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  
•       •       •

13110 clicks; posted to Main » and Politics » on 22 Sep 2020 at 7:30 AM (9 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



517 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 8:05:59 AM  

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.
 
2020-09-22 8:06:31 AM  

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.
 
2020-09-22 8:07:14 AM  
He should nominate Janice Rogers Brown
 
2020-09-22 8:07:48 AM  
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
 
2020-09-22 8:08:53 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.


this just means having religion or not cannot be used to deny you the office. no where does it say your views shaped by your lunacy cannot be called in to question.
 
2020-09-22 8:09:06 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.


It's as if 18th century slave-owning deadbeats who believed in bloodletting and phrenology shouldn't be regarded as omniscient, infallible beings.
 
2020-09-22 8:09:56 AM  

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?
 
2020-09-22 8:10:02 AM  
*Sigh*, So now Catholics are a cult...

I think the democrats forgot that they needed people to vote for them at some point.
 
2020-09-22 8:10:06 AM  

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?
 
2020-09-22 8:10:36 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.


Water isn't wet.  Whatever is in water or gets splashed by it is wet.  Jesus Christ.
 
2020-09-22 8:10:55 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.


Nearly half? It is far far higher than that. If you think how someone votes for president determines how smart they are, you need a reality check
 
2020-09-22 8:11:21 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.


You know she's not being disqualified due to it, right?
 
2020-09-22 8:11:53 AM  

Kornchex: That oath automatically disqualifies her.

/or it would in a normal world


Lol.

I bet you worry about Freemasons.
 
2020-09-22 8:11:58 AM  

vygramul: I want him to nominate Alex Jones or Ivanka or Julian Assange. I want to see someone incredibly bad nominated just to see what the GOP will tolerate. Because if it's anything, we should be informed of such.


Farkers...I keep telling ya, it's going to be Pirro

/Drink!
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-22 8:12:09 AM  
The only thing that matters to his base is being cruel to "liberals". That's it. They cannot be persuaded by logic, decency, compassion, kindness, or even being harmed by his policies themselves.They are a sneering mass of hate, and they must be overwhelmed by the opposite of that.
 
2020-09-22 8:12:21 AM  
Republicans are already so deep in their own cult they won't see being in one as an issue.
 
2020-09-22 8:12:26 AM  

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.


They have it figured out, they don't need to win elections just control the courts. Wait...
 
2020-09-22 8:12:31 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.


They absolutely did. That's why they added things like the electoral college, to add another layer of separation between that half of the US population and the workings of government.
 
2020-09-22 8:12:59 AM  

sniderman: 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


I think that's why they came up with the Electoral College. "Moſt of the populace are ſo ſtupid, they wear their pantaloons atop their heads! Theſe numbſkulls can't be truſted to actually vote for the candidate, we'll have electors actually do the electing."
 
2020-09-22 8:13:12 AM  
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?
 
2020-09-22 8:13:13 AM  
Well, I guess if he saves the economy, we can forgive all this... ahhahaha I cant even finish typing that.
 
2020-09-22 8:13:14 AM  

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

No


because?
 
2020-09-22 8:13:19 AM  

Calypsocookie: *looks down at my vagina*

Well it was nice making our own decisions for awhile huh?

*sadly walks away*

/me not my vagina


If you can, I suggest getting out of the country as soon as possible. It's not safe.
 
2020-09-22 8:13:47 AM  

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 never intended women, poc or non land owning white dudes to have a say in anything
 
2020-09-22 8:14:14 AM  

FreakyBunny: The only thing that matters to his base is being cruel to "liberals". That's it. They cannot be persuaded by logic, decency, compassion, kindness, or even being harmed by his policies themselves.They are a sneering mass of hate, and they must be overwhelmed by the opposite of that.


Well... liberals have been cruel to them for 40+ years... payback is a biatch, ain't it.
 
2020-09-22 8:14:38 AM  

EyeballKid: 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.

It's as if 18th century slave-owning deadbeats who believed in bloodletting and phrenology shouldn't be regarded as omniscient, infallible beings.


Nor Bronze-aged goatherders.
 
2020-09-22 8:15:07 AM  

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.
 
2020-09-22 8:15:10 AM  

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


The funniest part is that she isn't going to be the pick.
 
2020-09-22 8:15:14 AM  

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

No

because?


Why should it be?
 
2020-09-22 8:15:30 AM  
Funny how some threads seem to collect them like flypaper.
 
2020-09-22 8:15:58 AM  

dittybopper: 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

/What's the problem, its just a religion.  Participation should be no bar to office
 
2020-09-22 8:16:26 AM  

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.
 
2020-09-22 8:16:47 AM  

Natalie Portmanteau: GardenWeasel: Why are we replacing a Jew with a Catholic?

right? Gimme a Sikh.


Be careful what you ask for.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-22 8:16:57 AM  

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

No

because?

Why should it be?


Why should ratifying an amendment require more than a majority vote?
 
2020-09-22 8:17:29 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size

Thankfully Lindsey is a man of honor and integrity - https://usemywordsagainstme.com
 
2020-09-22 8:17:45 AM  
The MAGATs in the thread aren't even trying.
 
2020-09-22 8:18:03 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.


How dare you bring in the Constitution into a ranting session about someone who could be charged with applying the Constitution to the cases in front of her.
 
2020-09-22 8:18:49 AM  

Prank Call of Cthulhu: sniderman: 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

I think that's why they came up with the Electoral College. "Moſt of the populace are ſo ſtupid, they wear their pantaloons atop their heads! Theſe numbſkulls can't be truſted to actually vote for the candidate, we'll have electors actually do the electing."


Ah yes. And THAT'S worked out swimmingly!
 
2020-09-22 8:18:52 AM  

dwrash: Well... liberals have been cruel to them for 40+ years..


Liberals cruelly making conservatives...uh, not be allowed to poke their noses into what people do in the privacy of their own bedrooms, put up with the smell of the occasional taco truck, have some neighbors that don't look like them, stop them from lynching blacks, gays, and trans folks, getting rid of child labor, providing a 40-hour work week, giving women equal rights, ensuring air and water are clean, inspecting food for safety...

Those farking monsters.
 
2020-09-22 8:18:52 AM  

qorkfiend: 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.

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


It's illegal for the Senators to consider it.

It's just normal bigotry for you to consider it.
 
2020-09-22 8:19:08 AM  

Kraftwerk Orange: Natalie Portmanteau: GardenWeasel: Why are we replacing a Jew with a Catholic?

right? Gimme a Sikh.

Be careful what you ask for.

[Fark user image image 800x994]


Thats a tan white christian lady. Her name is Nikki !.
 
2020-09-22 8:19:20 AM  

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.
 
2020-09-22 8:19:41 AM  

bostonguy: I would love for all of those people who say they want to protect children to do something about those currently kidnapped from their parents and kept in cages.


We should totally send them home.

Shame the lawyers are fighting tk prevent them from traveling back to their home countries.
 
2020-09-22 8:19:47 AM  

Kraftwerk Orange: Natalie Portmanteau: GardenWeasel: Why are we replacing a Jew with a Catholic?

right? Gimme a Sikh.

Be careful what you ask for.

[Fark user image image 800x994]


She's not a Sikh though.
 
2020-09-22 8:20:05 AM  

wearsmanyhats: Jesus Christ!


Indeed!
 
2020-09-22 8:20:14 AM  
for some reason, Nicole Kidman is rooting for her

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-22 8:20:32 AM  

gar1013: Animatronik: And so the organized smear campaign begins...

The funniest part is that she isn't going to be the pick.


This is more probable than some may think.
Drumft needs Florida BAD, and will be more than willing to lick some Cuban asshole to get it, at least in one scenario.
Hopefully so, because Lagoa is a relatively innocuous pick.
 
2020-09-22 8:20:42 AM  

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

No

because?

Why should it be?

Why should ratifying an amendment require more than a majority vote?


Because it's supposed to be difficult
 
2020-09-22 8:20:45 AM  

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


Its funny that the evangelicals who would ask this question in most circumstances will be silent this time.   Not that I think it's in any way a valid position, but they can't even keep their hypocrisy out of their prejudices.
 
2020-09-22 8:21:52 AM  

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.
 
Displayed 50 of 517 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.