Jump to content

Amy Coney Barrett


Tiberius

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Democrats need to make it totally clear that this women is being sent to take health insurance away from tens of millions. She’s the oligarchs little tool. 

  You might want to tell your DNC overlords that their talking point about insurance was a little slow to come out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, RochesterRob said:

  You might want to tell your DNC overlords that their talking point about insurance was a little slow to come out.

 

 

 

...but, BUT there is substantial political capital in taking away health insurance from millions.......and the petulant little azzclown wonders why he has ZERO credibility...as if that would matter.....He's PPP's "Comedy Channel"......hell I tried the SEARCH function for "viable Tibs contributions" and the answer I got was "WTF"?.......

Edited by OldTimeAFLGuy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, RochesterRob said:

  Is the omission of Sandra Day O'Connor by Ahearn due to ignorance or an attempt to rewrite history?

 

Neither. Since Justice O'Connor was a Republican, she was clearly not a woman. As she was not legally a woman, RBG was the first female Justice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

I believe her response is, "You're an idiot."

That’s probably what she is thinking about all those people she can’t wait to torture by taking their insurance away. She will cheer as loud as the house Republicans did when they were so thrilled to pass repeal. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Tiberius said:

 

 

No doubt her daily to-do list says:

 

1.) Feed kids breakfast.

2.) Torture people by taking health insurance away.

3.) Cater to husband's wishes.

4.) Lunch.

5.) Overturn Roe v. Wade.

6.) Put kids down for nap.

7.) Make sure husband's supper is ready.

8.) Destroy democracy.

9.) Make sure house is clean.

10.) Legalize kids in cages.

11.) Go to bed.

  • Haha (+1) 3
  • Awesome! (+1) 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Koko78 said:

 

No doubt her daily to-do list says:

 

1.) Feed kids breakfast.

2.) Torture people by taking health insurance away.

3.) Cater to husband's wishes.

4.) Lunch.

5.) Overturn Roe v. Wade.

6.) Put kids down for nap.

7.) Make sure husband's supper is ready.

8.) Destroy democracy.

9.) Make sure house is clean.

10.) Legalize kids in cages.

11.) Go to bed.

That’s what she is being sent to do. The misery she creates will be widespread. 

 

 

  • Haha (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Tiberius said:

Lol, who else should we be mad at? You guys are on the verge of possibly losing the executive and the legislative branches, you mad at anyone? 

 

 

 

Ms Barrett, can an elected official in a position of authority be held accountable in civil court for lying during a public health crisis about the nature and threat of the danger, leading to unnecessary and preventable deaths? 

If your lifer/abuser/crook gets in, all the more reason to follow the will of the people and confirm this nominee. 
 

Dems and libs alike should be applauding the decision to nominate a justice at this time. 

12 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

No doubt her daily to-do list says:

 

1.) Feed kids breakfast.

2.) Torture people by taking health insurance away.

3.) Cater to husband's wishes.

4.) Lunch.

5.) Overturn Roe v. Wade.

6.) Put kids down for nap.

7.) Make sure husband's supper is ready.

8.) Destroy democracy.

9.) Make sure house is clean.

10.) Legalize kids in cages.

11.) Go to bed.

Let’s not move past #3, 7 and #12 too quickly here.  This list isn’t all bad. 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Dragoon said:

I heard she likes Jesus...that’s just way too radical for me. 

I’m just glad she has to answer questions about the constitution, she’s an origionalist you know. 

 

 

If Congress passes a law and provides money to achieve that end, can the president spend it on whatever he wants? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

I’m just glad she has to answer questions about the constitution, she’s an origionalist you know. 

 

 

If Congress passes a law and provides money to achieve that end, can the president spend it on whatever he wants? 


I gotta tell ya...I think people like you have been so busy convincing yourselves that Trump is the spawn of Hitler and Voldemort that y’all are really detached from objectivity and reality. 
 

Liberals calling Trump authoritarian is RICH....Whitmer, Cuomo, Newsome, the NJ idiot....man...I’ve never seen anything like TDS. 

  • Awesome! (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Dragoon said:


I gotta tell ya...I think people like you have been so busy convincing yourselves that Trump is the spawn of Hitler and Voldemort that y’all are really detached from objectivity and reality. 
 

Liberals calling Trump authoritarian is RICH....Whitmer, Cuomo, Newsome, the NJ idiot....man...I’ve never seen anything like TDS. 

Ok Dragoon! Enjoy the Stanley Cup playoffs tonight with a couple cold ones, I know I will 🍺

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

Ok Dragoon! Enjoy the Stanley Cup playoffs tonight with a couple cold ones, I know I will 🍺


I don’t think I can name 6 hockey teams. I’ve been a southerner since I was 10. Couldn’t have even told you hockey was still doing it’s thing. But enjoy the game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Tiberius said:

Watching Amy destroy lying Ted is delicious
pic.twitter.com/R8qbx49ZLG

— Molly Jong-Fast🏡 (@MollyJongFast) September 26, 2020

 

She starts off by acknowledging that she has to scramble to figure out what she’s going to say after Ted Cruz speaks.  The first 5 minutes has her voice cracking as if she’s about to cry—and maybe she is that emotional about whatever point she’s trying to make, and that’s fine—-she says the First Lady is about to lie in state, presumably meaning RBG, and I’m still not sure where the destruction part comes in?  
 

If she’s smart enough to have studied theater and to try and add emphasis with contrived hand gestures, I’d think she’s smart enough to know that when the Senate acts, it’s fulfilling its obligation to the people.  
 

Can you get me to the “destroy” part?  
 

**edit for clarity—she didn’t say First Lady, she said the first woman.  My bad,  the structure of that sentence seemed awkward to me so I went back and listened to her again. 

Edited by leh-nerd skin-erd
  • Thank you (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said:

She starts off by acknowledging that she has to scramble to figure out what she’s going to say after Ted Cruz speaks.  The first 5 minutes has her voice cracking as if she’s about to cry—and maybe she is that emotional about whatever point she’s trying to make, and that’s fine—-she says the First Lady is about to lie in state, presumably meaning RBG, and I’m still not sure where the destruction part comes in?  
 

If she’s smart enough to have studied theater and to try and add emphasis with contrived hand gestures, I’d think she’s smart enough to know that when the Senate acts, it’s fulfilling its obligation to the people.  
 

Can you get me to the “destroy” part?  
 

**edit for clarity—she didn’t say First Lady, she said the first woman.  My bad,  the structure of that sentence seemed awkward to me so I went back and listened to her again. 

And I thought no one would watch 🍺

 

I liked it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Tiberius said:

And I thought no one would watch 🍺

 

I liked it. 

I can understand why you did, but she is a lightweight up through about 5 minutes.  Did she ever get around to destroying anyone other than the reputation of whomever gave her the acting lessons?  Very robotic.  
 

I swear I’ll push past 5 minutes to see her destroy Ted Cruz.  

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, ALF said:

 

Will that stop the talk or actual packing the court with 11 or more justices ?

 No.   Lefty Congress critters want a Supreme Court that rewrites laws, which is basically an abdication of their responsibilities.  The Founders wanted SCOTUS to be a check and balance against the other branches, not an extension of either.

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Thank you (+1) 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, ALF said:

Doing away with the bipartisan 60 vote to confirm a SC Justice can result in more extreme jurists from whichever party controls the Senate.

 

This will just further divide the country and that is dangerous.

Sorry, but that was done away with a while ago. 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/mcconnell-went-nuclear-confirm-gorsuch-democrats-changed-senate-filibuster-rules-n887271

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...