Do you support the Nomination of Judge Barrett to the Supreme Court

Politics
41

It will, until the election year.

42

The election year stipulation is ridiculous. It was in 2016 as it is in 2020.

43

That’s what will happen. If the Senate is opposite party, they won’t fill a seat even if it comes open on 1 Jan.

44

I sure hope we don’t get to that but it does look increasingly so.

45

Logical end point.

46

Yes. She’s imminently qualified. Period.

She will write and join opinions I disagree with, but she will do it really, really well, and with sound legal reasoning, like Scalia. You have to respect that level of intellect. Or, diminish it at your own peril.

I look forward to reading her first few opinions. They will be well done.

And the tit for tat filibuster threats must stop somewhere. The constitution doesn’t require it but effective government does. Let’s stop them here.

2 Likes
47

Clarence Thomas.

Next one to go imho.

Allan

48

That will bring the court to a more rational 5-4 split.

Allan

49

His name is not “Clancey”.

And what is your opinion based on?

50

There is nothing “rational” or “irrational” about the split, no matter what it is.

51

That is what happens when you decided that you are in a religious war for your country. These people are crazy and should be sidelined to the trash bin of history, but they make up too much of the country.

We’ve been in a war that no one had declared. It’s time to fight back.

52

No hearings today? Guess we get a break from all the whiny dem senators. :+1:t2: :grin:

2 Likes
53

It’s okay that is my nickname for him, if trump can give out nicknames so can I.

It’s my opinion that the state of his health is not good.

Allan

54

Oh sure there is. A rational split would be 5 appointees from one party, 4 from another.

6-3 is irrational, in my opinion, no quotation marks needed.

Allan