are you watching? he foldedThis guy gets it. Should be an interesting exchange tomorrow.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
87 years, Christ on a bike. There should be an age limit for something as important as the senate.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
"Summer 2020, Amy. Just think of summer 2020"That caught my attention too, but to be fair she has done very good during the hearings.
I’m following them through CSpan on youtube
And she named four of the freedoms and didnt remember the right to assembly
edit: not assembly, but protest
She's been useless for years. She really should have stepped down years ago. Why she doesn't is telling.87 years, Christ on a bike. There should be an age limit for something as important as the senate.
He is Spartacus.Sen Corey Booker is good
because he wants to free slaves?He is Spartacus.
Sen martha blackburn is evilSen Corey Booker is good
Yep.So, all hysteria aside, who else thinks she’s a proper MILF?
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
https://newrepublic.com/article/159766/supreme-court-designed-kill-climate-policiesIf Democrats take back the Senate, and Congress is in a position to pass climate legislation next year, it could include provisions in those laws that strip the courts’ ability to challenge them—a tool used commonly by the right. “The Constitution in Article 3 gives the Congress a huge amount of authority to set up the courts and structure their jurisdiction,” Moyn says. “If Congress says the courts can’t help certain kinds of litigants, then the courts are powerless. Liberals and the left should want to use that power.” Rethinking basic legal ideology for a new generation will take more time.
Traditionally, climate has been thought about in the realm of so-called social issues, floating above supposedly meatier subjects like trade and the economy. Neither the Koch brothers nor the Federalist Society tend to see it that way, and thanks to her training, Amy Coney Barrett probably won’t, either. For the government to keep working in a warmer world and stave off its worst effects, people like Barrett will need to have less power to obstruct life-saving policy—and law schools will have to produce many fewer people like her.
Na it's mainly conservative media trying to manufacture rage directed against Barrett, not really making much waves in a media cycle constantly dominated by Trump.things are getting ugly
Wouldn't put it past her. And why did he bring it up?things are getting ugly
Not really. Just wing win media stirring the pot. The entire three days of hearings went remarkably smoothly compared to Kavanaugh.things are getting ugly
The media told Sen Kennedy about the boston professor calling her a white colonist for adopting two kids of color? Honest question.Not really. Just wing win media stirring the pot. The entire three days of hearings went remarkably smoothly compared to Kavanaugh.
You think she might be a white colonist for adopting two black kids?Wouldn't put it past her. And why did he bring it up?
Couple more years and she will be old enough for a run at the presidency87 years, Christ on a bike. There should be an age limit for something as important as the senate.
The Blaze as a reputable news source? These are the twats that gave Tomi fecking Lahren her springboard into the public consciousness. That alone puts them into the same batshit stratosphere as Newsmax & WND.things are getting ugly
The blaze is just showing what a senator told ACBThe Blaze as a reputable news source? These are the twats that gave Tomi fecking Lahren her springboard into the public consciousness. That alone puts them into the same batshit stratosphere as Newsmax & WND.
Of course it’s a source, it is showing news, somewhat breaking news in this case.The blaze is just showing what a senator told ACB
That’s not a source
Ok. Now i know that and I won’t argue it, i’m sure you know betterOf course it’s a source, it is showing news, somewhat breaking news in this case.
Okay, for the semantically-focused among us, The Blaze is a dubious news platform due to the loons they have had on their site.
Again, for the semantically-focused among us, The Blaze is a news platform or a media source. My apologies for apparently violating a canon of the news industry.Ok. Now i know that and I won’t argue it, i’m sure you know better
Anyway, in this case, they are just showing what a senator told ACB
So, the source is not the Blaze, but sen Kennedy
Mate, my english is not that good. But i think i understand your point. The Blaze is trying to make a big deal out of nothing. Is it that?Again, for the semantically-focused among us, The Blaze is a news platform or a media source. My apologies for apparently violating a canon of the news industry.
Was what the senator asked ACB not newsworthy?
The person she is interviewing will be appointed for life. The judge they’re replacing was a sitting judge till her death at the age of 87.87 years, Christ on a bike. There should be an age limit for something as important as the senate.
Something needs to be done but definitely no complete age ban. Some of the old folks serve as good reminders as well and can see history "repeating" itself.The person she is interviewing will be appointed for life. The judge they’re replacing was a sitting judge till her death at the age of 87.
America definitely needs term limits for various government positions.
She doesn’t know what ‘climate change’ means, and she’ll be appointed for life. Cool.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
The real horror of the Trump administration is the hundreds of lower court judges that his admin has rammed through in copious numbers. Their vileness will inhabit this country for at least one full generation, of not more. These judges will negatively affect potentially many people more quickly than SCOTUS will.One thing that amazes me is the importance that the judges have in the USA. In Argentina most people have no idea who are the SC judges.
But i just read an article in the NYT about ACB, were it says that in 2003 the SC ruled out state sodomy laws!!!
Of course, if you have such shit state laws, the SC decisions are paramount.
So the problem are not the SCOTUS, but the stupid state legislators.
one senator today IIRC said that Trump appointed over 100 lower court judges, non of them were black and only 20 percent weren't white -i guess latinos and asians-.The real horror of the Trump administration is the hundreds of lower court judges that his admin has rammed through in copious numbers. Their vileness will inhabit this country for at least one full generation, of not more. These judges will negatively affect potentially many people more quickly than SCOTUS will.
same law can be interpreted very differently. for example, 5 supreme court judges thought that a state cannot ban guns and 4 thought it can. 5 thought that votes should not be re-counted in florida and 4 thought they should, and so whoever was ahead at the point (George Bush) won.But seriously, judges work with the laws that the legislature provides, and for what i see some state legislatures have very shit laws
Those are examples of comstitutional law, and of course, you are rightsame law can be interpreted very differently. for example, 5 supreme court judges thought that a state cannot ban guns and 4 thought it can. 5 thought that votes should not be re-counted in florida and 4 thought they should, and so whoever was ahead at the point (George Bush) won.
all 5 were appointed by republicans. it is not a coincidence.