If Barrett was a Dem nominee, left would lose their minds if Pubs treated her the way Dems did during the hearing

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
54,237
Reaction score
11,514
Points
2,040
No rules were broken in either case.
So no rules will be broken when the court is expanded to 13 and we put on ultra-liberals...
Do that and you can see when the next civil war will start.

And your side will lose.

Of course you will go into hiding like the cowardly cuck you are.
Another Keyboard Kowboy who's so uneducated about the last one, you're willing to start the next one.
Come down south and take our guns...........LMAO........we WILL WOKE YOUR ASS UP..........LOL
Don’t have to take them
Just make them illegal and prosecute you if you get caught selling one or shooting it in public
Stupid shit like this is where the war actually breaks out. So you pack the SC and get a law like that passed and you expect the states to do what? Just put up with it? Or is it more likely they tell you democrats to suck a dick and dare you to come enforce your law? You’ve now created a no win for yourselves. You either come in and start the confiscations, and the shooting war. Or you verify that the federal government and their new expanded court is a farce that actually has no power and can be ignored completely.
Believe it or not

States signed up to the Constitution
And when you start negating amendments in the Constitution they can and will leave that compact.
You guys said the same thing in 1860

How did that work out for you?
Who on your side is the Lincoln that can motivate lefties enough to prevent it by force, which is what happened.

The Civil War didn't end the secession debate, it just laid the ground rule that if you leave and the other side doesn't want you to, it comes down to a fight.

What happens when a few States leave and either the rest of the country is OK with it, or can't muster the will to force the issue?
We settled the issue of States leaving in 1865

It remains a Conservative fantasy and empty threat
It was settled only if the rest of the country isn't OK with it AND can muster the force to prevent it from happening.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
128,455
Reaction score
13,715
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
No, they are not because of their federal ties, as well as their limited recruitment and numbers.

It is a right, criminals lose other rights at the same time they lose their RKBA, like voting rights, and the right to not be in prison. Those are lost after due process, a trial by jury of their peers, and conviction.

WMD's and artillery are not "arms"
Point was, they had to organize a national guard because a "militia" was impractical. This is why the Second Needs to be reconsidered... it's no longer relevant.
 

Zorro!

Gold Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2019
Messages
9,567
Reaction score
2,862
Points
265
The DNC is full of assholes...............ass..........fitting symbol of the DNC...........

They can't go full postal on her because of the election around the corner and Hunter pics showing daddy getting money for influence and crap..........

Not to worry.......Barrett is WHOOPING THEIR ASSES.
Heartwarming: Amy Coney Barrett Just Adopted A Local Troubled Youngster Named Hunter.

1603156777828.png

According to sources, Supreme Court nominee Amy Coney Barrett has adopted her 8th child, a troubled local youngster named Hunter. In a touching story of love triumphing over all odds, the Barrett family fought for custody of Hunter and welcomed him into their family for the first time this week.

"This family has love to spare," said Judge Barrett. "We just knew we had another child out there somewhere. We were told by the agency that young Hunter had his fair share of issues, but we knew we would be up to the challenge."

According to friends of the family, Hunter is slowly adjusting to his new home and family. He has kicked an old drug habit and is now attending church with the rest of the family. He has also renounced his old ways and paid back a Ukrainian gas company fourfold.

"We love having Hunter with us!" said the leader of the small church group Hunter attends every week. "Whenever we share testimonies, he puts our testimonies to shame with stories of drugs, corruption, and horrific scandal, unlike anything we've heard. Awesome!"

Judge Barrett is still struggling to teach Hunter the value of hard work. He is being paid a few dollars to do chores around the house when he's used to being paid $50,000 per month for nothing.

"We're still working on it," she said.
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
54,237
Reaction score
11,514
Points
2,040
No, they are not because of their federal ties, as well as their limited recruitment and numbers.

It is a right, criminals lose other rights at the same time they lose their RKBA, like voting rights, and the right to not be in prison. Those are lost after due process, a trial by jury of their peers, and conviction.

WMD's and artillery are not "arms"
Point was, they had to organize a national guard because a "militia" was impractical. This is why the Second Needs to be reconsidered... it's no longer relevant.
The 2nd is relevant as every person has the right to defend themselves with a tool adequate for the job.

If you want to be a disarmed serf move to Europe.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
128,455
Reaction score
13,715
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
The 2nd is relevant as every person has the right to defend themselves with a tool adequate for the job.

If you want to be a disarmed serf move to Europe.
Uh, guy, most of us don't own guns, and frankly, we are all a little tired of being held hostage to you guys compensating for your tiny peckers.

There are two reasons why you guys say you need guns. To defend yourself from Criminals and to defend yourself against government.

They are both kind of retarded.

A gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a bad guy.

As for fighting the government... They have tanks, cannons, jet fighters, etc. You aren't going to beat them.

So when the rest of us have to send our kids to school with a bullet proof backpack, engage in regular "Active Shooter Drills", have metal detectors, security guards, magnetic lock doors at our workplaces, etc, etc,... because you guys want to feel a false sense of security, some of us have to question why.
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
54,237
Reaction score
11,514
Points
2,040
The 2nd is relevant as every person has the right to defend themselves with a tool adequate for the job.

If you want to be a disarmed serf move to Europe.
Uh, guy, most of us don't own guns, and frankly, we are all a little tired of being held hostage to you guys compensating for your tiny peckers.

There are two reasons why you guys say you need guns. To defend yourself from Criminals and to defend yourself against government.

They are both kind of retarded.

A gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a bad guy.

As for fighting the government... They have tanks, cannons, jet fighters, etc. You aren't going to beat them.

So when the rest of us have to send our kids to school with a bullet proof backpack, engage in regular "Active Shooter Drills", have metal detectors, security guards, magnetic lock doors at our workplaces, etc, etc,... because you guys want to feel a false sense of security, some of us have to question why.
Again with that debunked study, you are fucking retarded every time you bring it up.

Most people don't use their 4th amendment rights, ever, doesn't mean they want to get rid of them.

Move to a country of cucks like yourself if you are afraid of guns, you mewly SJW soi boi.
 

basquebromance

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 26, 2015
Messages
61,783
Reaction score
9,157
Points
2,070
Barrett is what i call a "footnote judge", caught up in the small details of law rather than what really matters to people
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
128,455
Reaction score
13,715
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
Again with that debunked study, you are fucking retarded every time you bring it up.

Most people don't use their 4th amendment rights, ever, doesn't mean they want to get rid of them.

Move to a country of cucks like yourself if you are afraid of guns, you mewly SJW soi boi.
I was in the army for 11 years. I have no problem with guns.

I have a problem with people like you who talk about overthrowing the government and shooting darkies...
 

TheParser

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2017
Messages
3,835
Reaction score
1,990
Points
940
Just heard that the Honorable Charles Schumer has announced that the Democratic members of the Senate judiciary committee will boycott the confirmation hearing.

I believe that it is their right to do so.

In the very likely event that the Dems take the Senate on November 3, I hope that the Republicans in turn will boycott the whole Senate, since the end of the filibuster will make the Republicans totally incapable of playing any role in fashioning legislation.

I want the whole nation & world to see how the Dems will have turned the American government into a dictatorship.
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
54,237
Reaction score
11,514
Points
2,040
Again with that debunked study, you are fucking retarded every time you bring it up.

Most people don't use their 4th amendment rights, ever, doesn't mean they want to get rid of them.

Move to a country of cucks like yourself if you are afraid of guns, you mewly SJW soi boi.
I was in the army for 11 years. I have no problem with guns.

I have a problem with people like you who talk about overthrowing the government and shooting darkies...
You have plenty of problems with guns, more to the point, you don't trust your fellow law abiding citizens with them.

Yet you don't trust cops with them.

So I guess you only trust criminals with them, you soi boi old fart.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
128,455
Reaction score
13,715
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
You have plenty of problems with guns, more to the point, you don't trust your fellow law abiding citizens with them.
Most gun deaths are law abiding citizens someone should have questioned having a gun. The reality- most gun deaths are a combination of suicides, domestic violence and accidents. If we were just down to the murders commited by so-called "Criminals", our death rate would be containable.

Yet you don't trust cops with them.
One of out sixteen homicides in this country is a cop killing a citizen... I think concern is kind of warranted. 1000 Americans are killed every year by police

So I guess you only trust criminals with them, you soi boi old fart.
I've often said, the best argument for gun control is letting a gun nut wank off about all the people he wants to shoot.
 

martybegan

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2010
Messages
54,237
Reaction score
11,514
Points
2,040
You have plenty of problems with guns, more to the point, you don't trust your fellow law abiding citizens with them.
Most gun deaths are law abiding citizens someone should have questioned having a gun. The reality- most gun deaths are a combination of suicides, domestic violence and accidents. If we were just down to the murders commited by so-called "Criminals", our death rate would be containable.

Yet you don't trust cops with them.
One of out sixteen homicides in this country is a cop killing a citizen... I think concern is kind of warranted. 1000 Americans are killed every year by police

So I guess you only trust criminals with them, you soi boi old fart.
I've often said, the best argument for gun control is letting a gun nut wank off about all the people he wants to shoot.
Suicides, and that's them just choosing the easiest method, not having a gun won't stop them. Most other gun crime is criminal on criminal.

One out of sixteen is a useless number is 99% of them are justified by the stupidity of the criminals resisting the police.
 

JoeB131

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2011
Messages
128,455
Reaction score
13,715
Points
2,220
Location
Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
Suicides, and that's them just choosing the easiest method, not having a gun won't stop them. Most other gun crime is criminal on criminal.

One out of sixteen is a useless number is 99% of them are justified by the stupidity of the criminals resisting the police.
Yet, oddly cops in the UK kill only a handful of people a year... Hmmmm...

Speaking of the UK, when they UK banned coal gas (used in suicides by sticking your head in an oven) with natural gas, the suicide rate in the UK went down.

Yes, you eliminate a method of suicide, the suicide rate goes down.
 

kaz

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
62,707
Reaction score
12,038
Points
2,190
Location
Kazmania
The Democrats were absolutely vicious and disgusting and rude and mansplaining and accusatory and just awful to Barrett.

If the parties were flipped, the M5M would have lost their Goddamn minds and would have called the Republicans every name in the book.

But she is conservative, and she is Catholic....so ots ok to treat her like shit.
Oh hell yeah, the left would lose it
 

kaz

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
62,707
Reaction score
12,038
Points
2,190
Location
Kazmania
So does this mean we need to eliminate rope, sky scrapers, etc... ?
Asking for a friend
Naw, man, if you want to off yourself, no one will want to stop you.

We can do very fine without guns... or maybe just limit who can own them... like any sensible country does.
Yes, you want only the cops you claim are murdering black people to have guns. You've mentioned that.

Note you never did say how you were going to take guns from criminals. So far you've only tried to disarm victims
 

Dogbiscuit

Diamond Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2020
Messages
1,652
Reaction score
2,122
Points
1,903
So does this mean we need to eliminate rope, sky scrapers, etc... ?
Asking for a friend
Naw, man, if you want to off yourself, no one will want to stop you.

We can do very fine without guns... or maybe just limit who can own them... like any sensible country does.
Have you considered moving oversees ?
 

kaz

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2010
Messages
62,707
Reaction score
12,038
Points
2,190
Location
Kazmania
Dems treated Barrett better than Republicans treated Garland
Nobody gives a flying fuck about Garland. His nomination went as far as it could. A nice cordial no thanks.

Can you imagine the left today if Sotomayor was asked if she ever sexually assaulted someone? Holy shit you’d lose your fucking minds. And you’re the party of rape.
The ghost of Merrick Garland hangs over Republicans. republicans know what they did and now just want it to go away.

Let’s just make up and pretend it didnt happen.

But that act and the hypocrisy of rushing through the Barrett nomination has permanently burned all bridges between the parties.

Dems will not forget.
The Democrats were absolutely vicious and disgusting and rude and mansplaining and accusatory and just awful to Barrett.

If the parties were flipped, the M5M would have lost their Goddamn minds and would have called the Republicans every name in the book.

But she is conservative, and she is Catholic....so ots ok to treat her like shit.
Those lyin cheatin scum bastard dems wouldn't even give her a hearing. SO UNFAIR#MAGA
How is not giving Garland a hearing "cheating"?

what procedures or laws were broken?
No laws

A sitting President was denied the chance to fill a Supreme Court vacancy for the first time.
It caused bad blood and a rift between the parties that will not be easily settled


There are also no laws against adding seats to the courts or ending the Senate filibuster.

We shall see how Dems react to the Republican power play.
Fake news. The President doesn't get to "fill" a SCOTUS vacancy. They only get to make a nomination, which Obama did.

You really don't understand our system of government, do you?
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top