think I misjudged him as more of a hawk than he turned out to be. Yeah after having served through Iraq and AStan he’s very much a "what’s the end goal” and is it politically attainable type when it comes to military action.
March 23, 20223 yr I'm happy to see her get confirmed but here is yet another example of how far the influence of the far left goes in our society. Just answer the question and say "no". She certainly knows the answer.
March 23, 20223 yr 4 minutes ago, DrPhilly said: I'm happy to see her get confirmed but here is yet another example of how far the influence of the far left goes in our society. Just answer the question and say "no". She certainly knows the answer. Yeah, because that's how it happens. One day, I just decide that I'm an Asian man. It's just that easy. Cruz loves to discriminate.
March 23, 20223 yr 1 minute ago, jsdarkstar said: Yeah, because that's how it happens. One day, I just decide that I'm an Asian man. It's just that easy. Cruz loves to discriminate. So why can't she just say "no"?
March 23, 20223 yr Just now, DrPhilly said: So why can't she just say "no"? She could have. But it's not relevant to how she interprets the law.
March 23, 20223 yr 1 minute ago, jsdarkstar said: She could have. But it's not relevant to how she interprets the law. That's bullsheet. She can't say it because she it wouldn't sit well on the left fringe. It is also relevant given that we have so much law that has to do with racial rights.
March 23, 20223 yr Author 34 minutes ago, DrPhilly said: So why can't she just say "no"? There is no direct answer she could give that would have been to her advantage. It was a stupid trap question from an idiot who's using this confirmation hearing as a platform for his 2024 aspirations. She answered it correctly by evading it and not dignifying an unserious question with a serious answer.
March 23, 20223 yr 15 minutes ago, JohnSnowsHair said: There is no direct answer she could give that would have been to her advantage. It was a stupid trap question from an idiot who's using this confirmation hearing as a platform for his 2024 aspirations. She answered it correctly by evading it and not dignifying an unserious question with a serious answer. Yes but that is not my point.
March 23, 20223 yr 1 hour ago, DrPhilly said: That's bullsheet. She can't say it because she it wouldn't sit well on the left fringe. It wouldn't? Because I'm pretty sure the left doesn't think you can change your race like you can change your gender identity. You can't identify as black. She could've said "no," but then he would've pivoted back to gender.
March 23, 20223 yr 2 minutes ago, EaglesRocker97 said: It wouldn't? Because I'm pretty sure the left doesn't think you can change your race like you can change your gender identity. You can't identify as black. She could've said "no," but then he would've pivoted back to gender. Exactly and that’s the issue for the left.
March 23, 20223 yr Author 1 hour ago, DrPhilly said: Exactly and that’s the issue for the left. dude she's not entering an elected office. she doesn't need to "sell herself" to the far left voter. she's going to be the next supreme court justice. this is all theatre for senators aspiring to the White House.
March 23, 20223 yr 6 hours ago, jsdarkstar said: Uh huh, and how does the Constitution define a woman? It defines a black men as 3/5ths of a person. I'm sure Trumplicans would agree. What about black Trump supporters - do they agree? As for your first question, she was pretty much asked that and punted away.
Create an account or sign in to comment