How is the Supreme Court confirmation going to go?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, so much for qualified

My g-d, this is embarrassing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All the Dems are just using this time to spew political ad speach , harris had nothing to add except vote for biden harris. What a wasted opportunity.

Sorry you don't understand the genius of what Harris was able to do to the nominee yesterday.

This can’t be a serious statement. Harris looked like a moron.
DP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, so much for qualified

My g-d, this is embarrassing.

So interesting that you select one tiny moment and completely dismiss the hours she has spoken at length about the Constitution and the many cases she has been involved in - all without notes. But I’m not surprised.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All the Dems are just using this time to spew political ad speach , harris had nothing to add except vote for biden harris. What a wasted opportunity.

Sorry you don't understand the genius of what Harris was able to do to the nominee yesterday.

This can’t be a serious statement. Harris looked like a moron.
DP

But she knows the five freedoms protected under the First Amendment. Unlike Amy.

[Anonymous]

Because she looked at her notes or teleprompter

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Speaking of Blackburn, she had the most insightful words of the day. And I’m pro-choice, btw. Edited for clarity.

“Some of our (Democratic) colleagues chose to mention this yesterday... Republicans don’t nominate enough female judges. But when we nominate a highly qualified woman for a Supreme Court vacancy, what is the very first thing they do? They turn their attack machine on. And then they start into the politics of personal destruction. And they attack you for not fitting into the paradigm of the left - because you’re pro-life, pro-family, pro-religion... and if you don’t buy into this agenda of the left, if you’re female, then they act as if you’re not a “real” woman. And I will tell you, quite frankly, that they do NOT believe that all women deserve to have the opportunity to have a seat at the table. It’s only “certain” women, and we have seen their liberal narrative play out today. Senator Hirono really tuned up on this when she suggested that you, of all people, would not support women in the workplace. And I will tell you this: as a woman who has worked in the private sector and then in public service - when comments like that are made, it discourages ALL women from trying to step forward and take the skills they have developed in one area of their life, and then use it as an opportunity to serve their nation, serve their community, because they don’t want the liberal attack machine pointed at them. ... It is so discouraging to me to see groups on the left say, “We want diversity.” But let that diversity come from a woman who is on the political right, and their heads explode.

I find it so interesting that they have tried to use this focus (Barrett’s personal faith) to evaluate your professionalism as a judge. They are doing to you *exactly* what they say they despise.”

This is a great statement.. So true. And, glad that Blackburn pointed it out.

Where did any of the democratic senators questions her about her personal faith?
The only people talking about her faith were republicans.

Really! So all the Democrats who kept bringing up the petition she signed at her church re: abortion weren’t asking about her personal faith? Interesting!

asking about a letter she signed =/= asking about faith

you are projecting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, so much for qualified

My g-d, this is embarrassing.

So interesting that you select one tiny moment and completely dismiss the hours she has spoken at length about the Constitution and the many cases she has been involved in - all without notes. But I’m not surprised.

LOL. PP is talking about the First Amendment and describes as above. LOFL.

[Anonymous]

Someone needs to just straight-up ask her is she understands fully and completely that she is nothing more than a political pawn. Does she understand that 100% of the country knows that. Her qualifications notwithstanding, now, at this hearing, she is a mindless pawn.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This seemed so far fetched I had to verify it myself. Indeed, the previous snapshot taken on 28 Sept, 2020 did not describee preference as “offensive”.

Webster's Dictionary has changed its definition of the term preference to include the new understanding that it is "offensive" as regards "sexual preference." This new definition was made in real time, after Senator Mazie Hirono claimed the long standing, inoffensive term, was offensive, on the Senate floor. This claim was made to discredit Judge Amy Coney Barrett's Supreme Court nomination, and for no other reason.

https://thepostmillennial.com/websters-dictionary-changes-definition-of-preference-to-match-democrats-attack-on-amy-coney-barrett/

Wow. Big Brother in real time. Unreal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:ACB owned the democrats! She is many levels beyond them as an intellectual and in competence. Harris looked like a fool. ACB will be confirmed easily.

+1
Agree. She dismissed Harris handily.

Surely you realize what an incredibly low bar this is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone needs to just straight-up ask her is she understands fully and completely that she is nothing more than a political pawn. Does she understand that 100% of the country knows that. Her qualifications notwithstanding, now, at this hearing, she is a mindless pawn.

You do know that she is an independent jurist who may rule as she sees fit if confirmed, right? She isn’t beholden to Trump any more than Kagan and Sotomayor were beholden to Obama.

[Anonymous]

ACB is cruel.

Too bad once you realize this, it will be too late.

[Anonymous]

Blumenthal is despicable. She has answered him repeatedly. She cannot give her opinion on these cases.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Blumenthal is despicable. She has answered him repeatedly. She cannot give her opinion on these cases.

But she has given opinion on other cases. See the problem?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All the Dems are just using this time to spew political ad speach , harris had nothing to add except vote for biden harris. What a wasted opportunity.

Sorry you don't understand the genius of what Harris was able to do to the nominee yesterday.

I didn’t watch (so don’t yell at me like I’m a trumpster); what did she do? DP.

She hid behind a video call and basically parroted a campaign advertisement, no substance or questions

+1
And pretty much threatened Barrett about the ACA.