SCOTUS

[FannOLax]

Masochism; heartening to know at least one R hasn't gone all Q...

[DocBarrister]

So let me get this straight, the wife of a sitting Supreme Court Justice, the sitting President, and several Congressmen and Senators conspire to overturn an election and the Constitution of the United States. Aside from the Civil War, has anything close to this every happened in U.S. History? This was unimaginable to me ten years ago.

Have you noticed that not one single Republican poster has commented on this? Because who cares, right? I"m a Republican, and anything that a R does is fine by me.

If only Nixon could see this cr*p. He would know that had he done all those things in 2022......Republican voters wouldn't care, and he would NEVER have been removed from office.

The Republican party is in complete and utter shambles. It's sad, and has made American a lesser place.

Well, I'm still a registered Republican, though according to several of the other "Republicans" on here I don't deserve to be...but yeah, the Party is a complete mess, completely lost it's moral compass, heck it's lost it's mind. And yes, America is the lesser for it.

... a hopeless optimist.

yes, I'll take that...of course, there's some perverse satisfaction in not letting the extremists run me out of the party too. Is it sadism, or masochism?

Neither … it’s denialism.

DocBarrister

[jhu72]

The Liberal Redneck Reviews Jackson SCOTUS Hearing

[cradleandshoot]

Funny how Dr Ben Carson was a gifted neonatal pediatric surgeon also married to the same woman for many years. I wonder why the pasty faced, mean spirited angry white old liberals on this forum eviscerated him every day. FTR, Ben Carson is also a black man. His downfall was he is the wrong shade of black for the angry, hate filled very old and decrepit white liberal men on this forum. You can't be black and conservative, not in the eyes of you angry old white liberals. Black Americans are suppose to look forward to all the crumbs you hand them in the form of entitlements and say thanka masta while they lick your boot.

See, there's who you THINK some people are, then there's who they might REALLY be...

..

... Ben Carson is a nutter. It doesn't matter what color you are, a nutter is a nutter, when making statements like Carson did; "My mother raised me with no help from the government. We had food stamps and welfare and Section 8 housing, but we made it on our own"

And your an angry, disgruntled FLP racist. You know exactly what Dr Carson was say. In your eyes a black conservative. The person your ilk fears the most a black man that can think and provide for himself and succeed on the highest levels of his profession. In simple terms... Dr Carson is the wrong shade of black..he does not need FLP folks like yourself. Good for him. Bad for you... His family accepted help from the government and the taxpayers when they were struggling and the assistance. They didn't become DEPENDENT on the government which is the point of every entitlement program. When you instill the perceived reality into peoples heads that they can't survive without help from the government... Every FLP type smiles just a little brighter. You NEED us and you know it...

... and as usual, you are full of sh*t. His summary statement was untrue and certainly inarticulate for someone as supposedly bright as he.

We have a POTUS today that has made a political career making dumb, asinine statements. Would you want Joe performing a lobotomy on you? You don't need to be bright to win elections, Joe Biden is proof positive of that... Come on maaaaaaaaaaaaaan, get with the program.

[cradleandshoot]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/ ... 80b5ab827b

Interesting opinion piece.

[Peter Brown]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/ ... 80b5ab827b

Interesting opinion piece.

It is interesting.

On the one hand, I do see the usefulness of having a Supreme Court that ‘looks like America’. And I appreciate the wholesome family dynamic of this particular nominee.

But, more importantly, regarding this opinion piece, KJB is being paid to play a part here, the far left part of America which sadly we must endure as our burden of democracy.

She can’t answer basic questions about philosophy, because she doesn’t have a philosophy. Her philosophy is she will vote as the Party commands.

There is absolutely no confusion here among people who know DC. KJB will have little to no free agency on decisions that matter to the DNC; in return, her family’s net worth will grow rapidly.

Most leftists have little to no fundamental appreciation for the constitution…the constitution to the DNC is mostly an impediment to social reconstruction and expanding state power.

Most legal decisions from our courts’ leftist minds are absolutely no different than anything you might have found in the old Soviet Union…zero regard for individual rights, outright disdain for certain amendments such as 1, 2, 5, and 8, and a constant reinterpretation of basic language to suit the growing cancer of woke (‘what is a woman?’).

KJB sadly will be confirmed but she will remain unimportant so far as the court goes, provided Democrats are unable to stack it with more Party apparatchiks. Elections have consequences, and America has always ended expansionist, collectivist statist parties. November 8 will see to it again.

[MDlaxfan76]

What a ridiculous, partisan piece of crap. All troll, all the time.

[Typical Lax Dad]

What a ridiculous, partisan piece of crap. All troll, all the time.

She’s dumb.

[Peter Brown]

What a ridiculous, partisan piece of crap. All troll, all the time.

She’s dumb.

Nope. It’s not ‘dumb’ to cash in the chips you’ve collected over a career. She’s played a patient game and now it’s paid off.

Her husband is a multi millionaire surgeon, so she’ll take it slower than most collecting even more millions in book and speaking fees.

https://www.dispatch.com/story/news/pol ... 676104007/

Vacations?! Don’t need to pay for that anymore!

https://time.com/3945044/supreme-court- ... ree-trips/

Pension?! Gotch-you covered!

https://www.thoughtco.com/us-supreme-co ... ts-3322414

Ironically, I encourage these subtle payoffs, because it softens even the hardest communist leanings. After all, once you’re wealthy, you’re not inclined to give it away just because some Oberlin socialist working at the White House says so, even when your heart is also an Oberlin socialist

When the DNC commands their SCOTUS judges to rule for confiscatory taxation of the middle class, the left leadership always devise carve-out mechanics for their leaders’ estates, which ironically benefit all of us by preserving capitalism enough.

Same as it ever was.

[cradleandshoot]

What a ridiculous, partisan piece of crap. All troll, all the time.

So you have no opinion on the opinion piece?? Who are you venting your republican FLP venom on now?? PB is sounding way more rational than you at this point in time. Why is it the republican party you represent would never let you in the front door at the RNC?? The democrats would welcome you in with a big hug and a sloppy wet kiss. Be careful because someone on the D side might slip you some tongue. You would probably enjoy it.

[MDlaxfan76]

What a ridiculous, partisan piece of crap. All troll, all the time.

So you have no opinion on the opinion piece?? Who are you venting your republican FLP venom on now?? PB is sounding way more rational than you at this point in time. Why is it the republican party you represent would never let you in the front door at the RNC?? The democrats would welcome you in with a big hug and a sloppy wet kiss. Be careful because someone on the D side might slip you some tongue. You would probably enjoy it.

Sorry, my reference was to PB's stupid, hateful diatribe, not the opinion piece, nor you for posting it. The racism drips through it.

The crap above that you so delight in throwing my way is offensive to me, but of course, that's clearly why you're doing it. Putting that aside...

Re the opinion piece, I disagree with its author, but I didn't see it as a partisan piece necessarily, though it might have been.

I disagree that a judge should have a "philosophy" neatly defined by labels submitted by others. Indeed, what I heard was a judicious approach not confined by a philosophy or ideology but rather based on a series of steps and inputs that lead her to judgments that aren't predeterminable by ideology. It's clear that this approach can lead her to judgments that don't always align with how her own policy preferences may have been, but rather what the law and merits requires.

I listened to quite a lot of the hearings and heard her explain her approach multiple times. And she has an enormous record of applying that approach to live cases. We can expect that approach going forward.

Of course, that is frustrating to those on the left or right who wish for judges to decide cases on the basis of one or another preferred policy position.

Which is why the handful of Senators who seemed to be losing their minds over particular culture war issues are so hypocritically nonsensical...what they are asking a judge to do is to substitute their preferred policy views for actually following the law and the merits of each individual case. That's judicial activism, which they profess to abhor (want an "originalist" approach), yet it's exactly what they were demanding...else the judge should be tarred and feathered as less "outraged" than they are about society's ills....which BTW, they, the Senators, are hired by the public to actually enact and administrate policies and laws to address...

[cradleandshoot]

What a ridiculous, partisan piece of crap. All troll, all the time.

So what is Justice Browns judicial philosophy?? It wasn't that difficult a question. So basically her judicial philosophy is 100% neutral, she has no opinion about diddly jack squat. She can't even define what a woman is. She might even be have to rule on a case that might define the difference between a boy and a girl. BTW gender re-assignment does not count here. You can have all kinds of make believe cosmetic surgery that makes the individual more comfortable with who they are. So enlighten me Mr MD, does gender re-assignment surgery actually transform you into a woman?? Can you menstruate and ovulate?? Do you now have a functioning uterus?? Do you have fallopian tubes for your eggs to pass down to your uterus?? will male seamen fertilize those eggs. Can you gestate a fetus for 9 months? will your breasts produce lactate so you can nurse your baby?? The simple answer is hell effing no. The FLP answer is ... but if it makes you happy with yourself.... Pay for the effing surgery your damn self... if it makes you happy???

[MDlaxfan76]

What a ridiculous, partisan piece of crap. All troll, all the time.

So what is Justice Browns judicial philosophy?? It wasn't that difficult a question. So basically her judicial philosophy is 100% neutral, she has no opinion about diddly jack squat. She can't even define what a woman is. She might even be have to rule on a case that might define the difference between a boy and a girl. BTW gender re-assignment does not count here. You can have all kinds of make believe cosmetic surgery that makes the individual more comfortable with who they are. So enlighten me Mr MD, does gender re-assignment surgery actually transform you into a woman?? Can you menstruate and ovulate?? Do you now have a functioning uterus?? Do you have fallopian tubes for your eggs to pass down to your uterus?? will male seamen fertilize those eggs. Can you gestate a fetus for 9 months? will your breasts produce lactate so you can nurse your baby?? The simple answer is hell effing no. The FLP answer is ... but if it makes you happy with yourself.... Pay for the effing surgery your damn self... if it makes you happy???

See above...and then go dig for worms in the garden, cradle.
Please stop with the personal attacks.

on gender, I've responded on that as well: viewtopic.php?f=66&t=724&p=347612&hilit=woman#p347612

[cradleandshoot]

What a ridiculous, partisan piece of crap. All troll, all the time.

So you have no opinion on the opinion piece?? Who are you venting your republican FLP venom on now?? PB is sounding way more rational than you at this point in time. Why is it the republican party you represent would never let you in the front door at the RNC?? The democrats would welcome you in with a big hug and a sloppy wet kiss. Be careful because someone on the D side might slip you some tongue. You would probably enjoy it.

Sorry, my reference was to PB's stupid, hateful diatribe, not the opinion piece, nor you for posting it. The racism drips through it.

The crap above that you so delight in throwing my way is offensive to me, but of course, that's clearly why you're doing it. Putting that aside...

Re the opinion piece, I disagree with its author, but I didn't see it as a partisan piece necessarily, though it might have been.

I disagree that a judge should have a "philosophy" neatly defined by labels submitted by others. Indeed, what I heard was a judicious approach not confined by a philosophy or ideology but rather based on a series of steps and inputs that lead her to judgments that aren't predeterminable by ideology. It's clear that this approach can lead her to judgments that don't always align with how her own policy preferences may have been, but rather what the law and merits requires.

I listened to quite a lot of the hearings and heard her explain her approach multiple times. And she has an enormous record of applying that approach to live cases. We can expect that approach going forward.

Of course, that is frustrating to those on the left or right who wish for judges to decide cases on the basis of one or another preferred policy position.

Which is why the handful of Senators who seemed to be losing their minds over particular culture war issues are so hypocritically nonsensical...what they are asking a judge to do is to substitute their preferred policy views for actually following the law and the merits of each individual case. That's judicial activism, which they profess to abhor (want an "originalist" approach), yet it's exactly what they were demanding...else the judge should be tarred and feathered as less "outraged" than they are about society's ills....which BTW, they, the Senators, are hired by the public to actually enact and administrate policies and laws to address...

Justice Browns answer to a very simple question was very odd to me. Defining who is a boy and who is a girl is not rocket science. She may very soon have to decide title nine cases for college students that depend exactly on defining how you determine a boy from a girl. Hard to do that for a judge who does not know how to define who a girl is. She always can recuse herself from any case if she is still so confused.

[cradleandshoot]

What a ridiculous, partisan piece of crap. All troll, all the time.

So what is Justice Browns judicial philosophy?? It wasn't that difficult a question. So basically her judicial philosophy is 100% neutral, she has no opinion about diddly jack squat. She can't even define what a woman is. She might even be have to rule on a case that might define the difference between a boy and a girl. BTW gender re-assignment does not count here. You can have all kinds of make believe cosmetic surgery that makes the individual more comfortable with who they are. So enlighten me Mr MD, does gender re-assignment surgery actually transform you into a woman?? Can you menstruate and ovulate?? Do you now have a functioning uterus?? Do you have fallopian tubes for your eggs to pass down to your uterus?? will male seamen fertilize those eggs. Can you gestate a fetus for 9 months? will your breasts produce lactate so you can nurse your baby?? The simple answer is hell effing no. The FLP answer is ... but if it makes you happy with yourself.... Pay for the effing surgery your damn self... if it makes you happy???

See above...and then go dig for worms in the garden, cradle.
Please stop with the personal attacks.

So where was the personal attack??? I don't fish so i have no need to dig for worms my friend. The robins that just recently arrived do a fine job of that. I asked you a very simple question that was not a personal attack. Can a man actually become a woman??? Simple question, no personal attack, can you answer it??? Your becoming overly sensitive my friend, your overthinking very simple points. CAN A MAN ACTUALLY BECOME WOMAN???

[MDlaxfan76]

What a ridiculous, partisan piece of crap. All troll, all the time.

So what is Justice Browns judicial philosophy?? It wasn't that difficult a question. So basically her judicial philosophy is 100% neutral, she has no opinion about diddly jack squat. She can't even define what a woman is. She might even be have to rule on a case that might define the difference between a boy and a girl. BTW gender re-assignment does not count here. You can have all kinds of make believe cosmetic surgery that makes the individual more comfortable with who they are. So enlighten me Mr MD, does gender re-assignment surgery actually transform you into a woman?? Can you menstruate and ovulate?? Do you now have a functioning uterus?? Do you have fallopian tubes for your eggs to pass down to your uterus?? will male seamen fertilize those eggs. Can you gestate a fetus for 9 months? will your breasts produce lactate so you can nurse your baby?? The simple answer is hell effing no. The FLP answer is ... but if it makes you happy with yourself.... Pay for the effing surgery your damn self... if it makes you happy???

See above...and then go dig for worms in the garden, cradle.
Please stop with the personal attacks.

So where was the personal attack??? I don't fish so i have no need to dig for worms my friend. The robins that just recently arrived do a fine job of that. I asked you a very simple question that was not a personal attack. Can a man actually become a woman??? Simple question, no personal attack, can you answer it??? Your becoming overly sensitive my friend, your overthinking very simple points. CAN A MAN ACTUALLY BECOME WOMAN???

I'd already answered on this topic. If only it were a simple question...the simple-minded could understand.

viewtopic.php?f=66&t=724&p=347612&hilit=woman#p347612

cradle, you apparently have been told that she couldn't answer the question, but I watched the couple of times it was brought up and she was never allowed to answer...because it ain't as simple as the Fox audience sound clip seekers wanted...

It was an incredibly rude and crude approach, and the shame to be applied is on those Senators who played that dumb game. And on those who bought into it.

On the worms, perhaps your mother never told you to "go out in the garden and eat some worms" when you were acting like a cranky, whiny child? Mine did. I was winking at that, but suggesting a more therapeutic approach, because as a gardener, surely you know that worms are critical to preparing your garden soil for optimal growth...

[cradleandshoot]

What a ridiculous, partisan piece of crap. All troll, all the time.

So what is Justice Browns judicial philosophy?? It wasn't that difficult a question. So basically her judicial philosophy is 100% neutral, she has no opinion about diddly jack squat. She can't even define what a woman is. She might even be have to rule on a case that might define the difference between a boy and a girl. BTW gender re-assignment does not count here. You can have all kinds of make believe cosmetic surgery that makes the individual more comfortable with who they are. So enlighten me Mr MD, does gender re-assignment surgery actually transform you into a woman?? Can you menstruate and ovulate?? Do you now have a functioning uterus?? Do you have fallopian tubes for your eggs to pass down to your uterus?? will male seamen fertilize those eggs. Can you gestate a fetus for 9 months? will your breasts produce lactate so you can nurse your baby?? The simple answer is hell effing no. The FLP answer is ... but if it makes you happy with yourself.... Pay for the effing surgery your damn self... if it makes you happy???

See above...and then go dig for worms in the garden, cradle.
Please stop with the personal attacks.

on gender, I've responded on that as well: viewtopic.php?f=66&t=724&p=347612&hilit=woman#p347612

FTR, and correct me if I'm wrong. Joe Biden nominated as he said he would, a black woman to the SCOTUS. When the black woman nominated by Joe Biden for the SCOTUS was asked can she define what a woman is the answer was really simple. Apparently she didn't know she was the answer to the question. I'm guessing she still considers herself a woman, that was the criteria Biden used when he nominated her.
FTR, I have an abundance of worms in the garden. If your still a person who fishes ( notice I didn't use the sexist term fisherman) I'll be happy to send you a bunch free of charge.

[youthathletics]

[Peter Brown]

Why can’t the left answer a simple question, ‘what is a woman?’ Any child in elementary school can knock this answer out of the park swinging half-hearted. It just isn’t a challenge.

You ask some folks on the left, and they launch into twelve-minute nonsequitor fables about something their ‘wife’ told them at a some random cocktail party about how we can no longer define women and men.

Is this really how the left rolls now? How can something so simple prove so complex…?

I’m telling you, American voters are going to reject this abject lunacy in November, with a margin that will shock the world.

[MDlaxfan76]

We have idiots among us.