• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

With three GOP senators on board to vote for Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, it's looking like a done deal..

Moon said:
Why?
Click to expand...
Why???? Because "advise and consent" should not involve an obsession with the "political" make up of the court but rather the qualifications and ability to adjudicate based on law not politics.
 
Moon said:
Wow, look at those 48 Democrats who voted against Clarence Thomas, including the former KKK member Robert Byrd. Pretty sure the vast majority were white. I’m guessing you’re okay with that, though.

U.S. Senate: U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 102nd Congress - 1st Session

roll_call_vote.xml
www.senate.gov www.senate.gov
Click to expand...
Cordelier said:
Clarence Thomas was blatantly unqualified, though. The only reason he was named is because Bush needed a black conservative to replace Marshall, and the only other one on-hand was a 67 year-old semi-retired Judge in the 2nd Circuit. Before you start getting on the racial issue... let me remind you that Reagan named 83 Circuit Court Judges - and only 1 was African American. You think that was an accident? Or how about Trump? 0 out of 54! Yeah... the GOP is totally color-blind.
Click to expand...

Some are quite skilled at drilling down into irrelevant details that don't matter when one letter is next to the name, and equally able to utterly fail to see any need to ask any questions about them when it points the other way.
 
CaughtInThe said:
Image
Click to expand...

Gotta say... that's really disheartening. I expected as much from the bottom-feeders like Graham, Cruz, Hawley, Cotton , and Blackburn. But Ben Sasse? C'mon.... think for yourself, man.
 
Callen said:
Mary, you know exactly why not and it has zero to do with competency. I don't think it has much to do with Black and female for most either.....but yes some. It's because a Democratic President nominated her and they can't be havin' that!!!!
Click to expand...
Exactly. I saw a few video clips today of senators on the rules committee. They gave praise for her experience and over-all qualifications, but at the end said they would not support her. Purely partisan BS. At least they were somewhat honest about it.
 
Mr Person said:
Some are quite skilled at drilling down into irrelevant details that don't matter when one letter is next to the name, and equally able to utterly fail to see any need to ask any questions about them when it points the other way.
Click to expand...
You mean like pretending Republicans are racists if they vote against a black nominee? I agree.
 
Callen said:
Why???? Because "advise and consent" should not involve an obsession with the "political" make up of the court but rather the qualifications and ability to adjudicate based on law not politics.
Click to expand...
Why did you single out Scott?
 
BlueTex said:
Just had to put the final in the coffin for some of our conservative friends who held out hope...
Click to expand...
Hope of what? A democrat Senator dropping dead?
 
Moon said:
Why did you single out Scott?
Click to expand...
You know damn well why. However, you will not see me claim that most voted against her because she is a Black woman. I think a few may have but for most it was raw politics!
 
Cordelier said:
Clarence Thomas was blatantly unqualified, though. The only reason he was named is because Bush needed a black conservative to replace Marshall, and the only other one on-hand was a 67 year-old semi-retired Judge in the 2nd Circuit. Before you start getting on the racial issue... let me remind you that Reagan named 83 Circuit Court Judges - and only 1 was African American. You think that was an accident? Or how about Trump? 0 out of 54! Yeah... the GOP is totally color-blind.
Click to expand...
What are the qualifications for a Supreme Court justice and how was Clarence Thomas unqualified?
 
Callen said:
If Tim Scott doesn't vote for he should hang his head in shame. She is eminently well qualified.
Click to expand...
It's hard to be a black republican in todays republican party.
 
Callen said:
You know damn well why. However, you will not see me claim that most voted against her because she is a Black woman. I think a few may have but for most it was raw politics!
Click to expand...
Yet you single out a black Republican.
 
Moon said:
What are the qualifications for a Supreme Court justice and how was Clarence Thomas unqualified?
Click to expand...

Well, I'd say having more than 16 months' experience on the Bench would be a good start.... or, failing that, at least some experience arguing cases before the Supreme Court. Maybe some significant legal scholarship? Something that makes you stand out from the pack.
 
Cordelier said:
Gotta say... that's really disheartening. I expected as much from the bottom-feeders like Graham, Cruz, Hawley, Cotton , and Blackburn. But Ben Sasse? C'mon.... think for yourself, man.
Click to expand...
These are the same basic cast of clowns behind the Garland / Comey farce. The bottom line is that they will do anything they can to prevent Democrats from seating a judge. It does not matter who the nominee is nor how well qualified they are. I suspect their calculus is something to the effect of "if we can stall this until the next term, then we'll be in control and can stall it for another two years."
 
here's the video i tried to post earlier. IT IS SO FRIGGIN GOOD...



 
Cordelier said:
Well, I'd say having more than 16 months' experience on the Bench would be a good start.... or, failing that, at least some experience arguing cases before the Supreme Court. Maybe some significant legal scholarship? Something that makes you stand out from the pack.
Click to expand...
So nothing in writing anywhere?
 
Moon said:
Wow, look at those 48 Democrats who voted against Clarence Thomas, including the former KKK member Robert Byrd. Pretty sure the vast majority were white. I’m guessing you’re okay with that, though.

U.S. Senate: U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 102nd Congress - 1st Session

roll_call_vote.xml
www.senate.gov www.senate.gov
Click to expand...

🤣

I have no idea what you're trying to say. But yes, I'm completely OK with 48 Democrats voting against Justice Thomas.

Three more votes against him, and we'd be living in a different world.
 
BlueTex said:
It's looking like this is done...





Click to expand...

Trumpism, build over 2 1/2 decades by Fox has destroyed this country.

3 GOP votes for the most qualified person in years and its all partisan, after what McConnell did no less?

This country is dead.
 
TheDoctorWasIn said:
🤣

I have no idea what you're trying to say. But yes, I'm completely OK with 48 Democrats voting against Justice Thomas.

Three more votes against him, and we'd be living in a different world
Click to expand...
So you’re okay when Democrats vote against a black candidate but not when Republicans do. Makes sense.
 
Moon said:
So you’re okay when Democrats vote against a black candidate but not when Republicans do. Makes sense.
Click to expand...
Try as you might, it's not about race. It is about qualifications and character.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom