How is the Supreme Court confirmation going to go?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She just said she's open to overturning precedent.

So? Plessy v. Ferguson was precedent and was overturned. It happens with some degree of frequency.

Here's a list.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_overruled_United_States_Supreme_Court_decisions

[Anonymous]

Not a fan of ACB, but sheesh, how many men would have been praised for how well their kids sat still and been asked how he does it? Over and over again.

[Anonymous]

Fienstein just said her vote depends on ACB's responses to her questions. HA HA!!! Like she won't vote the party line no matter what ACB says.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Amy killing it so far.

Yes. She will be responsible for killing many. Her super spreading and overturning the ACA. Pro-life my arse.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not a fan of ACB, but sheesh, how many men would have been praised for how well their kids sat still and been asked how he does it? Over and over again.

Scalia raised some real jerks. 2 went to the super spreading event. One has had to apologize to his church community for his oopsie.

[Anonymous]

ACB is schooling Feinstein. She is imperious and impervious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:ACB is schooling Feinstein. She is imperious and impervious.

She's dodging answering the questions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ACB is schooling Feinstein. She is imperious and impervious.

She's dodging answering the questions.

And doing it in a very artful and tasteful manner!! Dodging par excellence.

Welcome to SCOTUS hearings. This is what they are now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't want ACB to be confirmed, but I actually think, all else being equal (meaning aside from her judicial philosophy and beliefs on abortion), naming a mother of 7 to the SCOTUS is great for women. I've seen posters on here attacking her just for being a mom.

She's obviously very smart and accomplished. I don't want her on the court, but I think it's great someone like her could be on the court.

Nobody attacked her for being a mom. She was lightly criticized for using her 7 children as a shield against scrutiny of her beliefs and her thin record. Why is 7 important? Would a woman with 8 children be more qualified? Would a woman with 3 children be less qualified?

Yes, because women who are not mothers are un-women, obvi.

The 7 kids count against her in my eyes.

Interesting.
Back when Scalia went through confirmation, not one person thought that him having 9 kids counted against him.

It was 1986. You remember then? I mean, I was five. Also it was a different time politically when the GOP tried to nominate qualified ideologues instead of lying cheating unqualified nuts.

Yep. Remember it well.
I get that you don't want her confirmed. But, calling her a "lying cheating unqualified nut" is a flat out lie. She is eminently qualified. And, that makes you mad because there is no reason not to confirm her.

She has lied on her forms and is willing to accept a cheating GOP seat.

[Anonymous]

They need to read her words from her speeches back to her and ask her to confirm that she said it.

[Anonymous]

What isn’t very personal for Feinstein, lol?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don't want ACB to be confirmed, but I actually think, all else being equal (meaning aside from her judicial philosophy and beliefs on abortion), naming a mother of 7 to the SCOTUS is great for women. I've seen posters on here attacking her just for being a mom.

She's obviously very smart and accomplished. I don't want her on the court, but I think it's great someone like her could be on the court.

Nobody attacked her for being a mom. She was lightly criticized for using her 7 children as a shield against scrutiny of her beliefs and her thin record. Why is 7 important? Would a woman with 8 children be more qualified? Would a woman with 3 children be less qualified?

Yes, because women who are not mothers are un-women, obvi.

The 7 kids count against her in my eyes.

Interesting.
Back when Scalia went through confirmation, not one person thought that him having 9 kids counted against him.

It was 1986. You remember then? I mean, I was five. Also it was a different time politically when the GOP tried to nominate qualified ideologues instead of lying cheating unqualified nuts.

Yep. Remember it well.
I get that you don't want her confirmed. But, calling her a "lying cheating unqualified nut" is a flat out lie. She is eminently qualified. And, that makes you mad because there is no reason not to confirm her.

She has lied on her forms and is willing to accept a cheating GOP seat.

No, she did not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ACB is schooling Feinstein. She is imperious and impervious.

She's dodging answering the questions.

And doing it in a very artful and tasteful manner!! Dodging par excellence.

Welcome to SCOTUS hearings. This is what they are now.

She's not artful at all.

And when asked if the President can delay the election, she said she'd have to talk to her clerks and do some research. Come on, Amy, that's not a hard question.

[Anonymous]

I can't, I can't, I can't....WTF can you answer...oh plz..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She just said she's open to overturning precedent.

So? Plessy v. Ferguson was precedent and was overturned. It happens with some degree of frequency.

Here's a list.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_overruled_United_States_Supreme_Court_decisions

Brown v Board was unanimous. Would anything Barrett wants overturned be done unanimously?