I am an agnostic, and no, the U.S. doesn’t need or want an atheist in charge, those peoples elevators don’t reach the top floor.
Actually while I said atheist, I didn’t mean to exclude agnostics (as I am one as well).
And i gave you the reason, it’s right there in parenthesis in my post.
That you believe that lie is not something you should be proud of.
There are two types of religious people who should never ever hold the office of President, agnostic is one and preacher (or whatever the pc term currently in use) is the other.
I did…was a kid and watched with great disgust. I even remember Ted Kennedy…”in Bob Bork’s America blah blah blah…”
It’s sad that we can actually rate which highly qualified Republican Supreme Court nominee’s were the victims of the worst slander courtesy of the left.
Hell Clueless Joe actually played a key role in that Clarence Thomas debacle.
1 Like
I don’t think preacher is non-PC.
Why do you think its bad to have an agnostic President?
Billy Graham
Is it possible the right just nominates more problematic individuals in general for the SC?
Are you going to pretend that once you expand the scope to not just include SC nominees that the GOP has itself a history of slandering those on the left?
Maybe… just maybe… politics are dirty and there are no angels.
Are you trying to get her a date? Or are you promoting her for a Supreme Court Justice seat? Which begs the question. What are her judicial qualifications for the job (ie: experience in the law).
No, If you make it that far you’re at the top of your field (no matter what political ideology you hold). Only one Justice has ever been impeached and that was Abe Fortas.
Republicans have a very naive view of the Supreme Court.
Seems like that may be changing a bit.
This would sound SO much more believable if you had EVER selected a nominee for president who wasn’t a white, male Christian. Just sayin’.
*Correction: This article’s headline originally stated that People of Praise inspired ‘The Handmaid’s Tale’. The book’s author, Margaret Atwood, has never specifically mentioned the group as being the inspiration for her work. A New Yorker profile of the author from 2017 mentions a newspaper clipping as part of her research for the book of a different charismatic Catholic group, People of Hope. Newsweek regrets the error.
Look at that. Built a whole narrative on a lie, and folks bought it and repeated it. Of course, some don’t mind being used.
1 Like
I blame it on complacency. They never saw everyone on the left becoming Bill Maher.
1 Like
“It wasn’t them. It was a different one but the same idea,” she said.
So it was a group with the same views, different name…Does that make it any better? And imo…I think the author is saying this so she doesn’t have to get involved in some controversy regarding a SCOTUS appointment.
Not too much irony there. .lol.
Sounds as though someone (the fellow debating you) is desperately trying to foment division among the gop concerning barrett.
It isn’t going to work of course. After 27 years of Ginsberg, Barrett sounds fabulous. 
all evidence is anecdotal
1 Like
Kamala Harris
