Your ideal Supreme Court

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by baconswitchfarm

You make an excellent case against reparations. I concur with your thinking.

Do you think that I didn’t know someone would make that argument. The thing is, I am very unsure about cash reparations.

With rare exceptions, no one alive today has owned slaves. Nor have their parents. Or even grandparents. My grandparents emigrated here from Central Europe in the 1880’s.

With rare exceptions, no one alive today has been a slave. I think the slaves freed at the end of the Civil War should have been paid retroactively for the labor they performed as slaves, but can not go so far as to argue that their descendants today-who suffered no actual injury-should be paid.

Isn’t there something in the Bible about the sins of the father being visited upon the son? Doesn’t seem fair.

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by Elkchester Road

So...if you are serious about "why should he be punished for the actions of someone 200 years ago"...you have a SERIOUS problem with the actions of many in the Summer 2020, right???

You are a Lummox.

Your logic escapes me.
Let me correct that. Your illogic escapes me.

[Elkchester Road]

Originally Posted by mostpost

Your logic escapes me.

It usually does...because you absolutely refuse to see things for what they are.

Are you seriously going to try to say that none of the actions of Rioters throughout the year of 2020 had nothing to do with "Reparations"??? And that those people were only taking "what was rightfully theirs"???

[Tom]

mostpost. least sense, in your entire life, you have never had a "great deal of thought."

[boxcar]

Originally Posted by mostpost

Do you think that I didn’t know someone would make that argument. The thing is, I am very unsure about cash reparations.

With rare exceptions, no one alive today has owned slaves. Nor have their parents. Or even grandparents. My grandparents emigrated here from Central Europe in the 1880’s.

With rare exceptions, no one alive today has been a slave. I think the slaves freed at the end of the Civil War should have been paid retroactively for the labor they performed as slaves, but can not go so far as to argue that their descendants today-who suffered no actual injury-should be paid.

Isn’t there something in the Bible about the sins of the father being visited upon the son?

Yeah there is. But it doesn't mean what you think it does.

Doesn’t seem fair.

Your ignorance, in principle, is explained in Mat 13:10-15.

[myohmyjustify]

It does not matter who the Biden choice for the Supreme Court will be.

There won't be a single vote from her that would have differed from Breyer. Now or in the next 30 years.

Now, come the GOP super red wave in the 2022 Senate and House elections, with the latter chamber adding over 50 GOP seats plus a 3rd Donald Trump presidential win in 2024 (winning 50 more MAGA red seats in the House) who on god's green earth will ever need the Supreme Court to adjudicate legislation that has wrongly been abdicated to them by our cowardly legislators for many years to date?

[Elkchester Road]

Originally Posted by mostpost

Your logic escapes me.
Let me correct that. Your illogic escapes me.

Here's a little "illogic" for you...November's coming...

[zico20]

Originally Posted by mostpost

Unlike you jokers, I put a great deal of thought into this. My Court has four women. (Sotomayor, Kagan, Brown Jackson and Barrett).
It has a Hispanic (Sotomayor) It has two African Americans (Obama and Brown Jackson.)

Even though I am definitely a Liberal, I thought it important that Conservatives have a voice on the Court.
I chose John Roberts because, while I disagree with his political philosophy, I admire the way he has conducted himself, his efforts to seek consensus. I chose Mitt Romney as a moderate Conservative, an honorable man who will decide fairly even if I disagree with how he decides. Finally, I chose Amy Cooney Barrett because I feel she deserves a chance to prove herself for better or worse.

The last person I picked was Adam Schiff. I truly believe he is qualified, but I will temporarily remove him from the list and invite you all to nominate a replacement. I know that most of you will simply make Stupid comments-you aren’t capable of anything else. But, hopefully, someone will come up with a viable suggestion.

Conservatives DON'T have a voice on your court. Every decision will be 6-3. So why do Democrats want to expand the court right now when they already have a say.

[zico20]

Originally Posted by mostpost

Do you think that I didn’t know someone would make that argument. The thing is, I am very unsure about cash reparations.

With rare exceptions, no one alive today has owned slaves. Nor have their parents. Or even grandparents. My grandparents emigrated here from Central Europe in the 1880’s.

With rare exceptions, no one alive today has been a slave. I think the slaves freed at the end of the Civil War should have been paid retroactively for the labor they performed as slaves, but can not go so far as to argue that their descendants today-who suffered no actual injury-should be paid.

Isn’t there something in the Bible about the sins of the father being visited upon the son? Doesn’t seem fair.

Shouldn't the first reparations be to the white families of those who died freeing the slaves. Death is worse than slavery in my book.

[azeri98]

Originally Posted by mostpost

Let’s try a fun exercise. Imagine you have been elected President of the United States, and every seat on the Supreme Court has become open. Who would you nominate to the bench?

Two things to keep in mind. You can nominate anyone currently on the Supreme Court. Confirmation is not a concern at this time.

Here is my list.

Sonya Sotomayor
John Roberts
Elena Kayan
Barack Obama
Mitt Romney
William Jefferson Clinton
Ketanji Brown Jackson
Amy Cooney Barrett. (Somewhat reluctantly.)
Adam Schiff

Let’s hear yours.

Joe Rogan
Steve Bannon
Tucker Carlson
Stone Cold Steve Austin
Aaron Rodgers
Jerry Jones
My Pillow Guy
Michael Flynn
Roger Stone

[Marshall Bennett]

Originally Posted by mostpost

The last person I picked was Adam Schiff.

LOL @ Adam Schiff!!
Now I'm convinced you're only here to provoke.

[davew]

pres Joe is doing a deep dive into 3 or 4 possibilities




I wonder if that includes his sniff test?

[Stevecsd2]

Originally Posted by JustRalph

Clone Clarence Thomas 8 times

:T hmbUp:

[MargieRose]

This young lady believes that she would be a fine nominee; after all, she is black.

Twitter

[Dave Schwartz]

Originally Posted by zico20

Conservatives DON'T have a voice on your court. Every decision will be 6-3. So why do Democrats want to expand the court right now when they already have a say.

Okay.
That was a brilliant USE OF LOGIC.