SCOTUS Pandora's Box

[BlackFlag]

The Middle East is a social conservative's dream, you stupid fucking retard

Wow but you are fucking stupid.

They share the exact same social beliefs as you. Sorry

They do not. In fact, their social beliefs more closely mimic the American left, if it can be said to resemble anything western at all.

Someday, someone will explain to you that western ideas of political left and right are not anything close to the left and right of other non-western cultures. Included in those differences is that the left and right of European cultures are nothing remotely like those of the United States and that in Europe, YOU would be considered a right wing nut.

The Middle Eastern areas you are talking about promote religion as law, deny rights to gay people, deny rights to women, oppose birth control, oppose secularism, oppose the West's liberal social freedoms, they love to drill baby drill, and on and on.

So, then you see that they are nothing like the right here in America. The right here in America does none of those things. I know you've been told they do, but you've been lied too.

The right here spends all of its time trying to do those things. It succeeds more often than not.

 

[jknowgood]

Brought to you by the Democrat party.

All this talk about rejecting a Supreme Court nominee got me digging into some history.

Did you know that there are only 11 nominees to the Supreme Court that were rejected by the Senate?

Here is a list of the last 4:

1. Robert Bork (1987) Appointed by Reagan
2. G Harrold Carswell (1970) Appointed by Nixon
3. Clement Haynsworth Jr. (1969) Appointed by Nixon
4. John Parker (1930) Appointed by Herbert Hoover

All of these rejected nominees were submitted by Republican Presidents. Yay! In fact, you have to go all the way back to 1894 to see a Supreme Court justice rejected by the Senate that was appointed by a democrat.

Some interesting info,

Bork was rejected mainly because he was viewed as possibly wanting to overturn Roe vs. Wade which seems to have become an acceptable litmus test to see if they are qualified Justice. Meanwhile, Court members like Hagan have never been a judge but in terms of being qualified, she is just fine anyway.

Other Republican nominees that were rejected, such as Harrold Carswell and John Parker, were rejected because they were seen a racists. I'm not sure of the dirt they dug up on Carswell, but I can tell you what they dug up on Parker. Parker was nominated by Herbert Hoover and rejected in 1930 on the basis of this comment, "The participation of the Negro in politics is a source of evil and danger to both races and is not desired by the wise men in either race."

So all well and good, don't vote for the Republican nominated Parker, but just a few years later FDR appoints Hugo Black.

Who is Hugo Black you ask?



Hugo Black had been associate justice of the Supreme Court for less than a month when the news broke. In September of 1937, an exposé by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette found proof of Black’s membership in the Ku Klux Klan. He had joined in September of 1923, and resigned in July, 1925, as one of his first moves before running for one of Alabama’s U.S. Senate seat. Ironically, the smoking gun was Black’s resignation letter, written in legible longhand on Klan stationery, which appeared on the paper’s front page.

Franklin Roosevelt, who nominated Hugo Black, was implicated in the scandal, which threatened to have far-reaching consequences for the president’s New Deal image. What was once seen as shrewd politics — the New Deal-friendly textualist was confirmed with a 63–16 vote — had become a disgrace. “Millions of Americans,” wrote one Indiana newspaper, “will not forget this sole tangible accomplishment of President Roosevelt’s attempted ‘liberalization’ of the Supreme Court.”

Yea, sounds about right.

Just one more interesting fact, after Carswell's name and reputation had been destroyed by Leftists, Nixon then appointed Harry Blackman to take his place and was nominated 94-0, and overwhelming favorite for both parties. He then went on to author Roe vs. Wade. Yay GOP!

As for the current justices, all the democrat justices got well over 60 votes to be nominated from both parties. However, all the Republican picks got under 60 votes EXCEPT John Roberts who later upheld Obamacare. Yay GOP!

Here are the votes from the Senate each received:

Here is a list of the Democrat appointments

Sotomayor (67-29)
Kagan (63-29)
Ginsburg (96-3)
Breyer (87-9)

And now the lowly evil Republicans, except Roberts, of course

Roberts (78-22)
Thomas (52-48)
Alito (58-42)
Gorsuch (54-45)

You can always spot a conservative Justice backstabber like Roberts cuz they will always get more than 60 votes from the Senate.

Thank goodness those 4 got blocked. We'd have more in common with the Middle East than with today's America if they'd gotten through. Unfortunately Rapey Kavanaugh is being forced through against the will of the people, so we will need to be very careful to counter the fascism and theocracy he is being installed to promote.

"against the will of the people" ? bullshit. 75% of americans polled wanted him confirmed. Wake up dude, the will of the people is not with the socialist radical left.

but tell me this, why is abortion the primary issue with you libs? What is it about the right to murder unborn human beings that gets you so spun up? What is it about turning it back over to the individual states and their voters to decide? Why is abortion the most important issue with leftists?

The thing most people don't realize....it is the left wing that has controlled a woman's Right to have babies, not Conservatives.....the socialists in Germany pushed having babies......the socialists in China murdered babies with their one child policy...the only people who have had government breeding programs are the left, not the Right...

It's funny you say that because you are literally the one trying to control whether a woman is forced to have a baby or not, but you think your inbred, stream of conscious rants about socialists makes that okay.

We aren't forcing anything, you get pregnant. You should have your baby. That's actual morally thinking, but i can see how you dislike that.

 

[Doc1]

Brought to you by the Democrat party.

All this talk about rejecting a Supreme Court nominee got me digging into some history.

Did you know that there are only 11 nominees to the Supreme Court that were rejected by the Senate?

Here is a list of the last 4:

1. Robert Bork (1987) Appointed by Reagan
2. G Harrold Carswell (1970) Appointed by Nixon
3. Clement Haynsworth Jr. (1969) Appointed by Nixon
4. John Parker (1930) Appointed by Herbert Hoover

All of these rejected nominees were submitted by Republican Presidents. Yay! In fact, you have to go all the way back to 1894 to see a Supreme Court justice rejected by the Senate that was appointed by a democrat.

Some interesting info,

Bork was rejected mainly because he was viewed as possibly wanting to overturn Roe vs. Wade which seems to have become an acceptable litmus test to see if they are qualified Justice. Meanwhile, Court members like Hagan have never been a judge but in terms of being qualified, she is just fine anyway.

Other Republican nominees that were rejected, such as Harrold Carswell and John Parker, were rejected because they were seen a racists. I'm not sure of the dirt they dug up on Carswell, but I can tell you what they dug up on Parker. Parker was nominated by Herbert Hoover and rejected in 1930 on the basis of this comment, "The participation of the Negro in politics is a source of evil and danger to both races and is not desired by the wise men in either race."

So all well and good, don't vote for the Republican nominated Parker, but just a few years later FDR appoints Hugo Black.

Who is Hugo Black you ask?



Hugo Black had been associate justice of the Supreme Court for less than a month when the news broke. In September of 1937, an exposé by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette found proof of Black’s membership in the Ku Klux Klan. He had joined in September of 1923, and resigned in July, 1925, as one of his first moves before running for one of Alabama’s U.S. Senate seat. Ironically, the smoking gun was Black’s resignation letter, written in legible longhand on Klan stationery, which appeared on the paper’s front page.

Franklin Roosevelt, who nominated Hugo Black, was implicated in the scandal, which threatened to have far-reaching consequences for the president’s New Deal image. What was once seen as shrewd politics — the New Deal-friendly textualist was confirmed with a 63–16 vote — had become a disgrace. “Millions of Americans,” wrote one Indiana newspaper, “will not forget this sole tangible accomplishment of President Roosevelt’s attempted ‘liberalization’ of the Supreme Court.”

Yea, sounds about right.

Just one more interesting fact, after Carswell's name and reputation had been destroyed by Leftists, Nixon then appointed Harry Blackman to take his place and was nominated 94-0, and overwhelming favorite for both parties. He then went on to author Roe vs. Wade. Yay GOP!

As for the current justices, all the democrat justices got well over 60 votes to be nominated from both parties. However, all the Republican picks got under 60 votes EXCEPT John Roberts who later upheld Obamacare. Yay GOP!

Here are the votes from the Senate each received:

Here is a list of the Democrat appointments

Sotomayor (67-29)
Kagan (63-29)
Ginsburg (96-3)
Breyer (87-9)

And now the lowly evil Republicans, except Roberts, of course

Roberts (78-22)
Thomas (52-48)
Alito (58-42)
Gorsuch (54-45)

You can always spot a conservative Justice backstabber like Roberts cuz they will always get more than 60 votes from the Senate.

Thank goodness those 4 got blocked. We'd have more in common with the Middle East than with today's America if they'd gotten through. Unfortunately Rapey Kavanaugh is being forced through against the will of the people, so we will need to be very careful to counter the fascism and theocracy he is being installed to promote.

Sure thing Komrade.

 

[Darkwind]

Wow but you are fucking stupid.

They share the exact same social beliefs as you. Sorry

They do not. In fact, their social beliefs more closely mimic the American left, if it can be said to resemble anything western at all.

Someday, someone will explain to you that western ideas of political left and right are not anything close to the left and right of other non-western cultures. Included in those differences is that the left and right of European cultures are nothing remotely like those of the United States and that in Europe, YOU would be considered a right wing nut.

The Middle Eastern areas you are talking about promote religion as law, deny rights to gay people, deny rights to women, oppose birth control, oppose secularism, oppose the West's liberal social freedoms, they love to drill baby drill, and on and on.

So, then you see that they are nothing like the right here in America. The right here in America does none of those things. I know you've been told they do, but you've been lied too.

The right here spends all of its time trying to do those things. It succeeds more often than not.

They do none of those things. Perhaps you should drink water instead of the kool-aid.

 

[Windparadox]

Abortion is pillar upon which the entire Progressive movement stands.

`
When one allows a trump follower to define questions and issues, this is the kind of bullshit you'll have to expect. It's a mix of half truths and lies. True, among the radical left-wing feminists, it seems like the main issue. That aside, regardless, they do not represent all progressives or liberals. Here are the issues progressives champion;

Campaign Finance
Economy
Education
Energy & Environment
Entitlement Reform
Financial Services
Fiscal Policies
Foreign Policy & Defense
Government Reform
Health Care
Housing
Immigration
Judiciary
Labor
Politics
Regulatory Reform
Small Business & Entrepreneurship
Social Empowerment
Tax
Telecom
Trade
Transportation & Infrastructure - Source​

`
Unlike the republicans in which any trump dolt can speak for the entire GOP, it does not work that way with progressives. While the MSM is concentrating on the angry loud mouths (it makes for good TV), they only speak for themselves. To that extent, it does fractionalize the democrats whom themselves are in deep shit with the Clinton's and makes it imperative that the old guard like Hillary, Feinstein, Pelosi, etc, must be removed.

At best, states issues are front and center. In Wisconsin, republican Scott Walker trails democrat Tony Evers for governor by 5 points, so it's still close there. republican Leah Vukmir is trailing incumbent democrat Tammy Baldwin by 11 points for the Senete. Wisconsin polls have democrat Randy Bryce running neck and neck with republican Bryan Steil for Wisconsin's 1st Congressional District, being vacated by Paul Ryan.
`
`

 

[jknowgood]

Lol, california has more in common with the middle east, in fact the middle east may have it better. That liberal shithole.

The Middle East is a social conservative's dream, you stupid fucking retard

Wow but you are fucking stupid.

They share the exact same social beliefs as you. Sorry

They do not. In fact, their social beliefs more closely mimic the American left, if it can be said to resemble anything western at all.

Someday, someone will explain to you that western ideas of political left and right are not anything close to the left and right of other non-western cultures. Included in those differences is that the left and right of European cultures are nothing remotely like those of the United States and that in Europe, YOU would be considered a right wing nut.

The Middle Eastern areas you are talking about promote religion as law, deny rights to gay people, deny rights to women, oppose birth control, oppose secularism, oppose the West's liberal social freedoms, they love to drill baby drill, and on and on.

All i can say on that one is wow!

 

[Votto]

Brought to you by the Democrat party.

All this talk about rejecting a Supreme Court nominee got me digging into some history.

Did you know that there are only 11 nominees to the Supreme Court that were rejected by the Senate?

Here is a list of the last 4:

1. Robert Bork (1987) Appointed by Reagan
2. G Harrold Carswell (1970) Appointed by Nixon
3. Clement Haynsworth Jr. (1969) Appointed by Nixon
4. John Parker (1930) Appointed by Herbert Hoover

All of these rejected nominees were submitted by Republican Presidents. Yay! In fact, you have to go all the way back to 1894 to see a Supreme Court justice rejected by the Senate that was appointed by a democrat.

Some interesting info,

Bork was rejected mainly because he was viewed as possibly wanting to overturn Roe vs. Wade which seems to have become an acceptable litmus test to see if they are qualified Justice. Meanwhile, Court members like Hagan have never been a judge but in terms of being qualified, she is just fine anyway.

Other Republican nominees that were rejected, such as Harrold Carswell and John Parker, were rejected because they were seen a racists. I'm not sure of the dirt they dug up on Carswell, but I can tell you what they dug up on Parker. Parker was nominated by Herbert Hoover and rejected in 1930 on the basis of this comment, "The participation of the Negro in politics is a source of evil and danger to both races and is not desired by the wise men in either race."

So all well and good, don't vote for the Republican nominated Parker, but just a few years later FDR appoints Hugo Black.

Who is Hugo Black you ask?



Hugo Black had been associate justice of the Supreme Court for less than a month when the news broke. In September of 1937, an exposé by the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette found proof of Black’s membership in the Ku Klux Klan. He had joined in September of 1923, and resigned in July, 1925, as one of his first moves before running for one of Alabama’s U.S. Senate seat. Ironically, the smoking gun was Black’s resignation letter, written in legible longhand on Klan stationery, which appeared on the paper’s front page.

Franklin Roosevelt, who nominated Hugo Black, was implicated in the scandal, which threatened to have far-reaching consequences for the president’s New Deal image. What was once seen as shrewd politics — the New Deal-friendly textualist was confirmed with a 63–16 vote — had become a disgrace. “Millions of Americans,” wrote one Indiana newspaper, “will not forget this sole tangible accomplishment of President Roosevelt’s attempted ‘liberalization’ of the Supreme Court.”

Yea, sounds about right.

Just one more interesting fact, after Carswell's name and reputation had been destroyed by Leftists, Nixon then appointed Harry Blackman to take his place and was nominated 94-0, and overwhelming favorite for both parties. He then went on to author Roe vs. Wade. Yay GOP!

As for the current justices, all the democrat justices got well over 60 votes to be nominated from both parties. However, all the Republican picks got under 60 votes EXCEPT John Roberts who later upheld Obamacare. Yay GOP!

Here are the votes from the Senate each received:

Here is a list of the Democrat appointments

Sotomayor (67-29)
Kagan (63-29)
Ginsburg (96-3)
Breyer (87-9)

And now the lowly evil Republicans, except Roberts, of course

Roberts (78-22)
Thomas (52-48)
Alito (58-42)
Gorsuch (54-45)

You can always spot a conservative Justice backstabber like Roberts cuz they will always get more than 60 votes from the Senate.

Thank goodness those 4 got blocked. We'd have more in common with the Middle East than with today's America if they'd gotten through. Unfortunately Rapey Kavanaugh is being forced through against the will of the people, so we will need to be very careful to counter the fascism and theocracy he is being installed to promote.

Lol, california has more in common with the middle east, in fact the middle east may have it better. That liberal shithole.

The Middle East is a social conservative's dream, you stupid fucking retard

No, the control people, a liberals paradise. Please don't let facts smack you across the face.

They have the same socially conservative "values" as you and your party. Their magical beliefs are slightly different, that's all.

Ok half wit, then why are conservatives trying to block immigration from the Middle East in large part from terrorist countries while dims bend over backward to let them in?

 

[saveliberty]

All the OP shows is Democrats have been obstructionists for a long time. Primarily based on Roe v Wade and wanting justices to interpret the Constitution.

 

[Votto]

Lol, california has more in common with the middle east, in fact the middle east may have it better. That liberal shithole.

The Middle East is a social conservative's dream, you stupid fucking retard

Wow but you are fucking stupid.

They share the exact same social beliefs as you. Sorry

They do not. In fact, their social beliefs more closely mimic the American left, if it can be said to resemble anything western at all.

Someday, someone will explain to you that western ideas of political left and right are not anything close to the left and right of other non-western cultures. Included in those differences is that the left and right of European cultures are nothing remotely like those of the United States and that in Europe, YOU would be considered a right wing nut.

The Middle Eastern areas you are talking about promote religion as law, deny rights to gay people, deny rights to women, oppose birth control, oppose secularism, oppose the West's liberal social freedoms, they love to drill baby drill, and on and on.

And in Israel women and gays have rights, yet idiots like you support the Islamo-fascists instead.

Why?

Face some facts, you are drawn to the Islamo-fascists because they are fascists. Their religion prevents them from separating the state and their religion, and their fight is to make Sharia law world wide. It's not much different from the Left. They are fascists with the religion of socialism, something that I'm sure they share with Islamo-fascists, and they will continue to fight until they have their one world government as well.

I'm sure they can come to some kind of agreement over women and gays and simply hook up.

Then instead of shouting down conservatives at universities and censoring them on Twitter and YouTube, etc., you can just behead them

Wouldn't that be nice?

 

[Redfish]

Abortion is pillar upon which the entire Progressive movement stands.

`
When one allows a trump follower to define questions and issues, this is the kind of bullshit you'll have to expect. It's a mix of half truths and lies. True, among the radical left-wing feminists, it seems like the main issue. That aside, regardless, they do not represent all progressives or liberals. Here are the issues progressives champion;

Campaign Finance
Economy
Education
Energy & Environment
Entitlement Reform
Financial Services
Fiscal Policies
Foreign Policy & Defense
Government Reform
Health Care
Housing
Immigration
Judiciary
Labor
Politics
Regulatory Reform
Small Business & Entrepreneurship
Social Empowerment
Tax
Telecom
Trade
Transportation & Infrastructure - Source​

`
Unlike the republicans in which any trump dolt can speak for the entire GOP, it does not work that way with progressives. While the MSM is concentrating on the angry loud mouths (it makes for good TV), they only speak for themselves. To that extent, it does fractionalize the democrats whom themselves are in deep shit with the Clinton's and makes it imperative that the old guard like Hillary, Feinstein, Pelosi, etc, must be removed.

At best, states issues are front and center. In Wisconsin, republican Scott Walker trails democrat Tony Evers for governor by 5 points, so it's still close there. republican Leah Vukmir is trailing incumbent democrat Tammy Baldwin by 11 points for the Senete. Wisconsin polls have democrat Randy Bryce running neck and neck with republican Bryan Steil for Wisconsin's 1st Congressional District, being vacated by Paul Ryan.
`
`

totally wrong, progressives what government to control all business and our personal lives, the things you listed are NOT progressive tenets. Freedom is not a progressive goal, quite the opposite.

 

[Windparadox]

totally wrong, progressives what government to control all business and our personal lives, the things you listed are NOT progressive tenets. Freedom is not a progressive goal, quite the opposite.

`
It's obvious you haven't read the source. Silly me to think anyone from the right actually will click on a link containing ""knowledge."

 

[bendog]

Yes, I know, too long to read.

Can't be helped though.

Did you do that all by yourself? LOL

 

[there4eyeM]

Merrick Garland could be added to the list of rejected nominees.

 

[Redfish]

totally wrong, progressives what government to control all business and our personal lives, the things you listed are NOT progressive tenets. Freedom is not a progressive goal, quite the opposite.

`
It's obvious you haven't read the source. Silly me to think anyone from the right actually will click on a link containing ""knowledge."

equating propaganda with knowledge just shows how misguided you libs are. I have read most of the progressive propaganda and 95% of it is BS. But you are free to believe it if it makes you feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeel good.

 

[Redfish]

Merrick Garland could be added to the list of rejected nominees.

he was not rejected, there was never a vote. He would have been rejected if there was a vote. Then you could add him to the reject list.