Acceptable registrations in the queue through January 10 at 7:30a ET have now been activated. Enjoy! -M.W.

Terms of Use have been amended effective October 6, 2019. Make sure you are aware of the new rules! Please visit this thread for details: https://www.mibuzzboard.com/phpBB3/view ... 16&t=48619

Amy Coney Barrett...

Debate and discussion of current events and political issues across the U.S. and throughout the World. Be forewarned -- this forum is NOT for the intellectually weak or those of you with thin skins. Don't come crying to me if you become the subject of ridicule. **Board Administrator reserves the right to revoke posting privileges based on my sole discretion**
Matt
Posts: 3611
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 12:18 pm
Location: Ann Arbor

Re: Amy Coney Barrett...

Post by Matt » Wed Oct 14, 2020 5:26 pm

Rate This wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 4:50 pm
Bryce wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 2:13 pm
Rate This wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 12:26 pm

She couldn’t give more than generic answers when asked if she had an opinion on climate change.
Not all very qualified scientists can agree about the presence or cause of climate change. How can one expect a Supreme Court Justice to have a definitive opinion?
“You know, I’m certainly not a scientist, I mean, I’ve read things about climate change. I would not say that I have firm views on it.”


I guess if I was going to argue a case in front of the Supreme Court, on any issue, I would prefer justices that didn't have a "firm view" on the subject. Firm views are seldom changed by evidence or argument.
She can’t even name the 5 freedoms guaranteed in the first amendment... don’t you suppose that’s a tad important to know considering she’ll be working with the document?
This is bad, even for you. Memorization is a prereq?



Rate This
Posts: 7375
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 12:17 am

Re: Amy Coney Barrett...

Post by Rate This » Wed Oct 14, 2020 5:41 pm

Matt wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 5:26 pm
Rate This wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 4:50 pm
Bryce wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 2:13 pm
Rate This wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 12:26 pm

She couldn’t give more than generic answers when asked if she had an opinion on climate change.
Not all very qualified scientists can agree about the presence or cause of climate change. How can one expect a Supreme Court Justice to have a definitive opinion?
“You know, I’m certainly not a scientist, I mean, I’ve read things about climate change. I would not say that I have firm views on it.”


I guess if I was going to argue a case in front of the Supreme Court, on any issue, I would prefer justices that didn't have a "firm view" on the subject. Firm views are seldom changed by evidence or argument.
She can’t even name the 5 freedoms guaranteed in the first amendment... don’t you suppose that’s a tad important to know considering she’ll be working with the document?
This is bad, even for you. Memorization is a prereq?
No but answering even one easy question should be. Even naming a couple would be ok. She’s just using the answers she rehearsed even when it’s not needed.



zzand
Posts: 815
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 9:16 am
Location: right here

Re: Amy Coney Barrett...

Post by zzand » Wed Oct 14, 2020 5:48 pm

She did a great job with the hearing and has proven to be one of the best nominees I have ever seen. And as others said, unlike Kagan, she is a sitting judge so she knows the gig pretty well.



Rate This
Posts: 7375
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 12:17 am

Re: Amy Coney Barrett...

Post by Rate This » Wed Oct 14, 2020 5:53 pm

zzand wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 5:48 pm
She did a great job with the hearing and has proven to be one of the best nominees I have ever seen. And as others said, unlike Kagan, she is a sitting judge so she knows the gig pretty well.
She’s been a judge for 5 minutes and apparently has no knowledge of any subject... a little thin I must say... this is a thing Trump appointees are known for. From the party of machiavelli I expect nothing less.



User avatar
audiophile
Posts: 6109
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 9:21 pm
Location: Between 88 and 108 MHz.

Re: Amy Coney Barrett...

Post by audiophile » Wed Oct 14, 2020 7:54 pm

Rate This wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 5:41 pm
Matt wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 5:26 pm
Rate This wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 4:50 pm
Bryce wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 2:13 pm
Rate This wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 12:26 pm

She couldn’t give more than generic answers when asked if she had an opinion on climate change.
Not all very qualified scientists can agree about the presence or cause of climate change. How can one expect a Supreme Court Justice to have a definitive opinion?
“You know, I’m certainly not a scientist, I mean, I’ve read things about climate change. I would not say that I have firm views on it.”


I guess if I was going to argue a case in front of the Supreme Court, on any issue, I would prefer justices that didn't have a "firm view" on the subject. Firm views are seldom changed by evidence or argument.
She can’t even name the 5 freedoms guaranteed in the first amendment... don’t you suppose that’s a tad important to know considering she’ll be working with the document?
This is bad, even for you. Memorization is a prereq?
No but answering even one easy question should be. Even naming a couple would be ok. She’s just using the answers she rehearsed even when it’s not needed.
She named 4! I'm not sure what your sources are, but they are WRONG!


Ask not what your country can do FOR you; ask what they are about to do TO YOU!!

Rate This
Posts: 7375
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 12:17 am

Re: Amy Coney Barrett...

Post by Rate This » Wed Oct 14, 2020 8:38 pm

audiophile wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 7:54 pm
Rate This wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 5:41 pm
Matt wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 5:26 pm
Rate This wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 4:50 pm
Bryce wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 2:13 pm
Rate This wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 12:26 pm

She couldn’t give more than generic answers when asked if she had an opinion on climate change.
Not all very qualified scientists can agree about the presence or cause of climate change. How can one expect a Supreme Court Justice to have a definitive opinion?
“You know, I’m certainly not a scientist, I mean, I’ve read things about climate change. I would not say that I have firm views on it.”


I guess if I was going to argue a case in front of the Supreme Court, on any issue, I would prefer justices that didn't have a "firm view" on the subject. Firm views are seldom changed by evidence or argument.
She can’t even name the 5 freedoms guaranteed in the first amendment... don’t you suppose that’s a tad important to know considering she’ll be working with the document?
This is bad, even for you. Memorization is a prereq?
No but answering even one easy question should be. Even naming a couple would be ok. She’s just using the answers she rehearsed even when it’s not needed.
She named 4! I'm not sure what your sources are, but they are WRONG!
I saw that... I stand partially corrected. But she didn’t get the 5th one. For a law professor thats pretty bad. It’s the 1st amendment after all...



User avatar
audiophile
Posts: 6109
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 9:21 pm
Location: Between 88 and 108 MHz.

Re: Amy Coney Barrett...

Post by audiophile » Wed Oct 14, 2020 8:58 pm

anxiety?


Ask not what your country can do FOR you; ask what they are about to do TO YOU!!

Rate This
Posts: 7375
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 12:17 am

Re: Amy Coney Barrett...

Post by Rate This » Wed Oct 14, 2020 10:38 pm

audiophile wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 8:58 pm
anxiety?
Over what a preordained dog and pony show?



Matt
Posts: 3611
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 12:18 pm
Location: Ann Arbor

Re: Amy Coney Barrett...

Post by Matt » Wed Oct 14, 2020 10:51 pm

Rate This wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 10:38 pm
audiophile wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 8:58 pm
anxiety?
Over what a preordained dog and pony show?
I agree with you that its embarrassing that Democrats have used this process as a partisan hackfest. These dem mental midget shitheads are asking her how she'd rule on hypothetical cases. She rightfully stated she'd base her decisions on law, not policy priorities.



Rate This
Posts: 7375
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 12:17 am

Re: Amy Coney Barrett...

Post by Rate This » Wed Oct 14, 2020 10:56 pm

Matt wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 10:51 pm
Rate This wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 10:38 pm
audiophile wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 8:58 pm
anxiety?
Over what a preordained dog and pony show?
I agree with you that its embarrassing that Democrats have used this process as a partisan hackfest. These dem mental midget shitheads are asking her how she'd rule on hypothetical cases. She rightfully stated she'd base her decisions on law, not policy priorities.
It's the exact same tactics that the Republicans would employ if the roles were reversed. Most of it is about riling up their base. There isn't much else to gain from the whole thing for them. They can't stop it. The only alternatives were to sue and or not show up. both of which look petulant. So they stick to riling up the base and she sticks to her scripted talking points. That includes the time she almost used the wrong one and said "oh wait..."...



Matt
Posts: 3611
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 12:18 pm
Location: Ann Arbor

Re: Amy Coney Barrett...

Post by Matt » Wed Oct 14, 2020 11:00 pm

Democrats are typically petulant children, so it's not a surprise when they act the part.



Rate This
Posts: 7375
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2020 12:17 am

Re: Amy Coney Barrett...

Post by Rate This » Wed Oct 14, 2020 11:15 pm

Matt wrote:
Wed Oct 14, 2020 11:00 pm
Democrats are typically petulant children, so it's not a surprise when they act the part.
Ah... and Republicans typically channel their inner Machiavelli and grasp at power they then do nothing with (ahem Mitch).. I think that evens out...

See you do the team thing without even realizing it.



User avatar
audiophile
Posts: 6109
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 9:21 pm
Location: Between 88 and 108 MHz.

Re: Amy Coney Barrett...

Post by audiophile » Fri Oct 16, 2020 5:16 am

Amy helps the disabled:



Ask not what your country can do FOR you; ask what they are about to do TO YOU!!

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic