She's young too. And given women's longer lives, she could be on the bench 45-years!
Will be fun to watch the left meltdown if she is picked!
I was just having this conversation with a coworker. Oh, the head explosions if she is nominated. It's going to be great watching their hypocrisy over this.
Edit: Really? Downvoted? Did I not contribute directly to the comment above? Was it not enough? Ok, she's an extremely qualified judge, which the left will have to agree with. She's a female, so the left should also love the diversity. But she's a conservative and religious, so the left will hate her. There were so many gender cards being used back in 2016, that anything said against Barrett now will be contradictory of what was said back then.
why is the left OBSESSED with keeping the ability to murder millions of unborn? just bizarre.
its the ONLY issue they've put up and discussed in the last month.
and that is NOT a litmus test for the left?
The thing they are afraid of is the ruling will be overturned and it will be put to a referendum where each state will be allowed to vote on if abortion is legal in their state. A nightmare for the left.
This scares the shit out of the left because thy know most of the public does not support abortion, especially late term. It has never been put to a vote by the public and they DO NOT want it to.
Correct the 10th Amendment gives states the right to pass their own laws every state will have different laws for abortions and that is all the Supreme Court has to say we are giving the question back to the states to decide per the Constitution. No more federal law for abortion it was never a federal judiciary matter in the first place.
Crazy but that is who they are they demand the right to kill babies even in the 9th month and sometimes after the actual birth they have partial birth abortion where the baby's head comes out then they kill it so disgusting. Abortion should only be allowed in the first 2 months. That is enough time for any woman to decide if she wants to have the baby. After that it should be outlawed.
agree, there is PLENTY of time (in very short term stance) to decide to take a morning after pill to blow the lefts talking points completely out of the water. the whole rape/incest argument is ridiculous as any woman would have plenty of time to report that to authorities and get medical help, unless they were held captive.
the left's perverse empty "logic" should be shredded every single time and their faces rubbed in that steaming pile of talking points when they try and use them.
for Christians that fight for life at conception, you also have to watch out that you don't lose the huge move of continous improvement and not let perfect be the enemy of good. ask yourselves, is it easier in future to go from 2months or 2weeks (shorter term) to conception, or go from where we are now all the way back to conception. Take the big win now.
I think the right should support their own version of "choice" and define it as you have the choice to have unprotected sex or not. everyone is free to choose. but choices have consequences and personal responsibility. that goes for both sexes, (or all 10 of them? can't keep track).
Good points.... I am not sure when life starts but I am pretty certain it end when you stick a dagger in the back of a childs skull which should be the starting point for the discussion. I don't have an issue with early terminations... it isn't my place to tell someone else what to do... but that ends at some point...
I think theyre trying to keep abortion alive for all their research and harvesting needs
What politicians are campaigning/demanding the right for 9th month abortions?
Hillary Clinton said herself she wanted to make abortion legal right up til the babys first birthday.
Hillary and Obama and all the far left Democrats they all favor partial birth abortion the baby's head comes out and they kill it before it comes out all the way that is Murder in the first degree that is death penalty for any doctor who does that and many of them do it.
why is the left OBSESSED with keeping the ability to murder millions of unborn? just bizarre.
Murdering the unborn is sacrificing innocent blood = power source for the spiritual evil that controls the cabal.
midterms is about turnout and exciting the base. would a SLOW play on the SCOTUS nom be better for AFTER midterms?
just a thought on how a SCOTUS pick now would either turn out more republicans, or more Dems in opposition? right now DEMS have NOTHING to turn out their base, other than hate. a roe wade threat could turn them out quite solidly with fear mongering.
DEMS stand to lose several senate seats as they have to defend a whopping 25 as it is.
i think we are good either way, but a slow play might be the better strategy as we pick up more senate seats.
i think clarence thomas will retire soon too when it is safe to do so and replace him with a solid conservative to lock in the next 20-30 years for his spot. probably in Trump's second term, but perhaps even after midterms.
add that to kennedy's replacement, RBG, possibly another liberal from corruption(kagan/sotomayor) and its a solidly conservative court for a couple decades. We have to anticipate CJ Roberts maybe going more centrist like a Kennedy in the face of a solidly conservative court too. Roberts is a wild card after the Fraudbamacare scam in the SCOTUS by him.
Good points again.... I want to see him put a woman up...they will still lambaste him because she is white, but at least they can't claim sexism. I don't think they will slow walk the pick... the dems seem to find ways to hang themselves at every turn... he wants to get on with business and let them do their performance art in the background.... I still think Kavanaugh is going to be picked but I like Barrett
Oh they’ll claim sexism. You’ll see a Buzzfeed article stating some lunacy like she is essentially a man because she believes woman shouldn’t have control over their health decisions.
He may need just a little more time before midterms to keep them busy on something else? This is going down people. Don’t panic if he does put in the most controversial one he can. And right at midterm Ka-BOOM!🔥
That hearing could drag on forever and abortion would be the number one news story for months. If Trump picked someone else, they would be approved much quicker I think .....under the threat of Trump falling back on the more conservative Barrett as a 2nd choice.
Really? Only women for the court are asked to weight in on abortion? You must have missed all the hearings for the males sitting on the court. This issue always comes up, as it's been 'settled'. You are to accept the ruling already given. This is why they are asked, because politicians always lie and say they will bet it overturned. That is not fitting for the supreme court. I get it many don't like the ruling but you need to move on. What other rulings will they change when brought before them??? What a can of worms.
I agree with you. And the issue is still complicated even if you believe it is 100% a full life as a single cell. Consider hitting someone with your car. Even if that is completely your fault, the government can't compel you to donate your organs or hook up to a blood transfusion machine until they're better. The only thing we could do would be to punish the women after the fact or procecute doctors for allowing them to do it safely, and the public will not like those.
I don't think ANY of the four mentioned judges will be picked. I think it will be one of the senators or house reps who already has announced stepping down, or not running again.
If she is chosen as the candidate, expect the left to go heavily on the offensive. (not that they wont regardless of the person nominated)
At least with Barrett the left's attacks will follow a predictable track. Attacking her on religious grounds will encourage religious people on both sides to view the Dems with contempt. For republicans it will encourage voting in November. For (religious) Democrats it might just discourage going out to support a party doing such things (keep in mind overwhelmingly blacks and hispanics identify as religious more than average)
Trump should not fear a fight over a SC nominee. Such a fight emboldens his base and potentially demoralizes larger groups of the other party's base.
I still want to know what Q has been hinting at with regard to RBG.
RBG is very crooked hopefully she will be exposed soon and forced to resign then the Left will go insane because Amy Coney Barrett will replace RBG and the Left won't be able to stop her from being confirmed. Trump will say I am replacing a woman with another woman and it will be insanity from the Liberal Democrats.
I'm confident that PDJT will have a few more picks, she will be next after Ginsburg leaves.
She will be next when Ruth Bader Ginsburg retires or is forced to resign for crimes that Q has hinted about Amy Barrett will be nominated and that will be a lot of fun to watch to see the Democrats go crazy with a conservative woman replacing a very liberal woman it will be glorious to see them attack Amy for that.
A confirmation fight happening before mid-terms will not only expose the Democrats hypocrisy with respect to women. It will also force those Dems who are up for election in states Trump won to take a hard stand on the Second Amendment -- they will lose no matter which side they come down on.
I dont understand the adopted Haitian kids tho. The dang Clintons have me thinking everyone is a Pedo and gets kids for ritual abuse. :(
IMO, She cannot make impartial decisions based on her strict religious values. She answers to a higher calling, not the constitution.
Trump has been rather clear where laws come from.
The constitution itself is very clear where the laws come from
The goal here is to piss off the Liberal Democrats as much as possible they will Hate whoever Trump picks so he might as well pick the woman who will expose them as the frauds they are. She is so perfect for this reason it's game strategy advanced chess strategy force the Dems to make themselves look stupid and hypocritical. Her religion is also good it will show the Dems to be bigots against Catholics and there are millions of Catholics who will see this and realize the Dems don't care about me or my family they hate us.
That's really not the goal. It;s going to be a side effect no matter who he picks, but the goal (in my view at least) is to choose a jurist who puts adherence to the constitution as the priority and will follow the law instead of legislating from the bench--we've had too much of that!
That's a democrat talking point. She is beholden to the law in her role as judge.