The Barrett Hearing

[slixey]

Is this really where we’re at? It’s all political posturing. Nothing substantive. It’s a disgrace. Totally disrespectful to Barrett. Like her or not she’s got the nomination and should be questioned about her record. Don’t need every damn Senator making some political statement.

 

[QuickDrawMcGraw77]

New to congressional hearings?

 

[slixey]

New to congressional hearings?

Yeah, I know.

 

[BDB99]

New to congressional hearings with a conservative nominee?

FIFY

 

[Aggie98nHouston]

FIFY

Fixed bc if it’s a liberal nominee there is no hearing I assume. That’s a good fix.

 

[wick]

Fixed bc if it’s a liberal nominee there is no hearing I assume. That’s a good fix.

No there would be a hearing.

 

[Aggie98nHouston]

Garland is waiting.

 

[BDB99]

Fixed bc if it’s a liberal nominee there is no hearing I assume. That’s a good fix.

No there would be a hearing but the nominee wouldn’t be insulted by allegations completely fabricated and their families wouldn’t be targeted for attacks. If you are referring to the Republican ran senate not having a hearing for a democrat nominee briefly before an election that’s politics. Should have had the senate. Like it was politics when the changed the rules and rammed through Obamacare on Christmas Eve. They had the power and used it to pass a shitty bill that was never designed to make anything about healthcare or coverage better for all

 

[2th_doc]

haha best i could find:

 

[Aggie98nHouston]

“If you are referring to the Republican ran senate not having a hearing for a democrat nominee briefly before an election that’s politics.”

I can accept that, but that’s not what Republicans said. They specifically said they would not do this. Wonder what else they would flat lie to their constituents about?

 

[Rooster77]

did sotomayor get this type of questioning from republicans about how she would project race into every decision? doubt it.

I think if every Dim asks the same question about her blatant agenda to repeal baby killing and ACA it'd be too funny.

any with the blabbering about garland, elections have consequences - guess if libs ran the senate at the time, they'd had no problem getting that ding dong through.

 

[superag1000]

I am sure If the dems had the president and the senate, they would wait until after the election to fill the SCOTUS. Anyone who believes that is an idiot,

 

[wick]

I am sure If the dems had the president and the senate, they would wait until after the election to fill the SCOTUS. Anyone who believes that is an idiot,

Kind of redundant isn’t it. Anyone who believes anything said by the Democratic leadership is an idiot

 

[schmak01]

I did learn that the term sexual preference is offensive today.

 

[KSig44]

So RBG was confirmed in 50 days, I am seeing if AB can beat that from announcement to swearing.

Watching the dem Senators is painful. If any are lawyers I think they graduated law school around the same rank that Biden graduated. To think RvW is on the same level as Brown V BOE as far as established law is laughable. Remember, the SC at one point said slavery was fine, nothing is settled until there is no one left to disagree. Trump was smart to hold ACB till this position, she is better than the other two he nominated.

 

[IDRILL4GASOIL]

So far it has been mild. I think they got nothing except try to bring Trump into the hearing for the election hate.

 

[jsy60]

So RBG was confirmed in 50 days, I am seeing if AB can beat that from announcement to swearing.

Watching the dem Senators is painful. If any are lawyers I think they graduated law school around the same rank that Biden graduated. To think RvW is on the same level as Brown V BOE as far as established law is laughable. Remember, the SC at one point said slavery was fine, nothing is settled until there is no one left to disagree. Trump was smart to hold ACB till this position, she is better than the other two he nominated.

can not believe some of these people ever got elected to any office. you can get registration papers that some of them are certifiable ugly and stupid, if that's the best we have we are hip deep in trouble. can't believe this.

 

[2th_doc]

I’m surprised these dem senators haven’t asked about ACB kidnapping two black kids, snatching them from their mom in Haiti..

seems like that should be brought up.

 

[schmak01]

I’m surprised these dem senators haven’t asked about ACB kidnapping two black kids, snatching them from their mom in Haiti..

seems like that should be brought up.

It’s because none of this is actually about her. She’s a good pick. It’s about drumming up fear for their base with absurdity around overturning gay marriage (won’t happen due to majority of Americans supporting it), Rowe vs. Wade (might push it back on states, but won’t make it illegal) and bashing Trump in hopes they actually get off their asses and vote for a guy with less enthusiasm for him than Hillary.

 

[KSig44]

It’s because none of this is actually about her. She’s a good pick. It’s about drumming up fear for their base with absurdity around overturning gay marriage (won’t happen due to majority of Americans supporting it), Rowe vs. Wade (might push it back on states, but won’t make it illegal) and bashing Trump in hopes they actually get off their asses and vote for a guy with less enthusiasm for him than Hillary.

RvW and gay marriage are the same thing. Both are UN-constitutional, again because of the 10th amendment. Both should go back to the states. Gay marriage was leagal in 8 stated before the SC over-ruled on it. It was heading down the right path and with support of Americans it would get to the 2/3 states needed to make an amendment to the constitution if warranted. THAT is the correct path. Having the SC legislate, 9 individuals telling you how to live your life, is why we have so many problems with these two topics.