Supreme court nominees

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kmcicco2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Do you intend to go on that: it was only once, it was so long ago, boys will be boys, she should suck it up, it will ruin him … ?
Oh, but you conveniently overlook that all of the women believe Kavanaugh’s denial. There is nothing there but let’s pick out something out of nothing.
 
The old “follow the money”! Who profits from abortion/butchering? Who founded Planned Parenthood? Who was Hillary Clinton’s most admired person? Who led with a racist, genocidal plan to eliminate Black Babies?
Yep! Its Obama/Clinton/Saul Lewinsky’s home base of operations - Chicago. How is it possible that after all this recent era of Obama/Clinton, the Black community has not thrown this boa constrictor off their necks
Exactly, it’s a hysteria and many on both sides of the spectrum get involved in hysteria… but I think one can say, her acts serve her aims and beliefs.
 
Without the numbers, your assertion in answer to @Jeanne_S proposition has no foundation.
That’s just your opinion and from all appearances, it seems you in effect, defend the Democrats who have as a main column of their party, abortion. You even used their terminology of “reproductive rights”, that is very left wing and feminist.
 
Oh, but you conveniently overlook that all of the women believe Kavanaugh’s denial. There is nothing there but let’s pick out something out of nothing.
Sorry, I assumed you read the article. It is not “some do, some don’t”, the article said they all believe Kavanaugh. So your statement has no foundation.
 
Last edited:
That is a simple matter of fact. The data are the foundation and the data are lacking.
We are not obliged to provide research for every point we make. Again, this seems like uncharitable behavior. This is a discussion forum.
I defend the truth, and just wish that people adhere to it.
Just a claim. If it defends what is against Catholic teaching, if it effectively defends abortion, I consider that wrong and certainly, not the truth.
Which article are you talking about? Something from another thread?
No, the original article in post #1. Generally people speak about the OP of a thread. Please don’t insult my intelligence that I’m talking about something from anotoher thread.
 
Last edited:
Do you intend to listen?
Do you intend to go on that: it was only once, it was so long ago, boys will be boys, she should suck it up, it will ruin him … ?
That’s rather libelous, her story has fallen apart with no witnesses, she went to school in Hawaii and is planning to go to New Zealand yet, claims she has a fear of flying to go to DC.

I’m not sure one could properly respond to such a post without risking being uncharitable themselves.

There is a good chance, Ford won’t even show up to testify at this point.

The good book also tells us “Thou Shalt Not Lie”.
 
Kind of hard to drive to Hawii and New
Zealand!

Will there be an upcoming book co-authored by her attorney Deborah Katz and a following book tour? 😫
I think the picture of the accuser at the women’s march following President Trump’s inauguration in her pink pu**y hat would make a nice cover.
 
Last edited:
Your knowledge of her is second-hand at best. She hasn’t even made it as a public figure yet. This isn’t Stormy Daniels. I’d wait until she comes into the open before even commenting.
 
Last edited:
Our Catholic brethren, Kavanaugh certainly deserves to be defended just as others are free to defend Ford.

Having said that, I think the SCOTUS should carefully, reflect the country in make up. I do think, despite being Catholic, it would be good to have an Evangelist or other on the court. Whatever represents the people.

I expect an argument, what about atheists, yes, they do in proportion to the people in America that are atheists for example which isn’t much.
 
Last edited:
The courts tend to look at public figures as fair game as far as defamation of character charges go. Just my observation in reading biographies.
 
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
 
40.png
JonNC:
She targeted it at men. I don’t intend to shut up, literally or rhetorically.
Do you intend to listen?
Do you intend to go on that: it was only once, it was so long ago, boys will be boys, she should suck it up, it will ruin him … ?
I don’t intend to listen to a command from a sexist who has stated clearly her ulterior motive which has nothing to do with Ford.
I do intend to hear out Dr. Ford, however, and listen to evidence she brings forward.
Until there is evidence, I assume Kavanaugh is innocent until proven guilty.
 
Last edited:
To take a diversion from this thread, may I ask what kind of party platform and political party you would enthusiastic and heartened to support?
One that conforms to the constitutional limits placed on the general government in the enumerated powers.
 
I do intend to hear out Dr. Ford, however, and listen to evidence she brings forward.
Until there is evidence, I assume Kavansugh is innocent until proven guilty.
Thanks. I think that, despite inflamed rhetoric, that is what the Senator was aiming for.
 
40.png
JonNC:
I do intend to hear out Dr. Ford, however, and listen to evidence she brings forward.
Until there is evidence, I assume Kavansugh is innocent until proven guilty.
Thanks. I think that, despite inflamed rhetoric, that is what the Senator was aiming for.
I don’t. I think her motives are to prevent a conservative from sitting on the Court by whatever means necessary, including destroying a man’s reputation even if he’s innocent.
 
40.png
JonNC:
I don’t intend to shut up
Well that is just too bad because an American politician has said that you must shut up. She has been elected by the American democratic process.
Yeah, but in America, she lacks the power to enforce her command. I’m sure that disappoints her.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top