Currently, there are 0 users and 1 guest visiting this topic.
Viewing 56 reply threads

  • Author

    Posts

    • spartan

      Participant
      Post count: 1866

      http://www.foxnews.com/politics/breyer-retire-supreme-court

      Should be interesting to watch. If he goes too far left the pick won’t get confirmed and if he doesn’t go far enough it’s going to be mayhem.

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      Lol.

      It’s funny how the court is now this political thing

      Breyer retiring is a sign that he sees the court in real danger of losing its standing, as shown right here lol

    • spartan

      Participant
      Post count: 1866

      Lol.

      It’s funny how the court is now this political thing

      Breyer retiring is a sign that he sees the court in real danger of losing its standing, as shown right here lol

      There you go with those vulcan mind tricks again. You have no idea.

      At 83 I think there is also a very good chance he wants to sit on the porch and watch the grandkids. I will wait for the announcement before I apportion any cause.

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      Keep in mind MCConnell engineered having Kavanaugh on the bench BEFORE his much more qualified and senior boss, Merrick Garland.

      Not sure how much people grasp this but there’s actual objective proof that the GOP is responsible for the current radical nature of the court. It’s undeniably – as sure as MATH – the truth that the party thst used to claim that “activist judges” were the problem actually deliberately stuff the court with conservatives who are actually, demonstrably ACTIVISTS … starting with Clarence Thomas

      From Thomas through to ACB … the conservative judge on the bench BREAK one long held principle of courts (dating back to England) and its in the news all the time, as recently as this week. And it’s because they are trying to reconstruct America

      Spartan is pre-emptively warning of “mayhem,” a guy who supports the Texas abortion law lol

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      Lol.

      It’s funny how the court is now this political thing

      Breyer retiring is a sign that he sees the court in real danger of losing its standing, as shown right here lol

      There you go with those vulcan mind tricks again. You have no idea.

      At 83 I think there is also a very good chance he wants to sit on the porch and watch the grandkids. I will wait for the announcement before I apportion any cause.

      He’s spoken about it. Idiot.

    • spartan

      Participant
      Post count: 1866

      He’s spoken about it. Idiot.

      I haven’t seen. Please educate me.

    • spartan

      Participant
      Post count: 1866

      Spartan is pre-emptively warning of “mayhem,” a guy who supports the Texas abortion law lol

      Look dickhead, in the current climate if Biden doesn’t pick what some groups of the Democrat Party consider pure enough they are going to be disapointed, angry and very vocal about it. It’s just an observation. Tell me I am wrong instead of going into automatic insult mode.

      What’s more Biden has pretty much boxed himself into a corner previously stating the next pick will be a woman of color. The only candidate I know of of late is the Lady who got confirmed to the DC Court of Appeals last year. Not sure if that’s long enough before SC nomination though.

    • spartan

      Participant
      Post count: 1866

      Ketanji Brown Jackson, and funny enough she clerked for Byer would be apropos.

      Edit: She is also young (51) so that would be appealing.

    • TheChronicHotAir

      Participant
      Post count: 6938

      Thank God obama’s pick never made it– Merritt Garland has proven to be a p.o.s.

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      He’s spoken about it. Idiot.

      I haven’t seen. Please educate me.

      Educate yourself.

      He wrote a fucking book (lol, you live under a rock?) and gave an interview to the NY Times as a result and the TOPIC is not exactly something new, its been talked about with every retirement recently BUT HIS IN PARTICULAR because of who he is and what he believes in and because we are in the ERA OF TRUMPISM where states pass laws to make citizens enforcers.

      Breyer’s goal is to UPHOLD the credibility of the Court because credibility is all it has. That is UNDERMINED by people like you, as point you make right here:

      If he goes too far left the pick won’t get confirmed and if he doesn’t go far enough it’s going to be mayhem.

      and its undermined by McConnell and other GOP who need ABORTION EXTEMIDSTS and others to stay in office

      The “radicalization” of the Court is a GOP-driven phenomenon. Its driven by a desire to keep America like the past . . to “make America great AGAIN” by undoing civil rights and abortion and similar. That sad reality and Bryers desire to uphold the CREDIBILIOY of the court, amongst the GOP-led appointment of people like Kavanaugh and ACB (both of whom called Roe the “law of the land” LOL) is precisely why his retirement is so problematic for Breyer. He does NOT . . . does NOT . . want it to be seen as a blatantly political move . . but hes 83, so you get this . .. from his interview . . about his BOOK:

      “The book explores the nature of the court’s authority, saying it is undermined by labeling justices as conservative or liberal. Drawing a distinction between law and politics, Justice Breyer wrote that not all splits on the court were predictable and that those that were could generally be explained by differences in judicial philosophy or interpretive methods.

      In the interview, he acknowledged that the politicians who had transformed confirmation hearings into partisan brawls held a different view, but he said the justices acted in good faith, often finding consensus and occasionally surprising the public in significant cases.

      “Didn’t one of the most conservative — quote — members join with the others in the gay rights case?” he asked in the interview, referring to Justice Neil M. Gorsuch’s majority opinion last year ruling that a landmark civil rights law protects gay and transgender workers from workplace discrimination.”

      He wants his legacy to be that of UPHOLDING the credibility of the court, but he knows that his retirement will be seen . . . EXACTLY (lol) . . exactly as you just posted

      If he goes too far left the pick won’t get confirmed and if he doesn’t go far enough it’s going to be mayhem.

      and now, the timing, means he’s given in to the politics that he wants to say does not exist in the Court (see Gorusch quote above) . . the politics that upholds the TX aversion law, strips the Voting Rights Act etc. and that has this Supreme Court as the most activist court in recent history . . LITERALLY in the news YESTERDAY

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      in the current climate

      Spartan, the current climate was the point. The current climate has ACTIVIST pass a law that makes citizens enforcers of a NON-existent abortion ban

      In other words, the current climate is the LOONIEST people in the country — ON BOTH SIDES — warring it out with each other and that climate has infected the court THANKS TO THE GOP . . something Breyer wants to deny, avoid etc.

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      Spartan , I am probably wasting my time because I doubt your ability to comprehend this BUT

      “”The Court granted certiorari before judgment in this case to determine whether, under our precedents, certain abortion providers can pursue a pre-enforcement challenge to a recently enacted Texas statute. We conclude that such an action is permissible against some of the named defendants but not others.””

      That phrase in bold is the key to understanding why the GOP stacking of the court matters. This too:

      “When Justice Brett Kavanaugh was facing tough questions during his 2018 confirmation battle about his views on the Supreme Court’s abortion rulings. he returned time and time again to the importance of precedent and their “precedent on precedent.”

      Speaking more broadly, Kavanaugh at the time described the circumstances that the justices overturn precedent as “rare” and said that a court majority’s disagreement with a prior ruling was, by itself, not enough to overturn it.”

      But Kavanaugh’s tone on when the court departs from “stare decisis,” the concept of standing by its previous decisions, was a bit different on Wednesday when the court debated the future of abortion rights and its previous rulings.

      LOOK UP CLARENCE THOMAS on same issue. I think you objected when I said he was thought of as a bot of a loon . .

      THERE YOU GO . . start your education

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      Spartan , I am probably wasting my time because I doubt your ability to comprehend this BUT

      “”The Court granted certiorari before judgment in this case to determine whether, under our precedents, certain abortion providers can pursue a pre-enforcement challenge to a recently enacted Texas statute. We conclude that such an action is permissible against some of the named defendants but not others.””

      That phrase in bold is the key to understanding why the GOP stacking of the court matters. This too:

      “When Justice Brett Kavanaugh was facing tough questions during his 2018 confirmation battle about his views on the Supreme Court’s abortion rulings. he returned time and time again to the importance of precedent and their “precedent on precedent.”

      Speaking more broadly, Kavanaugh at the time described the circumstances that the justices overturn precedent as “rare” and said that a court majority’s disagreement with a prior ruling was, by itself, not enough to overturn it.”

      But Kavanaugh’s tone on when the court departs from “stare decisis,” the concept of standing by its previous decisions, was a bit different on Wednesday when the court debated the future of abortion rights and its previous rulings.

      LOOK UP CLARENCE THOMAS on same issue. I think you objected when I said he was thought of as a bot of a loon . .

      THERE YOU GO . . start your education

      and t tie it together, this is 83 year olf BREYER talking about the past:

      “Justice Breyer made the point more broadly in his new book. “My experience from more than 30 years as a judge has shown me that anyone taking the judicial oath takes it very much to heart,” he wrote. “A judge’s loyalty is to the rule of law, not the political party that helped to secure his or her appointment.”

      as he is making that comment (or plea) the more recent GOP (hyper-political) appointments are doing exactly the opposite.

      That is why his retirement now, after resisting before, will be perceived as him realizing that he cant stop it . . PARTICULARLY after the TX abortion ban law.

      “U.S. Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer described as “very, very, very wrong” the court’s recent refusal to block a Texas law that has the effect of banning abortions in the state after about six weeks.

      “I wrote a dissent — and that’s the way it works,” he told NPR legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg in an interview in Boston.

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      ONE EXAMPLE of your conservative guys being the ACTIVISTS:

      “An analysis of the court’s current term, which ends Oct. 3, by Steve Vladeck, a professor at the University of Texas School of Law, found that the court handed down 68 orders on its shadow docket “from which at least one Justice publicly dissented.”

      “In *none* of those dissents has a Justice to the right of the Chief Justice joined a Justice to his left,” Vladeck wrote on Twitter. “That’s stunning.”

      Breyer told Totenberg that the court’s opinions overall are “more mixed than you suggest,” with liberal and conservative justices in agreement, but in reference to the shadow docket, he said: “It’s a huge mistake to decide major things without the normal full argument.”

      and that is ONLY ONE EXAMPLE

      the better example is how many times — compared to its entire history – the current Court has taken on a case BEFORE judgment . . . almost exclusively on cultural issues (race, voting, abortion)

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      The pressure put on Breyer was all about the problems with the Court today:

      Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of the University of California Berkeley School of Law, urged Breyer to retire in a Washington Post op-ed article in May, writing that there are times “when the stewards of our system must put the good of an institution they love, and of the country they love, above their own interests. They have to recognize that no one, not even a brilliant justice, is irreplaceable, and that the risks presented by remaining are more than hypothetical.”

      “RISKS PRESENTED BY REMAINING ARE MORE THAN HYPOTHETICAL”

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      the better example is how many times — compared to its entire history – the current Court has taken on a case BEFORE judgment

      “Certiorari “before judgment” is supposed to be an exceptionally rare practice through which #SCOTUS bypasses courts of appeals to expedite full review of merits cases. From Aug. 2004–Jan. 2018, #SCOTUS granted *0* such petitions. Today’s grant in the UNC case is the *15th* since.”

    • spartan

      Participant
      Post count: 1866

      You raise some very interesting quotes, but none of which support your argument that he is retiring BECAUSE he thinks the court is losing it’s standing. In fact many of your quotes would suggest otherwise as he goes out of his way to say his colleagues are driven by a desire to uphold the law, not anything else.

      Other quotes I would agree with in that the objectiveness and integrity of the court is called into question by the some people; i.e. politicians and organizations. But that’s politics for you. I do believe we run the risk of the SC will eventually lose it’s appearance of neutrality and thus it’s authority if we continue the way we are going.

      I will hold up and say perhaps we are having different interpretations of the word “standing” here, and if you can step back from lash out mode and explain yours. For me I am thinking something along the lines of “moral authority with the citizenry.” There will be those on both sides who will scream and shout about some of the judgements, Me included. Hell some of the Justices scream and shout at each other over some of the decisions, but personally I think the SC still holds moral integrity with a vast portion of the population.

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      Maybe the blame is on me for poorly explaining, so I will look back, but you have this wrong:

      he is retiring BECAUSE he thinks the court is losing it’s standing. In fact many of your quotes would suggest otherwise as he goes out of his way to say his colleagues are driven by a desire to uphold the law, not anything else.

      he realizes that the Court has strayed from his 27 years experience of Judges only wanting to UPHOLD the law – the very thing he is trying to elevate — and so he retiring BECAUSE . . he agrees with Erwin Chemerinsky

      “RISKS PRESENTED BY REMAINING ARE MORE THAN HYPOTHETICAL”

      The reality is that the GOP side has undermined the Court by blocking Garland, placing purely partisan judges who are intent on rolling back things like Civil Rights, abortion etc. , so if he loves the Court the best thing to do is not work internally but actually step aside to try to balance the court (Erwin Chemerinsky’s point). Doing so though CONCEDES that he was wrong about the Court

      sad reality

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      but personally I think the SC still holds moral integrity with a vast portion of the population.

      the institution does, perhaps, but its impossible to see the way the Court has been configured (block Garland, but appoint Kavanaugh and ACB) and think of it as a neutral arbiter, especially when the CONSERVATIVE wing of the Court is actually rolling back long standing precedent.

      I know you agree with that rollback, but solely as to whether or not it is POLITICAL, all one has to do is look at Kavanaugh and ACB during their confirmation as compared to NOW

      “WASHINGTON — During his confirmation to the Supreme Court, Brett M. Kavanaugh convinced Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) that he thought a woman’s right to an abortion was “settled law,” calling the court cases affirming it “precedent on precedent” that could not be casually overturned.

      Amy Coney Barrett told senators during her confirmation hearing that laws could not be undone simply by personal beliefs, including her own. “It’s not the law of Amy,” she quipped.”

      and Alito giving a speech (lol) to defend his role on the TX abortion case

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 5127

      Not sure how much people grasp this but there’s actual objective proof that the GOP is responsible for the current radical nature of the court. It’s undeniably – as sure as MATH – the truth that the party thst used to claim that “activist judges” were the problem actually deliberately stuff the court with conservatives who are actually, demonstrably ACTIVISTS … starting with Clarence Thomas

      Come on. Sotomayor is every bit the activist radical that Clarence Thomas is. She’s the one that just recently made some BS Rachael Maddow esq claim that thousands of kids were on ventilators, during a proceeding. Even Bill Maher called her out for the ridiculousness of a Supreme court Justice just making shit up that miraculously falls right in line with the current extreme politics that are out there. Anyway, she is as predictable as Joe Biden’s daily 24 piece puzzle selection…. (Something extremely dated)

      I think he’s obviously going to choose a liberal. Someone Republicans will hate. I wonder if we’ll get a bunch of fake rape accusations or if he’ll just pick a woman to head off any criticism.

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      Come on.

      I go onto explain below, but I was speaking of the way to Court (not an individual Justice) actually conducts business now. Taking up cultural cases BEFORE Judgment, shadow docket, ignoring precedent AS A REGULAR PRACTICE etc.

      Its all the conservative wing of the Court proactively engaging in changing the law

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      Rachael Maddow esq claim that thousands of kids were on ventilators, during a proceeding

      in the same hearing, Gorsuch made a similar mistake. Both just mistakes. Prepped by clerks, reading numbers wrong

      Not sure how that ever relates to “activism.”

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      Article supporting the point I made in this thread

      http://www.cnn.com/2022/01/26/politics/breyer-scotus-retirement-biden-liberal/index.html

      The focus is on the terms and the timing and points out his “change of heart” on retiring, if that’s the proper description

    • spartan

      Participant
      Post count: 1866

      Rachael Maddow esq claim that thousands of kids were on ventilators, during a proceeding

      in the same hearing, Gorsuch made a similar mistake. Both just mistakes. Prepped by clerks, reading numbers wrong

      Not sure how that ever relates to “activism.”

      Just to be petty, no he didn’t. It was a misunderstanding of a transcript.

    • spartan

      Participant
      Post count: 1866

      he realizes that the Court has strayed from his 27 years experience of Judges only wanting to UPHOLD the law – the very thing he is trying to elevate — and so he retiring BECAUSE . . he agrees with Erwin Chemerinsky

      I find it ironic that you say Byerer is retiring because it is has become too political then you quote someone that overtly encourages him to retire for political reasons. Maybe that is not what you meant, so if not please correct me.

    • spartan

      Participant
      Post count: 1866

      Its all the conservative wing of the Court proactively engaging in changing the law

      I think the SC is about as fundamentalist as I have seen it. And I am not referring to religion, but relating to or advocating the strict, literal interpretation . This means it will not treat the Constitution as a living document, but as has been demonstrated recently, I don’t think it is as “conservative” as some make it out to be. Particularly the 3 new Justices. I don’t think they will be what Democrats (for example) want them to be, and at the same time will rule as consistently as “conservatives” want them to.

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      he realizes that the Court has strayed from his 27 years experience of Judges only wanting to UPHOLD the law – the very thing he is trying to elevate — and so he retiring BECAUSE . . he agrees with Erwin Chemerinsky

      I find it ironic that you say Byerer is retiring because it is has become too political then you quote someone that overtly encourages him to retire for political reasons. Maybe that is not what you meant, so if not please correct me.

      I honestly have to wonder if you can read.

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      Its all the conservative wing of the Court proactively engaging in changing the law

      I think the SC is about as fundamentalist as I have seen it. And I am not referring to religion, but relating to or advocating the strict, literal interpretation . This means it will not treat the Constitution as a living document, but as has been demonstrated recently, I don’t think it is as “conservative” as some make it out to be. Particularly the 3 new Justices. I don’t think they will be what Democrats (for example) want them to be, and at the same time will rule as consistently as “conservatives” want them to.

      Thanks for sharing. Not sure how they relates to the quote about the activity of the conservative wing

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      Even if you hate Biden, just fast forward past him and listen to Justice Breyer speak

      http://www.nbcnews.com/video/full-remarks-justice-breyer-joins-biden-to-announce-retirement-from-supreme-court-131845701789

      His farewell choice is to call forth Lincoln and the Gettysburg Address . . and discuss the Great Experiment of divergent views and diverse people all bound together by ONE PRINCIPLE: adherence to a rule of law.

      Justice Breyer referenced the first two lines

      “Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth, upon this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.

      Now we are engaged in a great civil war, testing whether that nation, or any nation so conceived, and so dedicated, can long endure. We are met here on a great battlefield of that war. We have come to dedicate a portion of it, as a final resting place for those who here gave their lives that that nation might live. It is altogether fitting and proper that we should do this.”

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      Window into the Trumper mind. Credit to a white GOP Senator

      Biden nomination = affirmative action (because Biden said he would name a Black peron)

      the underlying racism is that any Black candidate is presumptively NOT qualified

      If you compare Kavanaugh and ACB to the top candidates linked to Biden that falls apart, but this also from the WaPo:

      “One metric as we chat about who is qualified to be a judge and who is not … Trump, whose judges were primarily white men, had 10ish of his noms rated “not qualified” by the ABA. Biden, whose 1st year judicial picks have been historically diverse, has none so far. (49 WQ/8 Q).”[/i]

      Th Trump part is a little bit of an unnecessary dig (although he intentionally appointed non-jurists), but its not like Biden has some track record as a President appointing unqualified people.

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      the implicit racism in the “affirmative action” claims is that there is NOT a supremely qualified black woman

      When Lindsey Graham disagrees . .

      “”I can’t think of a better person for President Biden to consider for the Supreme Court than Michelle Childs,” Graham said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “She has wide support in our state. She is considered to be a fair-minded, highly gifted jurist. She’s one of the decent people I’ve ever met.”

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 5127

      the implicit racism in the “affirmative action” claims is that there is NOT a supremely qualified black woman

      When Lindsey Graham disagrees . .

      “”I can’t think of a better person for President Biden to consider for the Supreme Court than Michelle Childs,” Graham said on CBS’s “Face the Nation.” “She has wide support in our state. She is considered to be a fair-minded, highly gifted jurist. She’s one of the decent people I’ve ever met.”

      Well who wouldn’t trust Lindsay Graham? Seriously?

      But Michelle Childs sounds pretty reasonable. I bet if she’s the pick you’ll hear a loud wail come up from the extremists on that side of the isle and probably because of my leanings, I’m highly skeptical that Biden won’t choose someone more radical to placate the extreme left as he’s done for a year now on every issue put in his hands. It’s as if he asks himself what AOC would do every time he needs to make a decision. He’s probably going to dig up an outright communist. You guys are already talking about price controls to ease inflation. It’s out there look it up.

      Call me what you will. Childs sounds mostly fine considering it’s your turn to pick but I have little faith in Joe Biden’s status as a “moderate”.

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      Well who wouldn’t trust Lindsay Graham? Seriously?

      He’s a known Antifa liberal hack . . .

      Or, alternatively . . and Trump’s biggest supporter

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      I’m highly skeptical that Biden won’t choose someone more radical to placate the extreme left as he’s done for a year now on every issue put in his hands

      you made those same claims about him being controlled by AOC, affectionately known by the Cove denizen as “dumb broad.”

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      but I have little faith in Joe Biden’s status as a “moderate”.

      Hey @JBear . . what’s your stance on Trump as a FASCIST who tried to “overturn” the election?

      http://www.pewterreport.com/forums/topic/trump-admits-what-the-cove-trumpers-deny-yes-coup/

    • Biggs3535

      Participant
      Post count: 7525

      but I have little faith in Joe Biden’s status as a “moderate”.

      Hey @JBear . . what’s your stance on Trump as a FASCIST who tried to “overturn” the election?

      http://www.pewterreport.com/forums/topic/trump-admits-what-the-cove-trumpers-deny-yes-coup/

      The pathetic, lonely loser continues to beg for someone to come outside and play with him.

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      The pathetic, lonely loser continues to give Cove Trumpers the chance to come out of the golden fascist rain (aka Trump piss) .

      None of them will take the invite, Biggly Boy

      Must like the shower . .

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      Beg people to play

      Over and over and over and over and over. Pathetic, lonely bastard.

      I can get you to post over and over because it’s bothers you to be outed as a coward and it bothers you even more because … well ..,I was right. Again.

      And that is the deepest cut

      Absurdly lol

      it was never really in doubt :-)

      but I have little faith in Joe Biden’s status as a “moderate”.

      Hey @JBear . . what’s your stance on Trump as a FASCIST who tried to “overturn” the election?

      http://www.pewterreport.com/forums/topic/trump-admits-what-the-cove-trumpers-deny-yes-coup/

      The pathetic, lonely loser continues to beg for someone to come outside and play with him.

      Buggsy, some might say you insecurity is only limited by your stupidity.

      I disagree

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      Beg people to play

      Over and over and over and over and over. Pathetic, lonely bastard.

      I can get you to post over and over because it’s bothers you to be outed as a coward and it bothers you even more because … well ..,I was right. Again.

      And that is the deepest cut

      Absurdly lol

      it was never really in doubt :-)

      but I have little faith in Joe Biden’s status as a “moderate”.

      Hey @JBear . . what’s your stance on Trump as a FASCIST who tried to “overturn” the election?

      http://www.pewterreport.com/forums/topic/trump-admits-what-the-cove-trumpers-deny-yes-coup/

      The pathetic, lonely loser continues to beg for someone to come outside and play with him.

      Buggsy, some might say you insecurity is only limited by your stupidity.

      I disagree

      (Buggsy turns head like dog)

    • Trask Force

      Participant
      Post count: 4625

      Its sad that Biden has to try to put diversity on the court, because the last loaded it up with whites. Trump said minorities love me, but apparently he didn’t love them back three Supreme Court picks in a row. So yeah of course the Democrat can’t even think about picking a white, because he has to fix the inequity from the last administration. Biden has no choice because Trump picked three white people in a row. Shocking. I will look forward to the day when diversity is an important issue for both parties, and not left up to just the Democrats. Maybe Island Buc can comment on this. Just another reason why I’m a “Yellow Dog Democrat” I guess.

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 5127

      He’s a known Antifa liberal hack . . .

      Or, alternatively . . and Trump’s biggest supporter

      LOL you know damned well that I dislike Lindsay Graham because he’s a neocon, war mongering, Republican of the worst kind. The type that is about on the same level as the really moderate Democrats who also like war and policing the world among other big government spending projects.

      When you know something as I know you do here, why do you insist on tossing out this red meat fake outrage? It’s not productive.

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 5127

      Its sad that Biden has to try to put diversity on the court, because the last loaded it up with whites. Trump said minorities love me, but apparently he didn’t love them back three Supreme Court picks in a row. So yeah of course the Democrat can’t even think about picking a white, because he has to fix the inequity from the last administration. Biden has no choice because Trump picked three white people in a row. Shocking. I will look forward to the day when diversity is an important issue for both parties, and not left up to just the Democrats. Maybe Island Buc can comment on this. Just another reason why I’m a “Yellow Dog Democrat” I guess.

      Good God you guys are twisted. It’s the way your minds work, it’s just ewwwww. And you go through life like this? Your whole life? or does it start at a certain age?

      You really have no problem with judging everything you do or think on race/gender distinction?

      Anyway, I’m all for diversity as a broad goal but I despise it when it’s targeted like the left is prone to do these days. And you guys seem to get off on it…. “Oh we have too many whitey’s….. lets get out the paint card so we can better judge skin tones of the candidates. Darkest wins! ” It’s very distasteful, crass and just overall offensive.

      The dumb mistake is/was announcing that you’re going to choose a black woman. That’s the mistake that highlights the rot of the left wing mind. Put out a larger than normal list that includes a broad spectrum of candiates…. “skin tones” and possibly even multiple genders. Then choose a black woman. Duh.

      Why do lefties insist on doing things in such a belligerent and offensive manner?

      And my point in the other thread about not being chosen on the basis of who’s qualified was in response to your dumb comments about how the other guys choose the less qualified because they skipped Merrick Garland who was Kavenagh’s boss.

      I know some of them are qualified but my point is that you’re not choosing based on who’s qaulified your choosing based on race and gender.

      But by all means carry on with the fake outrage.

    • jbear

      Participant
      Post count: 5127

      Sorry Trask when I said your dumb comment in the other thread I was speaking about Verge of course. Forgot I was talking to you for a minute.

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      Its sad that Biden has to try to put diversity on the court, because the last loaded it up with whites. Trump said minorities love me, but apparently he didn’t love them back three Supreme Court picks in a row. So yeah of course the Democrat can’t even think about picking a white, because he has to fix the inequity from the last administration. Biden has no choice because Trump picked three white people in a row. Shocking. I will look forward to the day when diversity is an important issue for both parties, and not left up to just the Democrats. Maybe Island Buc can comment on this. Just another reason why I’m a “Yellow Dog Democrat” I guess.

      Good God you guys are twisted. It’s the way your minds work, it’s just ewwwww. And you go through life like this? Your whole life? or does it start at a certain age?

      You really have no problem with judging everything you do or think on race/gender distinction?

      Anyway, I’m all for diversity as a broad goal but I despise it when it’s targeted like the left is prone to do these days. And you guys seem to get off on it…. “Oh we have too many whitey’s….. lets get out the paint card so we can better judge skin tones of the candidates. Darkest wins! ” It’s very distasteful, crass and just overall offensive.

      The dumb mistake is/was announcing that you’re going to choose a black woman. That’s the mistake that highlights the rot of the left wing mind. Put out a larger than normal list that includes a broad spectrum of candiates…. “skin tones” and possibly even multiple genders. Then choose a black woman. Duh.

      Why do lefties insist on doing things in such a belligerent and offensive manner?

      And my point in the other thread about not being chosen on the basis of who’s qualified was in response to your dumb comments about how the other guys choose the less qualified because they skipped Merrick Garland who was Kavenagh’s boss.

      I know some of them are qualified but my point is that you’re not choosing based on who’s qaulified your choosing based on race and gender.

      But by all means carry on with the fake outrage.

      That is the position you can take as a white person.

      And a white person who just watched a white president (Trump, who is a racist) appoint THREE white, cultural conservatives to the Court.

      In other words, the easy claim FROM A WHITE PERSPECTIVE is to suggest that race is the issue NOW because a “black” person will be nominated. . . as opposed to THEN . . . because the “norm” is to nominate white people.

      Its the same (privileged ) white perspective that has a white person suggest there’s no problem in policing, no systemic racism etc., a suggestion that comes with the privilege of not facing the issues daily.

      It is the VERY ESSENCE of WHY there is an “anti-racism” movement. . . . something white people condemn. . . weird, huh?

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      The dumb mistake is/was announcing that you’re going to choose a black woman. That’s the mistake that highlights the rot of the left wing mind. Put out a larger than normal list that includes a broad spectrum of candiates…. “skin tones” and possibly even multiple genders. Then choose a black woman. Duh.

      Again, Java you are displaying the very essence of white privilege/white fear. You’re suggesting, essentially, that your SENSIBILITIES are offended, by Biden’s words that he would name a “black” person . . . when the only way that could be “offensive” is if you believed there is a dearth of judicial quality in the blackly community ie that this would lead to an INFERIOR appointment who was aoppointed SOLELY because of race

      (This is the belief when someone like a MIss Senator says “affirmative action”)

      That is precisely the kind of accepted racism we have in America and IRONIC in the sense that it comes AFTER the appointment of someone like Kavanaugh or even ACB for that matter.

      I mean. Trump actually said he was going to offload nominations ot the Federalist Society . . . so its okay to say, in essence,” I am naming a “white conservative,” but not to say a black woman?”

      THIS IS LINDSEY GRAHAM. . white, southern conservative Senator who sits on JUDICIARY COMMITTEE

      “Graham says he “can’t think of a better person” than Michelle Childs for the Supreme Court”

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      This is one reason race is such an interesting topic.

      I don’t think for a minute that someone like JBear is a racist, far from it. But, it should be obvious from the posts here that there are many white people who reflexively accept and/or deny underlying racism because its just part of the culture

      This thread discusses outrage over Biden saying he would appoint a “black person”

      There is NO CORRESPONDING THREAD here saying it was outrageous for a Miss Senator to PREEMPTIVELY suggest this was “affirmative action” ie that there could be no black woman qualified.

      In fact, not only is there NO THREAD, but if you point out the inherent racism, white people here try to squelch the discussion with cries of “race baiting.”

      The same white people claim that “anti-racism” . . taking affirmative steps to combat racism because white people dont recognize inherent racism in society . . is EVIL

      The same white people same “no systemic racism” and BAN “To Kill a Mockingbird” and pass a law making it illegal to offend a white person . .

      REASONABLE human being are NOT that devoid of empathy, so that’s why many take it as INTENTIONAL (ie white privilege)

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      This is a Trumper response in a thread using “Brown People” in the title (a quote attributed to BUGGSY) to describe an event where a bunch of mostly white Trumpers laid siege to a hotel because they thought there were a bunch of illegal alien in the hotel

      I try to avoid name calling, but I can see why some on this board have called you a race baiting blah, blah, blah.

      The “brown people” in the story, who were here LEGALLY because there is a shortage of WHITE people willing to pick produce in a field . . are LITERALLY the type of people who Buggsy blamed for bringing down his dads flooring prices WHEN (by that logic) its the (likely white) farm owner who is to blame, right? The person who CONTRACTED with a company to bring foreigners here to do work white people will not.

      NONE of you Trumpers seem to realize that immigration is a problem that GOP does not want “solved” because it stirs you all up (enough to get people in Maitland to leave their homes and surround a hotel lol) . . . . just like Biden saying he would nominate a “black person.”

      Those tow things are LINKED a . . and they are both on Faux News

    • Biggs3535

      Participant
      Post count: 7525

      This is one reason race is such an interesting topic.

      lolz

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      This is one reason race is such an interesting topic.

      lolz

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      This is one reason race is such an interesting topic.

      lolz

      There you go @JBear . . . .

    • Kermit56

      Participant
      Post count: 713

      an event where a bunch of mostly white Trumpers

      A bunch? Have you seen any of the videos? More correctly, about a dozen.

      laid siege to a hotel

      12 people laying “siege”? Gimme a break

      because they thought there were a bunch of illegal alien in the hotel

      The did not think there were illegal aliens in the hotel. They were told there were illegal aliens in the hotel.

      This is why I replied to your post the way I did. You took an incident which represented a very, very small sample of a city, much less that of a state and blew it up on a post that read something to the effect of the state of Florida was laying siege to “Brown People.” I stand by my reply. It is understandable why other posters call you a race-baiting SOB.

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      ou took an incident which represented a very, very small sample of a city, much less that of a state and blew it up on a post that read something to the effect of the state of Florida was laying siege to “Brown People.”

      LOL, no I did not and I can show you using the thread itself AND your own posts

      and will begin right here:

      The point of the thread is right in the first sentence

      Life imitates Cove art

      Buggsy referred to Hispanic workers as “brown people.” And he specifically implied they were stealing work from white people and so lowering prices

      That is part of the “Cove art”

      the other part you actually use as a defense WHICH IS FUKIN HILARIOUS

      The did not think there were illegal aliens in the hotel. They were told there were illegal aliens in the hotel.

      The point of the thread is that some people who live in Maitland (suburban America) actually BELIEVED what “they were told” . . by LAURA LOOMER :

      AND TRUMPISM IS NEVER FAR BEHIND . . .

      “Laura Loomer, a Republican candidate for Florida’s 11th congressional district, shared the video and says it was sent to her claiming the men were undocumented migrants.

      and not only did they beleive it BUT IT SO MESHED with their insane view of immigration that it motivated them to stalk a hotel.

      Their view of immigration is INSANE because its fed to them by THE COCOON —– Laura Loomer and Trump and Faux news. The simple realty is that our immigration issue is in large part that:

      There’s a massive influx right now, so you have workers come in to handle spring crops,” Miller said.
      He says that over the last 10 years the need for H-2A workers has exploded.

      “At the end of the day, these workers are helping put food on our tables, and it’s extremely vital that this labor in the system stays in place,” Miller said.

      ITS ALMLOST LIKE WE NEED WORKERS HERE . . .

      and lastly “in Florida” doesn’t mean ALL of Florida it means the event happened IN FLORIDA

      Granted . . combining a few concepts but the POINT is that there are idiots ON YOUR side disconnected from realty because they LISTEN to people like Laura Loomer (the COCOON).

      The people who went to the hotel in Maitland could easily be any of the Trumpers here. Buggsy assailed these type of people right here in the Cove and dont lie almost every one of you has quoted or defended Laura Loomer at some point . She is a POSTER CHILD FOR TRUMPISM

      “Laura Loomer, the anti-Muslim congressional candidate praised by Trump”

    • Biggs3535

      Participant
      Post count: 7525

      Buggsy referred to Hispanic workers as “brown people.” And he specifically implied they were stealing work from white people and so lowering prices

      I doubt this actually has to be said to anyone that is familiar with Mr. Cronkite’s work, but this is horseshit. Further proof what a loathsome, race-baiting sack of shit we’re dealing with here.

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      Buggsy referred to Hispanic workers as “brown people.” And he specifically implied they were stealing work from white people and so lowering prices

      I doubt this actually has to be said to anyone that is familiar with Mr. Cronkite’s work, but this is horseshit. Further proof what a loathsome, race-baiting sack of shit we’re dealing with here.

      Its absolutely not horse shit

      Its not surprising that you would deny it

    • Biggs3535

      Participant
      Post count: 7525

      Its not surprising that you would deny it

      Considering it’s made-up horseshit, I’m guessing it’s not that surprising to you. Loathsome sack of shit.

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      Its not surprising that you would deny it

      Considering it’s made-up horseshit, I’m guessing it’s not that surprising to you. Loathsome sack of shit.

      Buggsy . . . Captain obvious says . . . “if it was horseshit you wouldn’t be prattling on about it, right?

      It says more about you that you try to deny it now

      Post whatever you want

    • Blayton Cigsby

      Participant
      Post count: 3002

      “the moon is made up of green cheese”

Viewing 56 reply threads
  • The forum ‘Pirate’s Cove’ is closed to new topics and replies.