Ketanji Brown Jackson will be a great justice!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The main issue is the way it was done. Biden announcing the nomination will only be a black woman is what is damaging. She will always be seen as the affirmative action choice, and he did her a great disservice handling it that way.

I will speak on behalf of all brilliant and more than qualified AAs in the US. You are not in her league and she isn’t thinking about you or your narrow beliefs at all. She is too busy reaping the fruits and rewards of her, gift of superior intellect, hard work and excellence.

Life’s not always fair and yes some people really are smarter than others. And you and everyone else in the room knows it and these people often aren’t in the package you think they should be.

You are very welcome.

I’m the one you are replying to. I am an AA Woman you fool. You do not speak for all of us.

NP. And you speak for very few, or the ones closely aligned to the Clarence Thomas' school of thought. It's sad that in 2022, you are so insecure and still seek the approval of others. Really girl, you're worried that they consider you an affirmative action pick. You are that insecure of your achievements that you use precious braincells for that line of thought. Pitiful

I am not insecure at all. I’m saying Biden hurt her credibility while trying to pander and self congratulate. KBJ is more than qualified, and should be the nominee, Biden just did it the wrong way, and that will stick with her forever. It’s insulting, and you give him a pass for it.

DP... Just stop it. KBJ's record already speaks for itself. She's an excellent nominee.

I’ve never said she was not an excellent nominee, I’ve said the opposite. You’re so blinded trying to "prove" something you can’t even understand the point I’m making. I’ll try again and dumb it down for you.

She’s an excellent nominee
She deserves the job

She will always have an * by her name through no fault of her own. That is 100% on Biden and it’s disgusting he did that to her

What does that * stand for? I don't understand what you are saying.

I don't see any * next to Sandra Day O'Connor's name. If Ketanji Brown Jackson gets one, then surely SDO gets one, too.

And what does that mean anyway?

All the white men supreme court justices prior to about the 1960s would get one next to their names. Because they were nominated and chosen at a time when only white men were considered eligible to sit on the Supreme Court by all those who held power. You cannot deny that.

Exactly. If that PP want to break out the "*", they can do so for every justice.

[Anonymous]

Anyone who had a 'good faith' concern about affirmative action would have been horrified by ACB's nomination after Trump specifically said he wanted to nominate a woman and there were certainly more qualified individuals available.

But right wingers were thrilled about ACB.

KBJ will be great - I mean she's definitely more qualified than the majority of sitting SCOTUS judges were when they were nominated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone who had a 'good faith' concern about affirmative action would have been horrified by ACB's nomination after Trump specifically said he wanted to nominate a woman and there were certainly more qualified individuals available.

But right wingers were thrilled about ACB.

KBJ will be great - I mean she's definitely more qualified than the majority of sitting SCOTUS judges were when they were nominated.

I agree that KBJ is a great choice. But why would one be “horrified” by ACB? Because she’s not an Ivy Leaguer?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone who had a 'good faith' concern about affirmative action would have been horrified by ACB's nomination after Trump specifically said he wanted to nominate a woman and there were certainly more qualified individuals available.

But right wingers were thrilled about ACB.

KBJ will be great - I mean she's definitely more qualified than the majority of sitting SCOTUS judges were when they were nominated.

I agree that KBJ is a great choice. But why would one be “horrified” by ACB? Because she’s not an Ivy Leaguer?

Because she is not "progressive" enough, obviously.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone who had a 'good faith' concern about affirmative action would have been horrified by ACB's nomination after Trump specifically said he wanted to nominate a woman and there were certainly more qualified individuals available.

But right wingers were thrilled about ACB.

KBJ will be great - I mean she's definitely more qualified than the majority of sitting SCOTUS judges were when they were nominated.

I agree that KBJ is a great choice. But why would one be “horrified” by ACB? Because she’s not an Ivy Leaguer?

Because she is not "progressive" enough, obviously.

No, because Trump said there were more qualified individuals available, but he chose her because of her gender.

[Anonymous]

Jackson is a qualified nominee to the Supreme Court. She'll get confirmed and will be a reliable liberal voice on the Court for years to come. End of story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone who had a 'good faith' concern about affirmative action would have been horrified by ACB's nomination after Trump specifically said he wanted to nominate a woman and there were certainly more qualified individuals available.

But right wingers were thrilled about ACB.

KBJ will be great - I mean she's definitely more qualified than the majority of sitting SCOTUS judges were when they were nominated.

I agree that KBJ is a great choice. But why would one be “horrified” by ACB? Because she’s not an Ivy Leaguer?

Because Trump said he would nominate a woman. Had the same person been a man, would not have been nominated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The main issue is the way it was done. Biden announcing the nomination will only be a black woman is what is damaging. She will always be seen as the affirmative action choice, and he did her a great disservice handling it that way.

I will speak on behalf of all brilliant and more than qualified AAs in the US. You are not in her league and she isn’t thinking about you or your narrow beliefs at all. She is too busy reaping the fruits and rewards of her, gift of superior intellect, hard work and excellence.

Life’s not always fair and yes some people really are smarter than others. And you and everyone else in the room knows it and these people often aren’t in the package you think they should be.

You are very welcome.

I’m the one you are replying to. I am an AA Woman you fool. You do not speak for all of us.

NP. And you speak for very few, or the ones closely aligned to the Clarence Thomas' school of thought. It's sad that in 2022, you are so insecure and still seek the approval of others. Really girl, you're worried that they consider you an affirmative action pick. You are that insecure of your achievements that you use precious braincells for that line of thought. Pitiful

I am not insecure at all. I’m saying Biden hurt her credibility while trying to pander and self congratulate. KBJ is more than qualified, and should be the nominee, Biden just did it the wrong way, and that will stick with her forever. It’s insulting, and you give him a pass for it.

DP... Just stop it. KBJ's record already speaks for itself. She's an excellent nominee.

I’ve never said she was not an excellent nominee, I’ve said the opposite. You’re so blinded trying to "prove" something you can’t even understand the point I’m making. I’ll try again and dumb it down for you.

She’s an excellent nominee
She deserves the job

She will always have an * by her name through no fault of her own. That is 100% on Biden and it’s disgusting he did that to her

What does that * stand for? I don't understand what you are saying.

I don't see any * next to Sandra Day O'Connor's name. If Ketanji Brown Jackson gets one, then surely SDO gets one, too.

And what does that mean anyway?

All the white men supreme court justices prior to about the 1960s would get one next to their names. Because they were nominated and chosen at a time when only white men were considered eligible to sit on the Supreme Court by all those who held power. You cannot deny that.

Black women represent around 6% of American society. We've had well over 100 people appointed to SCOTUS. Statistically and demographically speaking, we should have already had had a black woman on that bench years ago. That it didn't happen sooner should be your one and only asterisk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone who had a 'good faith' concern about affirmative action would have been horrified by ACB's nomination after Trump specifically said he wanted to nominate a woman and there were certainly more qualified individuals available.

But right wingers were thrilled about ACB.

KBJ will be great - I mean she's definitely more qualified than the majority of sitting SCOTUS judges were when they were nominated.

I agree that KBJ is a great choice. But why would one be “horrified” by ACB? Because she’s not an Ivy Leaguer?

She was unqualified, and a political hack. They saved up the worst, craziest and least qualified of Trump’s three (!) appointees for RBG’s seat.

KBJ is qualified and a normal, decent, functional human being, one who does not belong to a cult or swear fealty to anything but the US.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone who had a 'good faith' concern about affirmative action would have been horrified by ACB's nomination after Trump specifically said he wanted to nominate a woman and there were certainly more qualified individuals available.

But right wingers were thrilled about ACB.

KBJ will be great - I mean she's definitely more qualified than the majority of sitting SCOTUS judges were when they were nominated.

I agree that KBJ is a great choice. But why would one be “horrified” by ACB? Because she’s not an Ivy Leaguer?

Because she is not "progressive" enough, obviously.

No, because Trump said there were more qualified individuals available, but he chose her because of her gender.

There are more qualified individuals available now, but KBJ was chosen based on Race and Gender. You can’t be "horrified" at one and ok with another.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The main issue is the way it was done. Biden announcing the nomination will only be a black woman is what is damaging. She will always be seen as the affirmative action choice, and he did her a great disservice handling it that way.

I will speak on behalf of all brilliant and more than qualified AAs in the US. You are not in her league and she isn’t thinking about you or your narrow beliefs at all. She is too busy reaping the fruits and rewards of her, gift of superior intellect, hard work and excellence.

Life’s not always fair and yes some people really are smarter than others. And you and everyone else in the room knows it and these people often aren’t in the package you think they should be.

You are very welcome.

I’m the one you are replying to. I am an AA Woman you fool. You do not speak for all of us.

NP. And you speak for very few, or the ones closely aligned to the Clarence Thomas' school of thought. It's sad that in 2022, you are so insecure and still seek the approval of others. Really girl, you're worried that they consider you an affirmative action pick. You are that insecure of your achievements that you use precious braincells for that line of thought. Pitiful

I am not insecure at all. I’m saying Biden hurt her credibility while trying to pander and self congratulate. KBJ is more than qualified, and should be the nominee, Biden just did it the wrong way, and that will stick with her forever. It’s insulting, and you give him a pass for it.

DP... Just stop it. KBJ's record already speaks for itself. She's an excellent nominee.

I’ve never said she was not an excellent nominee, I’ve said the opposite. You’re so blinded trying to "prove" something you can’t even understand the point I’m making. I’ll try again and dumb it down for you.

She’s an excellent nominee
She deserves the job

She will always have an * by her name through no fault of her own. That is 100% on Biden and it’s disgusting he did that to her

DP. Does O’Connor have an * by her name. It was the same verbal deliberation made by RR. The only difference is that RR only said woman. There was no need for him to say white woman because everyone knew that RR would have never appointed a woman of color. Why, or why or why do you people make it more difficult for Black people. Your talking point is exactly what Tucker and Ingram have been spouting. And when confronted with how RR went about it with Justice O’Connor they give a stupid look of ignorance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Anyone who had a 'good faith' concern about affirmative action would have been horrified by ACB's nomination after Trump specifically said he wanted to nominate a woman and there were certainly more qualified individuals available.

But right wingers were thrilled about ACB.

KBJ will be great - I mean she's definitely more qualified than the majority of sitting SCOTUS judges were when they were nominated.

I agree that KBJ is a great choice. But why would one be “horrified” by ACB? Because she’s not an Ivy Leaguer?

She was unqualified, and a political hack. They saved up the worst, craziest and least qualified of Trump’s three (!) appointees for RBG’s seat.

KBJ is qualified and a normal, decent, functional human being, one who does not belong to a cult or swear fealty to anything but the US.

ACB had also never even seen a trial to completion. She barely practiced before retreating right back to the same school she came from, where she served as an ok teacher and mediocre academic. She failed at even being “ivory tower”. If you want the best and the brightest, you’re not searching for some third rate candidate from a Catholic echo chamber.

[Anonymous]

I think KBJ will be a great Justice. At the same time, I understand those who question the qualifications being sought now. Several years ago I was at an annual meeting at the Bar of the City of New York on how to become a judge. The Chairman of the panel, a African American judge, spoke on how he recommended judges. He brought up one judge before whom I had argued. He said he chose her because she was a practicing lesbian. I remember wondering to myself how one practices sex became relevant. The rest of the conference went along these lines. One White male raised his hand and said he had always wanted to be a judge but was beginning to feel discouraged. He asked the Chairman if a White male had any chance. The Chairman answered “we don’t want our judges looking like the portraits in this room.” So much for becoming a judge in New York.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think KBJ will be a great Justice. At the same time, I understand those who question the qualifications being sought now. Several years ago I was at an annual meeting at the Bar of the City of New York on how to become a judge. The Chairman of the panel, a African American judge, spoke on how he recommended judges. He brought up one judge before whom I had argued. He said he chose her because she was a practicing lesbian. I remember wondering to myself how one practices sex became relevant. The rest of the conference went along these lines. One White male raised his hand and said he had always wanted to be a judge but was beginning to feel discouraged. He asked the Chairman if a White male had any chance. The Chairman answered “we don’t want our judges looking like the portraits in this room.” So much for becoming a judge in New York.

And somehow, that’s not considered discrimination. People here will defend that

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think KBJ will be a great Justice. At the same time, I understand those who question the qualifications being sought now. Several years ago I was at an annual meeting at the Bar of the City of New York on how to become a judge. The Chairman of the panel, a African American judge, spoke on how he recommended judges. He brought up one judge before whom I had argued. He said he chose her because she was a practicing lesbian. I remember wondering to myself how one practices sex became relevant. The rest of the conference went along these lines. One White male raised his hand and said he had always wanted to be a judge but was beginning to feel discouraged. He asked the Chairman if a White male had any chance. The Chairman answered “we don’t want our judges looking like the portraits in this room.” So much for becoming a judge in New York.

And somehow, that’s not considered discrimination. People here will defend that

It may very well be indeed a form of discrimination. What’s amazing is that people like you never considered it a problem until it was pointed in your direction. You did not care when it was only white men followed by only white men and white women selected. Only now do you care about discrimination.