Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Intellectualist)   Not to alarm anyone, but Trump's top pick for the Supreme Court seems to be in a cult   (mavenroundtable.io) divider line
    More: Sick, Supreme Court of the United States, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, religious group, People of Praise, Amy Coney Barrett, part of the Christian group People of Praise, New York Times, group  
•       •       •

13269 clicks; posted to Main » and Politics » on 22 Sep 2020 at 7:30 AM (22 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



514 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-09-22 8:41:02 AM  

EyeballKid: gar1013: EyeballKid: Tyrone Slothrop: The candidate could be a literal swastika-wearing Nazi, and McConnell would get them passed as long as they opposed abortion and supported businesses over people.

\amd even that last bit is optional

Why are we acting like conservatives don't have a hard-on for Nazis, or that at the very least, they don't share the very same belief system?

Because that's the stupidest and most idiotic farking thing I'll read all day?

In that you probably don't read too much and every time you do, you throw a fit and declare that it's stupid, I'll grant some partial truth to your statement.


I bet you never got good grades in classes that required the use of grammar or writing.

To be clear:  getting a "B" is acceptable, not "good".
 
2020-09-22 8:42:06 AM  

physt: gar1013: havocmike: Why is such an important decision a simple majority vote? Shouldn't something like this be a 2/3rds vote?

Well, the Democrats decided to get rid of the 60 vote requirement for all nominees except Supreme Court Justices because they wanted to stop Republicans from using the filibuster.

Then, when the Dems tried to use the filibuster against Gorsuch, the Republicans decided to return the favor by removing the Supreme Court exception.

Meanwhile, Democrats (like Obama) are fond of saying that the filibuster is racist (despite engaging in the practice), but now find themselves unable to do anything because they put the wheels into motion to limit the ability to use the filibuster to stop nominees.

So in short, the Dems decided to play hardball because Republicans wouldn't just go along with what the Dems wanted, and in the process, they shot themselves in the foot.

Remember this story when you hear Schumer talk about how they should pack the court. It wasn't that long ago that Republicans controlled all three branches, and it will happen again. At that point, if court packing has occurred, expect to see as many justices as there are states in the union

If Biden wins, hopefully the DOJ will investigate and prosecute all the traitorous Republicans. It's a good possibility that the GOP won't survive as all their tops leaders are involved. Hard to pack the courts when you're top officials are hanging in the streets doing Mussolini impressions.

Of course, that vacuum would give QAnon the space they need to become a political party so the crazy ain't over.

/Remember kids... No Republican is safe to elect... evah...


Good to see you haven't gained a grip on reality.
 
2020-09-22 8:43:27 AM  
Is it time for the civil strike yet?

Can we blockade D.C.? Make it an impassable wall of humanity?
 
2020-09-22 8:43:30 AM  
How is this different from the standard wedding vows? How is this different from standard Christianity?

She is a fundamentalist Christian. This is what they all believe. Big deal.

Honestly, I disagree with them, but I respect fundamentalists more than wishy washy new age types that believe the next thing that sounds good. What the fundies believe is written down, in black and white.

I certainly don't want them having power over me, that's for sure, but I don't see anything extra whack-a-doodle about her oath. It's standard fundy Christian social club stuff. You know, the usual whack-a-doodle stuff.
 
2020-09-22 8:44:29 AM  

rudemix: Klyukva: One of the individuals reportedly topping President Donald Trump's shortlist to replace Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader-Ginsburg belongs to a religious group that believes husbands should rule over their wives, among other highly conservative and traditional beliefs.

I was hoping for some kinky dom/sub stuff in the article. Leaving disappointed.

It's inferred.


That's what I implied, too.
 
2020-09-22 8:45:25 AM  

Magorn: MegaLib: It is irrelevant.  Vice President Biden will win.  We will win the house and senate.  We will double the number of Justices and pack the SCOTUS with Progressives.  Republicans will never be relevant again.  They had the chance to pack the court, and were too week.  We won't make that mistake.  We will implement Medicare for all, free Public education, UBI and legally take the guns.  We will build a modern progressive nation with equal rights for all

13 justices, not 18

we have 13 judicial circuits and each of the Justices is supposed to also be the Chief admin judge of a circuit...the number 9 for justices was set when we had nine circuits.  Therefore 13 is merely correctly updating the court.   The fact that it will give dems a 7-6 majority?  well just icing on the cake


Cool.

If Dems pack the court, once we regain control of Congress and the Presidency, we'll expand it to 50...maybe even throw in a few for our various territories as well.

Dems suck at strategy. Don't say you weren't warned.
 
2020-09-22 8:45:27 AM  

MegaLib: It is irrelevant.  Vice President Biden will win.  We will win the house and senate.  We will double the number of Justices and pack the SCOTUS with Progressives.  Republicans will never be relevant again.  They had the chance to pack the court, and were too week.  We won't make that mistake.  We will implement Medicare for all, free Public education, UBI and legally take the guns.  We will build a modern progressive nation with equal rights for all


F*ck off, troll.
 
2020-09-22 8:45:41 AM  

gar1013: raius: gar1013: havocmike: Why is such an important decision a simple majority vote? Shouldn't something like this be a 2/3rds vote?

Well, the Democrats decided to get rid of the 60 vote requirement for all nominees except Supreme Court Justices because they wanted to stop Republicans from using the filibuster.

Then, when the Dems tried to use the filibuster against Gorsuch, the Republicans decided to return the favor by removing the Supreme Court exception.

Meanwhile, Democrats (like Obama) are fond of saying that the filibuster is racist (despite engaging in the practice), but now find themselves unable to do anything because they put the wheels into motion to limit the ability to use the filibuster to stop nominees.

So in short, the Dems decided to play hardball because Republicans wouldn't just go along with what the Dems wanted, and in the process, they shot themselves in the foot.

Remember this story when you hear Schumer talk about how they should pack the court. It wasn't that long ago that Republicans controlled all three branches, and it will happen again. At that point, if court packing has occurred, expect to see as many justices as there are states in the union

The only reason the Democrats removed it was because the Republicans filibustered everything.  They weren't letting Obama appoint any judges since McConnell decided his primary purpose was to stop anything Obama did.  The Democrats should remove the filibuster, all it does is prevent anything from happening since the Republicans act like a petulant child

Lol. You think Dems don't try to use the filibuster to stop things.

At any rate, glad you agree with the changes that render the Dems impotent in this situation.


You're trying way to hard.
 
2020-09-22 8:45:54 AM  
Pretty sure Trump's admin is nominating her so Democrats tear her apart, then try to nominate somebody who's a little less obvious.
 
2020-09-22 8:46:18 AM  

sniderman: Exluddite: It has become glaringly obvious that the framers of the constitution didn't count on people this corrupt, this stupid, or both actually getting elected.

The framers of the Constitution didn't expect nearly half of the U.S. population to be pants-on-head stupid either. And yet here we are.


To be fair, they didn't really intend to let most of those people vote...
 
2020-09-22 8:46:19 AM  
Those positions of "head" and "handmaid" are not part of Catholicism of any stripe.

That is a cult.
 
2020-09-22 8:46:33 AM  

dittybopper: qorkfiend: You think that means no one can ever talk about it?

Yes, when it comes to her confirmation or not.

If any senators bring it up in the hearings, then yes, absolute violation of Article VI.

And if the senators can't bring it up, what's the point of talking about it?   It's a nullity.   It's like discussing why water is wet.


Your intellect is truly dizzying.

Of course we can and should talk about it. We can express concerns to senators. They can't act on the religious aspect, but they can still count the "Holy crap she's crazy" calls.
 
2020-09-22 8:46:37 AM  
The irony is, if instead of a Christian "cult" where she's dominated by her husband, she was in a S&M relationship, you conservative weirdos would be twice as turned on.
 
2020-09-22 8:46:41 AM  

raius: gar1013: raius: gar1013: havocmike: Why is such an important decision a simple majority vote? Shouldn't something like this be a 2/3rds vote?

Well, the Democrats decided to get rid of the 60 vote requirement for all nominees except Supreme Court Justices because they wanted to stop Republicans from using the filibuster.

Then, when the Dems tried to use the filibuster against Gorsuch, the Republicans decided to return the favor by removing the Supreme Court exception.

Meanwhile, Democrats (like Obama) are fond of saying that the filibuster is racist (despite engaging in the practice), but now find themselves unable to do anything because they put the wheels into motion to limit the ability to use the filibuster to stop nominees.

So in short, the Dems decided to play hardball because Republicans wouldn't just go along with what the Dems wanted, and in the process, they shot themselves in the foot.

Remember this story when you hear Schumer talk about how they should pack the court. It wasn't that long ago that Republicans controlled all three branches, and it will happen again. At that point, if court packing has occurred, expect to see as many justices as there are states in the union

The only reason the Democrats removed it was because the Republicans filibustered everything.  They weren't letting Obama appoint any judges since McConnell decided his primary purpose was to stop anything Obama did.  The Democrats should remove the filibuster, all it does is prevent anything from happening since the Republicans act like a petulant child

Lol. You think Dems don't try to use the filibuster to stop things.

At any rate, glad you agree with the changes that render the Dems impotent in this situation.

You're trying way to hard.


I don't have to try. You leftists make it too easy.
 
2020-09-22 8:46:43 AM  

neongoats: dwrash: neongoats: dwrash: neongoats: dwrash: I was wondering what the democratic angle was going to be.. they cannot bring people out of the woodwork and said she raped or sexually abused them decades ago.  So y'all are deciding this is the hill to die on when opposing her nomination?

This is your stupid talking point? Go back to bed gramps. Sentient humans are talking.

You are all so predictable.. don't you see that.  You have always had limited choices to be outraged about and this is one of a handful of tactics that is always used... you guys are so boring.. yawn.

Yawn. Amoral trash thinks I'm boring. I'll care when a human being with morals calls me boring, not you shiat people.

You don't even know what I believe.  I've been observer of American culture and the conservative/liberal divide all my life.  And I know the attitudes that prevail.

You're just a little micro-trump that thinks you're a farking expert on every subject.


I think a government of and for the people should be understandable to the average citizens.  'experts' have no place in our government unless they can relate to and understand who they are supposed to be working for.  That is all.  Our government has been taken over by professional 'experts' that hold the citizenry in contempt.
 
2020-09-22 8:47:00 AM  

Tyrone Slothrop: GardenWeasel: Why are we replacing a Jew with a Catholic?

Catholics are more likely to be anti-abortion, of course. And a better question is why are there only 2 religions represented on the SC at all?


It is a bit strange,but what Catholics and Jews have in common is that the both come from very legalistic faiths with Canon Law and Talmudic law respectively making up a significant part of their belief systems.   I think it inspires a certain "reverence" for secular law as well that lead people to be passionate about the law and judging that makes them tend to stand out ... (Put a less charitable way, they are used to standing on their heads and bending logic like a pretzel from a young age, o law comes naturally)  but it's just a guess
 
2020-09-22 8:47:40 AM  

gar1013: raius: gar1013: raius: gar1013: havocmike: Why is such an important decision a simple majority vote? Shouldn't something like this be a 2/3rds vote?

Well, the Democrats decided to get rid of the 60 vote requirement for all nominees except Supreme Court Justices because they wanted to stop Republicans from using the filibuster.

Then, when the Dems tried to use the filibuster against Gorsuch, the Republicans decided to return the favor by removing the Supreme Court exception.

Meanwhile, Democrats (like Obama) are fond of saying that the filibuster is racist (despite engaging in the practice), but now find themselves unable to do anything because they put the wheels into motion to limit the ability to use the filibuster to stop nominees.

So in short, the Dems decided to play hardball because Republicans wouldn't just go along with what the Dems wanted, and in the process, they shot themselves in the foot.

Remember this story when you hear Schumer talk about how they should pack the court. It wasn't that long ago that Republicans controlled all three branches, and it will happen again. At that point, if court packing has occurred, expect to see as many justices as there are states in the union

The only reason the Democrats removed it was because the Republicans filibustered everything.  They weren't letting Obama appoint any judges since McConnell decided his primary purpose was to stop anything Obama did.  The Democrats should remove the filibuster, all it does is prevent anything from happening since the Republicans act like a petulant child

Lol. You think Dems don't try to use the filibuster to stop things.

At any rate, glad you agree with the changes that render the Dems impotent in this situation.

You're trying way to hard.

I don't have to try. You leftists make it too easy.


This is just getting sad, get a life.
 
2020-09-22 8:48:01 AM  

Armchair_Invective: It's mansplained in her campaign brochure.

[Fark user image 290x475]


The "New for 1977!" is fantastic.
 
2020-09-22 8:48:48 AM  

Wine Sipping Elitist: I respect fundamentalists


Uh, bub, things are "black and white" to those folks because their religious fundamentalism is a cult and they are indoctrinated. 

And you respect those people more than people that saw the cult for what it was, but still wanted to claim faith but NOT want to have to be in a cult to do it?

Oh, and lets not even get into the part about "wishy-washy" oh you mean, taking in a bunch of new info and finding the best course from all of it instead of just sticking to whatever you think blindly and without reason.

That's what you respect?

You're an odd one.
 
2020-09-22 8:49:12 AM  

dwrash: neongoats: dwrash: neongoats: dwrash: neongoats: dwrash: I was wondering what the democratic angle was going to be.. they cannot bring people out of the woodwork and said she raped or sexually abused them decades ago.  So y'all are deciding this is the hill to die on when opposing her nomination?

This is your stupid talking point? Go back to bed gramps. Sentient humans are talking.

You are all so predictable.. don't you see that.  You have always had limited choices to be outraged about and this is one of a handful of tactics that is always used... you guys are so boring.. yawn.

Yawn. Amoral trash thinks I'm boring. I'll care when a human being with morals calls me boring, not you shiat people.

You don't even know what I believe.  I've been observer of American culture and the conservative/liberal divide all my life.  And I know the attitudes that prevail.

You're just a little micro-trump that thinks you're a farking expert on every subject.

I think a government of and for the people should be understandable to the average citizens.  'experts' have no place in our government unless they can relate to and understand who they are supposed to be working for.  That is all.  Our government has been taken over by professional 'experts' that hold the citizenry in contempt.


Why in the world would you want a government of average people? Would you want to go a hospital where everything was dumbed down so the average layperson could understand it?
 
2020-09-22 8:49:16 AM  
Do you now see why we need to completely expunge a belief system dreamed up by illiterate, uneducated, unwise, angry and ignorant, goathearders in an endless state of war.

Christianity is the boat anchor on the world's neck.
 
2020-09-22 8:51:23 AM  

dwrash: experts' have no place in our government


Wow.

"Ah want people in the gummint jes lahk me, folks as seems like ah cu'd goan hev a beer with em. Don' need no fancy book larnin'."
 
2020-09-22 8:51:26 AM  
raius:   Why in the world would you want a government of average people? Would you want to go a hospital where everything was dumbed down so the average layperson could understand it?

               
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-22 8:52:34 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-22 8:53:22 AM  

Jake Havechek: dittybopper: qorkfiend: You think that means no one can ever talk about it?

Yes, when it comes to her confirmation or not.

If any senators bring it up in the hearings, then yes, absolute violation of Article VI.

And if the senators can't bring it up, what's the point of talking about it?   It's a nullity.   It's like discussing why water is wet.

Water isn't wet.  Whatever is in water or gets splashed by it is wet.  Jesus Christ.


A smart and a funny for you.
 
2020-09-22 8:53:32 AM  
Pack the courts 1.21.21
 
2020-09-22 8:54:03 AM  

dwrash: 'experts' have no place in our government unless they can relate to and understand who they are supposed to be working for.


Experts bad, gotcha.
 
2020-09-22 8:54:46 AM  

bearded clamorer: I was hoping it was Eric Bloom.


Perpetual sunglasses and leather for all?

BOC 2020
 
2020-09-22 8:55:32 AM  
People follow power, and just want to prattle on about whatever side is winning like they're on it, and part of the team because their lives have no other redeeming qualities.

The unifying theme however, is that they are always assholes no matter where they land.
They use policy and power to bully, not unite.

Just like this scab on our Nation.
It too will get picked and new skin will grow back.
 
2020-09-22 8:56:28 AM  
Watching the liberals shiat themselves over a woman's religion is just...well....hilarious. Here's a hint. This is not a politically sound strategy.
 
2020-09-22 8:57:17 AM  

dittybopper: Irrelevant, and if used against her in the hearings, a violation of the Constitution of the United States of America:

https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs​/constitution-transcript
Article. VI.
All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

If you're saying she can't be confirmed because of her religious beliefs (or lack thereof, if that applied), that's a flat-out violation of Article VI.

Doesn't matter if she's in a "cult" or not.   It's a blanket prohibition with no exceptions.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-22 8:57:38 AM  

dwrash: I think a government of and for the people should be understandable to the average citizens. 'experts' have no place in our government unless they can relate to and understand who they are supposed to be working for. That is all. Our government has been taken over by professional 'experts' that hold the citizenry in contempt.


Yeah, that confounded book lernin has no place in out govment, dangnammit!

Can you be more stereotypical?
 
2020-09-22 8:57:55 AM  

dittybopper: Irrelevant, and if used against her in the hearings, a violation of the Constitution of the United States of America:

https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs​/constitution-transcript
Article. VI.
All Debts contracted and Engagements entered into, before the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be as valid against the United States under this Constitution, as under the Confederation.
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

If you're saying she can't be confirmed because of her religious beliefs (or lack thereof, if that applied), that's a flat-out violation of Article VI.

Doesn't matter if she's in a "cult" or not.   It's a blanket prohibition with no exceptions.


Your party has been wiping its butt with that document and now you want to cite it? Fark right off with that shiat.
 
2020-09-22 8:59:05 AM  
TheCruxOfTheBiscuitIsTheApostrophe:​ Watching the liberals shiat themselves over a woman's religion is just...well....hilarious. Here's a hint. This is not a politically sound strategy.

I'm pretty sure if she were Muslim (HERPA DERPA SHARIA LAW) or a Satanist you guys would be hooting and hollering like enraged howler monkeys.
 
2020-09-22 8:59:12 AM  

Prank Call of Cthulhu: dwrash: experts' have no place in our government

Wow.

"Ah want people in the gummint jes lahk me, folks as seems like ah cu'd goan hev a beer with em. Don' need no fancy book larnin'."


Idiocracy was never supposed to be prophetic.
 
2020-09-22 8:59:23 AM  

Nick Nostril: way south: *Sigh*, So now Catholics are a cult...

I think the democrats forgot that they needed people to vote for them at some point.

Having been raised Cathaholic I can attest most fall into three different camps. The C&Es, the normal everyday types, and the shiite Catholics. This person is no doubt the latter.


media2.s-nbcnews.comView Full Size
 
2020-09-22 8:59:56 AM  

Astorix: Do you now see why we need to completely expunge a belief system dreamed up by illiterate, uneducated, unwise, angry and ignorant, goathearders in an endless state of war.

Christianity is the boat anchor on the world's neck.


So...uh...peace be with you?
 
2020-09-22 9:00:03 AM  

dwrash: 'experts' have no place in our government unless they can relate to and understand who they are supposed to be working for.  That is all.  Our government has been taken over by professional 'experts' that hold the citizenry in contempt.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-22 9:00:13 AM  
TheCruxOfTheBiscuitIsTheApostrophe:​ Watching the liberals shiat themselves over a woman's religion is just...well....hilarious. Here's a hint. This is not a politically sound strategy.

People don't care about her religion, they care about her weird cult.
 
2020-09-22 9:00:46 AM  

theteacher: This is good. Long senate confirmation hearing means beaucoup $$$ to Dem coffers.


it will only be long if McTurtle wants it to be and he doesn't so it won't.
 
2020-09-22 9:01:12 AM  
So her husband will be the justice?
 
2020-09-22 9:01:19 AM  

Prank Call of Cthulhu: TheCruxOfTheBiscuitIsTheApostrophe: Watching the liberals shiat themselves over a woman's religion is just...well....hilarious. Here's a hint. This is not a politically sound strategy.

I'm pretty sure if she were Muslim (HERPA DERPA SHARIA LAW) or a Satanist you guys would be hooting and hollering like enraged howler monkeys.


Be my guest. Keep up the good work!
 
2020-09-22 9:03:11 AM  

raius: Prank Call of Cthulhu: dwrash: experts' have no place in our government

Wow.

"Ah want people in the gummint jes lahk me, folks as seems like ah cu'd goan hev a beer with em. Don' need no fancy book larnin'."

Idiocracy was never supposed to be prophetic.


Idiocracy was a documentary from the future...
 
2020-09-22 9:03:12 AM  

raius: TheCruxOfTheBiscuitIsTheApostrophe: Watching the liberals shiat themselves over a woman's religion is just...well....hilarious. Here's a hint. This is not a politically sound strategy.

People don't care about her religion, they care about her weird cult.


You've been told she's in a weird cult by a hit piece. You are gullible and probably don't even know it.
 
2020-09-22 9:03:28 AM  

jiggitysmith: Animatronik: And so the organized smear campaign begins...

In in 2020, reporting the truth is a smear campaign because right-wing people have gone so far right, they have fallen off the edge of the earth.



No, you.  Bernie Sanders is a nutty marxist demagogue, and he ruined your party.
 
2020-09-22 9:03:46 AM  

koder: are assigned and are accountable to a personal adviser, called a "head" for men and a "handmaid" for women.

[Fark user image 850x446]


Who wants a handmaid? I want a shieldmaiden

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-22 9:03:47 AM  
TheCruxOfTheBiscuitIsTheApostrophe:​ Prank Call of Cthulhu: TheCruxOfTheBiscuitIsTheApostrophe: Watching the liberals shiat themselves over a woman's religion is just...well....hilarious. Here's a hint. This is not a politically sound strategy.

I'm pretty sure if she were Muslim (HERPA DERPA SHARIA LAW) or a Satanist you guys would be hooting and hollering like enraged howler monkeys.

Be my guest. Keep up the good work!


Oh, or an atheist. You dumbs-dumbs really hate that. How dare someone not believe in a magic invisible white man who lives in the sky and grants wishes.
 
2020-09-22 9:04:16 AM  
Huh, Had to bring in relief from the "B" team.
 
2020-09-22 9:04:55 AM  

raius: gar1013: raius: gar1013: raius: gar1013: havocmike: Why is such an important decision a simple majority vote? Shouldn't something like this be a 2/3rds vote?

Well, the Democrats decided to get rid of the 60 vote requirement for all nominees except Supreme Court Justices because they wanted to stop Republicans from using the filibuster.

Then, when the Dems tried to use the filibuster against Gorsuch, the Republicans decided to return the favor by removing the Supreme Court exception.

Meanwhile, Democrats (like Obama) are fond of saying that the filibuster is racist (despite engaging in the practice), but now find themselves unable to do anything because they put the wheels into motion to limit the ability to use the filibuster to stop nominees.

So in short, the Dems decided to play hardball because Republicans wouldn't just go along with what the Dems wanted, and in the process, they shot themselves in the foot.

Remember this story when you hear Schumer talk about how they should pack the court. It wasn't that long ago that Republicans controlled all three branches, and it will happen again. At that point, if court packing has occurred, expect to see as many justices as there are states in the union

The only reason the Democrats removed it was because the Republicans filibustered everything.  They weren't letting Obama appoint any judges since McConnell decided his primary purpose was to stop anything Obama did.  The Democrats should remove the filibuster, all it does is prevent anything from happening since the Republicans act like a petulant child

Lol. You think Dems don't try to use the filibuster to stop things.

At any rate, glad you agree with the changes that render the Dems impotent in this situation.

You're trying way to hard.

I don't have to try. You leftists make it too easy.

This is just getting sad, get a life.


Lol.

Bless your heart.
 
2020-09-22 9:04:56 AM  
TheCruxOfTheBiscuitIsTheApostrophe:​ Prank Call of Cthulhu: TheCruxOfTheBiscuitIsTheApostrophe: Watching the liberals shiat themselves over a woman's religion is just...well....hilarious. Here's a hint. This is not a politically sound strategy.

I'm pretty sure if she were Muslim (HERPA DERPA SHARIA LAW) or a Satanist you guys would be hooting and hollering like enraged howler monkeys.

Be my guest. Keep up the good work!


So brave of you to run away when called out on your bullshiat.
 
Displayed 50 of 514 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.