After doing a little reading on the subject, one candidate seems to stand out as the one I prefer most. What say you?
Put my vote in for Kethledge. Not that Barrett isn't a good choice, but the left will demonize her to no end for her Catholicism, and make a mockery of the whole process. Kethledge seems like not only the best choice, but the easiest to get confirmed as well.
I don't honestly know anything about any of the nominees but I do know that Amy Barrett will have a much easier time getting the vote because she is a woman. A white man not so much. If she's as conservative as they say she is she will be welcome to us on the right.
She's a toss up. I can see the concern her being a Catholic. The Pope would want her to vote to overturn Roe vs Wade and also vote to allow free access to the USA for any poor person from South America. Catholics tend to be socialistic in their attitudes. (Before the bashing begins, I am a Catholic) I would like to see Mike Lee be the pick.
There are nominally Catholic. Then there are Catholic. But, she is uber-Catholic and that can be problematic. Y'think? Moi Across an immense, unguarded, ethereal border, Canadians, cool and unsympathetic, regard our America with envious eyes and slowly and surely draw their plans against us.
I am the first kind. Being a Catholic and a politician must be an ever going conflict between the flesh and the soul. She is an exceptional intellect and I believe a Constitutionalist. I think she would incline to the middle ground and consider Row vs. Wade case law.
YES But, do you believe being uber-Catholic could be problematic in any manner? May we use the term, uber-Catholic to describe her Catholicism? If not, then what term and back to the first question.
Would you like to buy a bridge in NYC? The tolls will pay off the purchase price and then it is gravy train. Plus the gov't takes care of maintenance. How sweet is that. Message / Conversation Moi regarding positive interest. Oh and what "term" may we use to communicate her Catholicism as opposed to one who is more nominally, Catholic. Thank you
I'd use Catholic sense she is a member of the Catholic Church and one of it's subsets, the same way I'd use Protestant to describe either a Lutheran, a Calavinst, or Methodist. Why is that so hard to understand? She goes to a church that is connected to the order of the holy see, therefor she is a Catholic, and her beliefs are a part of the Church.
You seem to not understand the actual Catholic Church and the different religious orders that exist within it, all of which are approved by the Popes and are in communion with the Church itself.
One of the problematic matters with her nomination is not her but the narrow-mindedness of those who need to confirm her. First, she is highly intelligent and I have not heard anything about her jurisprudence causing any conflicts. Then again she has not much history. Second, her Catholicism should be a non-starter. I have no idea what her level of faith is. Then again, she has seven children, would have to assume she does not believe in birth control. That is not to say she doe's not believe in a woman's right to choose. I would think that we, as a Nation, had gotten past what a person's religion as a qualification for ANY judgeship. I would also think a person being nominated should not accept an appointment to being a judge if they have reservations about siding against the laws they are bound to uphold. Uber-Catholic? Has she shown any judgements to suggest that she is over zealous ? I had five children myself but only because I did not believe in abortion. It really didn't have anything to do with my Catholicism. I would be more inclined to ask the question " Is the Uber- Jewish membership of Congress being obstructionist of the Presidents pick for the Supreme Court, no matter who he picks?
My mom had the same reaction about Barrett and it baffles me. She insists that she is being discriminated against because she is Catholic. I honestly don’t know what the **** she is talking about. Nobody cares that she’s Catholic. What people care about is that she’s on record asserting that judges should rule based on their faith and not on the law. To me that makes her a terrible candidate and she would still be a terrible candidate regardless of what religion she belonged to. Imagine if she were a Muslim and said that. Hahaha the right would have an aneurism.
I'm believing Moi is asking, is Barrett a strict Catholic and adhering to the strictest Dogma of the church. I believe Paul Ryan acts very much in accordance with his faith and what the Pope thinks, in order to save his soul. The church has the power to twist peoples minds by threatening to ex-communicate them if they stray to far off the path. Many believe that this an automatic condemnation to hell.
The left has a special disdain for women and minorities who go against the dogma of the left, especially when they become candidates for a position of power. Look at what they did to Clarence Thomas when he was a nominee. It turned into a circus, and I think much the same would happen to Barrett. Yes, I think that is very unfortunate, but it is just the reality of how the game is played. Today I heard some pundits say it may be down to just Kethledge and Hardiman, because McConnell thinks those two will be the easiest to get confirmed by the Senate. As much as I dislike McConnell, I tend to agree with him on this one. I'm still on the Kethledge side of the ledger.
I can't remember the name of the Catholic group she is a member. I did read of her membership and researched it. Most conservative.Men lead was one point I remember. It isn't like she is a nominal Catholic. Maybe even attend Mass. She is a card carrying "conservative Catholic". Anyone know the group I speak of? It would help the dialog Moi
Im going to guess trump will pick Barrett. Its the most logical pick. Any pick will cause lefties heads to explode tonight.
What I hear now is that Kavanaugh is the leading choice. That bothers me, because he is the one that authored the "it's a tax" line that gave Roberts the reasoning to uphold ObamaCare. Hopefully Trump will go with someone that does not have that kind of a stain on his record.
That's not true, and is misinformation that has been put out by Never Trumpers and the leftness. Brett Kavanaugh Said Obamacare Was Unprecedented And Unlawful Brett Kavanaugh has by far the strongest, most consistent, most fearless record of constitutional conservatism of any federal court of appeals judge in the country. Over 12 years and 300 opinions, he has repeatedly fought for principles of textualism and originalism, reined in regulatory overreach, and ensured that administrative bureaucrats are accountable to the elected president. Nominating Kavanaugh would continue President Trump’s exemplary record of selecting the best-qualified person for the Supreme Court, as he did with his brilliant choice of Justice Neil Gorsuch. Unfortunately, being the clear best choice has downsides, including inviting unfair attacks. One came Monday in a lengthy article by Christopher Jacobs claiming that Kavanaugh “wrote a roadmap for saving Obamacare.” That is nonsense, and conservatives should not be misled into thinking otherwise. In 2011, two judges on the D.C. Circuit upheld the Obamacare individual mandate under the Commerce Clause. Kavanaugh dissented from that decision, which was authored by the respected Judge Laurence Silberman, a Reagan appointee. Kavanaugh explained that Obamacare could be challenged as unconstitutional, but that a federal jurisdictional statute required such a challenge to be brought in the future. Critically, and almost entirely absent from Jacobs’ account of the decision, Kavanaugh then called the individual mandate “a law that is unprecedented on the federal level in American history” and observed that upholding the individual mandate would be a “a jarring prospect” that would “usher in a significant expansion of congressional authority with no obvious principled limit.” The government’s argument for the mandate, Kavanaugh continued, would “ultimately extend as well to mandatory purchases of” many other products, a result that would have “extraordinary ramifications.” Kavanaugh’s thorough and principled takedown of the mandate was indeed a roadmap for the Supreme Court—the Supreme Court dissenters, justices Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, Clarence Thomas, and Samuel Alito, who explained that the mandate violated the Constitution. I am very familiar with that opinion, because I served as Kennedy’s law clerk that term. I can tell you with certainty that the only justices following a roadmap from Brett Kavanaugh were the ones who said Obamacare was unconstitutional. Kavanaugh was equally critical of the individual mandate under the weak Taxing Clause argument advanced by the government and catastrophically accepted by the Supreme Court. Kavanaugh explained that “no court to reach the merits has accepted the Government’s Taxing clause argument,” thereby showing his agreement with all the courts of appeals that correctly found the mandate unsustainable under that clause. Kavanaugh is by far the strongest choice for the job. His courageous and influential opinions on countless different issues—presidential power, regulatory overreach, religious liberty, the Second Amendment, and the list goes on—leave no doubt that he would be a forceful conservative justice for decades to come. Conservatives should not be misled by misinformation. Judge Brett Kavanaugh has the principles, the record, and the backbone that we need on the Supreme Court.....snip~ http://thefederalist.com/2018/07/03/...nted-unlawful/
I would have preferred Barrett. That being said. Kavanaugh is the strongest. Due to the leftness not being able to come up with much dirt on him. Due to the Repubs being able to steamroll the Demos with Kavanaugh. Both Collins and Murkowski voted him in as an Appellate Judge. So to did some Demos. Any others would have had a harder time getting confirmed. Only things they can hit Kavanaugh with is being associated to Bush and being on Ken Starrs Team. He has over 300 rulings and is Textulist, Originalist. All about the Separation of Powers. Is Hard Core 2nd Amendment. Is against the banning of any Semi Auto Weapons. Also is about property Rights.
