So where do USMB members stand on this SCJOTUS nomination...

[Sahba]

For those that care / for what it's worth... predictit.org has seen a major shift, dumping of Kavinaugh shares and buying up of Barrett shares. She's actually at the top of the leaderboard currently.

 

[Silhouette]

Actually you don't need to be a judge to be on the SCOTUS. You don't even need to be an attorney.

That's like saying you don't need fingers in order to be a classical guitarist. If true, it's a rule that needs changin'.

 

[Hossfly]

FWIW, I really don't care what the POLITICAL leanings of a Justice are, as long as they are beholden to the COTUS (and no other), and the supporting documents. As long as the Justice knows, understands, and holds true to the COTUS, as well as knows, understands, and holds true to the supporting documents (ie. The Federalist Papers, Amendments, contemporary arguments for and against, etc.) their POLITICAL leanings will have no effect on their LEGAL judgement.

Kagan wasn't even a judge. Obutthole put her there to push ultra liberal causes that are not constitutional. What a fucking disgrace. If Roe v Wade is overturned, it won't be because a judge is a practicing Catholic, it will be because it is unconstitutional.

Actually you don't need to be a judge to be on the SCOTUS. You don't even need to be an attorney.

 

[Pogo]

Actually you don't need to be a judge to be on the SCOTUS. You don't even need to be an attorney.

That's like saying you don't need fingers in order to be a classical guitarist. If true, it's a rule that needs changin'.

Yeah?

Why? I think it's kinda cool to have government open to more than just an elite class. Even if it isn't exercised.

Your analogy is absurd. You can't play the guitar without fingers. I think you mean it's like saying you don't need music lessons to be a classical guitarist.

 

[Pogo]

FWIW, I really don't care what the POLITICAL leanings of a Justice are, as long as they are beholden to the COTUS (and no other), and the supporting documents. As long as the Justice knows, understands, and holds true to the COTUS, as well as knows, understands, and holds true to the supporting documents (ie. The Federalist Papers, Amendments, contemporary arguments for and against, etc.) their POLITICAL leanings will have no effect on their LEGAL judgement.

Kagan wasn't even a judge. Obutthole put her there to push ultra liberal causes that are not constitutional. What a fucking disgrace. If Roe v Wade is overturned, it won't be because a judge is a practicing Catholic, it will be because it is unconstitutional.

Actually you don't need to be a judge to be on the SCOTUS. You don't even need to be an attorney.

There are literally no qualifications to sit on the SCOTUS, other than being nominated by the POTUS and approved by Congress. You can be any age, of any background or profession, of any country's citizenship.

 

[my2¢]

Who should replace Justice Kennedy Thread and Poll

 

[AvgGuyIA]

FWIW, I really don't care what the POLITICAL leanings of a Justice are, as long as they are beholden to the COTUS (and no other), and the supporting documents. As long as the Justice knows, understands, and holds true to the COTUS, as well as knows, understands, and holds true to the supporting documents (ie. The Federalist Papers, Amendments, contemporary arguments for and against, etc.) their POLITICAL leanings will have no effect on their LEGAL judgement.

Kagan wasn't even a judge. Obutthole put her there to push ultra liberal causes that are not constitutional. What a fucking disgrace. If Roe v Wade is overturned, it won't be because a judge is a practicing Catholic, it will be because it is unconstitutional.

Actually you don't need to be a judge to be on the SCOTUS. You don't even need to be an attorney.

And as the left wingers on the court keep showing us, they don't even have to understand the Constitution to be a Justice.

If the Leftist women on the Court ( Kagan and Sotomeyer) didn't have clerks to write there dissenting opinions, Americans would see what sort of idiots Democrats put on the court.

We cannot give democrats power back because they will pack the court with 15 judges like Kagan and Sotomeyer.

 

[Pogo]

FWIW, I really don't care what the POLITICAL leanings of a Justice are, as long as they are beholden to the COTUS (and no other), and the supporting documents. As long as the Justice knows, understands, and holds true to the COTUS, as well as knows, understands, and holds true to the supporting documents (ie. The Federalist Papers, Amendments, contemporary arguments for and against, etc.) their POLITICAL leanings will have no effect on their LEGAL judgement.

Kagan wasn't even a judge. Obutthole put her there to push ultra liberal causes that are not constitutional. What a fucking disgrace. If Roe v Wade is overturned, it won't be because a judge is a practicing Catholic, it will be because it is unconstitutional.

Actually you don't need to be a judge to be on the SCOTUS. You don't even need to be an attorney.

And as the left wingers on the court keep showing us, they don't even have to understand the Constitution to be a Justice.

If the Leftist women on the Court ( Kagan and Sotomeyer) didn't have clerks to write there dissenting opinions, Americans would see what sort of idiots Democrats put on the court.

We cannot give democrats power back because they will pack the court with 15 judges like Kagan and Sotomeyer.

It's instructive that a wag who classifies people as "idiots" based on their writing........... cannot himself spell the word their to do it.

 

[Moonglow]

So where do USMB members stand on this SCJOTUS nomination...

IDGF

 

[yiostheoy]

Strategically, who should get the nod and for what reason?

The Hill's Morning Report — Sponsored by Better Medicare Alliance — Anticipation builds for Trump’s SCOTUS pick

Looks like we will all find out tonight at 5PM DC time.

 

[blackhawk]

I don’t have a preference I will wait see who it is then decide how I feel about them.

 

[JakeStarkey]

A repeat for emphasis and an addendum for clarification.

They if not wounded in the war, can get on other health insurance. It like a job now, unless we have a war. I'm not buying it that we need to police the world, playing war games.

It is NEVER like a job. Do you know the airborne expect 7 to 10% of each jump to have those numbers of injuries to the paratroopers. I was on an exercise when 6 or 7 paratroopers were killed by high winds. No other job description has: to kill or capture the enemy and destroy his equipment and material. IOW, we and our opponents were trained daily to mess each other up big time, and the training was tough, dirty, bad. And a lot of it was real fun!

Penelope, you need to think clearly just about what the military does.

Addendum: It is effing dangerous, yet Henry B. Hough made a funny above of our personnel in service.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

A repeat for emphasis and an addendum for clarification.

They if not wounded in the war, can get on other health insurance. It like a job now, unless we have a war. I'm not buying it that we need to police the world, playing war games.

It is NEVER like a job. Do you know the airborne expect 7 to 10% of each jump to have those numbers of injuries to the paratroopers. I was on an exercise when 6 or 7 paratroopers were killed by high winds. No other job description has: to kill or capture the enemy and destroy his equipment and material. IOW, we and our opponents were trained daily to mess each other up big time, and the training was tough, dirty, bad. And a lot of it was real fun!

Penelope, you need to think clearly just about what the military does.

Addendum: It is effing dangerous, yet Henry B. Hough made a funny above of our personnel in service.

Jake, that was a nice post.

 

[Sahba]

Strategically, who should get the nod and for what reason?

The Hill's Morning Report — Sponsored by Better Medicare Alliance — Anticipation builds for Trump’s SCOTUS pick

Looks like we will all find out tonight at 5PM DC time.

I think it's 9 EST, interrupting the 'Batchelorette' (what a travesty). Perhaps it's intentional, the low information voters will actually be exposed to a historical Presidential address. lol

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Strategically, who should get the nod and for what reason?

The Hill's Morning Report — Sponsored by Better Medicare Alliance — Anticipation builds for Trump’s SCOTUS pick

Looks like we will all find out tonight at 5PM DC time.

9 PM and you have to watch Hannity. LOL