nedboy7 Posted yesterday at 02:30 AM Posted yesterday at 02:30 AM Trump hates anyone who knows more than him on any given subject. Outside of MAGA that is about 99% of the population. 1
JDHillFan Posted yesterday at 03:10 AM Posted yesterday at 03:10 AM 39 minutes ago, nedboy7 said: Trump hates anyone who knows more than him on any given subject. Outside of MAGA that is about 99% of the population. I’m curious as to how that relates to KBJ and her line of inquiry. Did she mention TRUMP or were you just unable to prevent yourself from doing so? On 8/28/2025 at 2:46 PM, nedboy7 said: You post like a moron. 2
nedboy7 Posted yesterday at 05:57 PM Posted yesterday at 05:57 PM 9 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: This is a dangerous game the libs are playing. They don’t realize this is one of the key issues as to why they lost. Cultural BS and the border. 3
MattM Posted 22 hours ago Posted 22 hours ago (edited) On 12/9/2025 at 11:11 AM, BillsFanNC said: Refreshing that useful idiots are going with the qualifications schtick. Let's play along.... You know what KBJ's most important qualifications are for being nominated and confirmed as a SC Justice? That she is black and she's a woman. Without meeting those two bars she would not have been considered as a nominee. Biden told us that. Ironic that she can't define what a woman actually is without expert assistance, but it's a defining and essential qualification regardless. Kind of diminishes the laundry list of accomplishments from Quack to have whatever you've actually accomplished in your career take a back seat to immutable characteristics that you were born with. Some might even call it racist. Oh and Mike Davis clerked for Gorsuch and runs the Article III project among many other highlights on his resume. He's certainly well qualified to opine on the ramblings of a DEI hire at SCOTUS. You know who didn't even make law review (and thus was spared working 20 plus hours a week on it in addition to classes) and "only" graduated ***** laude from HLS (just like KBJ)? Neil Gorsuch. Funny that no one ever questions his credentials, isn't it? Why might that be? Edited 22 hours ago by MattM 1 1
pennstate10 Posted 21 hours ago Posted 21 hours ago On 12/9/2025 at 7:40 AM, BillsFanNC said: Well she does need an expert biologist to tell her what a woman is. So, in context, it would seem like Mike Davis is a serious conservative, Republican. Right? Anyone want to argue that? Now lets consider his first sentence. "This is stunning a Supreme Court justice: 1. Actually thinks we must be ruled by unelected, unaccountable (leftwing) "experts"" Hmmm....lets think this through. There are 3 branches of government, in the US, right? Executive, Legislative, Judicial. Question. Which one of these three is unelected and unaccountable? Answer: The batsht crazy judicial branch, filled with professional grade grifters (Thomas, Alito), who have ruled that the president is above the law. I'm an old guy. The current Supreme Court is, by far, the worst collection of "justices" (and i use that word loosely) i have ever seen. That ruling, to say the president is above the law, is absolutely stunning. Until that point, I had believed that the justices were honorable. Maybe more conservative or liberal, but honorable. 100% chance that ruling is either reversed, or we degenerate into a dictatorship. Those are the only two choices. And for what its worth, I agree that KBJ was a DEI hire. In my opinion, she wasnt the most qualified justice in the US to be promoted. She was the most qualified black woman. I dont think thats right; choosing a Supreme Court justice from ~5% of the US population. I also dont think it right for clear liar grifters (Thomas, Alito) to remain on the court after they've demonstrated their dishonesty.. 1
Orlando Buffalo Posted 21 hours ago Posted 21 hours ago 43 minutes ago, MattM said: You know who didn't even make law review (and thus was spared working 20 plus hours a week on it in addition to classes) and "only" graduated ***** laude from HLS (just like KBJ)? Neil Gorsuch. Funny that no one ever questions his credentials, isn't it? Why might that be? What was the primary qualifications for Bidens pick to the SC?
Joe Ferguson forever Posted 21 hours ago Posted 21 hours ago (edited) 20 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said: What was the primary qualifications for Bidens pick to the SC? i'm thinking better qualifed than Gorsuch was a consideration. Edited 21 hours ago by Joe Ferguson forever
MattM Posted 21 hours ago Posted 21 hours ago 1 minute ago, Orlando Buffalo said: What was the primary qualifications for Bidens pick to the SC? Not the question I asked. Nice deflection. What were Gorsuch's? To stick with the quantifiable, her academic credentials are superior to his, no matter how you slice it. She made law review--he didn't. Despite working 20-30 hours/week on law review as an editor (no matter how she got on), she graduated with the same honors he did. The dirty little secret conservatives don't want to admit is that there are so few of them at elite educational institutions that they can almost instantly become public stars on the right, either on the bench or at think tanks. Smart liberals are relatively a dime per several dozen in those spaces. In his case, having a mother who was a Cabinet secretary under Reagan (a political nepo baby, if you will) certainly didn't hurt. Full disclosure--I was in his law school (and, coincidentally, also college) class. He was considered smart, but not brilliant. Obama (who graduated magna despite working 40 plus hours/week as LR EIC) was widely considered brilliant by people on both sides of the aisle. Didn't know Gorsuch in college, but did know him socially in law school through mutual friends (including Ken Mehlman, former RNC head who ran W's 2004 "Guns and Gays" campaign that maligned gay people to whip up the base--of course, 5 years later Ken comes out of the closet--and says "oops!") and got along with him on a personal level even if my politics are very different (much like the worlds we came from). Very disappointed in him on the bench so far, including his lying to the Senate at his confirmation hearings on Roe. 2 1
Orlando Buffalo Posted 20 hours ago Posted 20 hours ago 1 hour ago, MattM said: Not the question I asked. Nice deflection. What were Gorsuch's? To stick with the quantifiable, her academic credentials are superior to his, no matter how you slice it. She made law review--he didn't. Despite working 20-30 hours/week on law review as an editor (no matter how she got on), she graduated with the same honors he did. The dirty little secret conservatives don't want to admit is that there are so few of them at elite educational institutions that they can almost instantly become public stars on the right, either on the bench or at think tanks. Smart liberals are relatively a dime per several dozen in those spaces. In his case, having a mother who was a Cabinet secretary under Reagan (a political nepo baby, if you will) certainly didn't hurt. Full disclosure--I was in his law school (and, coincidentally, also college) class. He was considered smart, but not brilliant. Obama (who graduated magna despite working 40 plus hours/week as LR EIC) was widely considered brilliant by people on both sides of the aisle. Didn't know Gorsuch in college, but did know him socially in law school through mutual friends (including Ken Mehlman, former RNC head who ran W's 2004 "Guns and Gays" campaign that maligned gay people to whip up the base--of course, 5 years later Ken comes out of the closet--and says "oops!") and got along with him on a personal level even if my politics are very different (much like the worlds we came from). Very disappointed in him on the bench so far, including his lying to the Senate at his confirmation hearings on Roe. It is not a deflection, it is the reason. Her main qualifications was being a black women, Biden said it often. Until she started speaking I assumed she was likely well qualified for all the reasons you listed but she comes off poorly in every situation where she is in the minority. I disagreed with RBG often but she was a brilliant megal mind, KBJ is not similar to that and to pretend it is related to race when Clarence Thomas is just as black makes you sound like you incapable of seeing beyond your reason for liking her.
TH3 Posted 19 hours ago Posted 19 hours ago On 12/9/2025 at 10:28 AM, B-Man said: Always the sign of a closed mind. Why did you ignore the C-Span link ? Closed mind? Constantly posting other people’s ideas and quotes is a sign of no mind 1 hour ago, Orlando Buffalo said: What was the primary qualifications for Bidens pick to the SC? She wasn’t a white conservative guaranteed to vote a certain way on specific cases? Something wrong with that? 1
Joe Ferguson forever Posted 19 hours ago Posted 19 hours ago 18 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said: It is not a deflection, it is the reason. Her main qualifications was being a black women, Biden said it often. Until she started speaking I assumed she was likely well qualified for all the reasons you listed but she comes off poorly in every situation where she is in the minority. I disagreed with RBG often but she was a brilliant megal mind, KBJ is not similar to that and to pretend it is related to race when Clarence Thomas is just as black makes you sound like you incapable of seeing beyond your reason for liking her. Were you raised in a home where the n word was used frequently?
MattM Posted 19 hours ago Posted 19 hours ago 27 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said: It is not a deflection, it is the reason. Her main qualifications was being a black women, Biden said it often. Until she started speaking I assumed she was likely well qualified for all the reasons you listed but she comes off poorly in every situation where she is in the minority. I disagreed with RBG often but she was a brilliant megal mind, KBJ is not similar to that and to pretend it is related to race when Clarence Thomas is just as black makes you sound like you incapable of seeing beyond your reason for liking her. What were Gorsuch's qualifications, especially as compared to hers? Academically she certainly objectively had the better record as noted above (but no high-powered mother to smooth the way, perhaps). Why are her qualifications questioned repeatedly by conservatives, but not his?
BillsFanNC Posted 17 hours ago Author Posted 17 hours ago 4 hours ago, MattM said: You know who didn't even make law review (and thus was spared working 20 plus hours a week on it in addition to classes) and "only" graduated ***** laude from HLS (just like KBJ)? I wonder if DEI worked its magic for KBJ once again here. Tough call. 4 hours ago, MattM said: Neil Gorsuch. Funny that no one ever questions his credentials, isn't it? Why might that be? Again, Marxist DEI. It giveth to the unqualified at the expense of the qualified. Commies gonna commie.
Orlando Buffalo Posted 10 hours ago Posted 10 hours ago 9 hours ago, MattM said: What were Gorsuch's qualifications, especially as compared to hers? Academically she certainly objectively had the better record as noted above (but no high-powered mother to smooth the way, perhaps). Why are her qualifications questioned repeatedly by conservatives, but not his? Did you read what I said? I agree her paperwork qualifications from before the SC are top notch, it is her time on the SC that is making her look unprepared. She is great on paper but her application of the law is not up to snuff for the SC. Every field, especially mine, has the people with the Doctorates and every possible degree who can't apply them to even simple situations, and she seems that way. 9 hours ago, Joe Ferguson forever said: Were you raised in a home where the n word was used frequently? No, but clearly the only reason you like her is her skin color. Her skin color is meaningless to me. The best part is I praise a black man during the post you quoted. 1 1
MattM Posted 9 hours ago Posted 9 hours ago (edited) 8 hours ago, BillsFanNC said: I wonder if DEI worked its magic for KBJ once again here. Tough call. Again, Marxist DEI. It giveth to the unqualified at the expense of the qualified. Commies gonna commie. As noted, regardless of how KBJ was on law review, she in fact was on law review, meaning she worked 20-30 hours/week on it and still had grades as good as Gorsuch based on them both graduating ***** laude (as did I and about 30-40% of my class--the top 10-15% (including Obama, BTW) graduated magna). Not being on law review, Gorsuch didn't have that 20-30/week burden. Yet she's the one you folks love to attack as somehow unworthy and unqualified. I wonder why? 45 minutes ago, Orlando Buffalo said: Did you read what I said? I agree her paperwork qualifications from before the SC are top notch, it is her time on the SC that is making her look unprepared. She is great on paper but her application of the law is not up to snuff for the SC. Every field, especially mine, has the people with the Doctorates and every possible degree who can't apply them to even simple situations, and she seems that way. No, but clearly the only reason you like her is her skin color. Her skin color is meaningless to me. The best part is I praise a black man during the post you quoted. Not "up to snuff"? Where did you get your law degree? Prager U? Did she lie to the Senate during her confirmation hearing on Roe being settled precedent (I believe Kavanaugh even used the term "Super Precedent")? Did she decide to make the President a king in that ridiculous immunity decision? (Don't worry, though, the Court will reverse that one so fast it will make your head spin if and when a Democrat is allowed to become President again.) Edited 9 hours ago by MattM 1 1
JDHillFan Posted 9 hours ago Posted 9 hours ago 8 minutes ago, MattM said: Yet she's the one you folks love to attack as somehow unworthy and unqualified. I wonder why? Because she chose to answer a simple question with “I’m not a biologist”. There’s no coming back from that.
BillsFanNC Posted 9 hours ago Author Posted 9 hours ago 8 minutes ago, MattM said: As noted, regardless of how KBJ was on law review, she in fact was on law review, meaning she worked 20-30 hours/week on it and still had grades as good as Gorsuch based on them both graduating ***** laude (as did I and about 30-40% of my class--the top 10-15% (including Obama, BTW) graduated magna). Not being on law review, Gorsuch didn't have that 20-30/week burden. Yet she's the one you folks love to attack as somehow unworthy and unqualified. I wonder why? Not "up to snuff"? Where did you get your law degree? Prager U? Did she lie to the Senate during her confirmation hearing on Roe being settled precedent (I believe Kavanaugh even used the term "Super Precedent")? Did she decide to make the President a king in that ridiculous immunity decision? (Don't worry, though, the Court will reverse that one so fast it will make your head spin if and when a Democrat is allowed to become President again.) The stain of DEI is irrevocable. Including any credit given for extra hours "worked" As for your irrelevant credentials that you keep bringing up anyway:
MattM Posted 8 hours ago Posted 8 hours ago 21 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: The stain of DEI is irrevocable. Including any credit given for extra hours "worked" As for your irrelevant credentials that you keep bringing up anyway: What stain of DEI? She got roughly the same grades as Gorsuch with almost twice the workload. She was also (literally) a national champion debater in high school. I thought you guys were all about demonstrated objective merit? Or is that only a one-way street? As noted, he was not an academic superstar (relative to HLS), not even graduating towards the top of the class, but you for some reason only focus on those things for her. Why is that? For the record, I was actually friendly with the guy (he was fun to grab a drink with and shoot the *****) despite our political differences, so bear him no personal ill will despite my disappointment with his decisions and his crossing his fingers behind his back during his confirmation hearings. I just find it hysterical how you folks are so willfully blind on this issue.
Recommended Posts