She just throws her crap at the wall seeing what people will be willing to diverge from the topic that she cannot defend.

__________________
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead - Thomas Paine

A lie doesn't become truth, a wrong doesn't become right, and Evil doesn't become good, just because it is accepted by the majority. - Booker T Washington

I am really not at all certain of that.

After all, he said that he dos not view Robert Bork as having been fit for the job.

__________________
"In his second inaugural address, [Franklin D.] Roosevelt sought 'unimagined power' to enforce the 'proper subordination' of private power to public power. He got it…"—George Will, July 8, 2007

They upheld the Constitution that the left finds to be an impediment to their ambitions. To the left, anything that stands in their way to their Socialist Utopia is to be attacked.

__________________
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead - Thomas Paine

A lie doesn't become truth, a wrong doesn't become right, and Evil doesn't become good, just because it is accepted by the majority. - Booker T Washington

You state this as though it were a proven fact--and not merely an unproven allegation.

But I suppose that if one detests another person enough--because of his judicial philosophy, in this case--the presumption of innocence goes out the window, and is replaced by a presumption of guilt...

__________________
"In his second inaugural address, [Franklin D.] Roosevelt sought 'unimagined power' to enforce the 'proper subordination' of private power to public power. He got it…"—George Will, July 8, 2007

I recently saw a prediction online--it may have been tongue-in-cheek; but it is probably realistic--that the left will soon claim that the Constitution is...well, unconstitutional--since it was written exclusively by white men, and this country was founded upon the institution of slavery...

__________________
"In his second inaugural address, [Franklin D.] Roosevelt sought 'unimagined power' to enforce the 'proper subordination' of private power to public power. He got it…"—George Will, July 8, 2007

Yes. Let's fix it by having some black-robed baboon chosen on the basis of race and sex instead of actual qualifications.

DISCLAIIMER--for all you snowflakes out there, Manitou wishes to remind you that all judges are black-robed baboons to him. So don't tear your hair, your clothes, gnash your teeth, or fart at the moon over my title for them.

The left won't wipe their butts with the Constitution (they don't know what wiping is), but they will allow it trampled underfoot by sheep.

Bork was an originalist just like some on the bench recently (Scalia?)
How was he not qualified?

__________________
The leading cause of death among U.S. police officers in 2021 was covid-19

https://nleomf.org/wp-content/upload...-Final-web.pdf

the trial that lacked all the protections of a trial? even biden said it wasn't fair.
yes as a woman in the workplace I believed her. she had no reason to lie and put herself at the mercy of mostly male questioners.
the things Thomas did to harass her were also standard creep ploys.

__________________
The leading cause of death among U.S. police officers in 2021 was covid-19

https://nleomf.org/wp-content/upload...-Final-web.pdf

Once proven wrong, her response is always a shifted attack, usually a bald strawman. When that fails, we always suffer a post of incomprehensible gibberish that requires either exhausting your brain trying to make sense of it, or choose to ignore it and leave a post without reply (which personally I don't like to do) . . .

The exchanges here in this thread are illuminating; they expose either an inability to maintain continuity of thought or a complete lack of intellectual integrity (or both). To criticize someone for a defect in character or reasoning, and then turn immediately and do what you were decrying, takes a special kind of mindset: .

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeerleader Garland was not SCOTUS worthy, neither was Harriet Miers or Robert Bork.

Quote:

Originally Posted by saltwn says the person in favor of political nominations as long as they agree with his policy views.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pjohns I am really not at all certain of that. After all, he said that he dos not view Robert Bork as having been fit for the job.

Quote:

Originally Posted by saltwn Bork was an originalist just like some on the bench recently (Scalia?) How was he not qualified?

???? My answer that Robert Bork was unsuitable for SCOTUS, does, as @pjohns points out, absolutely eliminate the conclusion her attack is grounded in. If I did blindly support anyone who is aligned with my orginalist / textualist judicial doctrine, (or just my conservative "policy views"), how could I possibly say Bork was unqualified?

She proves in that last post of puzzlement, she recognizes the incongruity of her assessment of me but just pushes on, doing her usual shifted challenge, asking for an answer she has no interest in hearing or understanding. The "" exposes her, she assigns her puzzlement and surprise at my answer to be a defect in my reasoning, not in her lack of understanding or recognizing her projection.

The ignorant arrogance is so boring. She desperately wants to challenge my positions and statements but she has no real knowledge of what's being discussed.

She can't engage in actual debate, all she can express is her disdain and disgust that someone has the audacity to disagree with her. That personal sense of affront is evident in that goofy post #27 . . . She complains about my "insults" that somehow include "Oprah"(?????) and my "presumptive privilege". Never is there any actual defense of her statements / positions o my challenges; her argument is just claiming hurt feelings.

.

__________________