A Meta-Level Reason To Dismiss Amy Coney Barrett's Supreme Court Candidacy

The proof is in the pudding.

We'll see who's crying on November 3rd.

18 days from now.

In the meantime, here's some side-splitting entertainment.

Compendium Of Trump Videos That Reveal His Arrogance, Inhumanity, Stupidity And Cruelty
https://newsfrombarbaria.blogspot.com/2020/07/compendium-of-trump-videos-that-reveal.html

Roger Stone: Members Of Trump's Inner Circle Are Unusually Likely To Be Convicted Felons
https://newsfrombarbaria.blogspot.com/2020/08/roger-stone-members-of-trumps-inner.html

Trump's Sister - Federal Court Judge, Maryanne Trump Barry - Calls Trump "Cruel, A "Liar," A "Cheat" And An "Untrustworthy Phony"
https://newsfrombarbaria.blogspot.com/2020/08/trumps-sister-federal-court-judge.html

"There Is Neither Nobility, Nor Kindness, Nor Uplift In Trump's America"
https://newsfrombarbaria.blogspot.com/2020/07/there-is-neither-nobility-nor-kindness.html

A Comprehensive Review Of Trump's Racism (Featuring "Must-See Mash-Up Of Trump's Racist Preaching")
https://newsfrombarbaria.blogspot.com/2020/08/a-comprehensive-review-of-trumps-racism.html

Best "Pax" Posts About The Criminality Of Donald Trump, His Family And "The Best People"
https://newsfrombarbaria.blogspot.com/2020/08/best-pax-posts-about-criminality-of.html

"Liar. Cheat. Traitor. Thief."
https://newsfrombarbaria.blogspot.com/2020/08/liar-cheat-traitor-thief.html

I’m not taking advice on “kindness” or criminality from the party openly supporting rioters who’ve committed looting, arson, and murder all summer, destroying thousands of Americans’ lives.

Point out where it says this is a crisis, you utter moron. This has happened 29 times before, you disingenuous floating turd.

Where does the Constitution specify that a Supreme Court Justice must be a man?

As the Constitution was written, only men voted, only men held power. And then, only white men and only white men with property. "All men are created equal" was derived from a higher class of white men who were not typically allowed to hold power or have a voice. Their intention was to give, "that" group an equal voice. Not to give mere peasants or women, and definitely not blacks, any power or voice.

In reply to the other comment: No, he did not answer me. I asked where *the Constitution* says only men can be Supreme Court justices. An answer to that question would mean quoting *the Constitution*. He failed to do so.

And I ask you the same question, idiot. Where does the Constitition specify that a woman cannot be a Supreme Court Justice?

As was explained to you, the Constitution was written for "men".

You’re not answering the question, dumbass. A quote from the Constitution, please.

Why the quotes? Are they fake men? Do you understand how quotation marks work?

The constitution's "original intent" was for women to be less than full citizens. And only citizens -- i.e., white males -- were full citizens.

Where does the Constitution specify that a Supreme Court Justice must be a man? If it's not in there, shut the f--k up.

Also, I guess you're not aware of this, but from an originalist perspective, a validly-passed amendment *is part of the Constitution*. Therefore, the 19th amendment is included *as part of the Constitution*.

It is a fact that the "original" authors of the constitution considered women less than full citizens and therefore a CHANGE was required in The Founders' "original intent" in order to make women (and blacks) suitable candidates for the Supreme Court.

4imnja.jpg (click to show)

Furthermore, it is just as defensible - and far less arrogant - to assume that the Constitution is a living, flexible document and that The Founders were NOT "originalists"

"Getting it completely wrong" on both women and blacks were two go***mn BIG MISTAKES.

Stop treating The Founders like saints - and the constitution like sacred scripture.

Neither supposition is true.

Or even close to true.

"to assume that the Constitution is a living, flexible document "

In other words, what it actually says doesn't matter and we can just make up shit and call it "the Constitution". No, I don't like that plan.

Hey shit-for-brains, where does the Constitution say a Supreme Court Justice must be a man?

Hey retard, WHERE DOES THE CONSTITUTION SAY THAT? I want a quote FROM THE CONSTITUTION, you idiot.

Here, learn something"

On blacks: "The sublime principles of the Declaration did not apply to them. They are for whites only." (Writer Conor Cruise O'Brien) The "prevailing opinion of the framers" was that blacks were "so far inferior, that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect …and that the Negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit." (Former Justice Thurgood Marshall, the first black appointed to the Supreme Court)

On the poor: They were "defined … in a sense as an alien race that had to be held to close discipline." (Yale historian John Blum)

On women: "In colonial society …a married woman had virtually no rights at all…. The Revolution did little to change [this]." (A college American history textbook)

On voting rights for the poor: "Most states had numerous [property] requirements that had to be met before a man could vote…. In general, the idea of voting rights or any other kind of rights was not something that particularly troubled the Framers." (A college textbook on American government)

On immigration and citizenship: The Founders' willingness to consider national origin in naturalization and citizenship policy was "quite obviously inconsistent with the ideals of liberty and equality professed in …the nation's 'Creed.'" (Yale political scientist Rogers Smith)

In sum: "The American Revolution produced no significant benefits for American women. The same generalization can be made for other powerless groups in the colonies—native Americans, blacks, probably most property-less white males, and indentured servants." (Feminist historian Joan Hoff Wilson.)

***

It is a fact that the "original" authors of the constitution considered women less than full citizens and therefore a CHANGE was required in The Founders' "original intent" in order to make women (and blacks) suitable candidates for the Supreme Court.

4imnja.jpg (click to show)

Furthermore, it is just as defensible - and far less arrogant - to assume that the Constitution is a living, flexible document and that The Founders were NOT "originalists"

"Getting it completely wrong" on both women and blacks were two go***mn BIG MISTAKES.

Stop treating The Founders like saints - and the constitution like sacred scripture.

Neither supposition is true.

Or even close to true.

You still haven’t answered my question, moron.

Your use of epithet reveals your own unhappiness.

I hope you get the help you need.

Your inability to answer a direct question reveals your intellectual dishonesty.

I hope you come to think more clearly and honestly.

He answered you. You are just too ignorant to realize.

This woman is not only a hypocrite to her own ideals and the very document she's spent a lifetime upholding, she has also flipped on her own opinion regarding an election year SC pick. Here we are, 20 days till election and she still pushes forward when she had a completely different opinion on doing so 9 months before the 2016 election.

https://www.cbsnews.com/video/amy-coney-barrett-on-replacing-supreme-court-justices-election-year-2016/#x