Why Republicans keep talking about Amy Coney Barrett’s 7 kids

Basically, as a buffer to counter the legitimate criticism for her far rightwing views that'll lead to Republicans obstruct justice and enact their radical will on the country...

seems to me its democrats talking about them not repubes,,,

Then you didn't watch the hearings. ACB's children were the ONLY thing Republicans talked about. They were marched into the hearing room, in a line from oldest to youngest. Senators remarked on how "well behaved" they were. What a devoted mother she is, hurrying home from court in time to always be there for their soccers games, and on and on. You would have thought she was being nominated as "Mother of the Year" and not for a seat on the Supreme Court.

But ACB isn't applying for the position of Mom of the years, although it's obvious that she is a great Mom, and her family seems lovely. I don't ever remember any other nominee for the SC having his or her family publically paraded before the Senate in this fashion or Senators giving speeches about what a great parent they are. Why aren't they talking about what a great judge she is? Her qualifications or her experience. I watched that hearing all day, and at the end of the day, the only thing I knew about ACB is that she has a lot of kids, one of whom is Downs Syndrome and two of whom are racial minorities.

I would also like to add that much was made of her being a superwoman and role model to millions of young women everywhere for what women can achieve, to which I would say "hogwash". ACB is a woman of wealth and privilege who can afford to hire all the help she needs.

I had a full time housekeeper, who got my kids off to school in the morning, and picked them up after school. When I came home with a briefcase full of work, my house was tidy, my table was set and our dinner was in the oven. The cleaning lady came in Saturday morning and did the floors and bathrooms. She has a lot more "help" than I have, and with 7 kids, one of the DS, she needs it. I have a friend who owns her own paralegal business with 3 full time employees, manages her family's real estate investment trust, is the President of her son's school PTA, and throws elegant events. She has a full time live in housekeeper/nanny who she provides with a car.

I don't begrudge ACB her wealth or her privilege but none of us could do be superwomen without a lot of "help".
 
Trump will look like a fool if any of the Republicans vote against his nominee!

What ill be more interesting is if some of the so called moderate democrats vote for her.

Joe Manchin has shown integrity in the past.

Krysten Sinema is also a free thinker.
i call them "the gettables", the Dems you can get

Dianne Feinstein is another one.

We'll see.

If Manchin votes against her, it will be interesting to see how he fares.
Ben Sasse might vote against, see my thread in current events


Murkowski and Collins have already said they will vote against it.
 
Basically, as a buffer to counter the legitimate criticism for her far rightwing views that'll lead to Republicans obstruct justice and enact their radical will on the country...

seems to me its democrats talking about them not repubes,,,

Then you didn't watch the hearings. ACB's children were the ONLY thing Republicans talked about. They were marched into the hearing room, in a line from oldest to youngest. Senators remarked on how "well behaved" they were. What a devoted mother she is, hurrying home from court in time to always be there for their soccers games, and on and on. You would have thought she was being nominated as "Mother of the Year" and not for a seat on the Supreme Court.

But ACB isn't applying for the position of Mom of the years, although it's obvious that she is a great Mom, and her family seems lovely. I don't ever remember any other nominee for the SC having his or her family publically paraded before the Senate in this fashion or Senators giving speeches about what a great parent they are. Why aren't they talking about what a great judge she is? Her qualifications or her experience. I watched that hearing all day, and at the end of the day, the only thing I knew about ACB is that she has a lot of kids, one of whom is Downs Syndrome and two of whom are racial minorities.

I would also like to add that much was made of her being a superwoman and role model to millions of young women everywhere for what women can achieve, to which I would say "hogwash". ACB is a woman of wealth and privilege who can afford to hire all the help she needs.

I had a full time housekeeper, who got my kids off to school in the morning, and picked them up after school. When I came home with a briefcase full of work, my house was tidy, my table was set and our dinner was in the oven. The cleaning lady came in Saturday morning and did the floors and bathrooms. She has a lot more "help" than I have, and with 7 kids, one of the DS, she needs it. I have a friend who owns her own paralegal business with 3 full time employees, manages her family's real estate investment trust, is the President of her son's school PTA, and throws elegant events. She has a full time live in housekeeper/nanny who she provides with a car.

I don't begrudge ACB her wealth or her privilege but none of us could do be superwomen without a lot of "help".
the bigger question is why did the dems ignore them????

its almost like they knew they couldnt use them for political gain because some were black,,,
 
Basically, as a buffer to counter the legitimate criticism for her far rightwing views that'll lead to Republicans obstruct justice and enact their radical will on the country...

Damn tRumplings breed like lemmings. Follow like them too.
Biden was running foreign policy with his son and Biden's family becoming massive wealthy. Now we know why the Ukraine was being talked about and Biden was involved. Corruption! Psychopath! It looks Biden was running rings around Obama. Or maybe Obama was in on it.
 
Trump will look like a fool if any of the Republicans vote against his nominee!

What ill be more interesting is if some of the so called moderate democrats vote for her.

Joe Manchin has shown integrity in the past.

Krysten Sinema is also a free thinker.
i call them "the gettables", the Dems you can get

Dianne Feinstein is another one.

We'll see.

If Manchin votes against her, it will be interesting to see how he fares.
Ben Sasse might vote against, see my thread in current events


Murkowski and Collins have already said they will vote against it.

Dumbass...

They said they would vote against moving it forward.

Even Murkowski said that if it did proceed, she'd vote to confirm.
 
Basically, as a buffer to counter the legitimate criticism for her far rightwing views that'll lead to Republicans obstruct justice and enact their radical will on the country...

seems to me its democrats talking about them not repubes,,,

Then you didn't watch the hearings. ACB's children were the ONLY thing Republicans talked about. They were marched into the hearing room, in a line from oldest to youngest. Senators remarked on how "well behaved" they were. What a devoted mother she is, hurrying home from court in time to always be there for their soccers games, and on and on. You would have thought she was being nominated as "Mother of the Year" and not for a seat on the Supreme Court.

But ACB isn't applying for the position of Mom of the years, although it's obvious that she is a great Mom, and her family seems lovely. I don't ever remember any other nominee for the SC having his or her family publically paraded before the Senate in this fashion or Senators giving speeches about what a great parent they are. Why aren't they talking about what a great judge she is? Her qualifications or her experience. I watched that hearing all day, and at the end of the day, the only thing I knew about ACB is that she has a lot of kids, one of whom is Downs Syndrome and two of whom are racial minorities.

I would also like to add that much was made of her being a superwoman and role model to millions of young women everywhere for what women can achieve, to which I would say "hogwash". ACB is a woman of wealth and privilege who can afford to hire all the help she needs.

I had a full time housekeeper, who got my kids off to school in the morning, and picked them up after school. When I came home with a briefcase full of work, my house was tidy, my table was set and our dinner was in the oven. The cleaning lady came in Saturday morning and did the floors and bathrooms. She has a lot more "help" than I have, and with 7 kids, one of the DS, she needs it. I have a friend who owns her own paralegal business with 3 full time employees, manages her family's real estate investment trust, is the President of her son's school PTA, and throws elegant events. She has a full time live in housekeeper/nanny who she provides with a car.

I don't begrudge ACB her wealth or her privilege but none of us could do be superwomen without a lot of "help".
the bigger question is why did the dems ignore them????

its almost like they knew they couldnt use them for political gain because some were black,,,

As a professional woman, it was really off-putting that Republicans focussed on her family and not on the Judge's qualifications and record. Offensive even. They have never done anything remotely like this for any nomination in my lifetime, and they certainly didn't do it for Justices Ginsberg, Kagan or Sotomayer.

The sheer number of Republican Senators focussing on ACB's family over her qualifications and record, was so odd, that it made me wonder why they were doing this. Why weren't they talking about her great decisions, or her record. When I learned more about the Federalist Society, being funded by dark money to put talented young right wing law students on a glide path to SC, it all started to make sense.

They don't want to talk about who her politics, her record, or how she came to be nominated, and why the big push to get this woman onto the court before the election, even to the point of being willing to lose the Senate to get her confirmed.
 
did you know?

3 Supreme Court justices for 1 term is a RECORD

Trump is a lucky bastard!
 
Barrett is toying with them. the Dems are the kids. these are evil people too, remember Kavanaugh?
 
Basically, as a buffer to counter the legitimate criticism for her far rightwing views that'll lead to Republicans obstruct justice and enact their radical will on the country...



Do you ever read what you typed before hitting the post button or are you so deep in the bong to care? Tell the class how the highest court in the land can obstruct justice.

.
 
Do you ever read what you typed before hitting the post button or are you so deep in the bong to care? Tell the class how the highest court in the land can obstruct justice.

.
Why are you and your ilk so excited about having this judge on the Supreme Court?
 
What "far right wing views" might those be? Try to be specific.

ACB has been a darling of the Federalist society since she was in law school. She was one of the young Republican lawyers working for the Republican Party's theft of the 2000 election. She refused to confirm any belief in "predecents' that she disagrees with - like Roe v. Wade, or gay marriage, or other things the rabid right doesn't like.

I could not help but note that she considered Brown v. Board of Education as "precedent", but not Roe v. Wade. ACB has tried to obfuscate her politics and radical views from the American public in this hearing, but the cases which she refuses to acknowledge as "precedent" include a womans right to use birth control in her own home, were chilling indeed. She failed to notify the Senate of a number of ads she has endorsed regarding abortion, gay marriage, and the ACA. She has given speeches on multiple occasions to organizations with an avowed purpose of overturning gay marriage.

She failed to notify the Senate of these positions in her initial confirmation documents, and had to "amend" her documentation later. And although she admitted in her earlier confirmation hearing that she was aware of their anti-gay bias by the time she spoke to this organization, this week she said she was unaware of any anti-gay bias on the part of this organization today. So she not only "forgot" to tell the senate about them, she actually lied about these connections this week.

The Federalist Society has been working for generations, to pack the Federal courts with radically right wing justices, who are overwhelmingly white and male. They arrange the "right" kinds of clerkships for these students right out of law school, to put them on track for high court nominations. ACB has been on their radar as a good little soldier for the cause, since she was in law school.

The Federatist Society has used dark money to advance these nominations. They've run ads in support PR campaigns for their favoured nominees including Kavenaugh and ACB. 48 of the 52 federal appeals court judges appointed by Donald Trump, were on the Federalist Society list.


Kagan and Sotomayor both amended their initial submissions, that not unusual. I bet you can't remember everything you've done over the last 30 years.

.
 
Basically, as a buffer to counter the legitimate criticism for her far rightwing views that'll lead to Republicans obstruct justice and enact their radical will on the country...


The woman is eminently qualified, get over yourself.

define eminently qualified

the handmaiden doesn't seem very qualified to me, she seems like a housewife with a love for capital


The left wing ABA says you're full of shit.

.
 
Basically, as a buffer to counter the legitimate criticism for her far rightwing views that'll lead to Republicans obstruct justice and enact their radical will on the country...

Correct, a red herring.
Is she qualified?

Define "qualified". Anyone who has graduated law school and has practiced before the bar, is technically "qualified". ACB has been "groomed" by the Federalist Society so that her qualifications and background are impeccable and unquestionable. To me, if you don't accept "precedent", you're not "qualified".

If you have to hide, cover up and lie about your beliefs, as she did this week, you are definitely not qualified, and just based on the lies she told in the hearing, would disqualify her in my view. The first lie out of her mouth, makes her entirely unsuitable.

If she can't tell the truth in her confirmation hearing, how can you trust her to be telling you the truth about what she would do as a judge, or what her views are?


So you think Dread Scott should still be the law in the US? It was a precedent at one time.

.
 
Trump will look like a fool if any of the Republicans vote against his nominee!

What ill be more interesting is if some of the so called moderate democrats vote for her.

Joe Manchin has shown integrity in the past.

Krysten Sinema is also a free thinker.
i call them "the gettables", the Dems you can get

Dianne Feinstein is another one.

We'll see.

If Manchin votes against her, it will be interesting to see how he fares.


He said he won't, even though he voted to confirm her last time.

.
 

Forum List

Back
Top