sources say trumps choice is Amy Barrett

[Jim in CT]

Now we get to see, just before the election, how much senate democrats like women!!!

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/tru...-court-sources

[Pete F.]

I look forward to hearing Judge Barrett explain the hypocrisy that will permit her to accept the nomination after arguing Merrick Garland could not be confirmed to SCOTUS 8 months before the 2016 election because his views were too different from Justice Scalia’s.
As she said it will “dramatically flip the balance of power.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Well, since Harris has already given Biden a pass on his past #MeToo moments, it shouldn’t be a big deal
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Well, since Harris has already given Biden a pass on his past #MeToo moments, it shouldn’t be a big deal
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think you’re about the only person still clinging to this.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

I think you’re about the only person still clinging to this.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Oh, I’ve moved on. Trust me.

Someone brought up the word hypocrisy, just pointing out some similarities.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Oh, I’ve moved on. Trust me.

Someone brought up the word hypocrisy, just pointing out some similarities.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Not really.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Yes, Really
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

I look forward to hearing Judge Barrett explain the hypocrisy that will permit her to accept the nomination after arguing Merrick Garland could not be confirmed to SCOTUS 8 months before the 2016 election because his views were too different from Justice Scalia’s.
As she said it will “dramatically flip the balance of power.”
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

she’s not in the senate, why should she have to explain something that didn’t involve her?

the desperation lives loudly within you.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I think you’re about the only person still clinging to this.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

if you think that, watch Pence club her with this during the debate. i’m old enough to remember when harris said biden was a racist and that we were to believe his accusers.

heels-up harris and her ever-evolving principles.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Yes, Really
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

yes, really.

hey think hypocrisy is a condition to which democrats are immune.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Ian]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

yes, really.

hey think hypocrisy is a condition to which democrats are immune.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

What are your thoughts on the Senate’s double standards with the Merrick Garland fiasco and now this?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Ian

What are your thoughts on the Senate’s double standards with the Merrick Garland fiasco and now this?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

my thoughts are that it’s obvious hypocrisy. it’s the same exact hypocrisy ( same exact) that Joe Biden showed, when as a senator when Bush was president, he said S.C. nominations should not be
made in an election year. then in 2016, he flip flopped. what’s your take on that?

up until the clinton presidency, the process of confirming S.C. judges was civilized on both sides. then the democrats changed that with bork and thomas. then harry reid changed the rules in filibuster and the nuclear option to serve his agenda.

if the democrats chose to start fighting dirty, tough cookies for them if it comes back to haunt them.

if you want to suggest that we go back to being civilized, i agree 100%. but both sides need to do it, not just the gop.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[RIROCKHOUND]

Jim.
Should they have ignored Anita Hill? If so I disagree. If not, and they should have had hearings about it, stop bringing Thomas in as evidence of the Democrats ‘fighting dirty’. Thomas was a shoe in before her accusations.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

Jim.
Should they have ignored Anita Hill? If so I disagree. If not, and they should have had hearings about it, stop bringing Thogmas in as evidence of the Democrats ‘fighting dirty’. Thomas was a shoe in before her accusations.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

“Jim, should they have ignored anita hill”?

no, but why give her more attention than your side gives biden’s accusers, or bill clinton’s accusers?

and when we determine that Hills claims have changed over time, and that she inexplicably followed Thomas from job to job, it’s time to be skeptical.

again, it seems your sides willingness to believe accusers, is politically selective.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Jim keeps dodging what a large number of sentors said on the floor and on record. And he conflating it with past events which have no connections or relevance to the current issue At hand , That no POTUS should appoint a justice prior to an election.?.

He uses word .like hypocrisy.?. No its much more than that its lying its proof that what was done to Garland was a lie and the reasons was to remove power from the people and insert there choice , and doing it again .. and they excuse it away as its not illegal, neither are abortions yet

But a moral and ethical objection against lying sentors don't get votes so we'll make excuses

But moral and ethical objections against abortions well thats different and it an issue that

But Between 2006 and 2015, the American abortion rate declined 26 percent to the lowest level on record,
The biggest reason for the drop, experts say, isn’t tougher abortion laws — it’s better access to contraception.

But they keep beating a drum to an issue... to us a phrase from Tumps covid wisdom IT BASICALLY AFFECTS NO ONE.





Conservatism is now Transactional , respect for laws and the constitution are just sales pitches

[Pete F.]

I have decided to fight America's shameful anti-Catholic bias by voting for the Catholic presidential candidate.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Jim keeps dodging what a large number of sentors said on the floor and on record. And he conflating it with past events which have no connections or relevance to the current issue At hand , That no POTUS should appoint a justice prior to an election.?.

He uses word .like hypocrisy.?. No its much more than that its lying its proof that what was done to Garland was a lie and the reasons was to remove power from the people and insert there choice , and doing it again .. and they excuse it away as its not illegal, neither are abortions yet

But a moral and ethical objection against lying sentors don't get votes so we'll make excuses

But moral and ethical objections against abortions well thats different and it an issue that

But Between 2006 and 2015, the American abortion rate declined 26 percent to the lowest level on record,
The biggest reason for the drop, experts say, isn’t tougher abortion laws — it’s better access to contraception.

But they keep beating a drum to an issue... to us a phrase from Tumps covid wisdom IT BASICALLY AFFECTS NO ONE.

i said it was obvious hypocrisy. how is that dodging?



Conservatism is now Transactional , respect for laws and the constitution are just sales pitches

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

I have decided to fight America's shameful anti-Catholic bias by voting for the Catholic presidential candidate.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

if i say i’m a bird, does that make
me a bird?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Jim keeps dodging what a large number of sentors said on the floor and on record. And he conflating it with past events which have no connections or relevance to the current issue At hand , That no POTUS should appoint a justice prior to an election.?.

He uses word .like hypocrisy.?. No its much more than that its lying its proof that what was done to Garland was a lie and the reasons was to remove power from the people and insert there choice , and doing it again .. and they excuse it away as its not illegal, neither are abortions yet

But a moral and ethical objection against lying sentors don't get votes so we'll make excuses

But moral and ethical objections against abortions well thats different and it an issue that

But Between 2006 and 2015, the American abortion rate declined 26 percent to the lowest level on record,
The biggest reason for the drop, experts say, isn’t tougher abortion laws — it’s better access to contraception.

But they keep beating a drum to an issue... to us a phrase from Tumps covid wisdom IT BASICALLY AFFECTS NO ONE.





Conservatism is now Transactional , respect for laws and the constitution are just sales pitches

how didn’t dodge? i said they were hypocrites?

no you please address biden’s hypocrisy on this issue? he said when bush was president, that president’s should not make S.C. nominations in an election year. in 2016 he flip flopped. now he’s flip flopping again. he’s had three different opinions in making nominations close to an election, depending on who was in power.

so go ahead, address that as directly as i did. but you won’t. you can’t.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Got Stripers]

Hypocrisy is unreal, but would you hire a contractor with three years experience to build your dream house, or a surgeon with just three years to remove your brain tumor, it’s not like most can’t see what’s going on. Hope the payback is at the polls.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Hypocrisy is unreal, but would you hire a contractor with three years experience to build your dream house, or a surgeon with just three years to remove your brain tumor, it’s not like most can’t see what’s going on. Hope the payback is at the polls.

well we hired sotomayor who was repeatedly overturned by the S.C., once unanimously where they actually said her conclusion was “odd to say the least”. if she’s fit for the bench, i’m ok with someone who is a rhodes scholar, graduated #1 in her class at notre dame law, and was a professor of constitutional law, and clerked for a supreme court justice.

no i wouldnt hire a brain surgeon with three years experience. but there are some people
who claim that brain surgeons and judges are actually different.

if sotomayor has more experience, but it’s a history of the S.C. telling her that she screwed up, i don’t know why her resume is better.

in any event, she’s getting confirmed, unlikely anything can stop it.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Ian]

I find it crazy for me that when he said she was his choice, I felt relived that it wasn’t his sister or Bannon, or Miller... It was someone qualified...

I don’t know if I agree with anything she says, because I know nothing about her. But in the world of Trump + 2020 I find myself saying “please just confirm her in case he wins and decides to nominate a frog just to piss Democrats off”

What a weird time we live in...
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

how didn’t dodge? i said they were hypocrites?

no you please address biden’s hypocrisy on this issue? he said when bush was president, that president’s should not make S.C. nominations in an election year. in 2016 he flip flopped. now he’s flip flopping again. he’s had three different opinions in making nominations close to an election, depending on who was in power.

so go ahead, address that as directly as i did. but you won’t. you can’t.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

there you go again conflating what republicans actually said and what they are doing now and some how inserting Biden as an explanation

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

there you go again conflating what republicans actually said and what they are doing now and some how inserting Biden as an explanation

I'm not using Biden as an explanation. I'm using Bidens identical hypocrisy, which you won't even call hypocrisy, as evidence that you have no consistent standards on the issue.

WDMSO: the republicans are being hypocrites.

Jim: I agree. But why didn't you care when Biden exhibited the same exact hypocrisy?

WDMAO: Youre using Biden as an explanation (followed by emojis).

Id be interested to know, truly, if you don't see your double standard here, or are you just trying to dodge it. I have no idea which it is.

Anyway, what's good for the goose and all that. If democrats can do whatever suits them when they are in power, you cannot ask republicans not to do the same thing.

Prediction: she gets confirmed, and in November, the democrats run the whole show in DC, like they did in 2009. So you won't have to throw a temper tantrum for too long.

Emojis don't help a weak argument, I'm afraid.