Anonymous wrote:Can’t lightning strike these people down or something?

Are you really that stupid? LBJ won't take Breyers seat until October as he will finish out his term. ACB was filling an empty seat after the death of RBG... Jesus people, we have bigger problems that Congress needs to address.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t need to read the resume. Looks like we already know why she was picked. I really don’t understand why anyone wants to be part of a party that panders like this to race.

She was picked because she is exceptionally qualified.

Are you outraged at all the while male justices throughout history who were picked because they were white males? Who would not have been picked if they were not white, or not male?

Two wrongs make a right?

Either way, she will probably be a competent justice. Whether she will be a brilliant one is to be proven. So far her judicial record is better than Sotomayor, who is the weakest of the justices and a perfect example of someone elevated beyond her capacities pretty much her entire career to meet identity politics goals. It's also almost a given she will toe the Democratic line in just about everything so it's unlikely that she will surprise people or swing a verdict.

She may also be the last black justice appointed to the court for a long time. Once Clarence Thomas retires/dies, the court will likely revert to just having the one black justice as 1 / 9 = approximate share of the US population that is black.

I don't see any problem having 9 black female justices.

+1 “People ask me sometimes, when — when do you think it will it be enough? When will there be enough women on the court? And my answer is when there are nine.”
- Ruth Bader Ginsberg
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/justice-ginsburg-enough-women-supreme-court

Retiring while Obama was in office would have hastened that goal.

There are many reasons why it would have been right to retire during Obama's tenure in office, but not this.

Did you forget that RBG was replaced by another female justice, ACB? RGB's passing during Trump's presidency affected the liberal/conservative balance of the court, but did not change the male/female balance of the court at all.

As amy functions solely as a tool of the patriarchy - what were her comments on pregnancy and birth, do you remember? They were pretty heinous - she’s not so much a woman as she is a terrible and unqualified justice.

Roll your eyes all you want. That’s a fact based assessment of her.

Brown Jackson on the other hand promises to be a sane jurist.

DP
No. That is your opinion. And your second comment can be translated as “I like her because she has my ideology.”
You fail to admit that many of her decisions have been overturned

She might be good but. Biden should've shut his dumb mouth about needing a black woman , he screws her over.

Anonymous wrote:Can’t lightning strike these people down or something?

Good grief.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t need to read the resume. Looks like we already know why she was picked. I really don’t understand why anyone wants to be part of a party that panders like this to race.

She was picked because she is exceptionally qualified.

Are you outraged at all the while male justices throughout history who were picked because they were white males? Who would not have been picked if they were not white, or not male?

Two wrongs make a right?

Either way, she will probably be a competent justice. Whether she will be a brilliant one is to be proven. So far her judicial record is better than Sotomayor, who is the weakest of the justices and a perfect example of someone elevated beyond her capacities pretty much her entire career to meet identity politics goals. It's also almost a given she will toe the Democratic line in just about everything so it's unlikely that she will surprise people or swing a verdict.

She may also be the last black justice appointed to the court for a long time. Once Clarence Thomas retires/dies, the court will likely revert to just having the one black justice as 1 / 9 = approximate share of the US population that is black.

I don't see any problem having 9 black female justices.

+1 “People ask me sometimes, when — when do you think it will it be enough? When will there be enough women on the court? And my answer is when there are nine.”
- Ruth Bader Ginsberg
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/justice-ginsburg-enough-women-supreme-court

Retiring while Obama was in office would have hastened that goal.

There are many reasons why it would have been right to retire during Obama's tenure in office, but not this.

Did you forget that RBG was replaced by another female justice, ACB? RGB's passing during Trump's presidency affected the liberal/conservative balance of the court, but did not change the male/female balance of the court at all.

As amy functions solely as a tool of the patriarchy - what were her comments on pregnancy and birth, do you remember? They were pretty heinous - she’s not so much a woman as she is a terrible and unqualified justice.

Roll your eyes all you want. That’s a fact based assessment of her.

Brown Jackson on the other hand promises to be a sane jurist.

Anonymous wrote:Former public defender, experienced, brilliant - Biden made a great choice!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/02/25/ketanji-brown-jackson-supreme-court/

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t need to read the resume. Looks like we already know why she was picked. I really don’t understand why anyone wants to be part of a party that panders like this to race.

She was picked because she is exceptionally qualified.

Are you outraged at all the while male justices throughout history who were picked because they were white males? Who would not have been picked if they were not white, or not male?

Two wrongs make a right?

Either way, she will probably be a competent justice. Whether she will be a brilliant one is to be proven. So far her judicial record is better than Sotomayor, who is the weakest of the justices and a perfect example of someone elevated beyond her capacities pretty much her entire career to meet identity politics goals. It's also almost a given she will toe the Democratic line in just about everything so it's unlikely that she will surprise people or swing a verdict.

She may also be the last black justice appointed to the court for a long time. Once Clarence Thomas retires/dies, the court will likely revert to just having the one black justice as 1 / 9 = approximate share of the US population that is black.

I don't see any problem having 9 black female justices.

+1 “People ask me sometimes, when — when do you think it will it be enough? When will there be enough women on the court? And my answer is when there are nine.”
- Ruth Bader Ginsberg
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/justice-ginsburg-enough-women-supreme-court

Retiring while Obama was in office would have hastened that goal.

There are many reasons why it would have been right to retire during Obama's tenure in office, but not this.

Did you forget that RBG was replaced by another female justice, ACB? RGB's passing during Trump's presidency affected the liberal/conservative balance of the court, but did not change the male/female balance of the court at all.

As amy functions solely as a tool of the patriarchy - what were her comments on pregnancy and birth, do you remember? They were pretty heinous - she’s not so much a woman as she is a terrible and unqualified justice.

Anonymous wrote:Former public defender, experienced, brilliant - Biden made a great choice!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/02/25/ketanji-brown-jackson-supreme-court/

Amen.

Can’t lightning strike these people down or something?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She will sail through confirmation because, even if republicans don’t like her, they don’t want to appear racist in an election year. There are too many parallels as it is, so this one justice, who can’t tip the scales on major cases at the present time anyway because of the 6-3 majority, isn’t worth a fight.

There will be no fight as she is a liberal replacing a liberal. Dems have 50 votes (I think only 49 for now with the senator out), but some republicans will vote for her.

If she was selected to replace a conservative justice, she would get zero support and would have to wait for the senator Lujan to get back to get the 50th vote.

Even though she is qualified. She is hardly the “most qualified” overall. There are many other judges that had longer records and more experience. Judge Srinivasan for one…. But his gender and race did not fit the bill.

That has ever been an argument or an issue for Republican Presidents to adhere to, so why should it be one for Biden? Clarence Thomas was not considered "most qualified" at the time. Nor were David Souter, Brett Kavanaugh or Amy Coney Barrett.

This type of rhetoric in requiring a candidate to be "most qualified" rather than "qualified" is just another hidden white supremacist criterion for promoting the systemic favoritism of the good old boy white network to ensure that white males who have always had preference for the best of everything continue to be favored for everything.

Judge Jackson is well qualified for the position. Whether she is the "most qualified" for the position or not, is irrelevant. She will make a good contribution to the court and has excellent credentials and judicial history to justify her position on the court.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t need to read the resume. Looks like we already know why she was picked. I really don’t understand why anyone wants to be part of a party that panders like this to race.

You just don’t want to read her résumé because it’s better than many of the people the guys you voted for put on the court.

That’s just argumentative. The fact is ALL the members of the Supreme Court have very impressive resumes.

The liberal justices, sure. The con artist justices are impressive strictly as political hacks. Brown Jackson is actually impressive.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t need to read the resume. Looks like we already know why she was picked. I really don’t understand why anyone wants to be part of a party that panders like this to race.

She was picked because she is exceptionally qualified.

Are you outraged at all the while male justices throughout history who were picked because they were white males? Who would not have been picked if they were not white, or not male?

Two wrongs make a right?

Either way, she will probably be a competent justice. Whether she will be a brilliant one is to be proven. So far her judicial record is better than Sotomayor, who is the weakest of the justices and a perfect example of someone elevated beyond her capacities pretty much her entire career to meet identity politics goals. It's also almost a given she will toe the Democratic line in just about everything so it's unlikely that she will surprise people or swing a verdict.

She may also be the last black justice appointed to the court for a long time. Once Clarence Thomas retires/dies, the court will likely revert to just having the one black justice as 1 / 9 = approximate share of the US population that is black.

I don't see any problem having 9 black female justices.

+1 “People ask me sometimes, when — when do you think it will it be enough? When will there be enough women on the court? And my answer is when there are nine.”
- Ruth Bader Ginsberg
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/justice-ginsburg-enough-women-supreme-court

Retiring while Obama was in office would have hastened that goal.

There are many reasons why it would have been right to retire during Obama's tenure in office, but not this.

Did you forget that RBG was replaced by another female justice, ACB? RGB's passing during Trump's presidency affected the liberal/conservative balance of the court, but did not change the male/female balance of the court at all.

As amy functions solely as a tool of the patriarchy - what were her comments on pregnancy and birth, do you remember? They were pretty heinous - she’s not so much a woman as she is a terrible and unqualified justice.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t need to read the resume. Looks like we already know why she was picked. I really don’t understand why anyone wants to be part of a party that panders like this to race.

She was picked because she is exceptionally qualified.

Are you outraged at all the while male justices throughout history who were picked because they were white males? Who would not have been picked if they were not white, or not male?

Two wrongs make a right?

Either way, she will probably be a competent justice. Whether she will be a brilliant one is to be proven. So far her judicial record is better than Sotomayor, who is the weakest of the justices and a perfect example of someone elevated beyond her capacities pretty much her entire career to meet identity politics goals. It's also almost a given she will toe the Democratic line in just about everything so it's unlikely that she will surprise people or swing a verdict.

She may also be the last black justice appointed to the court for a long time. Once Clarence Thomas retires/dies, the court will likely revert to just having the one black justice as 1 / 9 = approximate share of the US population that is black.

I don't see any problem having 9 black female justices.

+1 “People ask me sometimes, when — when do you think it will it be enough? When will there be enough women on the court? And my answer is when there are nine.”
- Ruth Bader Ginsberg
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/justice-ginsburg-enough-women-supreme-court

Retiring while Obama was in office would have hastened that goal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t need to read the resume. Looks like we already know why she was picked. I really don’t understand why anyone wants to be part of a party that panders like this to race.

You just don’t want to read her résumé because it’s better than many of the people the guys you voted for put on the court.

That’s just argumentative. The fact is ALL the members of the Supreme Court have very impressive resumes.

Bingo. But facts don’t matter to the partisan haters.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t need to read the resume. Looks like we already know why she was picked. I really don’t understand why anyone wants to be part of a party that panders like this to race.

She was picked because she is exceptionally qualified.

Are you outraged at all the while male justices throughout history who were picked because they were white males? Who would not have been picked if they were not white, or not male?

Two wrongs make a right?

Either way, she will probably be a competent justice. Whether she will be a brilliant one is to be proven. So far her judicial record is better than Sotomayor, who is the weakest of the justices and a perfect example of someone elevated beyond her capacities pretty much her entire career to meet identity politics goals. It's also almost a given she will toe the Democratic line in just about everything so it's unlikely that she will surprise people or swing a verdict.

She may also be the last black justice appointed to the court for a long time. Once Clarence Thomas retires/dies, the court will likely revert to just having the one black justice as 1 / 9 = approximate share of the US population that is black.

I don't see any problem having 9 black female justices.

+1 “People ask me sometimes, when — when do you think it will it be enough? When will there be enough women on the court? And my answer is when there are nine.”
- Ruth Bader Ginsberg
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/justice-ginsburg-enough-women-supreme-court

Inspiring words from Ruth "no black clerks" Ginsberg.