Where all this hate towards Amy Coney Barrett is coming from?

[jc456]

The entire confirmation hearing today on Democrat side was based on a premise that Barrett would vote against CommieCare (ACA), or in other words, on nothing.

The "individual mandate" part, that was constitutionally sketchy, was already removed by Congress few years back. Although it's true that Trump's admin is trying to strike out rest of the ACA, what makes you lefties think that SCOTUS is going to vote against it if the law is constitutional? With "individual mandate" gone, the rest of the law, regardless of we liking it or not, is likely to stand, and six Justices who already voted for ACA earlier have no reason to vote against it now?

Democrats know this, and the MSM as well, but they simply don't care, and they're attacking Barrett on insinuation that she would vote against it, regardless of her vote wouldn't matter anyways. They spent half a day looking at the photos of people who "would die if they lose their healthcare", and those sad stories have absolutely nothing to do with confirmation hearing. In other words, they turn whole hearing today into Democrat party commercial with the message "look what Trump is going to do to sick people". In reality, of course, Trump isn't going to do anything to anyone. If law is unconstitutional, it should be repealed, but for the reason I mentioned above, the ACA is most likely going to stand.

Democrats have not disappointed, they acted exactly as you would expect from them. They were lying, acting "outraged", and like everyone but them is plain stupid. They know that ACA sucks, and for those that have to use it, it stinks, but Democrats are not fighting for it because it's a good law, but because it's a foundation on which they could continue to build the single payer, government controlled system, and if that foundation is gone, they would have to start, should they get a chance, all over again.

Therefore, just another mockery of the hearing, as they did with Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and now Barrett.

the argument I heard yesterday concerned her ruling on the election.

 

[Ame®icano]

The entire confirmation hearing today on Democrat side was based on a premise that Barrett would vote against CommieCare (ACA), or in other words, on nothing.

The "individual mandate" part, that was constitutionally sketchy, was already removed by Congress few years back. Although it's true that Trump's admin is trying to strike out rest of the ACA, what makes you lefties think that SCOTUS is going to vote against it if the law is constitutional? With "individual mandate" gone, the rest of the law, regardless of we liking it or not, is likely to stand, and six Justices who already voted for ACA earlier have no reason to vote against it now?

Democrats know this, and the MSM as well, but they simply don't care, and they're attacking Barrett on insinuation that she would vote against it, regardless of her vote wouldn't matter anyways. They spent half a day looking at the photos of people who "would die if they lose their healthcare", and those sad stories have absolutely nothing to do with confirmation hearing. In other words, they turn whole hearing today into Democrat party commercial with the message "look what Trump is going to do to sick people". In reality, of course, Trump isn't going to do anything to anyone. If law is unconstitutional, it should be repealed, but for the reason I mentioned above, the ACA is most likely going to stand.

Democrats have not disappointed, they acted exactly as you would expect from them. They were lying, acting "outraged", and like everyone but them is plain stupid. They know that ACA sucks, and for those that have to use it, it stinks, but Democrats are not fighting for it because it's a good law, but because it's a foundation on which they could continue to build the single payer, government controlled system, and if that foundation is gone, they would have to start, should they get a chance, all over again.

Therefore, just another mockery of the hearing, as they did with Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and now Barrett.

the argument I heard yesterday concerned her ruling on the election.

My OP is written after first day of hearings. What about her argument from yesterday (2nd day of hearing)?

 

[jc456]

The entire confirmation hearing today on Democrat side was based on a premise that Barrett would vote against CommieCare (ACA), or in other words, on nothing.

The "individual mandate" part, that was constitutionally sketchy, was already removed by Congress few years back. Although it's true that Trump's admin is trying to strike out rest of the ACA, what makes you lefties think that SCOTUS is going to vote against it if the law is constitutional? With "individual mandate" gone, the rest of the law, regardless of we liking it or not, is likely to stand, and six Justices who already voted for ACA earlier have no reason to vote against it now?

Democrats know this, and the MSM as well, but they simply don't care, and they're attacking Barrett on insinuation that she would vote against it, regardless of her vote wouldn't matter anyways. They spent half a day looking at the photos of people who "would die if they lose their healthcare", and those sad stories have absolutely nothing to do with confirmation hearing. In other words, they turn whole hearing today into Democrat party commercial with the message "look what Trump is going to do to sick people". In reality, of course, Trump isn't going to do anything to anyone. If law is unconstitutional, it should be repealed, but for the reason I mentioned above, the ACA is most likely going to stand.

Democrats have not disappointed, they acted exactly as you would expect from them. They were lying, acting "outraged", and like everyone but them is plain stupid. They know that ACA sucks, and for those that have to use it, it stinks, but Democrats are not fighting for it because it's a good law, but because it's a foundation on which they could continue to build the single payer, government controlled system, and if that foundation is gone, they would have to start, should they get a chance, all over again.

Therefore, just another mockery of the hearing, as they did with Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and now Barrett.

the argument I heard yesterday concerned her ruling on the election.

My OP is written after first day of hearings. What about her argument from yesterday (2nd day of hearing)?

Senator Blumenthal, stated her seat would vote on the 2020 election if it went to the courts. Therefore she is disqualified.

 

[Dragonlady]

She deserves far less respect than she is getting because it is clear she is ruthlessly partisan for having anything to do with this travesty.

Da fuq?

Dude she's going to be confirmed

You lost....we win. Now resume the fetal position

You haven't won, and this packing of the courts by the Republican Party will not be allowed to stand.

Filling a seat is not “court packing” it’s called doing the job.

Holding seats open, slowing confirmations to keep them open. Republicans stole 2 of Trumps’s nomination. Trump bragged how Obama “left” 120 seats on the deferral Judiciary empty and he filled them. Obama left no seats empty, McConnell spent 8 years holding up every appointment and 4 years ramming them through to pack the courts.

The Federalist Society provided a list of radical right wingers, many of them very unqualified and Trump’s nominations were rushed through at lightening speed. All of them young, radically right wing, and nearly all of them, white males.

Republicans have been “packing the courts” for the past 12 years. Refusing to confirm Obama’s picks and rushing through Trump’s.

So stop with the bullshit about “packing the courts”. It’s just another Republican cover up for what they’ve done here to thwart the will of the people.

Republicans control the Senate. Obama lectured us that "Elections have consequences". When Democrats win the Senate then they will do the exact same thing. Suck it up, buttercup.

Just because no one was ever corrupt enough to do it, doesn’t mean it’s OK or that there won’t be consequences after this election.

One of the “consequences” of this election, is that laws will be put in place to prevent this kind of corruption and power grabs by Republicans, and one of the ways that can be done is to “unpack” the courts, by increasing the numbers of judges, to balance the courts and provide a judiciary that is not overwhelmingly conservative, white and male.

Furthermore, the Republicans are guaranteed to lose the Senate if they push through a nomination that 70% of Americans don’t want them to make BEFORE this election. You spent so much time convincing Republican voters that Obama should have waited and promising that if this happened in the last year of Trump’s term, they would wait, that Republican voters now believe what Trump and McCONNELL are doing is WRONG.

Republicans would have been further ahead to wait in terms of both the Presidential or down ballot races. Vote for Trump to cement to court. Return your GOP Senators to ensure confirmation. The ads practically write themselves. But by all means, shoot yourselves in the foot.

Republicans will lose right across the board and risk giving Democrats the super majority they will need to “unpack the courts”, and pass legislation to ensure future governments on either side can never do it again. After all, if the courts are packed for generations to come, there’s really no need to return any of these incompetent ass clowns to Washington. Reload, and shoot the other foot right off.

Has Trump ever made a decision that didn’t blow up in his face? Accepting help from the Russians got him the Russia investigation. Trying to fire Comey to end the RI, got him the Mueller Investigation. Trying to extort the Ukrainians got him impeached. Trying to pretend Covid was a hoax got 220,000 Americans killed and crashed the economy.

The list is endless. Debt and destruction have been the story of Trump’s life. Bankruptcy for all who believe and invested with him.

Stupid is as stupid does. The only thing dumber than Trump, are his “true believers”.

 

[hadit]

Amy is too decent and normal for the Rats.

She loves her family, she loves the Constitution, she has morals and values, and last but not least, she is an attractive, intelligent woman.

That is totally unacceptable for the crazy, demented Left.

What really pisses them off is she adopted two beautiful Haitian kids that would be dead now if she hadn't pulled a Angelina Jolie and took them in.

It pisses off blobbers even more.... Adopting kids from what the president calls a "shit hole"...

Names?

 

[hadit]

She deserves far less respect than she is getting because it is clear she is ruthlessly partisan for having anything to do with this travesty.

In which of her rulings did her "partisan" views override the law? Be specific, please.

 

[Crepitus]

Right... as opposed to Justices Kagan and Sotomayor?

Yes.

 

[Crepitus]

So Trump mind controls you?

Lol, seriously? That's what you got outta my post?

Damn.... Just damn.

 

[BS Filter]

Blumenthal is such a greasy smarmy vile piece of shit.

 

[jc456]

Blumenthal is such a greasy smarmy vile piece of shit.

looked like he has Parkinson's.

 

[BS Filter]

Pat Leahy has occupied his Senate seat since 1974. Why do people keep voting for these senile poop heads?

 

[j-mac]

She deserves far less respect than she is getting because it is clear she is ruthlessly partisan for having anything to do with this travesty.

Da fuq?

Dude she's going to be confirmed

You lost....we win. Now resume the fetal position

You haven't won, and this packing of the courts by the Republican Party will not be allowed to stand.

Filling a seat is not “court packing” it’s called doing the job.

Holding seats open, slowing confirmations to keep them open. Republicans stole 2 of Trumps’s nomination. Trump bagged how Obama “left” 120 seats on the deferral Judiciary empty and he filled them.

Wait, "Stole"??? Are you trying to say that Republican Presidents don't have the duty to appoint open seats on the court? And he did fill them...I guess the One should have done a better job eh?

The Federalist Society provided a list of radical right wingers, many of them very unqualified and Trump’s nominations were rushed through at lightening speed. All of them young, radically right wing, and nearly all of them, white males.

Sounds like liberal sour grapes to me....

Republicans have been “packing the courts” for the past 12 years. Refusing to confirm Obama’s picks and rushing through Trump’s.

Clearly you have NO idea what "Packing the court" is....If Democrats were the ones in power in the Senate, they'd be doing the same thing, if not just taking the nominee straight to the floor for a vote, and screwing Republican's out of even questioning....

So stop with the bullshit about “packing the courts”. It’s just another Republican cover up for what they’ve done here to thwart the will of the people.

Elections have consquences...the will of the people was that Republican's hold the Senate, and the Presidency...So, if there is 'Bull Shit' being offered here, it's from you.

 

[eddiew37]

The great deal maker?? lol
No deal with Russia and nukes
No deal with China and we lost the tariff war
No deal with womd North Korea
No deal with stimulus and Pelosi
add to that ,,a fn tax cheating crook

Even CNN is telling Pelosi to take the deal because people are hurting. When a Democrat loses CNN, you're in trouble.

The AH's you support have left out so much Pelosi is right to not go with targeted bs They leave out so much beneficial to blue states I love it when pelosi tells them to go F themselves

It isn't the taxpayers fault that idiot blue state Democrats can't control their states. I don't want to bail them out. If liberalism is so great, they shouldn't need any assistance. They are morons, just like Biden/Harris supporters.

Bail OUT? It's blue state tax money bailing YOU out for years

 

[Coyote]

If I just entered this thread I’d have no idea that the topic was Amy Comey Barrett. Get back on topic please. Thread will be getting some clean up.

 

[busybee01]

The entire confirmation hearing today on Democrat side was based on a premise that Barrett would vote against CommieCare (ACA), or in other words, on nothing.

The "individual mandate" part, that was constitutionally sketchy, was already removed by Congress few years back. Although it's true that Trump's admin is trying to strike out rest of the ACA, what makes you lefties think that SCOTUS is going to vote against it if the law is constitutional? With "individual mandate" gone, the rest of the law, regardless of we liking it or not, is likely to stand, and six Justices who already voted for ACA earlier have no reason to vote against it now?

Democrats know this, and the MSM as well, but they simply don't care, and they're attacking Barrett on insinuation that she would vote against it, regardless of her vote wouldn't matter anyways. They spent half a day looking at the photos of people who "would die if they lose their healthcare", and those sad stories have absolutely nothing to do with confirmation hearing. In other words, they turn whole hearing today into Democrat party commercial with the message "look what Trump is going to do to sick people". In reality, of course, Trump isn't going to do anything to anyone. If law is unconstitutional, it should be repealed, but for the reason I mentioned above, the ACA is most likely going to stand.

Democrats have not disappointed, they acted exactly as you would expect from them. They were lying, acting "outraged", and like everyone but them is plain stupid. They know that ACA sucks, and for those that have to use it, it stinks, but Democrats are not fighting for it because it's a good law, but because it's a foundation on which they could continue to build the single payer, government controlled system, and if that foundation is gone, they would have to start, should they get a chance, all over again.

Therefore, just another mockery of the hearing, as they did with Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and now Barrett.

It is not hate. Clearly Republicans are expecting her to overturn Obamacare and Roe vs Wade. They would not have nominated her if they didn't. They also see the court as one that will legislate from the bench as it has in the past since Republicans gained a majority.

 

[Ame®icano]

The entire confirmation hearing today on Democrat side was based on a premise that Barrett would vote against CommieCare (ACA), or in other words, on nothing.

The "individual mandate" part, that was constitutionally sketchy, was already removed by Congress few years back. Although it's true that Trump's admin is trying to strike out rest of the ACA, what makes you lefties think that SCOTUS is going to vote against it if the law is constitutional? With "individual mandate" gone, the rest of the law, regardless of we liking it or not, is likely to stand, and six Justices who already voted for ACA earlier have no reason to vote against it now?

Democrats know this, and the MSM as well, but they simply don't care, and they're attacking Barrett on insinuation that she would vote against it, regardless of her vote wouldn't matter anyways. They spent half a day looking at the photos of people who "would die if they lose their healthcare", and those sad stories have absolutely nothing to do with confirmation hearing. In other words, they turn whole hearing today into Democrat party commercial with the message "look what Trump is going to do to sick people". In reality, of course, Trump isn't going to do anything to anyone. If law is unconstitutional, it should be repealed, but for the reason I mentioned above, the ACA is most likely going to stand.

Democrats have not disappointed, they acted exactly as you would expect from them. They were lying, acting "outraged", and like everyone but them is plain stupid. They know that ACA sucks, and for those that have to use it, it stinks, but Democrats are not fighting for it because it's a good law, but because it's a foundation on which they could continue to build the single payer, government controlled system, and if that foundation is gone, they would have to start, should they get a chance, all over again.

Therefore, just another mockery of the hearing, as they did with Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and now Barrett.

It is not hate. Clearly Republicans are expecting her to overturn Obamacare and Roe vs Wade. They would not have nominated her if they didn't. They also see the court as one that will legislate from the bench as it has in the past since Republicans gained a majority.

Read my previous posts. Although Roe v Wade should be overturned and decision returned to States, that won't happen with or without Barrett as a Justice.

 

[JoeB131]

The funny thing with you lefties is that for every failing law you ram thru, you blame Republicans.

States are free to run their healthcare as they're pleased. RomneyCare was implemented by the state, and has no impact on other states.

The idea of CommieCare (ACA) is a flaw by itself, forcing people into it, and penalizing them if they don't (beating people in submission is leftist mantra), has no place in free society.

Whenever you guys talk about Freedom, it's usually about rich people abusing the rest of us...

Romney called his plan a "Model for the Nation". Nobody disputed it in 2008 when he said it. He didn't get the nomination because the Evangelicals wouldn't support a Mormon.

By 2012, Obama had passed his plan for the nation, Romney disowned it, and the Evangelicals would have voted for Romney if he was sacrificing virgins to C'Thulhu.

"He's summoned the Great Old Ones! The world is doomed!"
"Yeah, but a least we got that n***** out of the White House!"

 

[Lakhota]

Where all this hate towards Amy Coney Barrett is coming from?

From her documented record and her evasiveness to answer Senate confirmation questions!

 

[hadit]

Where all this hate towards Amy Coney Barrett is coming from?

From her documented record and her evasiveness to answer Senate confirmation questions!

In which of her rulings did she ignore the law in favor of a personal opinion? And why do you expect a nominee to state for the record how he/she will vote when the case has not even been heard? That's stupid.

 

[Gaeandilth]

Where all this hate towards Amy Coney Barrett is coming from?

From her documented record and her evasiveness to answer Senate confirmation questions!

Questions she refuses to answer are the same questions that every SCOTUS nominee in 50 years has refused to answer. And the questions are mostly to her opinion which is none of their fucking business. A judge is supposed to not take into account their personal views and opinions into judgments. Dems know this and are trying to trap her into answering.
I mean for fucks sake she was actually accused of being a racist when she has 2 adopted black children from haiti. And do not tell me that Spartacus' was not calling her a racist.