Paperview
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2013
- Messages
- 10,341
- Reaction score
- 5,075
- Location
- The Road Less Travelled
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
lung cancer, COPD, are both possible. My mom died of complications of COPD, and that is how we knew things were wrong-coughing fits
And your mom was out on the cold campaign trail for months and months and months, giving public speeches nearly every day, stop after stop, in an intense media zoo atmosphere - traveling to and fro across the country in a wild marathon too, right?
Well, let us start by noting that excellent grades are not a requirement (nor even a legal degree) for the Supreme Court. With that said, Ms. Lynch is the current Attorney General, has been a federal prosecutor for more than 20 years, and she has served on the Board of the Federal Reserve Bank. She is also a Harvard Law Graduate. And while I recognize that you believe all of her accomplishments were caused by her race, I would argue that her accomplishments are impressive because of the disadvantages suffered due to her race.
You wanted an argument for why she should "even be considered" and I have given you one. The fact that you believe there are more qualified individuals is largely irrelevant as to that topic.
Is a Harvard background a new requirement for Supreme Court justices?
Like many lefties you confuse her getting positions due to her race with her getting those positions DESPITE her race. When she applied to law school, being a black female was a huge advantage over far better qualified white males
Interestingly enough, I feel that you suffer from the exact opposite affliction.
well that's rather stupid since you are making stuff up and have no clue of what you are talking about. And I am not the issue here, since I am not being suggested as a quota pick for a position that should really be the best and the brightest legal scholar in the country or at least someone who is in that league. LL is not in that league
Where did I make anything up? Everything that I have said is based in fact (by the way, I am still waiting on you to back up your legal argument on how Heller supports your assertion that any gun ban is unconstitutional despite the language that actually comes from the Heller decision to the contrary). The lone statement that I have made that could be inferred as "made up" because it is, in fact, "opinion" is the notion where I claimed you are assuming the opposite - namely that she achieved her accomplishments because of her race, instead of in spite of her race.
when you can establish that firearms commonly used by police officers are both NOT IN COMMON USE and are unusually dangerous, get back to me
anyone who applied to top tier law schools in the 80s knows what sort of breaks Harvard was giving blacks back then
So...that's your argument? That any firearm regularly used by cops must be allowed? You have some language from the Heller decision to support that claim? Any how about the reference to "in common usage at the time"? That gets dismissed outright?
And I don't suppose Harvard supplied breaks to blacks in the 1980s because of oppression felt by Black in the 1960s and 1970s? Nooooo, that doesn't make any sense at all.
The USA won't have a Republican president anytime soon.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?