Supreme court nominees

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kmcicco2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Please prove your first point. Most anything takes longer. And even if they did complete it in 2 or 3 days, there would be demands for more, more, more.

Oh, it’s exactly about keeping a potentially prolife justice off the bench. That’s as plain as day. Even “pro-choice” Geraldo Rivera acknowledges that. Now, nobody really knows who Kavanaugh would rule on abortion, but because he’s a devoted Catholic that’s the stereotype the bigoted anti-Catholic Dems have pinned on him. It’s exactly because he might actually believe in his religion that they oppose him.

Feinstein either had authority to release it or she didn’t. If she did, she hid the ball. If she didn’t, she violated the woman’s confidence just to oppose Kavanaugh for the “sin” of being Catholic.

I am afraid of something. I’m afraid the Democrats will keep this up until and unless Trump appoints an abortionist. That’s what this is all about, and it’s all it is about.
 
JanetF said:
The difference is McDonnell was blocking a supreme court nominee prior to a PRESIDENTIAL election.
Click to expand...
The real difference is that McConnell used a procedural rule to prohibit the nominee from being considered. This case is a personal slander aimed at the destruction of a person’s reputation. Now, the outcome in both cases may be the same - a presidential nominee is not confirmed to the court - but there is a world of difference in the tactics used.
 
Ridgerunner said:
Please prove your first point.
Click to expand...
No thank you as there’s google, and the rest I just consider partisan stuff, so I’m just going to boogey-out. Again, time will tell, and I simply am not interested in playing partisan and conspiracy games.
 
Ender said:
This case is a personal slander aimed at the destruction of a person’s reputation.
Click to expand...
And you know this how? So, your conclusion is that she did this for what reason?

Ya know, you and some others may well be making her into a victim again by assuming she’s lying. Why would you do that?

Again, “patience is a virtue”.
 
Last edited:
Ender said:
40.png
JanetF:
The difference is McDonnell was blocking a supreme court nominee prior to a PRESIDENTIAL election.
Click to expand...
This case is a personal slander aimed at…
Click to expand...
You can only call it slander if you know for a fact the accusation is false. Just like we say the “alleged” assault against Ford, we should say the alleged slander by Ford.
 
This assault on Kavanaugh is anti-Catholic bigotry, period. If Kavanaugh was an Anglican, they wouldn’t be doing this.

And just in case anybody wonders, the National Abortion Rights Action League has prominently on its website its “support” for Ms. Ford against Kavanaugh and is promoting “I believe” buttons for people to wear in order to widen the slander against Judge Kavanaugh. Read it if you can stand to do it without throwing up. https://www.prochoiceamerica.org/

And again, remember, that Kavanaugh has never said how he would rule on Roe. The ONLY reason for this campaign against him is that he’s a devoted Catholic.

Catholics should never again vote for a Democrat until that party purges itself of its abortion religion and the anti-Catholicism it engenders.
 
Last edited:
Metis1 said:
Seems that you’re scared of something, maybe like her story might be confirmed? maybe other witnesses? maybe other women? Anyhow, I have patience and don’t subscribe to acting recklessly, so let’s see what transpires before jumping to conclusions. .
Click to expand...
That is good advice to all on this forum.
 
What, that your side didn’t get what you wanted with respect to Garland? to Franken?
 
There was no chRacter assissination recGarland by the Republicans.They made a move that was fully within their right to do in not having a vote on hiim.
 
Besides, this is not about Garland or revenge or anything else. This is about abortion and anti-Catholicism. If you can stand it, read this. https://www.prochoiceamerica.org/

The abortion promotion industry already has Kavanaugh convicted, not because of evidence, but because he’s a believing Catholic. And their supporters like Ford and Feinstein are part of it.
 
Look at least the republicans were transparent and upfront re their play to keepmGarland off thevSCOTUs.Unlike the Dems who find it necessary to trot out a woman who some 35 years ago allegedly was assaulted by Kavaenaugh.Smearing his name forever re of whether he did anything or not.younare ok with that?
 
Last edited:
ProVobis said:
You keep saying that and when I brought up that Obama appointed a Catholic you switched your argument to NARAL.
Click to expand...
No switch. Sotomayor is pro-abortion. That’s why NARAL endorsed her. Democrats only like Catholics when they’re not being Catholics.
 
Last edited:
Is that even possible? Once you’re baptized a Catholic, you’re Catholic forever is my understanding. At least that was drilled into my traditionalist head.
 
Kavanaugh is now a public figure so he’s fair game is the way I understand it. I have nothing personal against him, just sayin.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top