ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
It is all political posturing, she just got confirmed for the DC Circuit last year 53-47. Be honest, you guys would be against any S Ct nominee Biden puts up, the reasons may differ from one candidate to the other, but you still would be against the choice, as would Cruz, McConnell, Hawley, et al. Anyone could see from 100 miles away that the vote is going to end up 51-50, or maybe 51-49 if a Republican breaks ranks, but Jackson is going to get confirmed.

As for me, I preferred Childs from South Carolina, a state court judge who went to public universities, breaking up the Harvard-Yale-Columbia Ivy League cartel.

53-47 again, boy, that one was hard to call, had to pull a Nostradamus there.

As at least one of the Republican Senators said that voted for her, I really would like to see the S Court nominations get away from the hyper partisanship mode that has prevailed for a long time now, although I guess that is a hopeless wish these days
 
Last edited:
Just another day (happens everyday) in the declining morals of the good 'ol U S of A.
Rapidly descending to the pit of hell.....

 
I am just amazed that the usual suspects on the Paddock are against Biden's Supreme Court nominee. Who would have guessed?? And just about fell in the floor in shock to read this AM that McConnell announced he was against her too. Never saw that one coming. It just goes to show you that incredible things happen some days when you least expect it.
For whatever it is worth, I think she is well qualified for the position. I didn't watch all of the confirmation hearings but I didn't see anything that would lead me to vote against her if I were a senator.

I think Biden announcing that he was going to be pick a black woman before announcing her as the nominee was (1) a national embarrassment and (2) personally detrimental to her because it cheapens her resume (which is as good as it gets for that job) and creates the impression that she was chosen because of her skin and genitals and not her many accomplishments.

It is also stupid that liberals won't answer questions as simple as "can you define a woman?" but that is also somewhat a product of the media circus that senate hearings have become where every senator tries to ask a gotcha question to go viral on youtube.
 
Actually, Dion, the first leftist was identified by the apostle John and was later rebuked by Jesus as one who would have been better off had he not been born.

Judas Iscariot typified the classic leftist who pretends to be for the poor but is in reality a thief:

John 12

Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was, which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead.

2 There they made him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him.

3 Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment.

4 Then saith one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, which should betray him,

5 Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor?

6 This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein.
 
Just another day (happens everyday) in the declining morals of the good 'ol U S of A.
Rapidly descending to the pit of hell.....

The west is every bit the evil that the rest of the world has come to believe. It's half of us but we absolutely deserve the reputation of the "Great Satan" they have bestowed upon us. Didn't think that before but post Obama era has been radical display of leftist sickness on this world.
 
Cool, so pedophilia is the Republican outrage of the month. Happy to hear you’ve received your marching orders from above. We’ll all be sure to add it to the list . . . Hillary’s emails . . . BLM . . . Hunter’s laptop . . . Dominion voting machines . . . Mr. Potato Head/Aunt Jemima/Dr. Seuss . . . Colin Kaepernick . . . CRT . . . January 6 . . . mask/vaccine mandates . . . transgender athletes . . . etc. Its great the higher-ups schedule for you exactly what to be pissed off about.
^^^^^^ Objects to the pedophilia controversy = pedophile
 
It is also stupid that liberals won't answer questions as simple as "can you define a woman?" but that is also somewhat a product of the media circus that senate hearings have become where every senator tries to ask a gotcha question to go viral on youtube.

We will just have to agree to disagree with the picking of a black woman, but you are correct about the media circus it has all become. Twenty years ago, nominations were approved 90-10, or 85-15 (for the most part, I well remember Robert Bork).

As an aside, lots of people think that the S Ct is just entirely political, but Chief Justice Roberts spoke just a few years ago at the UK law school and to rebut that perception pointed out that 45% of all opinions were unanimous. As usual, the talking heads on Fox/OAN/CNBC/CNN and on social media gaslight the public with the relative handful that are controversial, when in actuality year in and year out, the Court carries on without a lot of rancor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hank Camacho
The group who thinks you're a Nazi for having an America first mentality and not being filled with white guilt and labels you a white supremacist for listening to a conservative lecture... does not like being called a groomer or pedophile despite their obsession with talking to your little kid about gay sex, trans mental illness, and masturbation and freaking out if you try to stop them from doing it behind a parent's back.

I'm pretty comfortable in calling them a groomer, pedo, or pedo apologist when you seriously are against a parent's right to know what their kid is being taught and to not talk about your alphabet cult to my kid who still believes in Santa Claus.
 
Actually, Dion, the first leftist was identified by the apostle John and was later rebuked by Jesus as one who would have been better off had he not been born.

Judas Iscariot typified the classic leftist who pretends to be for the poor but is in reality a thief:

John 12

Then Jesus six days before the passover came to Bethany, where Lazarus was, which had been dead, whom he raised from the dead.

2 There they made him a supper; and Martha served: but Lazarus was one of them that sat at the table with him.

3 Then took Mary a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped his feet with her hair: and the house was filled with the odour of the ointment.

4 Then saith one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, which should betray him,

5 Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and given to the poor?

6 This he said, not that he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare what was put therein.
I dont see anywhere that Jesus said give your things to a central planner and let them divide it up, when they talk about him redistributing wealth. Amd he never said a 3rd party should forceably take from you to give to others. But it is important to note this is how socialists see themselves as righteous and full of caring.

But when I look at passages, it seems Jesus while caring for the poor was also about the rich persons salvation...he never said you have to give this much or that.

Here:
Someone in the crowd said to him, “Teacher, tell my brother to divide the family inheritance with me.” But he said to him, “Friend, who set me to be a judge or arbitrator over you?” And he said to them, “Take care! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of possessions” (Luke 12:13–15).

He never said distribution...he just warned against greed.
 
Well if you announce that you're going to nominate a black woman, I would hope that she could at least provide a definition of what a woman is during her confirmation hearing.
 
We will just have to agree to disagree with the picking of a black woman, but you are correct about the media circus it has all become. Twenty years ago, nominations were approved 90-10, or 85-15 (for the most part, I well remember Robert Bork).
I was but a wee lad when Bork was nominated so I have zero memory of it, just what I've read after. After he went down Scalia was nominated and was approved unanimously. I ask in all seriousness because I honestly don't know, if Scalia was a unanimous approval, wtf was Bork?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sawnee Cat
Cool, so pedophilia is the Republican outrage of the month. Happy to hear you’ve received your marching orders from above. We’ll all be sure to add it to the list . . . Hillary’s emails . . . BLM . . . Hunter’s laptop . . . Dominion voting machines . . . Mr. Potato Head/Aunt Jemima/Dr. Seuss . . . Colin Kaepernick . . . CRT . . . January 6 . . . mask/vaccine mandates . . . transgender athletes . . . etc. Its great the higher-ups schedule for you exactly what to be pissed off about.
Again, if pedophilia is not your outrage of the month EVERY month, you are self-owning at unheard levels. Maybe you all really are supportive of grooming after all.
 
Florida keeps winning!

Newsflash Newsom and California leftists, NO ONE WANTS YOU IN THEIR STATE! Same for New Yorkers. Stay in the sewer you created.

But to your point, Austin, it's amazing how the left's brains and hypocrisy always works. Their ideology and obsession with identity politics end up conflicting. "OMG! We must go scorched earth over this Christian baker!" "WOMEN'S RIGHTS!" "GAY RIGHTS!" Crickets when it comes to anything that can be critical of a Muslim or someone who isn't a white Christian.
 
I dont see anywhere that Jesus said give your things to a central planner and let them divide it up, when they talk about him redistributing wealth. Amd he never said a 3rd party should forceably take from you to give to others. But it is important to note this is how socialists see themselves as righteous and full of caring.

But when I look at passages, it seems Jesus while caring for the poor was also about the rich persons salvation...he never said you have to give this much or that.

Here:
Someone in the crowd said to him, “Teacher, tell my brother to divide the family inheritance with me.” But he said to him, “Friend, who set me to be a judge or arbitrator over you?” And he said to them, “Take care! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of possessions” (Luke 12:13–15).

He never said distribution...he just warned against greed.
Nobody's greedier than lefties. They have to be - they have a hole in their soul and they use money and power to fill it instead of God.
 

/
Question--- what would happen at your job if you played a video of a cartoon dick or sex? Tell me there wouldn't be a claim of sexual harassment and HR involved. But somehow doing this to kids is okay.
Is that actually real? And what the hell is Amaze.org? I’m afraid to search it.
 
I dont see anywhere that Jesus said give your things to a central planner and let them divide it up, when they talk about him redistributing wealth. Amd he never said a 3rd party should forceably take from you to give to others. But it is important to note this is how socialists see themselves as righteous and full of caring.

But when I look at passages, it seems Jesus while caring for the poor was also about the rich persons salvation...he never said you have to give this much or that.

Here:
Someone in the crowd said to him, “Teacher, tell my brother to divide the family inheritance with me.” But he said to him, “Friend, who set me to be a judge or arbitrator over you?” And he said to them, “Take care! Be on your guard against all kinds of greed; for one’s life does not consist in the abundance of possessions” (Luke 12:13–15).

He never said distribution...he just warned against greed.
“Whoever has two coats must share with anyone who has none; and whoever has food must do likewise.” Luke 3:10-11

“And all who believed were together and had all things in common. And they were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need. And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they received their food with glad and generous hearts” Acts 2:44-46

“How hard it is for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God! Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God” Luke 18:18–25

“Come now, you rich, weep and howl for the miseries that are coming upon you. Your riches have rotted and your garments are moth-eaten. Your gold and silver have corroded, and their corrosion will be evidence against you and will eat your flesh like fire. You have laid up treasure in the last days. Behold, the wages of the laborers who mowed your fields, which you kept back by fraud, are crying out against you, and the cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of hosts. You have lived on the earth in luxury and in self-indulgence. You have fattened your hearts in a day of slaughter.” James 5:1-6


Or some Old Testament if you have a more Hebrew bent:

“The rich rule over the poor, and the borrower is the slave of the lender.” Proverbs 22:7

“A faithful man will abound with blessings, but whoever hastens to be rich will not go unpunished.” Proverbs 28:20

“One gives freely, yet grows all the richer; another withholds what he should give, and only suffers want. Whoever brings blessing will be enriched, and one who waters will himself be watered.” Proverbs 11:24-25


I’ll close with many personal favorite, as it directly addresses your entire Republican premise:

“If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that?” James 2:15-16
 
As if these people shouldn’t be locked up along with groomer Democrat teachers.

“Hey look there are also pedo Republicans” is not the hammer move you maybe think it is. Lol good grief.
So Sex Trafficking is on par with the unicorn of teaching sex in a classroom because that's also evil. How much mental gymnastics is required for this thinking?
 
“Whoever has two coats must share with anyone who has none; and whoever has food must do likewise.” Luke 3:10-11

“And all who believed were together and had all things in common. And they were selling their possessions and belongings and distributing the proceeds to all, as any had need. And day by day, attending the temple together and breaking bread in their homes, they received their food with glad and generous hearts” Acts 2:44-46

“How hard it is for those who have wealth to enter the kingdom of God! Indeed, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God” Luke 18:18–25

“Come now, you rich, weep and howl for the miseries that are coming upon you. Your riches have rotted and your garments are moth-eaten. Your gold and silver have corroded, and their corrosion will be evidence against you and will eat your flesh like fire. You have laid up treasure in the last days. Behold, the wages of the laborers who mowed your fields, which you kept back by fraud, are crying out against you, and the cries of the harvesters have reached the ears of the Lord of hosts. You have lived on the earth in luxury and in self-indulgence. You have fattened your hearts in a day of slaughter.” James 5:1-6


Or some Old Testament if you have a more Hebrew bent:

“The rich rule over the poor, and the borrower is the slave of the lender.” Proverbs 22:7

“A faithful man will abound with blessings, but whoever hastens to be rich will not go unpunished.” Proverbs 28:20

“One gives freely, yet grows all the richer; another withholds what he should give, and only suffers want. Whoever brings blessing will be enriched, and one who waters will himself be watered.” Proverbs 11:24-25


I’ll close with many personal favorite, as it directly addresses your entire Republican premise:

“If a brother or sister is poorly clothed and lacking in daily food, and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, be warmed and filled,” without giving them the things needed for the body, what good is that?” James 2:15-16
Again...where does it say you must forceably give your things to a 3rd party of will then determine how to distribute it. It of course says this no where. It also says nothing about making it law that portions of your things are taken thru tax.

What you're sharing here tho seems to explain the opposite of bernie tho...who refuses to give to charity.
 
Again...where does it say you must forceably give your things to a 3rd party of will then determine how to distribute it. It of course says this no where. It also says nothing about making it law that portions of your things are taken thru tax.

What you're sharing here tho seems to explain the opposite of bernie tho...who refuses to give to charity.
That's exactly what those say people should do, just in moral, not legal, language. He wasn't an accountant writing tax code.
 
Again...where does it say you must forceably give your things to a 3rd party of will then determine how to distribute it. It of course says this no where. It also says nothing about making it law that portions of your things are taken thru tax.

What you're sharing here tho seems to explain the opposite of bernie tho...who refuses to give to charity.

It's not possible for them to understand the meaning of scripture.
 
I was but a wee lad when Bork was nominated so I have zero memory of it, just what I've read after. After he went down Scalia was nominated and was approved unanimously. I ask in all seriousness because I honestly don't know, if Scalia was a unanimous approval, wtf was Bork?
He did not support abortion and said it without beating around the bush. Judge Bork answered every question without hesitation and without apologizing. He was not argumentative and did not raise his voice. He was honest about his Judicial philosophy. That was the nail in his coffin.

Ted Kennedy and his baby killers won the day but they rejected the most brilliant judicial mind of the last century. I watched every second of it and when he was rejected I went down to the Voters Registraion office and officially changed my registration from Democrat to Republican. Ted Kennedy and Biden were horses asses in that hearing. The entire Democrat Party as well
 
Ok I appreciate that. Again 100% don't remember anything, but what did Scalia say during his hearings?

I'm only asking because Scalia (along with Clarence Thomas) are pretty much 100% reliable votes on the conservative side of every issue. Which is fine (and people that call Clarence Thomas an Uncle Tom are disgusting). Did Scalia hint that he was ok with abortion?
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT