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.

(Twitter)   Just when you thought the Republicans could not go any lower   (twitter.com) divider line
    More: Murica, shot  
•       •       •

6926 clicks; posted to Politics » on 27 Sep 2020 at 1:12 PM (9 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



336 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2020-09-27 8:54:57 AM  
Original Tweet:

 
2020-09-27 9:57:47 AM  
Lame, just got a new definition
 
2020-09-27 10:18:30 AM  
Nefarious A.C.B.


When does the Pope excommunicate her?
 
2020-09-27 11:37:14 AM  
This  shows all the cleverness, ingenuity, and originality I expect of the Republican party.
 
2020-09-27 11:45:09 AM  
Objection:  Most people paying attention realized there is no bottom.
 
2020-09-27 11:50:47 AM  
I've run out of evens I can't anymore, she could not be any more different than RBG.

Fark these people and fark anyone still supporting these human pieces of farking garbage.

/fark
 
2020-09-27 12:00:05 PM  
Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

Fark user imageView Full Size


/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton
 
2020-09-27 12:06:33 PM  

Dave and the Mission: Objection:  Most people paying attention realized there is no bottom.


Damn right.

Just assume any Republican is the absolute worst person imaginable and you'll never be surprised when they advocate for the inhumanity of others.

/their court nominee has an opposition opinion where she says voting is a right of only the "virtuous" citizens which should terrify anyone who isn't interested in licking Donald Trump's taint in order to be able to vote.  That qualifier was used after the civil war to deny the vote to black people (and, I suppose via denying felons with full civil rights, still is via the targeting of black men by police and prosecutors)

pbs.twimg.comView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 12:10:53 PM  

Il Douchey: Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

[Fark user image 318x159]

/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton


Are you more impressed by her total of 3 years of experience as a judge or her participation in an extremist religious sect that literally inspired The Handmaid's Tale?
 
2020-09-27 12:10:56 PM  
Another Churchy Biatch?
 
2020-09-27 12:12:49 PM  
Just the usual conservative creativity.
 
2020-09-27 1:00:49 PM  
fark these guys with a rusty chainsaw.
 
2020-09-27 1:11:16 PM  
weddingsinger:Are you more impressed by her total of 3 years of experience as a judge or her participation in an extremist religious sect that literally inspired The Handmaid's Tale?

Hey, Biden's got like fifty years of "experience" and you know damn well that nobody is impressed with anything about old Joe.  Her sharp mind is more important than a long tenure; there will be time for that.

/If dogging on her religion is all you got, you got nothin
 
2020-09-27 1:12:47 PM  
Subby,

I don't know that I've ever thought they couldn't go lower.
 
2020-09-27 1:14:34 PM  
If you believe they can't go any lower, you've left yourself completely unprepared for reality.
 
2020-09-27 1:14:49 PM  
pandering f*cks
 
2020-09-27 1:14:53 PM  

Dave and the Mission: Objection:  Most people paying attention realized there is no bottom.


Came here to say this. It's been years since I last thought there was a bottom.
 
2020-09-27 1:15:02 PM  

Dave and the Mission: Objection:  Most people paying attention realized there is no bottom.


Exactly

I've always assumed that the Republicans will find a new, sordid way of redefining "lower"
 
2020-09-27 1:16:24 PM  

Il Douchey: Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

[Fark user image 318x159]

/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton


You guys think Paula Deen is bangable.
 
2020-09-27 1:16:37 PM  

Il Douchey: Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

[Fark user image 318x159]

/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton


JILF?
 
2020-09-27 1:16:50 PM  

Il Douchey: Her sharp mind


stickershock23.comView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 1:16:57 PM  

Il Douchey: Her sharp mind is more important than a long tenure; there will be time for that.


So something that requires time... will require time.

Got it.
 
2020-09-27 1:18:02 PM  
Watching the right trying to paint her as the next RBG is so sad and pathetic to watch.

No one can compare to RBG, especially that nutjob Trump nominated.
 
2020-09-27 1:18:05 PM  
Why yes.  She is notorious.
 
2020-09-27 1:18:18 PM  
stewie woodstock
Youtube A030wZ8kjyQ
 
2020-09-27 1:18:41 PM  

Il Douchey: Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

[Fark user image 318x159]

/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton


and then a bit later

Il Douchey: weddingsinger:Are you more impressed by her total of 3 years of experience as a judge or her participation in an extremist religious sect that literally inspired The Handmaid's Tale?

Hey, Biden's got like fifty years of "experience" and you know damn well that nobody is impressed with anything about old Joe.  Her sharp mind is more important than a long tenure; there will be time for that.

/If dogging on her religion is all you got, you got nothin


It took you about an hour to think about something other than her physical appearance or stigginit to the libs.

You should see if OANN has any job openings


/It does make me wonder why no one talked about Kavanaugh that way, though.
 
2020-09-27 1:19:24 PM  
Change the shirt to "The Notorious Knocked-Up ACB".

Her Supreme Court clerk will be Michelle Duggar.
 
2020-09-27 1:19:35 PM  
That was some weapons grade cringe right there, but then, the republican party is some weapons grade cringe so I suppose that's to be expected.
 
2020-09-27 1:19:54 PM  

Il Douchey: Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

[Fark user image 318x159]

/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton


Just like a Republican, the only value women have to them is how "bangable" they are.
 
2020-09-27 1:20:01 PM  

weddingsinger: Il Douchey: Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

[Fark user image 318x159]

/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton

Are you more impressed by her total of 3 years of experience as a judge or her participation in an extremist religious sect that literally inspired The Handmaid's Tale?


Hold on.  I don't think this these folks are entirely right in the head and I certainly don't want this appointment to process.  But, they didn't inspire The Handmaid's Tale - the author confirms this to be the case.  It was a different, similarly named, cult.  Not arguing with your conclusions, just your facts.
 
2020-09-27 1:20:10 PM  
Is this more of that "conservative humor" I've been hearing about?
 
2020-09-27 1:20:13 PM  

Il Douchey: weddingsinger:Are you more impressed by her total of 3 years of experience as a judge or her participation in an extremist religious sect that literally inspired The Handmaid's Tale?

Hey, Biden's got like fifty years of "experience" and you know damn well that nobody is impressed with anything about old Joe.  Her sharp mind is more important than a long tenure; there will be time for that.

/If dogging on her religion is all you got, you
I got nothin


FTFY
 
2020-09-27 1:20:16 PM  

Il Douchey: Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

[Fark user image image 318x159]

/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton


The GOP. Woman's value is always based on how "bangable" they are.
 
2020-09-27 1:21:13 PM  

Dave and the Mission: Objection:  Most people paying attention realized there is no bottom.


Fark user imageView Full Size



You need to clarify
 
2020-09-27 1:21:20 PM  
tangentially

I love how right wingers who say she's a total hottie keep sharing pics of her that are filtered more than Cybil Shepard was in "Moonlighting".

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 1:21:24 PM  

JDAT: Il Douchey: Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

[Fark user image 318x159]

/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton

JILF?


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 1:21:31 PM  
Thurgood Marshall : Clarence Thomas :: Ruth Bader Ginsburg : ________________.
 
2020-09-27 1:21:45 PM  
More like the notorious See You Next Tuesday.

/Not misogyny.
 
2020-09-27 1:22:12 PM  
Leave it to a bunch of illiterate morons to not even know alphabetical order.
 
2020-09-27 1:22:22 PM  

Il Douchey: Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

[Fark user image image 318x159]

/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton


Bangable?  After that many kids it's going to be like sliding a hotdog down a hallway.
 
2020-09-27 1:22:24 PM  
Here's the deal.....just stop getting outraged by their infantile behavior. They only do it to get a rise out of you. Just expect them to act like 5th grade bullies at all times. I've just started laughing at the ones that do the whole "talk at the top of your voice and say horrible things". THAT, pisses them off more than anything. I've had them try to start fights with me over it....which 100% of the time has ended when I show them I am more than willing to do so. Just like High School...
 
2020-09-27 1:22:31 PM  
As usual, not an original idea from an entire half of the political spectrum. Yawn.
 
2020-09-27 1:22:37 PM  
my decorum!!!
 
2020-09-27 1:23:22 PM  

gameshowhost: Il Douchey: Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

[Fark user image 318x159]

/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton

You guys think Paula Deen is bangable.


I saw plenty of people on conservative forums gushing over Sarah Huckabee.

That should show you where their standards are.
 
2020-09-27 1:23:36 PM  
Yep, she's a Sharia Law cultist from the American Taliban.
 
2020-09-27 1:23:36 PM  
RBG is why we are in this SC nomination mess. YAAAAS QWEEN
 
2020-09-27 1:24:36 PM  

Sin'sHero: Nefarious A.C.B.


When does the Pope excommunicate her?


"FAKE POPE! Benedict is the real Jesus Peter!"
 
2020-09-27 1:24:37 PM  
She can't just still RBG's nickname.


I hereby dub her "Lil Whine."  (Fitting that she was nominated by an Old Dirty Bastard.)
 
2020-09-27 1:24:43 PM  

ChubbyTiger: weddingsinger: Il Douchey: Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

[Fark user image 318x159]

/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton

Are you more impressed by her total of 3 years of experience as a judge or her participation in an extremist religious sect that literally inspired The Handmaid's Tale?

Hold on.  I don't think this these folks are entirely right in the head and I certainly don't want this appointment to process.  But, they didn't inspire The Handmaid's Tale - the author confirms this to be the case.  It was a different, similarly named, cult.  Not arguing with your conclusions, just your facts.


Well is it that these people read The Handmaid's Tale and said "Hey, that's a great idea!" ?
 
2020-09-27 1:24:57 PM  

Il Douchey: weddingsinger:Are you more impressed by her total of 3 years of experience as a judge or her participation in an extremist religious sect that literally inspired The Handmaid's Tale?

Hey, Biden's got like fifty years of "experience" and you know damn well that nobody is impressed with anything about old Joe.  Her sharp mind is more important than a long tenure; there will be time for that.

/If dogging on her religion is all you got, you got nothin


She's an unqualified moron.  You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.  The only reason she has a chance at the job is because Republicans think winning is more important then being good at the job.

Their short sighted antics are going to lead to even more unrest.  Hopefully the Progressives whip the Conservatives assess again.
 
2020-09-27 1:25:27 PM  
On second thought, let's go Wu Tang with her nickname.

I'll call her P.T.A.
 
2020-09-27 1:25:30 PM  
RBG got here nickname organically from younger people who admired her.

This new clown is like the new kid who comes to school, heard a nickname someone else had, and said call me that name now. You don't get to steal your nickname.
 
2020-09-27 1:25:47 PM  

Insurgent: RBG is why we are in this SC nomination mess. YAAAAS QWEEN


Yes, how dare she... (checks notes)... die?
 
2020-09-27 1:26:04 PM  
biography.comView Full Size


As if Drake would ever hook up with that.
 
2020-09-27 1:26:49 PM  

Dog Man: RBG got here nickname organically from younger people who admired her.

This new clown is like the new kid who comes to school, heard a nickname someone else had, and said call me that name now. You don't get to steal your nickname.


"How do you do, fellow Justices?"
 
2020-09-27 1:28:28 PM  
Rubber stamping a supreme court judge -- that's a dream for US Senators which is just a normal day of business in Russia for politicians..

Certainly Putin could find use for some slightly used US politicians, give them a fiefdom or principality to rule in the formerly greater Russia..

The US should be on a different course, even if it is on a fascist one.  The Mongols Golden Hoard conquered Russia quite well.  Perhaps the US could team up with some folks from the Far East who weren't afraid of the Napoleonic/Nazi curse of never invade Moscow in the winter.

The American people instead of becoming the abused members of an isolated family should become the proud rulers of the former Soviet Union.
 
2020-09-27 1:28:34 PM  

ChubbyTiger: weddingsinger: Il Douchey: Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

[Fark user image 318x159]

/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton

Are you more impressed by her total of 3 years of experience as a judge or her participation in an extremist religious sect that literally inspired The Handmaid's Tale?

Hold on.  I don't think this these folks are entirely right in the head and I certainly don't want this appointment to process.  But, they didn't inspire The Handmaid's Tale - the author confirms this to be the case.  It was a different, similarly named, cult.  Not arguing with your conclusions, just your facts.


You're right, they shouldn't have said "literally inspired."  But at the very least, the cult Barrett has been part of for decades is absolutely a brother cult to the one Atwood based The Handmaid's Tale on.  It's a charismatic Catholic cult, which is to say they do things like speak in tongues and do faith healings, and other pentecostal-related crap.

Point is, the underlying danger stands.
 
2020-09-27 1:29:00 PM  

raius: She's an unqualified moron.  You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.


I believe what you meant to say was "I don't like her."
 
2020-09-27 1:29:12 PM  

edmo: Just the usual conservative creativity.


Just the usual lack of conservative creativity.

/FTFY
 
2020-09-27 1:29:47 PM  

Il Douchey: Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

[Fark user image image 318x159]

/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton


. /It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton

I'm glad you're living up down to your name and focussing on the important things
 
2020-09-27 1:29:53 PM  
You realize, USA, that if you don't get rid of these people we will have to hate you all.
 
2020-09-27 1:30:06 PM  

Il Douchey: Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

[Fark user image 318x159]

/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton


Pace YOURself. You've got little more than a month left before I would bet dollars to donuts you magically disappear into the ether, never to admit you would spit-polish Trump's shoes if he let you.
 
2020-09-27 1:30:08 PM  
This is lower then forced hysterectomies, intentional family separations, and children in cages being sexually assaulted by guards?
 
2020-09-27 1:30:24 PM  
too proud to retire during a dem supermajority after multiple bouts of cancer. what a waste
 
2020-09-27 1:30:34 PM  

weddingsinger: Dave and the Mission: Objection:  Most people paying attention realized there is no bottom.

Damn right.

Just assume any Republican is the absolute worst person imaginable and you'll never be surprised when they advocate for the inhumanity of others.

/their court nominee has an opposition opinion where she says voting is a right of only the "virtuous" citizens which should terrify anyone who isn't interested in licking Donald Trump's taint in order to be able to vote.  That qualifier was used after the civil war to deny the vote to black people (and, I suppose via denying felons with full civil rights, still is via the targeting of black men by police and prosecutors)

[pbs.twimg.com image 680x382]


And this, right here is the problem with "Originalists", in a nutshell. She sees the 2nd amendment as an individual right unconnected to serving in the militia, even though IT'S RIGHT THERE IN THE farkING AMENDMENT!

But the right to vote is intended only for "virtuous" citizens. So, white people and the right kind of people of color (i.e. her adopted children, who will grow up privileged and educated, and not vote like those people).
 
2020-09-27 1:30:54 PM  
Subby, you oughta know by now that there is absolutely no low too low for Republicans.
 
2020-09-27 1:30:55 PM  

Il Douchey: /It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton


This is some incel shiat right here.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 1:31:20 PM  

Il Douchey: weddingsinger:Are you more impressed by her total of 3 years of experience as a judge or her participation in an extremist religious sect that literally inspired The Handmaid's Tale?

Her sharp mind is more important than a long tenure; there will be time for that.


Yeah, Supreme Court Justice is definitely an on-the-job trained position.
 
2020-09-27 1:32:07 PM  
I don't recall ever thinking that. In fact, I knew the first instant I saw her referred to as ACB that if she were ever nominated, this exact behavior from Republicans was guaranteed. It's childish taunting and mocking.
 
2020-09-27 1:32:29 PM  
*eyeroll*

A couple weeks ago nobody outside the Federalist society and their enablers could have been picked this woman out of a two person line up.
 
2020-09-27 1:32:30 PM  

weddingsinger: Dave and the Mission: Objection:  Most people paying attention realized there is no bottom.

Damn right.

Just assume any Republican is the absolute worst person imaginable and you'll never be surprised when they advocate for the inhumanity of others.

/their court nominee has an opposition opinion where she says voting is a right of only the "virtuous" citizens which should terrify anyone who isn't interested in licking Donald Trump's taint in order to be able to vote.  That qualifier was used after the civil war to deny the vote to black people (and, I suppose via denying felons with full civil rights, still is via the targeting of black men by police and prosecutors)

[pbs.twimg.com image 680x382]

So her position is that if someone were to commit a felony while using a gun, after serving their sentence, they get the right to own a gun back, or more literally never lost that right, but they don't get their right to vote back?
 
2020-09-27 1:32:50 PM  

Needlessly Complicated: Il Douchey: /It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton

This is some incel shiat right here.

[Fark user image image 425x246]


🤦🏻♂

/ That's all I have the energy for right now
// You all know the usual arguments by now
 
2020-09-27 1:33:04 PM  
Subby:  "Just when you thought the Republicans could not go any lower"

Fark Republicans:  "Hold my beer and watch this."
 
2020-09-27 1:33:16 PM  
Just imagine the hilarity of all the shirts co-opting the "Notorious RBG" phrase, if the full name of the GOP's nominee was Amy Coney Annette Barrett.
 
2020-09-27 1:34:02 PM  

Advernaut: You realize, USA, that if you don't get rid of these people we will have to hate you all.


We kind of figure you did by now anyways...
 
2020-09-27 1:34:12 PM  

gameshowhost: tangentially

I love how right wingers who say she's a total hottie keep sharing pics of her that are filtered more than Cybil Shepard was in "Moonlighting".

[Fark user image image 850x845]


I saw this pic.

scotusblog.comView Full Size


And it reminded me of her:

i.kym-cdn.comView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 1:34:49 PM  
gfy acb, gop, djt etc.
 
2020-09-27 1:34:52 PM  

nmrsnr: This  shows all the cleverness, ingenuity, and originality I expect of the Republican party.


My question is, do Democrats go with "Amy was a pimp in H.S. who ran rape trains at parties" or do Democrats find an person from H.S. who said "they heard Amy use the N-word while talking to friends". I think they should go with both. What do you think?
 
2020-09-27 1:34:53 PM  

the sentinel: edmo: Just the usual conservative creativity.

Just the usual lack of conservative creativity.

/FTFY


I think OP was being sarcastic.
 
2020-09-27 1:35:20 PM  
Looking forward to that 13 justice SCOTUS.
 
2020-09-27 1:36:38 PM  

Klyukva: raius: She's an unqualified moron.  You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.

I believe what you meant to say was "I don't like her."


No, look at her qualifications and look at the other judges qualifications.  She's an unqualified moron in comparison.  She doesn't get graded on a curve, she a farking imbecile compared to her compatriots.
 
2020-09-27 1:37:23 PM  

santini: weddingsinger: Dave and the Mission: Objection:  Most people paying attention realized there is no bottom.

Damn right.

Just assume any Republican is the absolute worst person imaginable and you'll never be surprised when they advocate for the inhumanity of others.

/their court nominee has an opposition opinion where she says voting is a right of only the "virtuous" citizens which should terrify anyone who isn't interested in licking Donald Trump's taint in order to be able to vote.  That qualifier was used after the civil war to deny the vote to black people (and, I suppose via denying felons with full civil rights, still is via the targeting of black men by police and prosecutors)

[pbs.twimg.com image 680x382]
So her position is that if someone were to commit a felony while using a gun, after serving their sentence, they get the right to own a gun back, or more literally never lost that right, but they don't get their right to vote back?


Believe it or not, I'm not opposed to having felons (of non-violent crimes) having their rights to own guns restored, as well as their voting rights. ACB is just applying those standards in a hypocritical manner.
 
2020-09-27 1:37:46 PM  
All Courts are Bad
 
2020-09-27 1:38:05 PM  

TommyDeuce: fark these guys with a rusty chainsaw.


Listen, that's cool and all but rusty chainsaws are dangerous to operate, thereby putting the person holding the chainsaw in jeopardy.

I don't believe we need to jeopardize the chainsaw operator in this situation.
 
2020-09-27 1:38:53 PM  

pmdgrwr: nmrsnr: This  shows all the cleverness, ingenuity, and originality I expect of the Republican party.

My question is, do Democrats go with "Amy was a pimp in H.S. who ran rape trains at parties" or do Democrats find an person from H.S. who said "they heard Amy use the N-word while talking to friends". I think they should go with both. What do you think?


I suppose you can take some pride in the fact that they found someone who (probably) isn't a sex offender this time, but I would hope that the bar for a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court is a little bit higher than that.
 
2020-09-27 1:38:58 PM  
Barrett is an anti-feminist in sheep's clothing trotting out her wholesome diverse family, She's the Clayton Bixby of the KKK. Her sole purpose to the Federalist Society is to undo everything RGB did.
 
2020-09-27 1:39:03 PM  

ChubbyTiger: weddingsinger: Il Douchey: Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

[Fark user image 318x159]

/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton

Are you more impressed by her total of 3 years of experience as a judge or her participation in an extremist religious sect that literally inspired The Handmaid's Tale?

Hold on.  I don't think this these folks are entirely right in the head and I certainly don't want this appointment to process.  But, they didn't inspire The Handmaid's Tale - the author confirms this to be the case.  It was a different, similarly named, cult.  Not arguing with your conclusions, just your facts.


THank you.

I'm looking it up and see why the confusion: Atwood in 1987 merely mentioned a "a Catholic charismatic spinoff sect, which calls the women handmaids." and Barrett's group did refer to the advisors who tell members what to do as "heads" (men) or "handmaids" (women) and changed the names after Handmaid's Tale came out.  The other group (People of Hope) called wives "handmaids" also.

So I guess I'm back to hating ABC for her sh*tty "originalist" Constitutional takes and her normal level of religiously imposed misogyny (seriously, Paul should NOT be in the Bible)
 
2020-09-27 1:39:51 PM  

raius: Klyukva: raius: She's an unqualified moron.  You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.

I believe what you meant to say was "I don't like her."

No, look at her qualifications and look at the other judges qualifications.  She's an unqualified moron in comparison.  She doesn't get graded on a curve, she a farking imbecile compared to her compatriots.


Do you mean she does get graded on a curve? Because that's what comparing her to others means.
 
2020-09-27 1:41:26 PM  
By the looks of this thread, the Republicans achieved exactly what they intended to with this shirt offer.
 
2020-09-27 1:41:35 PM  
lh3.googleusercontent.comView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 1:41:41 PM  
dammit i guess i got owned again
 
2020-09-27 1:42:51 PM  

Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: She's an unqualified moron.  You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.

I believe what you meant to say was "I don't like her."

No, look at her qualifications and look at the other judges qualifications.  She's an unqualified moron in comparison.  She doesn't get graded on a curve, she a farking imbecile compared to her compatriots.

Do you mean she does get graded on a curve? Because that's what comparing her to others means.


No I mean she doesn't get graded on a curve compare to the rest of us.  She's out of her depth, and frankly so are you.
 
2020-09-27 1:42:53 PM  
Sexy supreme court justice probably isn't a new genre of porn, but i foresee a surge in popularity.
 
2020-09-27 1:43:05 PM  

nmrsnr: This  shows all the cleverness, ingenuity, and originality I expect of the Republican party.


I'm guessing it was designed by one of those companies that redoes corporate logos with a Christian theme without getting permission from the original companies..
 
2020-09-27 1:43:38 PM  

Needlessly Complicated: Il Douchey: /It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton

This is some incel shiat right here.

[Fark user image 425x246]


Is it truly hard to believe that Fark gets the runoff from 8chan's trolls?

Purely because Drewis too much of a greedy farking coward to try and inspire a real online community?
 
2020-09-27 1:43:57 PM  

sprgrss: By the looks of this thread, the Republicans achieved exactly what they intended to with this shirt offer.


To broadcast to the world how trite and unoriginal they are?

Kind of funny they had to steal a nickname from a liberal judge. Because even they know history will look on RBG far more favorably than they will for Barrett.
 
2020-09-27 1:45:03 PM  

gameshowhost: I love how right wingers who say she's a total hottie keep sharing pics of her that are filtered more than Cybil Shepard was in "Moonlighting".


You just ruined the 80s for me.
 
2020-09-27 1:45:12 PM  

Mrtraveler01: To broadcast to the world how trite and unoriginal they are?

Kind of funny they had to steal a nickname from a liberal judge. Because even they know history will look on RBG far more favorably than they will for Barrett.


It went over your head.
 
2020-09-27 1:45:44 PM  

raius: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: She's an unqualified moron.  You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.

I believe what you meant to say was "I don't like her."

No, look at her qualifications and look at the other judges qualifications.  She's an unqualified moron in comparison.  She doesn't get graded on a curve, she a farking imbecile compared to her compatriots.

Do you mean she does get graded on a curve? Because that's what comparing her to others means.

No I mean she doesn't get graded on a curve compare to the rest of us.  She's out of her depth, and frankly so are you.


Okay. Maybe we can have a rational conversation about her later when the 2 minutes hate are up and you're thinking straight.
 
2020-09-27 1:47:05 PM  

FlippityFlap: Here's the deal.....just stop getting outraged by their infantile behavior. They only do it to get a rise out of you. Just expect them to act like 5th grade bullies at all times. I've just started laughing at the ones that do the whole "talk at the top of your voice and say horrible things". THAT, pisses them off more than anything. I've had them try to start fights with me over it....which 100% of the time has ended when I show them I am more than willing to do so. Just like High School...


THIS
Laugh at the Timothy McVeigh gravy seals too. Laugh at the dumb farkers with flags all over their trucks.
 
2020-09-27 1:47:13 PM  

weddingsinger: Dave and the Mission: Objection:  Most people paying attention realized there is no bottom.

Damn right.

Just assume any Republican is the absolute worst person imaginable and you'll never be surprised when they advocate for the inhumanity of others.

/their court nominee has an opposition opinion where she says voting is a right of only the "virtuous" citizens which should terrify anyone who isn't interested in licking Donald Trump's taint in order to be able to vote.  That qualifier was used after the civil war to deny the vote to black people (and, I suppose via denying felons with full civil rights, still is via the targeting of black men by police and prosecutors)

[pbs.twimg.com image 680x382]


Do you know what case that is from?? Like to see it in its entirety.
 
2020-09-27 1:47:14 PM  

Mrtraveler01: sprgrss: By the looks of this thread, the Republicans achieved exactly what they intended to with this shirt offer.

To broadcast to the world how trite and unoriginal they are?

Kind of funny they had to steal a nickname from a liberal judge. Because even they know history will look on RBG far more favorably than they will for Barrett.


Maybe whoever designed the shirt was not trying to pay her a compliment?  Maybe 'notorious' was meant to be taken literally in this instance.
 
2020-09-27 1:47:37 PM  

Insurgent: too proud to retire during a dem supermajority after multiple bouts of cancer. what a waste


^^^
This.  RBG was a great justice on the bench, but her judgment off it deserves to be questioned.
 
2020-09-27 1:47:54 PM  

Il Douchey: weddingsinger:Are you more impressed by her total of 3 years of experience as a judge or her participation in an extremist religious sect that literally inspired The Handmaid's Tale?

Hey, Biden's got like fifty years of "experience" and you know damn well that nobody is impressed with anything about old Joe.  Her sharp mind is more important than a long tenure; there will be time for that.

/If dogging on her religion is all you got, you got nothin


Eabod, you trumpist arse licking redneck.
 
2020-09-27 1:49:14 PM  

raius: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: She's an unqualified moron.  You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.

I believe what you meant to say was "I don't like her."

No, look at her qualifications and look at the other judges qualifications.  She's an unqualified moron in comparison.  She doesn't get graded on a curve, she a farking imbecile compared to her compatriots.

Do you mean she does get graded on a curve? Because that's what comparing her to others means.

No I mean she doesn't get graded on a curve compare to the rest of us.  She's out of her depth, and frankly so are you.


Don't you talk to Cloaca like that!!
 
2020-09-27 1:49:16 PM  

Insurgent: too proud to retire during a dem supermajority after multiple bouts of cancer. what a waste


She wanted her replacement to be picked by the first female president.
 
2020-09-27 1:49:55 PM  
More reading points out Atwood's book had already been published (1985) before 'People of Hope' (New Jersey cult) had made the papers (1987)

In a NYTimes article in 1987 Atwood herself seems to think the Catholic sect got the idea from her, not the other way around.  Which still raises the question of whether the word 'handmaid' was a coincidental use (possibly due to a common source of inspiration) or a forgotten reference to People of Praise.

The direct inspiration for her book seems to be the Iranian revolution (1979) and the Puritans.
 
2020-09-27 1:50:00 PM  

olorin604: weddingsinger: Dave and the Mission: Objection:  Most people paying attention realized there is no bottom.

Damn right.

Just assume any Republican is the absolute worst person imaginable and you'll never be surprised when they advocate for the inhumanity of others.

/their court nominee has an opposition opinion where she says voting is a right of only the "virtuous" citizens which should terrify anyone who isn't interested in licking Donald Trump's taint in order to be able to vote.  That qualifier was used after the civil war to deny the vote to black people (and, I suppose via denying felons with full civil rights, still is via the targeting of black men by police and prosecutors)

[pbs.twimg.com image 680x382]

Do you know what case that is from?? Like to see it in its entirety.


Kanter v. Barr
 
2020-09-27 1:50:24 PM  

Il Douchey: Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

[Fark user image 318x159]

/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton


FARK username checks out

allthatsinteresting.comView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 1:51:47 PM  

raius: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: She's an unqualified moron.  You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.

I believe what you meant to say was "I don't like her."

No, look at her qualifications and look at the other judges qualifications.  She's an unqualified moron in comparison.  She doesn't get graded on a curve, she a farking imbecile compared to her compatriots.

Do you mean she does get graded on a curve? Because that's what comparing her to others means.

No I mean she doesn't get graded on a curve compare to the rest of us.  She's out of her depth, and frankly so are you.


Upon what, other than her potential politics, do you base this claim?
 
2020-09-27 1:52:08 PM  

olorin604: weddingsinger: Dave and the Mission: Objection:  Most people paying attention realized there is no bottom.

Damn right.

Just assume any Republican is the absolute worst person imaginable and you'll never be surprised when they advocate for the inhumanity of others.

/their court nominee has an opposition opinion where she says voting is a right of only the "virtuous" citizens which should terrify anyone who isn't interested in licking Donald Trump's taint in order to be able to vote.  That qualifier was used after the civil war to deny the vote to black people (and, I suppose via denying felons with full civil rights, still is via the targeting of black men by police and prosecutors)

[pbs.twimg.com image 680x382]

Do you know what case that is from?? Like to see it in its entirety.


https://newrepublic.com/article/15951​2​/amy-coney-barrett-wants-felons-guns-n​ot-votes
 
2020-09-27 1:53:22 PM  
It was Scalia's dying wish that Ginsburg be replaced by a conservative.
 
2020-09-27 1:54:38 PM  

Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: She's an unqualified moron.  You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.

I believe what you meant to say was "I don't like her."

No, look at her qualifications and look at the other judges qualifications.  She's an unqualified moron in comparison.  She doesn't get graded on a curve, she a farking imbecile compared to her compatriots.

Do you mean she does get graded on a curve? Because that's what comparing her to others means.

No I mean she doesn't get graded on a curve compare to the rest of us.  She's out of her depth, and frankly so are you.

Okay. Maybe we can have a rational conversation about her later when the 2 minutes hate are up and you're thinking straight.


Find a Supreme Court judge with less qualification and relevant experience in the last 50 years.  You can't, because she's woefully unqualified.

Put up or shut up.
 
2020-09-27 1:56:51 PM  

Il Douchey: HerpAderpADooItrollU


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 1:57:07 PM  

Il Douchey: weddingsinger:Are you more impressed by her total of 3 years of experience as a judge or her participation in an extremist religious sect that literally inspired The Handmaid's Tale?

Hey, Biden's got like fifty years of "experience" and you know damn well that nobody is impressed with anything about old Joe.  Her sharp mind is more important than a long tenure; there will be time for that.

/If dogging on her religion is all you got, you got nothin



I don't even know why I'm bothering, but how sharp is a mind that falls for a fundamentalist religion?
 
2020-09-27 1:57:18 PM  

raius: Find a Supreme Court judge with less qualification and relevant experience in the last 50 years.  You can't, because she's woefully unqualified.

Put up or shut up.


In what way do you find her unqualified?
 
2020-09-27 1:57:26 PM  
I disagree, subby.

This is totally on par for today's Republican party.
 
mjg
2020-09-27 1:57:34 PM  
Points! Vikes!
 
2020-09-27 1:57:39 PM  

sprgrss: raius: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: She's an unqualified moron.  You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.

I believe what you meant to say was "I don't like her."

No, look at her qualifications and look at the other judges qualifications.  She's an unqualified moron in comparison.  She doesn't get graded on a curve, she a farking imbecile compared to her compatriots.

Do you mean she does get graded on a curve? Because that's what comparing her to others means.

No I mean she doesn't get graded on a curve compare to the rest of us.  She's out of her depth, and frankly so are you.

Upon what, other than her potential politics, do you base this claim?


Seriously? Look at her experience, it's supposed to be main qualifier for the job.  The post is supposed to be apolitical.
 
2020-09-27 1:58:02 PM  

sprgrss: Mrtraveler01: To broadcast to the world how trite and unoriginal they are?

Kind of funny they had to steal a nickname from a liberal judge. Because even they know history will look on RBG far more favorably than they will for Barrett.

It went over your head.


Let me guess, it was to stick it to those libs huh?

Like I said, trite and unoriginal. Maybe you guys could think of something original and clever for once instead of making the libs do the hard work for you guys? ;)
 
2020-09-27 1:58:47 PM  

Rann Xerox: Change the shirt to "The Notorious Knocked-Up ACB".

Her Supreme Court clerk will be Michelle Duggar.


She's a fetus Phalanx.
 
2020-09-27 1:59:31 PM  

Erebus1954: It was Scalia's dying wish that Ginsburg be replaced by a conservative.


Actually we don't know what he said as he died. He was out in the middle of nowhere in Texas when he passed away.
 
2020-09-27 1:59:38 PM  

Klyukva: Insurgent: too proud to retire during a dem supermajority after multiple bouts of cancer. what a waste

She wanted her replacement to be picked by the first female president.


she gambled and lost and farked over millions of people in the process.
 
2020-09-27 1:59:59 PM  
She belongs to A religious cult who calls women handmaidens, not THE religious cult who calls women handmaidens you're thinking of. Big difference.
 
2020-09-27 2:01:42 PM  

Il Douchey: Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

[Fark user image 318x159]

/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton


User name checks out.  Remember what they did to the last Il Duce?
 
2020-09-27 2:01:54 PM  

Dave and the Mission: Objection:  Most people paying attention realized there is no bottom.


Agreed. Things that don't surprise me:

*  That the GOP finds a way to go lower.
*  The rate at which they find a way to go lower.

Things that routinely surprise me:

*  The form in which they go lower.
*  That the American people still put up with it as meekly as they do.
 
2020-09-27 2:02:03 PM  

FlippityFlap: Here's the deal.....just stop getting outraged by their infantile behavior. They only do it to get a rise out of you. Just expect them to act like 5th grade bullies at all times. I've just started laughing at the ones that do the whole "talk at the top of your voice and say horrible things". THAT, pisses them off more than anything. I've had them try to start fights with me over it....which 100% of the time has ended when I show them I am more than willing to do so. Just like High School...


Everything they do now is about "owning the libs". All of it.

Getting pissed off over something as laughably juvenile as this? They savor your outrage.
 
2020-09-27 2:02:19 PM  
Nope.
scotusblog.comView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 2:02:21 PM  

Advernaut: You realize, USA, that if you don't get rid of these people we will have to hate you all.


You volunteering your country for deportations?
 
2020-09-27 2:02:28 PM  
100% guaranteed we see Republican senators wearing pussy hats in the judiciary committee. Disgusting, rank hypocrisy is fuel to the gop. If they bother with hearings.
 
2020-09-27 2:02:32 PM  

pueblonative: Dave and the Mission: Objection:  Most people paying attention realized there is no bottom.

[Fark user image 300x168]


You need to clarify


There is no pure, white, hairless bottom, pulsing, quivering, beckoning for one's touch.
A bottom like two freshly-laid eggs, washed and glistening in the morning sun.

Oh my I... I may begin to perspire.
 
2020-09-27 2:02:41 PM  

weddingsinger: Dave and the Mission: Objection:  Most people paying attention realized there is no bottom.

Damn right.

Just assume any Republican is the absolute worst person imaginable and you'll never be surprised when they advocate for the inhumanity of others.

/their court nominee has an opposition opinion where she says voting is a right of only the "virtuous" citizens which should terrify anyone who isn't interested in licking Donald Trump's taint in order to be able to vote.  That qualifier was used after the civil war to deny the vote to black people (and, I suppose via denying felons with full civil rights, still is via the targeting of black men by police and prosecutors)

[pbs.twimg.com image 680x382]


Good Lord.  And she cites a Freaking Kentucky Law Journal for her support?

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 2:02:51 PM  

raius: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: She's an unqualified moron.  You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.

I believe what you meant to say was "I don't like her."

No, look at her qualifications and look at the other judges qualifications.  She's an unqualified moron in comparison.  She doesn't get graded on a curve, she a farking imbecile compared to her compatriots.

Do you mean she does get graded on a curve? Because that's what comparing her to others means.

No I mean she doesn't get graded on a curve compare to the rest of us.  She's out of her depth, and frankly so are you.

Okay. Maybe we can have a rational conversation about her later when the 2 minutes hate are up and you're thinking straight.

Find a Supreme Court judge with less qualification and relevant experience in the last 50 years.


Given that she was nominated at a younger age than other justices I would be surprised if she didn't have a less storied career. But you called her a "moron", which would be surprising if it had any truth to it whatsoever.
 
2020-09-27 2:03:01 PM  
Cancer free stickers for everyone!!'
 
2020-09-27 2:05:08 PM  

Il Douchey: Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

[Fark user image image 318x159]

/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton


"fine"

If shiat taste should have a name, it's this account right here.
 
2020-09-27 2:05:55 PM  

raius: Seriously? Look at her experience, it's supposed to be main qualifier for the job.  The post is supposed to be apolitical.


In what way do you find her resume deficient?
 
2020-09-27 2:06:37 PM  

Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: She's an unqualified moron.  You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.

I believe what you meant to say was "I don't like her."

No, look at her qualifications and look at the other judges qualifications.  She's an unqualified moron in comparison.  She doesn't get graded on a curve, she a farking imbecile compared to her compatriots.

Do you mean she does get graded on a curve? Because that's what comparing her to others means.

No I mean she doesn't get graded on a curve compare to the rest of us.  She's out of her depth, and frankly so are you.

Okay. Maybe we can have a rational conversation about her later when the 2 minutes hate are up and you're thinking straight.

Find a Supreme Court judge with less qualification and relevant experience in the last 50 years.

Given that she was nominated at a younger age than other justices I would be surprised if she didn't have a less storied career. But you called her a "moron", which would be surprising if it had any truth to it whatsoever.


So she's unqualified for the job then.  Glad we agree.
 
2020-09-27 2:07:45 PM  
sure she'll get confirmed, no question, the important thing is that dems now have the moral high ground since she is obviously unqualified.
 
2020-09-27 2:07:54 PM  

Prank Call of Cthulhu: More like the notorious See You Next Tuesday.

/Not misogyny.


reported for miso-.... you can't just cut me off at the pass like that
 
2020-09-27 2:07:56 PM  
They can always go lower. Never assume they've hit bottom.
 
2020-09-27 2:08:23 PM  

Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: She's an unqualified moron.  You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.

I believe what you meant to say was "I don't like her."

No, look at her qualifications and look at the other judges qualifications.  She's an unqualified moron in comparison.  She doesn't get graded on a curve, she a farking imbecile compared to her compatriots.

Do you mean she does get graded on a curve? Because that's what comparing her to others means.

No I mean she doesn't get graded on a curve compare to the rest of us.  She's out of her depth, and frankly so are you.

Okay. Maybe we can have a rational conversation about her later when the 2 minutes hate are up and you're thinking straight.

Find a Supreme Court judge with less qualification and relevant experience in the last 50 years.

Given that she was nominated at a younger age than other justices I would be surprised if she didn't have a less storied career. But you called her a "moron", which would be surprising if it had any truth to it whatsoever.


Clerking and private practice for a few years, holding a law degree for just 23 years, and being a real judge for less than three years?  Someone who has made it quite clear that her religious beliefs come before the Constitution?
 
2020-09-27 2:08:33 PM  
I'm OK with this.  It's a moral obligation to part anyone foolish enough to buy this from as much money as possible.  I hope it's $100 and they sell millions.
 
2020-09-27 2:08:38 PM  
No, I've never thought that.   I've found the depth of human depravity is bottomless.
 
2020-09-27 2:09:59 PM  

SumoJeb: Sexy supreme court justice probably isn't a new genre of porn, but i foresee a surge in popularity.


phrasing?
 
2020-09-27 2:10:08 PM  

NM Volunteer: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: She's an unqualified moron.  You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.

I believe what you meant to say was "I don't like her."

No, look at her qualifications and look at the other judges qualifications.  She's an unqualified moron in comparison.  She doesn't get graded on a curve, she a farking imbecile compared to her compatriots.

Do you mean she does get graded on a curve? Because that's what comparing her to others means.

No I mean she doesn't get graded on a curve compare to the rest of us.  She's out of her depth, and frankly so are you.

Okay. Maybe we can have a rational conversation about her later when the 2 minutes hate are up and you're thinking straight.

Find a Supreme Court judge with less qualification and relevant experience in the last 50 years.

Given that she was nominated at a younger age than other justices I would be surprised if she didn't have a less storied career. But you called her a "moron", which would be surprising if it had any truth to it whatsoever.

Clerking and private practice for a few years, holding a law degree for just 23 years, and being a real judge for less than three years?  Someone who has made it quite clear that her religious beliefs come before the Constitution?


Apparently being experienced and qualified as your peers is a partisan issue.  It's little fun at least to watch them spin to defend it though.
 
2020-09-27 2:10:20 PM  

Insurgent: sure she'll get confirmed, no question, the important thing is that dems now have the moral high ground since she is obviously unqualified.


Don't confuse your disagreement with one's judicial philosophy as not being qualified.
 
2020-09-27 2:10:45 PM  

SumoJeb: Sexy supreme court justice probably isn't a new genre of porn, but i foresee a surge in popularity.



Yeah I can't wait until Kav tries to "boof" her.

What a shiatshow this last four years has been.

Thanks gun nuts and pro-life whackos. Without you authoritarian hillbillies we might actually be in the 21st century.
 
2020-09-27 2:10:52 PM  

sprgrss: By the looks of this thread, the Republicans achieved exactly what they intended to with this shirt offer.


If they were trying to get mocked, they didn't actually have to put in any additional effort.
 
2020-09-27 2:11:16 PM  

raius: NM Volunteer: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: She's an unqualified moron.  You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.

I believe what you meant to say was "I don't like her."

No, look at her qualifications and look at the other judges qualifications.  She's an unqualified moron in comparison.  She doesn't get graded on a curve, she a farking imbecile compared to her compatriots.

Do you mean she does get graded on a curve? Because that's what comparing her to others means.

No I mean she doesn't get graded on a curve compare to the rest of us.  She's out of her depth, and frankly so are you.

Okay. Maybe we can have a rational conversation about her later when the 2 minutes hate are up and you're thinking straight.

Find a Supreme Court judge with less qualification and relevant experience in the last 50 years.

Given that she was nominated at a younger age than other justices I would be surprised if she didn't have a less storied career. But you called her a "moron", which would be surprising if it had any truth to it whatsoever.

Clerking and private practice for a few years, holding a law degree for just 23 years, and being a real judge for less than three years?  Someone who has made it quite clear that her religious beliefs come before the Constitution?

Apparently being experienced and qualified as your peers is a partisan issue.  It's little fun at least to watch them spin to defend it though.


Just remind them they did the same to Obama, and claimed that Trump's inexperience in politics is a benefit. Because they ignore that his "experience" is being a failed businessman.
 
2020-09-27 2:11:29 PM  

Il Douchey: weddingsinger:Are you more impressed by her total of 3 years of experience as a judge or her participation in an extremist religious sect that literally inspired The Handmaid's Tale?

Hey, Biden's got like fifty years of "experience" and you know damn well that nobody is impressed with anything about old Joe.  Her sharp mind is more important than a long tenure; there will be time for that.

/If dogging on her religion is all you got, you got nothin


The fact that your previous statement commented on how 'bangable' she was says volumes.

In that, you obviously care more about getting in a Republican woman's pants than you do about their ability to do a job fairly.
 
2020-09-27 2:11:55 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 2:11:57 PM  

Mrtraveler01: Erebus1954: It was Scalia's dying wish that Ginsburg be replaced by a conservative.

Actually we don't know what he said as he died. He was out in the middle of nowhere in Texas when he passed away.


He was murdered by the ghost of Seth Rich.
 
2020-09-27 2:12:11 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 2:12:12 PM  

Klyukva: Insurgent: too proud to retire during a dem supermajority after multiple bouts of cancer. what a waste

She wanted her replacement to be picked by the first female president.


Hubris is a hell of a thing, especially when it significantly farks at least half of the nation over.
 
2020-09-27 2:12:14 PM  

raius: NM Volunteer: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: She's an unqualified moron.  You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.

I believe what you meant to say was "I don't like her."

No, look at her qualifications and look at the other judges qualifications.  She's an unqualified moron in comparison.  She doesn't get graded on a curve, she a farking imbecile compared to her compatriots.

Do you mean she does get graded on a curve? Because that's what comparing her to others means.

No I mean she doesn't get graded on a curve compare to the rest of us.  She's out of her depth, and frankly so are you.

Okay. Maybe we can have a rational conversation about her later when the 2 minutes hate are up and you're thinking straight.

Find a Supreme Court judge with less qualification and relevant experience in the last 50 years.

Given that she was nominated at a younger age than other justices I would be surprised if she didn't have a less storied career. But you called her a "moron", which would be surprising if it had any truth to it whatsoever.

Clerking and private practice for a few years, holding a law degree for just 23 years, and being a real judge for less than three years?  Someone who has made it quite clear that her religious beliefs come before the Constitution?

Apparently being experienced and qualified as your peers is a partisan issue.  It's little fun at least to watch them spin to defend it though.


It's on par for the scumbags.  They supported an alleged billionaire with no government experience as president, so why not support a religious nutjob for the College of Cardinals Supreme Court?
 
2020-09-27 2:12:49 PM  

NM Volunteer: Clerking and private practice for a few years,


Par for the course

holding a law degree for just 23 years,

Just 23 years?  That practically a whole career looking forward to retirement

and being a real judge for less than three years?

That's three more years than Elena Kagan and William Rehnquist had combined prior to becoming members of the Supreme Court

Someone who has made it quite clear that her religious beliefs come before the Constitution?

And there it is.  The actual complaint.  It's not that she is unqualified its that your beliefs of what her jurisprudence are.
 
2020-09-27 2:12:50 PM  

sprgrss: raius: Seriously? Look at her experience, it's supposed to be main qualifier for the job.  The post is supposed to be apolitical.

In what way do you find her resume deficient?


It's practically empty.
 
2020-09-27 2:15:25 PM  
There is a special place in hell for women who don't help other women.
 
2020-09-27 2:15:53 PM  
So wait, she's a rapper?
 
2020-09-27 2:15:59 PM  

Mrtraveler01: gameshowhost: tangentially

I love how right wingers who say she's a total hottie keep sharing pics of her that are filtered more than Cybil Shepard was in "Moonlighting".

[Fark user image image 850x845]

I saw this pic.

Fark user imageView Full Size


First the pic reminded me of Michelle Bachman.

Then it reminded me of the guy who would occasionally tell the many women lawyers in the office that he thought they should be at home, cooking and taking care of the children and they had no business working.  (He then played the victim when he and a third of the firm was laid off during truly bad economic times for the firm's specialty.)

I doubt if a conservative reporter will ask her why she is working, instead of being at home with the children.
 
2020-09-27 2:16:01 PM  

sprgrss: Someone who has made it quite clear that her religious beliefs come before the Constitution?

And there it is.  The actual complaint.  It's not that she is unqualified its that your beliefs of what her jurisprudence are.


So this doesn't bother you at all?  Someone who would put their religious beliefs first in that kind of apolitical, areligious position?  Would you be spouting the same nonsense if Democrats nominated, say, a Muslim?  Or a Sikh?
 
2020-09-27 2:16:07 PM  

sprgrss: NM Volunteer: Clerking and private practice for a few years,

Par for the course

holding a law degree for just 23 years,

Just 23 years?  That practically a whole career looking forward to retirement

and being a real judge for less than three years?

That's three more years than Elena Kagan and William Rehnquist had combined prior to becoming members of the Supreme Court

Someone who has made it quite clear that her religious beliefs come before the Constitution?

And there it is.  The actual complaint.  It's not that she is unqualified its that your beliefs of what her jurisprudence are.


Look at those goalpost moves. If you clerk for 20+ years and it's not to another SCOTUS Justice, then what are you even doing with your life or your degree.
 
2020-09-27 2:16:33 PM  

sprgrss: raius: Seriously? Look at her experience, it's supposed to be main qualifier for the job.  The post is supposed to be apolitical.

In what way do you find her resume deficient?


She has almost no experience as a judge, and very little as a general legal scholar.

Put it this way: Erwin Chemerinsky is the most renowned Constitutional scholar around--and I think he'd be unqualified as a Supreme Court justice.

Just because some people agree with her legal opinions on originalism doesn't make her eminently qualified to rule on everything from contract law to death penalty cases.

I'd sooner see a conservative judge with ten years of circuit court experience than a scholar who once clerked for Scalia.

YMMV, of course. But anyone can research. That isnt experience.
 
2020-09-27 2:16:42 PM  

sprgrss: NM Volunteer: Clerking and private practice for a few years,

Someone who has made it quite clear that her religious beliefs come before the Constitution?

And there it is.  The actual complaint.  It's not that she is unqualified its that your beliefs of what her jurisprudence are.


This is a secular nation, by law.  There is no such thing as a qualified judge who puts religious beliefs ahead of the constitution.

/adding another unqualified wingnut to the growing pile of unqualified wingnuts is wrong by any measure
 
2020-09-27 2:16:50 PM  

sprgrss: Insurgent: sure she'll get confirmed, no question, the important thing is that dems now have the moral high ground since she is obviously unqualified.

Don't confuse your disagreement with one's judicial philosophy as not being qualified.


3 years as a judge is qualified for a SCOTUS seat now?

How unfathomably stupid are you? Really?
 
2020-09-27 2:17:44 PM  
"Republicans would shiat their own pants if it meant a Democrat had to smell it."
 
2020-09-27 2:17:59 PM  
my god has anyone mentioned how ugly she is? priorties, people!
 
2020-09-27 2:18:12 PM  

gameshowhost: There is no such thing as a qualified judge who puts religious beliefs ahead of the constitution.


There is zero evidence to support this claim other than what you want to believe.
 
2020-09-27 2:18:16 PM  
Sooo desperate to be cool...
 
2020-09-27 2:18:17 PM  

Mrtraveler01: Erebus1954: It was Scalia's dying wish that Ginsburg be replaced by a conservative.

Actually we don't know what he said as he died. He was out in the middle of nowhere in Texas when he passed away.


And, he died in his sleep.

Supposedly....

/Kidding
//I am
///Not an Alex Jones fan, honest!
 
2020-09-27 2:18:29 PM  
Someone should convert them to Notorious ACAB shirts.
 
2020-09-27 2:18:43 PM  

BitwiseShift: Mrtraveler01: gameshowhost: tangentially

I love how right wingers who say she's a total hottie keep sharing pics of her that are filtered more than Cybil Shepard was in "Moonlighting".

[Fark user image image 850x845]

I saw this pic.

[Fark user image 500x500]

First the pic reminded me of Michelle Bachman.

Then it reminded me of the guy who would occasionally tell the many women lawyers in the office that he thought they should be at home, cooking and taking care of the children and they had no business working.  (He then played the victim when he and a third of the firm was laid off during truly bad economic times for the firm's specialty.)

I doubt if a conservative reporter will ask her why she is working, instead of being at home with the children.


This would be the least heartbreaking question ever.
 
2020-09-27 2:18:47 PM  

quiotu: 3 years as a judge is qualified for a SCOTUS seat now?

How unfathomably stupid are you? Really?


How many years as a judge did Elena Kagan or William Rehnquist have prior to joining the Supreme Court?
 
2020-09-27 2:19:42 PM  

recombobulator: I'm OK with this.  It's a moral obligation to part anyone foolish enough to buy this from as much money as possible.  I hope it's $100 and they sell millions.


i.kym-cdn.comView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 2:20:30 PM  

sprgrss: NM Volunteer: Clerking and private practice for a few years,

Par for the course

holding a law degree for just 23 years,

Just 23 years?  That practically a whole career looking forward to retirement

and being a real judge for less than three years?

That's three more years than Elena Kagan and William Rehnquist had combined prior to becoming members of the Supreme Court

Someone who has made it quite clear that her religious beliefs come before the Constitution?

And there it is.  The actual complaint.  It's not that she is unqualified its that your beliefs of what her jurisprudence are.


Go look at Kagan record, compare it to Barret.  Take out the politics and tell me whose more qualified?  If you're honest you'll be able to admit Kagan had a much more storied career with relevant experience than Barret.  They aren't in the same league.

Scalia is not someone I agreed with, but he was qualified for the job, she's not.  Why would you want someone who's so obviously inexperienced?
 
2020-09-27 2:20:51 PM  

MinatoArisato013: sprgrss: NM Volunteer: Clerking and private practice for a few years,

Par for the course

holding a law degree for just 23 years,

Just 23 years?  That practically a whole career looking forward to retirement

and being a real judge for less than three years?

That's three more years than Elena Kagan and William Rehnquist had combined prior to becoming members of the Supreme Court

Someone who has made it quite clear that her religious beliefs come before the Constitution?

And there it is.  The actual complaint.  It's not that she is unqualified its that your beliefs of what her jurisprudence are.

Look at those goalpost moves. If you clerk for 20+ years and it's not to another SCOTUS Justice, then what are you even doing with your life or your degree.


You have no idea what a law clerk does, do you.
 
2020-09-27 2:22:02 PM  

sprgrss: quiotu: 3 years as a judge is qualified for a SCOTUS seat now?

How unfathomably stupid are you? Really?

How many years as a judge did Elena Kagan or William Rehnquist have prior to joining the Supreme Court?


This lady has absolutely zero qualifications for the position, you can't list any, the GOP knows this, which is why this is being fast tracked. Because the more about her history that's shown, the more embarrassing this will look. At least Kavanaugh had experience, she's there as a placemark for an anti-abortion vote and nothing else.

She will embarrass conservatives for 30+ years if she's voted in, and you lot are far too stupid and shameless to care, if it gets a vote you want.
 
2020-09-27 2:22:57 PM  

quiotu: sprgrss: Insurgent: sure she'll get confirmed, no question, the important thing is that dems now have the moral high ground since she is obviously unqualified.

Don't confuse your disagreement with one's judicial philosophy as not being qualified.

3 years as a judge is qualified for a SCOTUS seat now?

How unfathomably stupid are you? Really?


The amount of time as a judge is a trap, you can build relevant experience in other legal work.  In this case Barret just hasn't.
 
2020-09-27 2:23:05 PM  

sprgrss: gameshowhost: There is no such thing as a qualified judge who puts religious beliefs ahead of the constitution.

There is zero evidence to support this claim other than what you want to believe.


So, your argument is that if the court says it's so, that they could legally say the US is a Christian nation, to be ruled by laws made by Biblical, not man's law? And that all other religions should be seen as blasphemous?

Because that sounds like what you're saying here.
 
2020-09-27 2:23:18 PM  

raius: Go look at Kagan record, compare it to Barret.  Take out the politics and tell me whose more qualified?  If you're honest you'll be able to admit Kagan had a much more storied career with relevant experience than Barret.  They aren't in the same league.



They are pretty much on equal footing with each other.

These amorphous standards of "qualifications" you've concocted in your mind would have disqualified everyone from Elena Kagan to William Rehnquist to Earl Warren.
 
2020-09-27 2:25:36 PM  
Are you all ready for single payer? Because nuking the ACA is how you get popular suppory for single payer.
 
2020-09-27 2:26:34 PM  

quiotu: This lady has absolutely zero qualifications for the position, you can't list any, the GOP knows this, which is why this is being fast tracked. Because the more about her history that's shown, the more embarrassing this will look. At least Kavanaugh had experience, she's there as a placemark for an anti-abortion vote and nothing else.


You are moving goalposts buddy.  You made the claim that 3 years of prior judicial service is insufficient.  That's infinitely more judicial service than either Kagan, Rehnquist, Black, Warren, Byron White, and many other Supreme Court justices within the past 50 years have had.
 
2020-09-27 2:26:43 PM  

gameshowhost: Prank Call of Cthulhu: More like the notorious See You Next Tuesday.

/Not misogyny.

reported for miso-.... you can't just cut me off at the pass like that


Fark user imageView Full Size


/vagina-American
 
2020-09-27 2:28:02 PM  

sprgrss: raius: Go look at Kagan record, compare it to Barret.  Take out the politics and tell me whose more qualified?  If you're honest you'll be able to admit Kagan had a much more storied career with relevant experience than Barret.  They aren't in the same league.


They are pretty much on equal footing with each other.

These amorphous standards of "qualifications" you've concocted in your mind would have disqualified everyone from Elena Kagan to William Rehnquist to Earl Warren.


If you can't argue in good faith then don't argue at all.  Kagan was far more impressive, all it takes is looking at their records to determine that.
 
2020-09-27 2:29:12 PM  

Airius: Are you all ready for single payer? Because nuking the ACA is how you get popular suppory for single payer.


Hooray?
 
2020-09-27 2:29:28 PM  

gameshowhost: BitwiseShift: Mrtraveler01: gameshowhost: tangentially

I love how right wingers who say she's a total hottie keep sharing pics of her that are filtered more than Cybil Shepard was in "Moonlighting".

[Fark user image image 850x845]

I saw this pic.

[Fark user image 500x500]

First the pic reminded me of Michelle Bachman.

Then it reminded me of the guy who would occasionally tell the many women lawyers in the office that he thought they should be at home, cooking and taking care of the children and they had no business working.  (He then played the victim when he and a third of the firm was laid off during truly bad economic times for the firm's specialty.)

I doubt if a conservative reporter will ask her why she is working, instead of being at home with the children.

This would be the least heartbreaking question ever.


Someone should, though. Just to see what she'll say.
 
2020-09-27 2:29:51 PM  

raius: If you can't argue in good faith then don't argue at all.  Kagan was far more impressive, all it takes is looking at their records to determine that.


I'm sorry but you are the one who claims her record shows deficiencies in merit.

Her resume is not all too different than many others who found themselves on the bench

You just don't like her jurisprudential outlook, either that or you are one of those snobs who thinks anyone who didn't attend an Ivy is unqualified for the bench.
 
2020-09-27 2:30:00 PM  

sprgrss: gameshowhost: There is no such thing as a qualified judge who puts religious beliefs ahead of the constitution.

There is zero evidence to support this claim other than what you want to believe.


All kinds of evidence sourced right here:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio​n​s/the-bombshell-consequences-of-amy-co​ney-barrett/2020/09/25/3531ab9c-ff6f-1​1ea-8d05-9beaaa91c71f_story.html
 
2020-09-27 2:30:18 PM  

raius: sprgrss: raius: Go look at Kagan record, compare it to Barret.  Take out the politics and tell me whose more qualified?  If you're honest you'll be able to admit Kagan had a much more storied career with relevant experience than Barret.  They aren't in the same league.


They are pretty much on equal footing with each other.

These amorphous standards of "qualifications" you've concocted in your mind would have disqualified everyone from Elena Kagan to William Rehnquist to Earl Warren.

If you can't argue in good faith then don't argue at all.  Kagan was far more impressive, all it takes is looking at their records to determine that.


You expect someone who previously said, "I know progressives are secretly cheering on the disease just so they can have a "told you so moment""  to argue in good faith?
 
2020-09-27 2:31:13 PM  

gameshowhost: sprgrss: gameshowhost: There is no such thing as a qualified judge who puts religious beliefs ahead of the constitution.

There is zero evidence to support this claim other than what you want to believe.

All kinds of evidence sourced right here:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinion​s/the-bombshell-consequences-of-amy-co​ney-barrett/2020/09/25/3531ab9c-ff6f-1​1ea-8d05-9beaaa91c71f_story.html


Ruth Marcus, that's a hard pass.
 
2020-09-27 2:31:47 PM  

sprgrss: quiotu: This lady has absolutely zero qualifications for the position, you can't list any, the GOP knows this, which is why this is being fast tracked. Because the more about her history that's shown, the more embarrassing this will look. At least Kavanaugh had experience, she's there as a placemark for an anti-abortion vote and nothing else.

You are moving goalposts buddy.  You made the claim that 3 years of prior judicial service is insufficient.  That's infinitely more judicial service than either Kagan, Rehnquist, Black, Warren, Byron White, and many other Supreme Court justices within the past 50 years have had.


The others were vetted to show they had qualifications. Actual time as a judge counts for a lot.

So fine, she has other qualifications. What are they? Be specific. If 3 years as a judge means nothing, then 20+ years as a clerk means less than nothing.

What has she done to deserve a lifetime appointment on the highest court in the country?
 
2020-09-27 2:31:47 PM  

aleister_greynight: You expect someone who previously said, "I know progressives are secretly cheering on the disease just so they can have a "told you so moment""  to argue in good faith?


That's an interesting allegation there.
 
2020-09-27 2:32:12 PM  

New Burner Account: Il Douchey: Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

[Fark user image image 318x159]

/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton

Bangable?  After that many kids it's going to be like sliding a hotdog down a hallway.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 2:32:29 PM  

sprgrss: You just don't like her jurisprudential outlook, either that or you are one of those snobs who thinks anyone who didn't attend an Ivy is unqualified for the bench.


Who would like a possible justice that would take rights away from many citizens and give more to people who already have more power over the nation than they should be allowed?

Oh...you would.  That explains everything.
 
2020-09-27 2:32:47 PM  

sprgrss: gameshowhost: sprgrss: gameshowhost: There is no such thing as a qualified judge who puts religious beliefs ahead of the constitution.

There is zero evidence to support this claim other than what you want to believe.

All kinds of evidence sourced right here:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinion​s/the-bombshell-consequences-of-amy-co​ney-barrett/2020/09/25/3531ab9c-ff6f-1​1ea-8d05-9beaaa91c71f_story.html

Ruth Marcus, that's a hard pass.


"Whar the evidence?!  NO NOT THAT EVIDENCE!"
 
2020-09-27 2:33:01 PM  

sprgrss: raius: If you can't argue in good faith then don't argue at all.  Kagan was far more impressive, all it takes is looking at their records to determine that.

I'm sorry but you are the one who claims her record shows deficiencies in merit.

Her resume is not all too different than many others who found themselves on the bench

You just don't like her jurisprudential outlook, either that or you are one of those snobs who thinks anyone who didn't attend an Ivy is unqualified for the bench.


Yes, such a snob to think to be at the pinnacle of your profession that you actually have the needed experience.

This idea that outsiders know better then experts is leading do the downfall of America.  It's not snobbery to expect the best, you shouldn't want to go get a beer with your judge.

Anyways we're done here, have the last word or don't.  You don't want to argue in good faith, so I didn't want to listen you anymore.

Cheers.
 
2020-09-27 2:34:00 PM  

sprgrss: aleister_greynight: You expect someone who previously said, "I know progressives are secretly cheering on the disease just so they can have a "told you so moment""  to argue in good faith?

That's an interesting allegation there.


It's not an allegation, it's a direct quotation from you that I saved.
 
2020-09-27 2:34:02 PM  

quiotu: The others were vetted to show they had qualifications. Actual time as a judge counts for a lot.

So fine, she has other qualifications. What are they? Be specific. If 3 years as a judge means nothing, then 20+ years as a clerk means less than nothing.

What has she done to deserve a lifetime appointment on the highest court in the country?


What are you trying to say here?

You claim that 3 years of service on the bench is meaningless, yet I pointed out numerous Justices who were never judges prior.

Now you are saying something about 20+ years as a clerk.  I know of no one who ever spent that much time, in the modern era as a clerk.  Her clerkship service is par for the course.

Do you even know what you are attempting to argue anymore?
 
2020-09-27 2:34:19 PM  

Dave and the Mission: Objection:  Most people paying attention realized there is no bottom.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 2:34:24 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 2:34:47 PM  

quiotu: This lady has absolutely zero qualifications for the position, you can't list any, the GOP knows this, which is why this is being fast tracked.


Summa cum laude graduate from Notre Dame Law School, 15 years a professor at same, a clerk for the SCOTUS, and a judge on a Circuit Court?

You can argue that she is underqualified, you can argue that she's not the correct person for the job, but you can't reasonably argue that she has no qualifications.
 
2020-09-27 2:35:22 PM  
The GOP really are just fat, stupid grade school bullies, aren't they?
 
2020-09-27 2:35:46 PM  

raius: Yes, such a snob to think to be at the pinnacle of your profession that you actually have the needed experience.

This idea that outsiders know better then experts is leading do the downfall of America.  It's not snobbery to expect the best, you shouldn't want to go get a beer with your judge.

Anyways we're done here, have the last word or don't.  You don't want to argue in good faith, so I didn't want to listen you anymore.

Cheers.


How is her resume any different from the likes of William Rehnquist, Byron White, and any numerous other justices?  23 years teaching at a T-14 law school is pretty impressive so is her prior clerkships along with her academic writing while being a law professor and now three years on the 7th Circuit.

You just don't like her jurisprudence.
 
2020-09-27 2:35:49 PM  
If we're being honest about this, we know that the real issue is less her qualifications and more that she was specifically picked to kill the ACA.

This is going to cost us money, it's going to kill people, and it's going to make life really miserable for others.  America is already behind every other developed country in the world with regard to healthcare, and we're going to go backwards.

It's also going to cost the rest of you suckers money because it means I'm ditching the U.S. when I retire, so my hard-earned money is going to be spent elsewhere.  No matter how much I save up, without the ACA, there's potentially unlimited financial downside for medical emergencies, so it'll be very possible to go bankrupt even with insurance.  I don't want to live like that.
 
2020-09-27 2:35:52 PM  
Just when you thought the Republicans could not go any lower


I have never thought that.
 
2020-09-27 2:36:32 PM  

Name_Omitted: quiotu: This lady has absolutely zero qualifications for the position, you can't list any, the GOP knows this, which is why this is being fast tracked.

Summa cum laude graduate from Notre Dame Law School, 15 years a professor at same, a clerk for the SCOTUS, and a judge on a Circuit Court?

You can argue that she is underqualified, you can argue that she's not the correct person for the job, but you can't reasonably argue that she has no qualifications.


She doesn't have the qualifications for the job she's applying for.  No thinks she's uneducated, but she's not on the save level as her potential future peers.

This is supposed to be the pinnacle of her career, it's not an entry level position.
 
2020-09-27 2:36:47 PM  
I think Trump could have chosen someone better than ACB but I'm wondering if this is some kind 3d chess move.
 
2020-09-27 2:37:08 PM  

sprgrss: raius: Yes, such a snob to think to be at the pinnacle of your profession that you actually have the needed experience.

This idea that outsiders know better then experts is leading do the downfall of America.  It's not snobbery to expect the best, you shouldn't want to go get a beer with your judge.

Anyways we're done here, have the last word or don't.  You don't want to argue in good faith, so I didn't want to listen you anymore.

Cheers.

How is her resume any different from the likes of William Rehnquist, Byron White, and any numerous other justices?  23 years teaching at a T-14 law school is pretty impressive so is her prior clerkships along with her academic writing while being a law professor and now three years on the 7th Circuit.

You just don't like her jurisprudence.


And I'll correct myself here, Notre Dame is not T-14
 
2020-09-27 2:37:33 PM  
fark off.  A notorious person can still be of good character.
Robin Hood is a go-to example.

Nefarious would be a more apt choice of words.

/Or infamous, like El Guapo.
 
2020-09-27 2:38:16 PM  

Il Douchey: Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

[Fark user image 318x159]

/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton


oh she won't be confirmed.  Just wait until the hearings.  She won't cry and pout like beer bro, but since she doesn't have a penis the repubs won't risk too much on her behalf.  The clock's ticking, and it's running down fast.
 
2020-09-27 2:38:19 PM  

raius: This is supposed to be the pinnacle of her career, it's not an entry level position.


23 years in the practice of law, prior clerkships, 15 years as a professor at Notre Dame, and 3 years on the 7th Circuit is not entry level qualifications.
 
2020-09-27 2:38:28 PM  

Chuck87: I think Trump could have chosen someone better than ACB but I'm wondering if this is some kind 3d chess move.


Very unlikely.  Either a campaign donor insisted on her, or he knows he will lose in November and is trying to get the person most likely to take down Obamacare.  Tiny Dick Daughterfarker is still obsessed with eliminating that, because it has Obama's name on it.
 
2020-09-27 2:38:44 PM  
Do SCOTUS justice get security?
 
2020-09-27 2:38:51 PM  

Chuck87: I think Trump could have chosen someone better than ACB but I'm wondering if this is some kind 3d chess move.


She's young and Conservative that's all he and the Republicans want, because they want her on the bench a long time.
 
2020-09-27 2:39:02 PM  

Curmudgeonly: The GOP really are just fat, stupid, successful grade school bullies, aren't they?


FTFY
 
2020-09-27 2:39:03 PM  
Don't you Libs know anything?

She is CONSERVATIVE.

That is THE ONLY QUALIFICATION THAT MATTERS.  Anything else is gravy.
 
2020-09-27 2:39:12 PM  

Chuck87: I think Trump could have chosen someone better than ACB but I'm wondering if this is some kind 3d chess move.


Its about motivating his base that he desperately needs to get out in November if he has a shot at winning.

The flip side might be that it'll motivate Democrats even more.
 
2020-09-27 2:40:16 PM  
That's bait.
 
2020-09-27 2:40:25 PM  
Unearned accolades.  Yep, that sounds about right.

Let's see 20 years from now if she's more like Scalia or Thomas. Then she can get a new nickname.
 
2020-09-27 2:42:34 PM  

DittoToo: Do SCOTUS justice get security?


They do, but if they decide to outlaw abortion we'll see just how good they are I suppose.  Anyone can be killed with proper motivation.

I'm not recommending that approach, just speculating on where things seem to be heading.
 
2020-09-27 2:43:30 PM  

sprgrss: raius: This is supposed to be the pinnacle of her career, it's not an entry level position.

23 years in the practice of law, prior clerkships, 15 years as a professor at Notre Dame, and 3 years on the 7th Circuit is not entry level qualifications.


As one of 9 people in the entire country that get to judge the definition of every law and constitutional amendment in this country? No... she doesn't.

And it doesn't take a genius to see it.
 
2020-09-27 2:43:32 PM  

WalkingCarpet: I've run out of evens I can't anymore, she could not be any more different than RBG.

Fark these people and fark anyone still supporting these human pieces of farking garbage.

/fark


They say that imitation is the highest form of flattery.  The right is soooo jealous of RBG's rock star status.  The People of Praise connection means she can never sit with the cool kids.

In fact, most of our politics can be explained by high school.  The republicans are perennially angry that they never mastered the coolness of the left.
 
2020-09-27 2:43:52 PM  
That should go over like a fart in church. They can't even come up with anything original?
 
2020-09-27 2:43:53 PM  

Original: Original Tweet:

NRSC: 🚨 LIMITED EDITION: Show your support for Pres. Trump's Supreme Court nominee, Judge Amy Coney Barrett, with your very own Notorious A.C.B. t-shirt! Claim yours here ⬇https://t.co/qi1eWqTz17


<Fark user image>
Hurr, female judge with three names, durr!
</Fark user image>
 
2020-09-27 2:44:56 PM  

raius: She doesn't have the qualifications for the job she's applying for.  No thinks she's uneducated, but she's not on the save level as her potential future peers.

This is supposed to be the pinnacle of her career, it's not an entry level position.


We agree that she's not the most qualified candidate available, but if there job is to interpret the law, 15 years of teaching it at a prestigious institution hardly qualifies as entity level.

Completely ignoring her experience is not a strong argument.
 
2020-09-27 2:45:24 PM  

NetOwl: If we're being honest about this, we know that the real issue is less her qualifications and more that she was specifically picked to kill the ACA.

This is going to cost us money, it's going to kill people, and it's going to make life really miserable for others.  America is already behind every other developed country in the world with regard to healthcare, and we're going to go backwards.

It's also going to cost the rest of you suckers money because it means I'm ditching the U.S. when I retire, so my hard-earned money is going to be spent elsewhere.  No matter how much I save up, without the ACA, there's potentially unlimited financial downside for medical emergencies, so it'll be very possible to go bankrupt even with insurance.  I don't want to live like that.


You won't have to. The republicans play chess with a move depth of 1. The blowback from nuking the ACA in court is to get single payer.

We could have had a hybrid system through significant regulation of the RICO activity going on in the healthcare industry, thus driving down the costs to where only the indigent and economically struggling would require a 100% paid public policy. (Medicare for all who need it, private paid care for rich people who don't)

Instead we will get a full single payer system with a government where some politicians try to fark it up instead of making it work well.
 
2020-09-27 2:46:19 PM  

quiotu: sprgrss: raius: This is supposed to be the pinnacle of her career, it's not an entry level position.

23 years in the practice of law, prior clerkships, 15 years as a professor at Notre Dame, and 3 years on the 7th Circuit is not entry level qualifications.

As one of 9 people in the entire country that get to judge the definition of every law and constitutional amendment in this country? No... she doesn't.

And it doesn't take a genius to see it.


It's just a starter job, get your foot in the door and make a name for for yourself.  Not like it's supposed to be final step of your career or anything.

Hell just make the next one fresh out law school, think how long they could serve!
 
2020-09-27 2:46:54 PM  

Chuck87: I think Trump could have chosen someone better than ACB but I'm wondering if this is some kind 3d chess move.


You are about the only person ever thinking "Well, maybe this is an amazingly *intelligent* move that Trump is using to confound his detractors."

You're also an idiot.
 
2020-09-27 2:47:07 PM  

quiotu: As one of 9 people in the entire country that get to judge the definition of every law and constitutional amendment in this country? No... she doesn't.

And it doesn't take a genius to see it.


And what are your views of Sandra Day O'Connor, William Rehnquist, Byron White, Elena Kagan's, etc. qualifications prior to joining the court?

I already know that your opinion is duly uninformed because you were previously harping on only 3 years prior judicial service and you also think she clerked for 20+ years or maybe it is someone else you think clerked for that long.
 
2020-09-27 2:47:40 PM  
Get the His and Hers set:

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 2:47:59 PM  

Name_Omitted: raius: She doesn't have the qualifications for the job she's applying for.  No thinks she's uneducated, but she's not on the save level as her potential future peers.

This is supposed to be the pinnacle of her career, it's not an entry level position.

We agree that she's not the most qualified candidate available, but if there job is to interpret the law, 15 years of teaching it at a prestigious institution hardly qualifies as entity level.

Completely ignoring her experience is not a strong argument.


It does at that level though.  Just because I've driven a car for 15 years doesn't mean I'm qualified to be in the Grand Prix.
 
2020-09-27 2:48:13 PM  

raius: It's just a starter job, get your foot in the door and make a name for for yourself.  Not like it's supposed to be final step of your career or anything.

Hell just make the next one fresh out law school, think how long they could serve!


She has far more experience than a lot of people who have served on the Court in the last 60 years.
 
2020-09-27 2:48:20 PM  
they forgot the period after the 'B'
weird

Fark user image

oh well, no matter.
here is your obligatory ACB Hitler mustache Photoshop.
No conservaturd thread would be complete without one.

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 2:49:31 PM  

raius: It does at that level though.  Just because I've driven a car for 15 years doesn't mean I'm qualified to be in the Grand Prix.


Teaching at Notre Dame School of law isn't equivalent to you puttering around in your prius for 15 years.  It's more akin to driving Formula Two for many numerous years before getting the call up to Formula One
 
2020-09-27 2:49:44 PM  

raius: Il Douchey: weddingsinger:Are you more impressed by her total of 3 years of experience as a judge or her participation in an extremist religious sect that literally inspired The Handmaid's Tale?

Hey, Biden's got like fifty years of "experience" and you know damn well that nobody is impressed with anything about old Joe.  Her sharp mind is more important than a long tenure; there will be time for that.

/If dogging on her religion is all you got, you got nothin

She's an unqualified moron.  You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.  The only reason she has a chance at the job is because Republicans think winning is more important then being good at the job.

Their short sighted antics are going to lead to even more unrest.  Hopefully the Progressives whip the Conservatives assess again.


Are there no qualified conservatives to nominate for the supreme court? Like this lady and justice Bro are really the bottom of the barrel. Scalia was an evil competent conservative Judge, not like the chaotic dumbasses Trump keeps picking.

If everything is going to crumble, it would feel better to have lost to a worthy opponent than to someone from Trump's clown car of lunatic fundamentalists. Maybe it's just me though.
 
2020-09-27 2:49:44 PM  

Name_Omitted: raius: She doesn't have the qualifications for the job she's applying for.  No thinks she's uneducated, but she's not on the save level as her potential future peers.

This is supposed to be the pinnacle of her career, it's not an entry level position.

We agree that she's not the most qualified candidate available, but if there job is to interpret the law, 15 years of teaching it at a prestigious institution hardly qualifies as entity level.

Completely ignoring her experience is not a strong argument.


15 years of teaching it, but less than 3 years of actually doing it?  Completely ignoring her rejection of stare decisis and her belief that her heretical religious beliefs come before the Constitution, her experience in actual interpretation is meager.
 
2020-09-27 2:50:15 PM  

Olympic Trolling Judge: Thurgood Marshall : Clarence Thomas :: Ruth Bader Ginsburg : ________________.


I thought the very same thing.
 
2020-09-27 2:50:17 PM  

sprgrss: raius: It's just a starter job, get your foot in the door and make a name for for yourself.  Not like it's supposed to be final step of your career or anything.

Hell just make the next one fresh out law school, think how long they could serve!

She has far more experience than a lot of people who have served on the Court in the last 60 years.


Name them.

We'll wait.
 
2020-09-27 2:50:19 PM  

Deucednuisance: weddingsinger: Dave and the Mission: Objection:  Most people paying attention realized there is no bottom.

Damn right.

Just assume any Republican is the absolute worst person imaginable and you'll never be surprised when they advocate for the inhumanity of others.

/their court nominee has an opposition opinion where she says voting is a right of only the "virtuous" citizens which should terrify anyone who isn't interested in licking Donald Trump's taint in order to be able to vote.  That qualifier was used after the civil war to deny the vote to black people (and, I suppose via denying felons with full civil rights, still is via the targeting of black men by police and prosecutors)

[pbs.twimg.com image 680x382]

Good Lord.  And she cites a Freaking Kentucky Law Journal for her support?

[Fark user image image 650x408]


I mean the only response to that position is, "Ma'am, why do you support arming rapists and serial murderers?"

"Ma'am your own argument is that it is an individual right not based on virtue (other than the virtue of having enough money to afford firearms), so why do you want rapists and serial murderers to be armed all the time?"

"Ma'am, my mother was raped. Why do you want her rapist to have a firearm? Why are you trying to facilitate rapist and murderers?"
 
2020-09-27 2:50:29 PM  

Corvus: Il Douchey: Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

[Fark user image image 318x159]

/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton

The GOP. Woman's value is always based on how "bangable" they are.


And it might even mean something if any Republican male was capable of getting it up.  Between ED, micro penis, and having their tiny todgers suffocated by their gunts, I'm afraid they've doomed Judge Lydia to eternal disappointment.
 
2020-09-27 2:51:26 PM  

NihilismKat: raius: Il Douchey: weddingsinger:Are you more impressed by her total of 3 years of experience as a judge or her participation in an extremist religious sect that literally inspired The Handmaid's Tale?

Hey, Biden's got like fifty years of "experience" and you know damn well that nobody is impressed with anything about old Joe.  Her sharp mind is more important than a long tenure; there will be time for that.

/If dogging on her religion is all you got, you got nothin

She's an unqualified moron.  You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.  The only reason she has a chance at the job is because Republicans think winning is more important then being good at the job.

Their short sighted antics are going to lead to even more unrest.  Hopefully the Progressives whip the Conservatives assess again.

Are there no qualified conservatives to nominate for the supreme court? Like this lady and justice Bro are really the bottom of the barrel. Scalia was an evil competent conservative Judge, not like the chaotic dumbasses Trump keeps picking.

If everything is going to crumble, it would feel better to have lost to a worthy opponent than to someone from Trump's clown car of lunatic fundamentalists. Maybe it's just me though.


They want them young, they want to control the court for decades.  Qualifications are secondary.
 
2020-09-27 2:51:31 PM  

sprgrss: raius: It does at that level though.  Just because I've driven a car for 15 years doesn't mean I'm qualified to be in the Grand Prix.

Teaching at Notre Dame School of law isn't equivalent to you puttering around in your prius for 15 years.  It's more akin to driving Formula Two for many numerous years before getting the call up to Formula One


..and how many drivers make that leap?
 
2020-09-27 2:51:33 PM  

raius: NM Volunteer: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: Klyukva: raius: She's an unqualified moron.  You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.

I believe what you meant to say was "I don't like her."

No, look at her qualifications and look at the other judges qualifications.  She's an unqualified moron in comparison.  She doesn't get graded on a curve, she a farking imbecile compared to her compatriots.

Do you mean she does get graded on a curve? Because that's what comparing her to others means.

No I mean she doesn't get graded on a curve compare to the rest of us.  She's out of her depth, and frankly so are you.

Okay. Maybe we can have a rational conversation about her later when the 2 minutes hate are up and you're thinking straight.

Find a Supreme Court judge with less qualification and relevant experience in the last 50 years.

Given that she was nominated at a younger age than other justices I would be surprised if she didn't have a less storied career. But you called her a "moron", which would be surprising if it had any truth to it whatsoever.

Clerking and private practice for a few years, holding a law degree for just 23 years, and being a real judge for less than three years?  Someone who has made it quite clear that her religious beliefs come before the Constitution?

Apparently being experienced and qualified as your peers is a partisan issue.  It's little fun at least to watch them spin to defend it though.


Don't you hate Walruses?
 
2020-09-27 2:51:49 PM  

Insurgent: Klyukva: Insurgent: too proud to retire during a dem supermajority after multiple bouts of cancer. what a waste

She wanted her replacement to be picked by the first female president.

she gambled and lost and farked over millions of people in the process.


Farked over millions of people by allowing the actual assholes to fark over millions of people?  You know who I blame?  The actual assholes!
 
2020-09-27 2:51:50 PM  

jzgplj: That should go over like a fart in church. They can't even come up with anything original?


How would they come up with anything original?
You do understand what is required to originate things, right?-
 
2020-09-27 2:52:30 PM  
Are people really mad that the Republicans stole the nickname given to a a white lady by another white lady who stole it from a dead black rapper?
 
2020-09-27 2:54:27 PM  

DarkSoulNoHope: ChubbyTiger: weddingsinger: Il Douchey: Pace yourself libs.  You've probably got about forty more years of loathing this fine woman

[Fark user image 318x159]

/It's a new day America -ACB is already being referred to as the first bangable justice since Sherman Minton

Are you more impressed by her total of 3 years of experience as a judge or her participation in an extremist religious sect that literally inspired The Handmaid's Tale?

Hold on.  I don't think this these folks are entirely right in the head and I certainly don't want this appointment to process.  But, they didn't inspire The Handmaid's Tale - the author confirms this to be the case.  It was a different, similarly named, cult.  Not arguing with your conclusions, just your facts.

Well is it that these people read The Handmaid's Tale and said "Hey, that's a great idea!" ?


Nobody was happy in the Handmaid's Tale.  Not even the architects and commanders.  It's not a case of the dog catching the car and not knowing what to do.  It's the dog catching the car and becoming a brain damaged quadriplegic in the process.
 
2020-09-27 2:54:28 PM  

Il Douchey: weddingsinger:Are you more impressed by her total of 3 years of experience as a judge or her participation in an extremist religious sect that literally inspired The Handmaid's Tale?

Hey, Biden's got like fifty years of "experience" and you know damn well that nobody is impressed with anything about old Joe.  Her sharp mind is more important than a long tenure; there will be time for that.

/If dogging on her religion is all you got, you got nothin


I'm impressed with Biden's ability to be kind to people.

Back when he was VP, two people interrupted Biden to complain about their friend killed in Syria.  Joe handled it very respectfully and talked to them afterwards.  It turns out the friend wasn't a member of the armed forces, he was a civilian who illegally joined a foreign militia.

I also think it's terrible cruel that people take his gentleness with children and make him out like he's a pedophile.  It's toxic masculinity.  If children aren't treated kindly, they turn into incompetent jerks.
 
2020-09-27 2:56:16 PM  

misanthropicsob: Are people really mad that the Republicans stole the nickname given to a a white lady by another white lady who stole it from a dead black rapper?


Too much haha, pretty soon boo hoo.
 
2020-09-27 2:58:29 PM  

sprgrss: quiotu: As one of 9 people in the entire country that get to judge the definition of every law and constitutional amendment in this country? No... she doesn't.

And it doesn't take a genius to see it.

And what are your views of Sandra Day O'Connor, William Rehnquist, Byron White, Elena Kagan's, etc. qualifications prior to joining the court?

I already know that your opinion is duly uninformed because you were previously harping on only 3 years prior judicial service and you also think she clerked for 20+ years or maybe it is someone else you think clerked for that long.


Why you keep trotting out Rehnquist and Kagan is beyond me. They've already been confirmed. Whatever we may think about their qualifications, it's too late. (Especially Rehnquist, being dead)

In general, being a law professor for even 50 years would be a disqualifier for me. Professors are singularly ignorant about the real-world applications of the law, unless they're also practicing attorneys. A lot of them are ideologues. Or they know one narrow area, and are ignorant of other applications.

Being a "Notre Dame law professor" isnt the ringing endorsement you seem to think.
 
2020-09-27 2:58:46 PM  
By the way, why is everyone posting pictures of Samantha Bee?
 
2020-09-27 2:59:53 PM  
Sunny, I have never thought that they won't go lower.  There's not even a bottom
 
2020-09-27 3:00:00 PM  
I have long given up on being shocked by the sleaziness' of the Republican Party.
 
2020-09-27 3:01:48 PM  

jso2897: jzgplj: That should go over like a fart in church. They can't even come up with anything original?

How would they come up with anything original?
You do understand what is required to originate things, right?-


As with most nicknames, it was not "stolen by" her, it was given to her. I doubt Ginsberg even knew who Biggie Smalls was.
 
2020-09-27 3:02:18 PM  

Farkonaut: sprgrss: raius: It does at that level though.  Just because I've driven a car for 15 years doesn't mean I'm qualified to be in the Grand Prix.

Teaching at Notre Dame School of law isn't equivalent to you puttering around in your prius for 15 years.  It's more akin to driving Formula Two for many numerous years before getting the call up to Formula One

..and how many drivers make that leap?


More importantly, teaching isn't doing.

How many teachers at driving schools jump from "instructor" to "test driver" for less than 5 years, then get their F1 seat?

Answer: zero.

Everyone thought Max Verstappen was too young at almost 18. Never mind he had been in karting at age 4 and winning races in ever more serious divisions for 13 years....
 
2020-09-27 3:03:09 PM  

misanthropicsob: Are people really mad that the Republicans stole the nickname given to a a white lady by another white lady who stole it from a dead black rapper?


Oooh. Edge and a half there,
 
2020-09-27 3:04:47 PM  
unoriginal? must be GOP....
 
2020-09-27 3:05:05 PM  

Insurgent: too proud to retire during a dem supermajority after multiple bouts of cancer. what a waste


There was never a point where she could have retired and gotten through hearings with a Dem supermajority (even if we're including former Dem Lieberman as a guaranteed 60th vote).  Ted Kennedy was already in the hospital by the time Al Franken got seated.  Kennedy's replacement didn't get seated until the end of September, and the Senate was already deep into the heath care debate, working through recess to finish.  That takes us all the way to the end of December, then it was recess again for the holidays until January 19th, the day of the Massachusetts special election.  Scott Brown was seated about two weeks later.  SCOTUS confirmations usually take at least two months.
 
2020-09-27 3:05:29 PM  
There is no bottom. Everyone knows that.
Oh, except the media I guess.
 
2020-09-27 3:06:25 PM  

maxheck: misanthropicsob: Are people really mad that the Republicans stole the nickname given to a a white lady by another white lady who stole it from a dead black rapper?

Oooh. Edge and a half there,


Sorry, I meant to say: damn Republicans can't even come up with their own insipid memes!
 
2020-09-27 3:06:55 PM  
her experience, while on the short side, wouldn't be inherently disqualifying on its own.
many of her decisions on the 7th circuit are actually good ones.

the ones which are really troubling though are the ones where she shows that she believes that on certain topics of religious importance the church is the law of the land instead of congress.  and that the church saying something is bad or wrong makes it "unconstitutional" which is a funny definition of originalist that conservatives seem to have fairly often.
 
2020-09-27 3:09:46 PM  

sprgrss: NM Volunteer: Clerking and private practice for a few years,

Par for the course

holding a law degree for just 23 years,

Just 23 years?  That practically a whole career looking forward to retirement

and being a real judge for less than three years?

That's three more years than Elena Kagan and William Rehnquist had combined prior to becoming members of the Supreme Court

Someone who has made it quite clear that her religious beliefs come before the Constitution?

And there it is.  The actual complaint.  It's not that she is unqualified its that your beliefs of what her jurisprudence are.


The religious beliefs of Kavabeer and Gorsuch weren't issues.  Barrett's religious beliefs are an issue because they are extreme.  We should be concerned just as if a radical Muslim were nominated to the court.
 
2020-09-27 3:10:10 PM  

oopsboom: her experience, while on the short side, wouldn't be inherently disqualifying on its own.
many of her decisions on the 7th circuit are actually good ones.

the ones which are really troubling though are the ones where she shows that she believes that on certain topics of religious importance the church is the law of the land instead of congress.  and that the church saying something is bad or wrong makes it "unconstitutional" which is a funny definition of originalist that conservatives seem to have fairly often.


That's the question that will likely be hammered into her, likely multiple times in multiple ways, for as long as the Democrats can ask it.

'What do you think holds more sway when it comes to defining or creating laws... the Bible, or the US Constitution?'
 
2020-09-27 3:11:44 PM  

fortheloveof: Deucednuisance: weddingsinger: Dave and the Mission: Objection:  Most people paying attention realized there is no bottom.

Damn right.

Just assume any Republican is the absolute worst person imaginable and you'll never be surprised when they advocate for the inhumanity of others.

/their court nominee has an opposition opinion where she says voting is a right of only the "virtuous" citizens which should terrify anyone who isn't interested in licking Donald Trump's taint in order to be able to vote.  That qualifier was used after the civil war to deny the vote to black people (and, I suppose via denying felons with full civil rights, still is via the targeting of black men by police and prosecutors)

[pbs.twimg.com image 680x382]

Good Lord.  And she cites a Freaking Kentucky Law Journal for her support?

[Fark user image image 650x408]

I mean the only response to that position is, "Ma'am, why do you support arming rapists and serial murderers?"

"Ma'am your own argument is that it is an individual right not based on virtue (other than the virtue of having enough money to afford firearms), so why do you want rapists and serial murderers to be armed all the time?"

"Ma'am, my mother was raped. Why do you want her rapist to have a firearm? Why are you trying to facilitate rapist and murderers?"


No, the question should be to ask if she wants Jeffrey Epstein to have a firearm.
 
2020-09-27 3:11:57 PM  

Farkonaut: sprgrss: raius: It's just a starter job, get your foot in the door and make a name for for yourself.  Not like it's supposed to be final step of your career or anything.

Hell just make the next one fresh out law school, think how long they could serve!

She has far more experience than a lot of people who have served on the Court in the last 60 years.

Name them.

We'll wait.


You'll be waiting a long time.
 
2020-09-27 3:13:18 PM  

Fart_Machine: Farkonaut: sprgrss: raius: It's just a starter job, get your foot in the door and make a name for for yourself.  Not like it's supposed to be final step of your career or anything.

Hell just make the next one fresh out law school, think how long they could serve!

She has far more experience than a lot of people who have served on the Court in the last 60 years.

Name them.

We'll wait.

You'll be waiting a long time.


At least the other one had the decency to stop after being called out to name them.
 
2020-09-27 3:13:40 PM  

GreatGlavinsGhost: fortheloveof: Deucednuisance: weddingsinger: Dave and the Mission: Objection:  Most people paying attention realized there is no bottom.

Damn right.

Just assume any Republican is the absolute worst person imaginable and you'll never be surprised when they advocate for the inhumanity of others.

/their court nominee has an opposition opinion where she says voting is a right of only the "virtuous" citizens which should terrify anyone who isn't interested in licking Donald Trump's taint in order to be able to vote.  That qualifier was used after the civil war to deny the vote to black people (and, I suppose via denying felons with full civil rights, still is via the targeting of black men by police and prosecutors)

[pbs.twimg.com image 680x382]

Good Lord.  And she cites a Freaking Kentucky Law Journal for her support?

[Fark user image image 650x408]

I mean the only response to that position is, "Ma'am, why do you support arming rapists and serial murderers?"

"Ma'am your own argument is that it is an individual right not based on virtue (other than the virtue of having enough money to afford firearms), so why do you want rapists and serial murderers to be armed all the time?"

"Ma'am, my mother was raped. Why do you want her rapist to have a firearm? Why are you trying to facilitate rapist and murderers?"

No, the question should be to ask if she wants Jeffrey Epstein to have a firearm.


Opps, make that Ghislaine Maxwell.

Why does she want Ghislaine Maxwell to have a fire arm?

Or Brock Turner.
 
2020-09-27 3:14:02 PM  

raius: Klyukva: raius: She's an unqualified moron.  You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.

I believe what you meant to say was "I don't like her."

No, look at her qualifications and look at the other judges qualifications.  She's an unqualified moron in comparison.  She doesn't get graded on a curve, she a farking imbecile compared to her compatriots.


Idiots. -Those so defective that the mental development never exceeds that or a normal child of about two years.
Imbeciles. -Those whose development is higher than that of an idiot, but whose intelligence does not exceed that of a normal child of about seven years.
Morons. -Those whose mental development is above that of an imbecile, but does not exceed that of a normal child of about twelve years.
- Edmund Burke Huey, Backward and Feeble-Minded Children, 1912
 
2020-09-27 3:15:04 PM  
Lifetime appointments are still negotiable.
 
2020-09-27 3:15:58 PM  

misanthropicsob: Are people really mad that the Republicans stole the nickname given to a a white lady by another white lady who stole it from a dead black rapper?


Yes and THIS IS A NEW LOW.
 
2020-09-27 3:16:03 PM  

schecter: they forgot the period after the 'B'
weird

[Fark user image 145x69]



N.W.A didn't have a period after the A.  Just sayin'.
 
2020-09-27 3:17:21 PM  

raius: NihilismKat: raius: Il Douchey: weddingsinger:Are you more impressed by her total of 3 years of experience as a judge or her participation in an extremist religious sect that literally inspired The Handmaid's Tale?

Hey, Biden's got like fifty years of "experience" and you know damn well that nobody is impressed with anything about old Joe.  Her sharp mind is more important than a long tenure; there will be time for that.

/If dogging on her religion is all you got, you got nothin

She's an unqualified moron.  You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.  The only reason she has a chance at the job is because Republicans think winning is more important then being good at the job.

Their short sighted antics are going to lead to even more unrest.  Hopefully the Progressives whip the Conservatives assess again.

Are there no qualified conservatives to nominate for the supreme court? Like this lady and justice Bro are really the bottom of the barrel. Scalia was an evil competent conservative Judge, not like the chaotic dumbasses Trump keeps picking.

If everything is going to crumble, it would feel better to have lost to a worthy opponent than to someone from Trump's clown car of lunatic fundamentalists. Maybe it's just me though.

They want them young, they want to control the court for decades.  Qualifications are secondary.


They want them young, they want them obedient and they want someone with a skeleton in their closet, to make it easier to control them.

Looking at you Kegbro.
 
2020-09-27 3:17:51 PM  

jaylectricity: raius: Klyukva: raius: She's an unqualified moron.  You know that, I know that, everyone knows that.

I believe what you meant to say was "I don't like her."

No, look at her qualifications and look at the other judges qualifications.  She's an unqualified moron in comparison.  She doesn't get graded on a curve, she a farking imbecile compared to her compatriots.

Idiots. -Those so defective that the mental development never exceeds that or a normal child of about two years.
Imbeciles. -Those whose development is higher than that of an idiot, but whose intelligence does not exceed that of a normal child of about seven years.
Morons. -Those whose mental development is above that of an imbecile, but does not exceed that of a normal child of about twelve years.
- Edmund Burke Huey, Backward and Feeble-Minded Children, 1912


Im not sure if definitions of terms, particularly ones that have potential discriminatory tones, or evolve with society rapidly, should be what we use the 1912 definitions.

Example; pretty much every term for minority groups up until VERY recently, and even then it can be tight.
 
2020-09-27 3:19:57 PM  

Klyukva: misanthropicsob: Are people really mad that the Republicans stole the nickname given to a a white lady by another white lady who stole it from a dead black rapper?

Yes and THIS IS A NEW LOW.


So much lower than giving hysterectomies to unwilling immigrants.
 
2020-09-27 3:20:12 PM  
Y'all don't like this, you might want to start voting blue, and no more excuses.
 
2020-09-27 3:26:14 PM  

Gyrfalcon: MinatoArisato013: sprgrss: NM Volunteer: Clerking and private practice for a few years,

Par for the course

holding a law degree for just 23 years,

Just 23 years?  That practically a whole career looking forward to retirement

and being a real judge for less than three years?

That's three more years than Elena Kagan and William Rehnquist had combined prior to becoming members of the Supreme Court

Someone who has made it quite clear that her religious beliefs come before the Constitution?

And there it is.  The actual complaint.  It's not that she is unqualified its that your beliefs of what her jurisprudence are.

Look at those goalpost moves. If you clerk for 20+ years and it's not to another SCOTUS Justice, then what are you even doing with your life or your degree.

You have no idea what a law clerk does, do you.


Basic search seems to say it doesn't magically make you qualified to be a judge especially a Supreme Court Justics.
 
2020-09-27 3:39:50 PM  

Gyrfalcon: Why you keep trotting out Rehnquist and Kagan is beyond me. They've already been confirmed. Whatever we may think about their qualifications, it's too late. (Especially Rehnquist, being dead)


Because if we are going to sit there and say "this person lacks the qualifications to be a Supreme Court Justice" pointing to actual Supreme Court justices with similar qualifications is relevant to showing that the claims that this person lacks whatever amorphous qualifications that are required.
 
2020-09-27 3:41:13 PM  

Farkonaut: Name them.

We'll wait.


You can go back through this very thread, that you are putatively reading, and see the wide assortment of Supreme Court Justices I've named that have similar or less qualifications than Barrett.
 
2020-09-27 3:41:40 PM  
The lib impotent outrage gets me hard.

Here's the deal: Your braindead fossil of a candidate and his cop sidekick are going to lose spectacularly, and Trump will probably get one MORE SCJ to make it 7-2. Suck on that for the next 25 years or so liberals!
 
2020-09-27 3:42:24 PM  
Do they have one, just one original idea in their heads?

Trick question. Most of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion was plagiarized too.
 
2020-09-27 3:42:59 PM  

MinatoArisato013: Gyrfalcon: MinatoArisato013: sprgrss: NM Volunteer: Clerking and private practice for a few years,

Par for the course

holding a law degree for just 23 years,

Just 23 years?  That practically a whole career looking forward to retirement

and being a real judge for less than three years?

That's three more years than Elena Kagan and William Rehnquist had combined prior to becoming members of the Supreme Court

Someone who has made it quite clear that her religious beliefs come before the Constitution?

And there it is.  The actual complaint.  It's not that she is unqualified its that your beliefs of what her jurisprudence are.

Look at those goalpost moves. If you clerk for 20+ years and it's not to another SCOTUS Justice, then what are you even doing with your life or your degree.

You have no idea what a law clerk does, do you.

Basic search seems to say it doesn't magically make you qualified to be a judge especially a Supreme Court Justics.


No one is a clerk for 20+ years.
 
2020-09-27 3:45:15 PM  

BigGrnEggGriller: The lib impotent outrage gets me hard.


Really shows how empty and hollow your "movement" really is huh?
 
2020-09-27 3:47:49 PM  

Mrtraveler01: BigGrnEggGriller: The lib impotent outrage gets me hard.

Really shows how empty and hollow your "movement" really is huh?


I don't usually kink shame... but admitting that you can only chub when your betters are yelling at you is... a bold statement...
 
2020-09-27 3:55:22 PM  

Gyrfalcon: jso2897: jzgplj: That should go over like a fart in church. They can't even come up with anything original?

How would they come up with anything original?
You do understand what is required to originate things, right?-

As with most nicknames, it was not "stolen by" her, it was given to her. I doubt Ginsberg even knew who Biggie Smalls was.


Not only did she know who he was, she did an interview and said, in part, they had a lot in common:

https://www.nbcnews.com/video/even-th​e​-notorious-rbg-says-she-and-biggie-sma​lls-have-a-lot-in-common-884293699738
 
2020-09-27 3:57:59 PM  

gameshowhost: Klyukva: Insurgent: too proud to retire during a dem supermajority after multiple bouts of cancer. what a waste

She wanted her replacement to be picked by the first female president.

Hubris is a hell of a thing, especially when it significantly farks at least half of the nation over.

Kuta: ^^^
This. RBG was a great justice on the bench, but her judgment off it deserves to be questioned.

GoodDoctorB: Insurgent: RBG is why we are in this SC nomination mess. YAAAAS QWEEN

Yes, how dare she... (checks notes)... die?

Uhm, nice demonstration of the awesome superpower of Ace Reporter Jack Brolin there, Insurgent. When did you get bitten by a retroactive spider? Oh, gameshowhost and Klyukva, which of his caped-and-medalioned Shmoo sidekicks Shoulda, Coulda, and Woulda, are each of you?

She'd only had two bouts of cancer at the time of the short-lived Democratic supermajority in the Senate (which lasted only weeks, not the full two years, contrary to popular belief). One of those was almost a decade previously: stage 2 colon cancer (90+% recovery rate) in September 1999. Generally considered cured after five years. She went double that. Pancreatic cancer was diagnosed in January 2009 around the time of Obama's inauguration, but it was a rare case of catching it in time (the main reason pancreatic cancer is so deadly is that it shows no definitive symptoms until it's too late ― catch it early enough as hers was then and it's quite treatable). Again, she went well over five years cancer-free. Her remaining three bouts of cancer were well into the Trump Administration, starting in November 2018.

The Democratic ⅗ Senate supermajority even on paper only lasted from the seating of Al Franken in July 7, 2009 due to Norm Coleman's refusal to concede and demanded recounts (and after Arlen Specter's earlier party switch), until Ted Kennedy's passing on August 25, 2009. But during pretty much all of that time either Byrd or Kennedy was in the hospital in the process of dying and rarely able to cast votes.

It takes sixty actual votes, not just sixty Democratic Senators on the roster, to invoke cloture and break a filibuster. Given that the Republican leaders had pledged on the day of Obama's inauguration in their secret meeting at The Caucus Room eatery (a meeting called by GOP strategist Frank Luntz who wasn't elected to anything) to oppose everything Obama tried to do, no matter what the consequences, even if it were something they'd normally support ― even if it were their own idea! (remember McConnell filibustering his own bill just because Obama liked it?), and given that during this period Harry Reid had not yet nuked the filibuster even for lower-court, let alone Supreme Court (Mitch would do that during the Trump Administration to get Gorsuch and Kavanaugh seated) justices, when, exactly, was she supposed to retire while being reasonably sure that Obama would get to nominate her replacement and the Senate would confirm it?

She also had no way of knowing in advance that James O'Keefe would do that ACORN sting video that led to Congress (sadly including many Democratic votes, and signed by Obama [despite being an unconstitutional Bill of Attainder], all of whom fell for O'Keefe's bald-faced lies) defunded that worthy organization right as the Census Year 2010 Midterm election season was starting, when ACORN's inner-city voter registration and GotV infrastructure was most needed (they'd been doing such a good job that both the DNC and DCCC had let their own infrastructures in this regard atrophy, and so suddenly had none when we most needed them), costing the Dems even close to a Senate supermajority, their majority in the House (hello Speaker Bœhner!) thanks to the Teabagger influx, and a whopping eleven State legislatures (putting the Constitution itself in dire danger).

So, yeah, Ace Reporter Jack Brolin & two of his three Shmoo Sidekicks, when exactly should she have retired?
 
2020-09-27 4:04:39 PM  

BigGrnEggGriller: The lib impotent outrage gets me hard.

Here's the deal: Your braindead fossil of a candidate and his cop sidekick are going to lose spectacularly, and Trump will probably get one MORE SCJ to make it 7-2. Suck on that for the next 25 years or so liberals!


Bet you didn't intend to broadcast that your sex life is non-existent when you hit "add comment", did you?
 
2020-09-27 4:05:14 PM  

Sin'sHero: Nefarious A.C.B.


Brilliant. I want that t shirt.
 
2020-09-27 4:06:21 PM  

sprgrss: raius: Seriously? Look at her experience, it's supposed to be main qualifier for the job.  The post is supposed to be apolitical.

In what way do you find her resume deficient?


She only has two years of practice as a lawyer. The rest was all clerking, professorships, and being a judge. That implies mostly political connections rather than ability.
 
2020-09-27 4:06:52 PM  
This has probably already been posted, but I have never thought Republicans couldn't go lower.
 
2020-09-27 4:09:26 PM  

sprgrss: 23 years teaching at a T-14 law school is pretty impressive


As someone who has rejected T-14 grads for jobs based on the quality of their written work, it's really not that impressive.

/many T-14 schools stopped giving out first year grades a few years back so that every student could claim they're "at the top" of the class
//many of them have also stopped teaching constitutional law as a requirement
 
2020-09-27 4:10:14 PM  

grumpfuff: This has probably already been posted, but I have never thought Republicans couldn't go lower.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 4:15:59 PM  
That's why the republicans are so obsessed about China -- they keep digging so deep they are about to break through into Chinese territory any day now.
 
2020-09-27 4:16:02 PM  

raius: sprgrss: NM Volunteer: Clerking and private practice for a few years,

Par for the course

holding a law degree for just 23 years,

Just 23 years?  That practically a whole career looking forward to retirement

and being a real judge for less than three years?

That's three more years than Elena Kagan and William Rehnquist had combined prior to becoming members of the Supreme Court

Someone who has made it quite clear that her religious beliefs come before the Constitution?

And there it is.  The actual complaint.  It's not that she is unqualified its that your beliefs of what her jurisprudence are.

Go look at Kagan record, compare it to Barret.  Take out the politics and tell me whose more qualified?  If you're honest you'll be able to admit Kagan had a much more storied career with relevant experience than Barret.  They aren't in the same league.

Scalia is not someone I agreed with, but he was qualified for the job, she's not.  Why would you want someone who's so obviously inexperienced?


Experienced judges on the Supreme Court are another casualty of hyper-partisanship - can't have a extensive history of judicial rulings that the other side can pick apart. Now Barrett has a paper trail a mile long because of her career as a law professor, but I guarantee that any questions about her writings (no matter how weird or out of the mainstream) will be dismissed as thought experiments and not an indication of how she would rule in an actual case.
 
2020-09-27 4:16:47 PM  

COMALite J: It takes sixty actual votes, not just sixty Democratic Senators on the roster, to invoke cloture and break a filibuster.


The Republicans haven't had a supermajority in the Senate since 1875. Why is it that they manage to accomplish so much of what they want without one, while the Democrats have actually had one and didn't get jack shiat?
 
2020-09-27 4:19:02 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size

Fark user imageView Full Size

Fark user imageView Full Size
Fark user imageView Full Size
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 4:19:33 PM  

maxheck: misanthropicsob: Are people really mad that the Republicans stole the nickname given to a a white lady by another white lady who stole it from a dead black rapper?

Oooh. Edge and a half there,


That's his schtick. All edge, no point.
 
2020-09-27 4:19:50 PM  
Bottom? Where we're going there is no bottom.
 
2020-09-27 4:26:46 PM  

Theaetetus: COMALite J: It takes sixty actual votes, not just sixty Democratic Senators on the roster, to invoke cloture and break a filibuster.

The Republicans haven't had a supermajority in the Senate since 1875. Why is it that they manage to accomplish so much of what they want without one, while the Democrats have actually had one and didn't get jack shiat?


Because they have no problem ignoring the rules when it suits them, including rules they themselves made up whole cloth to justify the last time they ignored the rules.
 
2020-09-27 4:33:32 PM  
Wow. Talk about pissing on somebody's grave. Sick and bottomless.
This is why the Democrats can't compete with them. You can barely comprehend the evil.

Like imagine one of those Calvin and Hobbes peeing stickers that everybody ripped off. Imagine that Trump dropped dead, Biden was made President, and to celebrate, the DNC sold those Calvin and Hobbes stickers, with Biden pissing on Trump's grave.

Then Biden would talk a lot about how the White House was so dirty, they had to have a complete overhaul, since Trump apparently couldn't control his bladder.And then he and Obama would appear on camera, laughing like fools.

It would be something like that.
 
2020-09-27 4:35:39 PM  

weddingsinger: Dave and the Mission: Objection:  Most people paying attention realized there is no bottom.

Damn right.

Just assume any Republican is the absolute worst person imaginable and you'll never be surprised when they advocate for the inhumanity of others.

/their court nominee has an opposition opinion where she says voting is a right of only the "virtuous" citizens which should terrify anyone who isn't interested in licking Donald Trump's taint in order to be able to vote.  That qualifier was used after the civil war to deny the vote to black people (and, I suppose via denying felons with full civil rights, still is via the targeting of black men by police and prosecutors)

[pbs.twimg.com image 680x382]


This woman is a terrible pick for SCOTUS, Having said that, you are reading this opinion incorrectly. She is not talking about virtue as a trait in an individual. She is talking about political virtue, which is the act of giving up some bits of absolute freedom to make it possible to live in a functioning democracy (or republic, as the window-lickers would insist). Political virtue is the heart of liberalism. Having said that, this woman is not a liberal.
 
2020-09-27 4:38:34 PM  

Theaetetus: She only has two years of practice as a lawyer. The rest was all clerking, professorships, and being a judge. That implies mostly political connections rather than ability.


What do you think the rest of the court is composed of?
 
2020-09-27 4:45:41 PM  

Gyrfalcon: gameshowhost: BitwiseShift: Mrtraveler01: gameshowhost: tangentially

I love how right wingers who say she's a total hottie keep sharing pics of her that are filtered more than Cybil Shepard was in "Moonlighting".

[Fark user image image 850x845]

I saw this pic.

[Fark user image 500x500]

First the pic reminded me of Michelle Bachman.

Then it reminded me of the guy who would occasionally tell the many women lawyers in the office that he thought they should be at home, cooking and taking care of the children and they had no business working.  (He then played the victim when he and a third of the firm was laid off during truly bad economic times for the firm's specialty.)

I doubt if a conservative reporter will ask her why she is working, instead of being at home with the children.

This would be the least heartbreaking question ever.

Someone should, though. Just to see what she'll say.


I'd enjoy it, mmmmyes.
 
2020-09-27 4:47:36 PM  

Deucednuisance: weddingsinger: Dave and the Mission: Objection:  Most people paying attention realized there is no bottom.

Damn right.

Just assume any Republican is the absolute worst person imaginable and you'll never be surprised when they advocate for the inhumanity of others.

/their court nominee has an opposition opinion where she says voting is a right of only the "virtuous" citizens which should terrify anyone who isn't interested in licking Donald Trump's taint in order to be able to vote.  That qualifier was used after the civil war to deny the vote to black people (and, I suppose via denying felons with full civil rights, still is via the targeting of black men by police and prosecutors)

[pbs.twimg.com image 680x382]

Good Lord.  And she cites a Freaking Kentucky Law Journal for her support?

[Fark user image 650x408]


I know it's Poor Form to quote oneself, but I find it interesting that this image has gotten more comments that when I first made it for the Kavanaugh hearings.

Thanks Farkers, use it freely!
 
2020-09-27 4:47:51 PM  

sprgrss: gameshowhost: sprgrss: gameshowhost: There is no such thing as a qualified judge who puts religious beliefs ahead of the constitution.

There is zero evidence to support this claim other than what you want to believe.

All kinds of evidence sourced right here:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinion​s/the-bombshell-consequences-of-amy-co​ney-barrett/2020/09/25/3531ab9c-ff6f-1​1ea-8d05-9beaaa91c71f_story.html

Ruth Marcus, that's a hard pass.


never said you had to read her words. read the sourced articles.
 
2020-09-27 4:49:25 PM  

sprgrss: raius: Yes, such a snob to think to be at the pinnacle of your profession that you actually have the needed experience.

This idea that outsiders know better then experts is leading do the downfall of America.  It's not snobbery to expect the best, you shouldn't want to go get a beer with your judge.

Anyways we're done here, have the last word or don't.  You don't want to argue in good faith, so I didn't want to listen you anymore.

Cheers.

How is her resume any different from the likes of William Rehnquist, Byron White, and any numerous other justices?  23 years teaching at a T-14 law school is pretty impressive so is her prior clerkships along with her academic writing while being a law professor and now three years on the 7th Circuit.

You just don't like her jurisprudence.


In the United States, putting a religion ahead of the Constitution isn't not an issue of jurisprudence, it's an immediate disqualification.
 
2020-09-27 4:49:52 PM  
DAMMIT  I DOUBLE NEGATIVE DUN GOOFED
 
2020-09-27 4:52:56 PM  

jso2897: Y'all don't like this, you might want to start voting blue, and no more excuses.


"There is no need for elected officials to meet the wants and needs of the voting public.  Particularly not the vast working class.  Supply-side works, we swear once again, this time."
 
2020-09-27 4:53:41 PM  

Dear Jerk: weddingsinger: Dave and the Mission: Objection:  Most people paying attention realized there is no bottom.

Damn right.

Just assume any Republican is the absolute worst person imaginable and you'll never be surprised when they advocate for the inhumanity of others.

/their court nominee has an opposition opinion where she says voting is a right of only the "virtuous" citizens which should terrify anyone who isn't interested in licking Donald Trump's taint in order to be able to vote.  That qualifier was used after the civil war to deny the vote to black people (and, I suppose via denying felons with full civil rights, still is via the targeting of black men by police and prosecutors)

[pbs.twimg.com image 680x382]

This woman is a terrible pick for SCOTUS, Having said that, you are reading this opinion incorrectly. She is not talking about virtue as a trait in an individual. She is talking about political virtue, which is the act of giving up some bits of absolute freedom to make it possible to live in a functioning democracy (or republic, as the window-lickers would insist). Political virtue is the heart of liberalism. Having said that, this woman is not a liberal.


The issue is here:

To resolve the Second Amendment matter, Barrett noted that the governments haven't "introduced any evidence that founding-era legislatures imposed virtue-based restrictions on the right; such restrictions applied to civic rights like voting and jury service, not to individual rights like the right to possess a gun."

"history does show that felons could be disqualified from exercising certain rights-like the rights to vote and serve on juries-because these rights belonged only to virtuous citizens."


She is NOT espousing a position from liberalism but rather as a strict originalist where certain rights (voting) were limited to white, male land owners, for example.  Her stated position is that anything in the Constitution requires a Constitutional amendment to alter (so women can vote) but indicates a willingness to limit voting rights except in how they are specifically protected in the Constitution.

This becomes incredibly relevant when large portions of the voting public are denied their right to vote because of felonies that result from racist policing and imprisonment.

/sh*t, we just found out about two different plots to remove (mostly) black tenants from housing by landlords and police conspiring to pin felonies on residents to justify their forced removal so areas could be gentrified.  St. Louis and Atlanta.  If police are willing to frame black people over property scams, why not over voting rights or just general good ol boy racism?
 
2020-09-27 4:54:09 PM  

gameshowhost: In the United States, putting a religion ahead of the Constitution isn't not an issue of jurisprudence, it's an immediate disqualification.


blah blah blah blah blah.  Nothing she has ever done as a professor, judge, clerk indicates that she puts religion ahead of the Constitution.
 
2020-09-27 5:01:24 PM  

Stands With A Tiny Fist: Theaetetus: COMALite J: It takes sixty actual votes, not just sixty Democratic Senators on the roster, to invoke cloture and break a filibuster.

The Republicans haven't had a supermajority in the Senate since 1875. Why is it that they manage to accomplish so much of what they want without one, while the Democrats have actually had one and didn't get jack shiat?

Because they have no problem ignoring the rules when it suits them, including rules they themselves made up whole cloth to justify the last time they ignored the rules.


Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-09-27 5:07:56 PM  

sprgrss: Gyrfalcon: Why you keep trotting out Rehnquist and Kagan is beyond me. They've already been confirmed. Whatever we may think about their qualifications, it's too late. (Especially Rehnquist, being dead)

Because if we are going to sit there and say "this person lacks the qualifications to be a Supreme Court Justice" pointing to actual Supreme Court justices with similar qualifications is relevant to showing that the claims that this person lacks whatever amorphous qualifications that are required.


If that was the only qualification anyone was talking about, then maybe you'd have a point. Maybe some people are.

However, she lacks breadth in OTHER areas that make ME question her qualifications overall; specifically her lack of breadth in any area besides teaching law in law school, which in MY opinion makes anyone (yes: anyone) unqualified for a seat on the Supreme Court. If all anyone (yes: anyone) had to offer was a couple of years on a circuit or appellate court and a lot of years in the classroom, then they should not be considered for SCOTUS. As I said above, I would consider the brilliant Constitutional scholar Erwin Chemerensky unqualified for a seat on the Supreme Court bench, despite being arguably more "qualified" than anyone currently sitting.

Things may have been different in times past, of course, which is why Rhenquist's confirmation is irrelevant. And of course neither you nor I have any say in the matter, which is why our opinions are also irrelevant.
 
2020-09-27 5:08:12 PM  

gameshowhost: jso2897: Y'all don't like this, you might want to start voting blue, and no more excuses.

"There is no need for elected officials to meet the wants and needs of the voting public.  Particularly not the vast working class.  Supply-side works, we swear once again, this time."


I don't mean you - you stay home - everybody with any  brains should vote, though.
 
2020-09-27 5:11:04 PM  

pmdgrwr: nmrsnr: This  shows all the cleverness, ingenuity, and originality I expect of the Republican party.

My question is, do Democrats go with "Amy was a pimp in H.S. who ran rape trains at parties" or do Democrats find an person from H.S. who said "they heard Amy use the N-word while talking to friends". I think they should go with both. What do you think?


I don't think she partied with Kavenaugh so that's probably not an issue.
If anything crazy right wing women like her are more likely to be victims of physical or sexual abuse as children than perpetrators.
 
2020-09-27 5:12:54 PM  
I always assume right wingers can go lower. They're the shiat people with garbage shiat people disease(being a right winger). And they have no morals and believe in nothing but stigginit.
 
2020-09-27 5:13:08 PM  

Gyrfalcon: Things may have been different in times past, of course, which is why Rhenquist's confirmation is irrelevant. And of course neither you nor I have any say in the matter, which is why our opinions are also irrelevant.


Kagan's confirmation wasn't too log ago.

You are creating standards that have never existed for qualification.

And Chermerinsky has lost his ever loving mind in a fit of resist.
 
2020-09-27 5:37:28 PM  

sprgrss: gameshowhost: In the United States, putting a religion ahead of the Constitution isn't not an issue of jurisprudence, it's an immediate disqualification.
blah blah blah blah blah.  Nothing she has ever done as a professor, judge, clerk indicates that she puts religion ahead of the Constitution.


She seems eminently qualified, but then there's this.

But some people think Ms. Coney Barrett should be more transparent about her membership in the organization and answer questions about how her faith influences her philosophy on the law. "You can't say that our faith on the one hand has ramifications for politics, law and the common good and on the other hand expect not to answer questions about it," Cathleen Kaveny, a professor of law and theology at Boston College, told America in 2017.

Now we all know that she's going to be confirmed, but I kind of have a problem with this. She says that her personal views don;t influence her rulings, but how can you have this deep delusion about a major part of your life, and still be objective about the law?

These people also believe that women are secondary to their husbands, like it's the natural order of things. So how could she rule in favor of anything that is about equality? And what about queers? Such messy humans. They don't know their place.  And neither would she.
 
2020-09-27 6:02:14 PM  

Excelsior: Stands With A Tiny Fist: Theaetetus: COMALite J: It takes sixty actual votes, not just sixty Democratic Senators on the roster, to invoke cloture and break a filibuster.

The Republicans haven't had a supermajority in the Senate since 1875. Why is it that they manage to accomplish so much of what they want without one, while the Democrats have actually had one and didn't get jack shiat?

Because they have no problem ignoring the rules when it suits them, including rules they themselves made up whole cloth to justify the last time they ignored the rules.

[Fark user image 750×576]

Also, two words: Moscow Miatch:
Fark user imageView Full Size

The above was from a tweet retweeted from then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid dated November 21, 2013 and is why he invoked the "nuclear option," because even though Moscow Miatch was only Senate Minority Leader at the time, he had already done more filibusters of nominees than all previous Presidents combined had had to deal with.

The chart is incorrectly labeled as PolitiFact points out (they rate it "Mostly True") since it counts cloture motions, not actual nominees blocked (there were sometimes multiple clotures for a given nominee). The actual case is even worse! 68 individual nominees blocked from 1789 (when George Washington was inaugurated) − noon EST on January 20, 2009; vs. 79 from noon EST on January 20, 2009 − November 22, 2013 (when the PolitiFact article was published). So, that blue slice on the left for Obama should be quite a bit smaller, and the red slice for all the others quite a bit larger.

Of course, once the GOP took the Senate in 2014, starting January 3, 2015, Moscow Miatch was Senate Majority Leader and he just plain wouldn't hold votes for Obama nominees, period (no, Merrick Garland wasn't the only one ― he was just a particularly egregious example), as he openly bragged about to Sean Hannity.
Mitch McConnell Brags About Blocking Barack Obama
Youtube mtPgUrVPXeI
 
2020-09-27 6:20:41 PM  

gameshowhost: DAMMIT  I DOUBLE NEGATIVE DUN GOOFED


PUT YOUR FACE BACK ON, TUFFLES :P
 
2020-09-27 6:23:09 PM  
Amy "wire hangers" Barret. You read it here first.
 
2020-09-27 6:24:16 PM  

Il Douchey: Her sharp mind is more important than a long tenure; there will be time for that.


Her mind has about as many sharp corners as a satsuma.
 
2020-09-27 6:29:10 PM  

BigGrnEggGriller: The lib impotent outrage gets me hard.

Here's the deal: Your braindead fossil of a candidate and his cop sidekick are going to lose spectacularly, and Trump will probably get one MORE SCJ to make it 7-2. Suck on that for the next 25 years or so liberals!


So looking forward to your disappearance on November 4.

Don't let the door hit ya where the Good Lord split ya!

(On second thought, DO.)
 
2020-09-27 6:33:58 PM  

Stands With A Tiny Fist: Theaetetus: COMALite J: It takes sixty actual votes, not just sixty Democratic Senators on the roster, to invoke cloture and break a filibuster.

The Republicans haven't had a supermajority in the Senate since 1875. Why is it that they manage to accomplish so much of what they want without one, while the Democrats have actually had one and didn't get jack shiat?

Because they have no problem ignoring the rules when it suits them, including rules they themselves made up whole cloth to justify the last time they ignored the rules.


Yes, so they're evil and competent. While our side is ostensibly good*, and incompetent. Either way, we need new leadership.

*given how much more our wealthy Boomer Congresscritters have in common with the Republicans than us, I wonder how much of the "incompetence" is a "oh, gosh, we would love to accomplish more, but we just don't know how to ignore or change the rules when they would benefit us! Woe is us! But keep voting for us, because we're gooooooood" ruse.
 
2020-09-27 6:34:52 PM  

sprgrss: Theaetetus: She only has two years of practice as a lawyer. The rest was all clerking, professorships, and being a judge. That implies mostly political connections rather than ability.

What do you think the rest of the court is composed of?


In the case of the Justice being replaced, a damn fine litigator, and a solid jurist.
 
2020-09-27 6:38:30 PM  

sprgrss: Theaetetus: She only has two years of practice as a lawyer. The rest was all clerking, professorships, and being a judge. That implies mostly political connections rather than ability.

What do you think the rest of the court is composed of?


I didn't say she wouldn't fit right in with Thomas, Alito, and Kavanaugh.
 
2020-09-27 6:40:06 PM  

Deucednuisance: sprgrss: Theaetetus: She only has two years of practice as a lawyer. The rest was all clerking, professorships, and being a judge. That implies mostly political connections rather than ability.

What do you think the rest of the court is composed of?

In the case of the Justice being replaced, a damn fine litigator, and a solid jurist.


Eh, beware of Gell-Mann Amnesia. I liked Ginsburg too, but there were quite a few decisions in my field where she sided with a terrible opinion. Maybe because I'm less familiar with other fields, I'm giving her more credit than she necessarily deserves.
 
2020-09-27 7:29:45 PM  

COMALite J: The chart is incorrectly labeled as PolitiFact points out (they rate it "Mostly True") since it counts cloture motions, not actual nominees blocked (there were sometimes multiple clotures for a given nominee). The actual case is even worse! 68 individual nominees blocked from 1789 (when George Washington was inaugurated) − noon EST on January 20, 2009; vs. 79 from noon EST on January 20, 2009 − November 22, 2013 (when the PolitiFact article was published). So, that blue slice on the left for Obama should be quite a bit smalllarger, and the red slice for all the others quite a bit largsmaller.

/FT4me. The actual pie slices should've been ~53¾% of the total blocked nominations in U.S. history then-to-date being nominated by Obama (and that's just prior to November 22, 2013!) vs. ~46¼% nominated by George Washington − George W. Bush inclusive.
 
2020-09-27 8:28:22 PM  
Setting everything else aside. the fact she has just 3 years experience on the bench is a huge issue for me. to be even considered for the federal bench one should have to have 5 years experience as a judge, for SCOTUS consideration one should have to have at least 10 years experience with a minimum of five as a federal Judge.


Serious we need to get the GOP out of power long enough to fix shiat so if they manage to get back in it is extreme difficult to screw shiat up .
 
2020-09-27 8:44:31 PM  

sprgrss: gameshowhost: In the United States, putting a religion ahead of the Constitution isn't not an issue of jurisprudence, it's an immediate disqualification.

blah blah blah blah blah.  Nothing she has ever done as a professor, judge, clerk indicates that she puts religion ahead of the Constitution.


sorry that you can't infer

it's a grade school skill, so maybe you'll figure it out someday
 
2020-09-27 8:45:47 PM  

kb7rky: gameshowhost: DAMMIT  I DOUBLE NEGATIVE DUN GOOFED

PUT YOUR FACE BACK ON, TUFFLES :P


i ated both halves
 
2020-09-27 8:49:49 PM  

gameshowhost: sorry that you can't infer

it's a grade school skill, so maybe you'll figure it out someday


Your personal biases aren't logical inferences.
 
2020-09-27 9:21:52 PM  
Already Chewed Bubblegum? Eww no thanks.
 
2020-09-27 10:55:12 PM  

sprgrss: gameshowhost: sorry that you can't infer

it's a grade school skill, so maybe you'll figure it out someday

Your personal biases aren't logical inferences.


my logical inferences aren't personal biases. you're just not that bright.
 
2020-09-28 2:14:44 PM  
It's pretty pathetic watching all your pissed off Democratic party line fanbois get all outraged right now that Trump has nominated RBGs successor.

All the crap you have to say about this or that Congressional hurdle is garbage.

If Obama nominates a replacement for RBG in either 2013 or 2015, there is NO WAY IN HELL that even a McConnell controlled Senate can sit on the replacement until after an election that is 15-18 months away.

RBG was a great justice, but she royally farked up her legacy by not retiring after she turned 80 years old.

If your blinders keep you from seeing that, maybe you need to start getting some information from other sources or thinking for yourself.
 
2020-09-28 6:50:39 PM  

Kuta: It's pretty pathetic watching all your pissed off Democratic party line fanbois get all outraged right now that Trump has nominated RBGs successor.

All the crap you have to say about this or that Congressional hurdle is garbage.

If Obama nominates a replacement for RBG in either 2013 or 2015, there is NO WAY IN HELL that even a McConnell controlled Senate can sit on the replacement until after an election that is 15-18 months away.

RBG was a great justice, but she royally farked up her legacy by not retiring after she turned 80 years old.

If your blinders keep you from seeing that, maybe you need to start getting some information from other sources or thinking for yourself.


You're not wrong. The hubris of expecting HRC to automatically get queened in 2016 was something else.
 
2020-09-28 7:08:01 PM  

gameshowhost: Kuta: It's pretty pathetic watching all your pissed off Democratic party line fanbois get all outraged right now that Trump has nominated RBGs successor.

All the crap you have to say about this or that Congressional hurdle is garbage.

If Obama nominates a replacement for RBG in either 2013 or 2015, there is NO WAY IN HELL that even a McConnell controlled Senate can sit on the replacement until after an election that is 15-18 months away.

RBG was a great justice, but she royally farked up her legacy by not retiring after she turned 80 years old.

If your blinders keep you from seeing that, maybe you need to start getting some information from other sources or thinking for yourself.

You're not wrong. The hubris of expecting HRC to automatically get queened in 2016 was something else.

And she had reason to expect that if she retired her Obama-nominated replacement wouldn't've been Merricked by Moscow Miatch ― why, exactly?

Scroll up and read my previous.
 
2020-09-28 10:17:54 PM  

COMALite J: gameshowhost: Kuta: It's pretty pathetic watching all your pissed off Democratic party line fanbois get all outraged right now that Trump has nominated RBGs successor.

All the crap you have to say about this or that Congressional hurdle is garbage.

If Obama nominates a replacement for RBG in either 2013 or 2015, there is NO WAY IN HELL that even a McConnell controlled Senate can sit on the replacement until after an election that is 15-18 months away.

RBG was a great justice, but she royally farked up her legacy by not retiring after she turned 80 years old.

If your blinders keep you from seeing that, maybe you need to start getting some information from other sources or thinking for yourself.

You're not wrong. The hubris of expecting HRC to automatically get queened in 2016 was something else.
And she had reason to expect that if she retired her Obama-nominated replacement wouldn't've been Merricked by Moscow Miatch ― why, exactly?

Scroll up and read my previous.


You are wrong, fanboi.

Merrick only happened because there was less than a calendar year for McConnell to delay.

If RBG had finished out the spring SCOTUS term and retired in June 2013 or June 2015, the Senate could not have in good conscience have sat on Obama's nomination.

Turtle is trash, but there are some limits.
 
Displayed 336 of 336 comments

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.