Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[REDSTATEWARD]

Would  a Constitutional scholar such as yourself deign to tell us ignoramuses what "superprecedent" actually is?

Ask Amy Klochubar.  It came from her question.

[barton]

I voted, by mail.

I cannot believe Proposition 16, they want to repeal the Civil Rights Act of 1964...

Um,  Prop 16 doesn't remove any protections against discrimination or the other things King marched for.   It just restores Affirmative Action and other programs that aid diversity and levels the playing field for disadvantaged persons.   It works against systemic racism and poverty,  Tony.  You need to read the full text of stuff you're voting on.   

[Yankguy1]

Would  a Constitutional scholar such as yourself deign to tell us ignoramuses what "superprecedent" actually is?

Ask Amy Klochubar.  It came from her question.

Actually your co-scholar Barrett has been using the term throughout the hearings and in her writings so I was hoping you could help us out.

[facilitatorn]

Neither do their own homework.

Clarence is caught up in his wife’s terror plot, so we’re down to 5-3 again.

Remove CT and we only need an 11 seat bench.

[REDSTATEWARD]

Would  a Constitutional scholar such as yourself deign to tell us ignoramuses what "superprecedent" actually is?

Ask Amy Klochubar.  It came from her question.

Actually your co-scholar Barrett has been using the term throughout the hearings and in her writings so I was hoping you could help us out.

well, then you already know the answer.

[Yankguy1]

I'm not the scholar you are. She uses a lot of big words. Can't you help me out?

[REDSTATEWARD]

I'm not the scholar you are. She uses a lot of big words. Can't you help me out?

Ask Amy to help you. 

[REDSTATEWARD]

I voted, by mail.

I cannot believe Proposition 16, they want to repeal the Civil Rights Act of 1964...

Um,  Prop 16 doesn't remove any protections against discrimination or the other things King marched for.   It just restores Affirmative Action and other programs that aid diversity and levels the playing field for disadvantaged persons.   It works against systemic racism and poverty,  Tony.  You need to read the full text of stuff you're voting on.

Prop 16 would codify systemic racism.  It is stillborn according to California polls .
With total common sense justification.

[bankshot1]

Senator Ben Sasse, a voice you will be hearing a lot of over the next couple of weeks.

http://journalstar.com/listen-ben-sasse-discusses-president-trump-in-response-to-constituents-question/video_f8707338-498d-53e1-9bb8-0624e137721f.html

I think there’s a really good question for trump tonight in there somewhere.

A real profile in courage.

Too fucking scared to stand-up to his colleagues or the incompetent fascist.

His real concern is the blue tsunami that may take his position of pwer away, not the real damage thie fascist motherfucker  has done to the US.

If you had any balls Sasse, you'd vote against Trump and his hand-picked hand-maiden of justice, and Trump and McConnell's paln to pack the court with another justice bought and paid for by dark and dangerous money.

Let Americans be heard over the scurrying of the Repub-rats who see the end coming and are starting to run to the exits. 

[Yankguy1]

I'm not the scholar you are. She uses a lot of big words. Can't you help me out?

Ask Amy to help you.

Klobuchar? Why would I ask a "Constutional idiot" (U of Chicago Law, notwithstanding) when I could ask someone of your scholarship?

[REDSTATEWARD]

I'm not the scholar you are. She uses a lot of big words. Can't you help me out?

Ask Amy to help you.

Klobuchar? Why would I ask a "Constutional idiot" (U of Chicago Law, notwithstanding) when I could ask someone of your scholarship?

Because Amy raised the issue.

[bankshot1]

And didn't Klobuchar use super-precedent as it was used by ACB in an article she had written.

[Yankguy1]

I'm not the scholar you are. She uses a lot of big words. Can't you help me out?

Ask Amy to help you.

Klobuchar? Why would I ask a "Constutional idiot" (U of Chicago Law, notwithstanding) when I could ask someone of your scholarship?

Because Amy raised the issue.

No she didn't. But again we could use your Constitutional brilliance here!

[Hairy Lime]

Best moments from the Amy Coney Barrett responses to stupid democrat questions about the Constitution:

Amy Klobuchar was ask­ing Judge Bar­rett about the hold of prece­dent, and iden­ti­fied Brown v. Board of Ed­u­ca­tion (1954) as “su­perpecedent” then asked if Roe v Wade is su­perprecedent?
Barrett’s response was a polite SAY WHAT?

 “I’m an­swer­ing a lot of ques­tions about Roe, which I think in­di­cates that Roe doesn’t fall into that cat­e­gory.”

Sen. Dick Durbin asked why Bar­rett ruled in a 2019 case that states can­not strip Sec­ond Amend­ment rights from felons who’ve com­pleted their sentences with­out proof that they are dangerous but main­tained that felons can be stripped of vot­ing rights.
Bar­rett calmly explained that these rights are found in dif­fer­ent parts of the Con­sti­tu­tion and that the vot­ing rules are left to the states.
Durban then quickly moved on.

Either the Senators are Constitutional idiots or their staffs are.

Or you are, which gets my vote.

[REDSTATEWARD]

I'm not the scholar you are. She uses a lot of big words. Can't you help me out?

Ask Amy to help you.

Klobuchar? Why would I ask a "Constutional idiot" (U of Chicago Law, notwithstanding) when I could ask someone of your scholarship?

Because Amy raised the issue.

No she didn’t

LOL! Yes she did.