Should Amy Barrot and Brett Kavanaugh be punished fot lying?

That isn’t what I am asking. Those hearings are customary

I specifically laid out the question that I was asking, this is about how they were sat by breaching customary procedure and ethical standards. But I understand if you don’t want to answer. Carry-on

 

Than which judges are you talking about

I don't understand the question I've stated that and you responded saying it's simple I tried to answer it twice.

Maybe the issue is you. Maybe you're question wasn't as concise as you thought it was.

 

I had assumed you were an American, and approved of elctive representation.

 

Most people only read the headline above the fold. There is a lot of big money fueling these protests, and providing the tools for the useful idiots to get their mugs on the news.

 

While they aren't mature enough for self-rule, the vast majority of us are. Their claim about the Court's Position: THIS IS NOT A JOB FOR UNELECTED JUDGES BUT FOR YOUR ELECTED LEGISLATURES" that this is tyrannical overreach by the Court is one of the dumbest hot takes of the modern era.

 

I am an American. I consider congress to be the most corrupt branch of government. It is not because it was designed that way. It is because we continue to elect corrupt people to it. I view congress as the greatest impediment to the American way of life and personal freedom. It is not because it was intended to be that way. It is because it has become that way. I don't apologize for my opinion either. I merely point things out to voters as one more thing to consider in deciding their vote. You are welcome to ignore what I say. It matters not a whit to me.

 

Hyper-partisan rationales, aside, the U.S.'s retrogressive ruling in favor of authoritarianism aligns it with the likes of Iraq, Nicaragua, and El Salvador's statist tyranny concerning women's reproductive rights, and distinguishes it from advanced, democratic first-world nations that have progressed:

[A]s Biden began a five-day swing through Europe Sunday, he arrived in the Bavarian Alps bearing a less pleasant reality: America is backward, at least in the view of almost every foreign leader with whom he will meet this week, who responded to the news that the U.S. Supreme Court had overturned a woman’s right to abortion with abject dismay and alarm.

“It must be protected,” Macron wrote. “I wish to express my solidarity with the women whose liberties are being undermined by the Supreme Court of the United States.”

Foreign leaders call the Supreme Court abortion decision “horrific”
For Biden, a president who came to office promising a return to stability and predictability after four tumultuous years under his predecessor, the Friday ruling offered yet another reminder of the lasting legacy of former president Donald Trump, whose three Supreme Court appointees tipped the balance on the bench and with a stroke of their powerful pens upended half a century of settled law.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/worl...peans-disagree/ar-AAYTcpm?ocid=BingNewsSearch​

 

Ridiculous. THIS IS A QUESTION FOR YOUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE LEGISLATURES, NOT UNELECTED JUDGES is not an act of tyranny by the judges, quite the opposite.

 

False. There have been nine justices since 1869. There are nine justices today. No change.

 

I hope you understand that Collins is a liberal. Better not get too outspoken about her.

 

republicans changed the votes for SC judges to 50, which allowed for activist judges

republicans said the people should decide when a seat opened under Obama on election year

republicans said Republicans should decide when a seat opened under Trump on election year

Republican stole the SC, so the SC opinion no longer matters, it's partisan now, so lets just replace it with each new President that controls the Senate

 

The repression of women and abrogation of their rights by authoritarian statism is, obviously, achievable by different methods.

A half-century of established law, supported by most Americans, that respected the right of women to make personal reproductive decisions in consultations with loved ones, and trusted medical and spiritual advisers, is being arrogated by impersonal politicians and bureaucrats - as is the case in some sh¡thole nations like Iraq, Nicaragua, and El Salvador,

Advanced democracies continue to safeguard that freedom.

 

there were left wing activist judges already on the court this is that goose and gander thing.

It's not just justices that rule against things you like that are activists.

that was to keep Merrick Garland off of the bench in our courts and just so you know how I feel about this. Mitch McConnell is an American hero for stopping that scumbag from being on our courts. He is one of the most corrupt people in the official realm at the moment and he has single-handedly screwed over the education system than just to help his son in law make money.

So we're talking about a special circumstance where we were keeping a corrupt piece of garbage out of the realm of power.

that's because they had the majority that's their job that's why you want a majority in the Senate and the house if your Democrat elected officials didn't keep their majority the blame falls on them. I would suggest that the majority declined because of Obama's desperate need to have a legacy and the extremely unfavorable affordable Care act. I would venture a thought that removing that was why Trump was elected that in the border wall which the Democrats don't want to do s*** about too so this is one of the consequences to not winning elections.

that's insurrection are you renouncing your citizenship?

 

the SC judges required 60 votes, thus most were more moderate, with the Republicans change, we now have activist judges

 

The White House said President Joe Biden does not agree with fellow Democrats’ calls for the U.S. Supreme Court to be expanded in the wake of recent rulings on guns and abortion that he has called disappointing and troubling.

“That is something that the president does not agree with,” White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre told reporters Saturday when asked about Biden’s stance on adding justices. “That is not something that he wants to do.”

Something I finally agree with Biden on

 

Where does it say this is required?

 

it was required, republicans changed the rules, were does it say how many judges, time for dems to seat more

if the rules allow it, do it..... right

if Republicans no longer want to play fair, neither should Dems

 

Where by what?

 

How is authoritarian statism achieved by freely elected representative legislatures?

If it's supported by most Americans, why is getting passed by their representatives a problem? And how is it that Dems can't even get all the Senate Democrats to vote for their bill?

 

'Punishing the judges' is not going to solve anything. Adding new ones won't either. Trusting that Mitch McConnell will keep the filibuster, when it no longer is convenient does not work either.

We do not get along any more. We do not trust each other anymore. We do not share any of the same values anymore. We want entirely separate things. We need to divide this union up and split as amicably as we can before things get violent.

 

The chart proved that the Dems have more religious overall than the Republicans.
You're welcome.

 

You may approve of the U.S. retrogressing to the state of Iraq, Nicaragua, and El Salvador where politicians and bureaucrats arrogate a woman's right to control her body, but most Americans clearly do not.

1. Majority of Americans disapprove of overturning Roe v. Wade​
2. Poll: Most Americans want abortion legal in most cases​
3. Do Americans Want Abortion Rights? Majority Support Legalized Abortions​
4. Public Opinion on Abortion | Pew Research Center
   ​

Don't expect to see advanced democracies adopting the authoritarianism of sh¡thole nations.

 

I wonder when this thread will be moved. It seems whenever lefties lose an argument bigly the thread gets moved.

 

Do you keep using this spelling to deliberately evade the auto-censors of PF?

 

I thought everyone knew about how the Senate worked for SC picks, sorry, let me explain a little better - it was agreed upon rules, Republicans decided to change those rules to 50 for SC picks, 60 votes required a bipartisan pick, 50 means activist judges will be the norm going forward as it only requires a simple majority

now dems can decide to change long-standing rules too, like adding more seats