Ketanji can’t define what a woman is

you're definitely confused. Like I said your DNA says what sex you are. You can cut and tuck but you can not change what you are. I will never accept someone who can not accept themselves

 

All you're doing is reasserting what you've already said and I clearly disagree with you.

Jackson is soft on pedophiles. That alone disqualifies her for the position she held previous and for the supreme Court anything else is just icing on the cake.

 

That's not logically possible. Please try to be rational when discussing these matters. When is men's history month??

... would that be because at least one of those options is murder?

Abortion is murder, not birth control.

RQAA.

NCAA

 

What's your solution?

 

So you are not for women's rights except in this case.
NCAA is not allowing men in women's sports.

Name a man that they allowed. Not the one you already named with failure.

 

I am not the least bit confused.
Notice the bold section say major, not all. That should be a good clue to the world not being binary.

 

That was a shock. Justice Roberts changed dramatically after Obama rebuked the court during the SOTU over Citizens United.

 

Put that guy up against Andrea Shaw

 

So they alter the XX chromosomes? is that what you are saying?

 

Yeah....she is pretty ripped but there are men more ripped than the one I pictured. Think Andrea would go down pretty quick against the man/women I pictured. (Andrea does have larger breasts!)

 

Soft would imply she was giving less than the standard sentence for the offense. She's not doing that. She's giving the sentence that the vast majority of the federal bench, a bipartisan group selected over the course of decades by various administrations with the advice and consent of the various Senates.

If you'd like a tougher sentence, change the law. She and the rest of the federal bench are bound by the law, and in the law she's bound by Congress to look past the guidelines at other factors they identified which is why 70% of the federal bench hands out sentences like this in these particular cases where they are a 1st offense, no person can be identified as harmed by the defendant, the defendant is young etc.
You want to complain about someone being soft, blame Congress for not amending the statute to take that requirement to look beyond the guidelines away from the Judges.

 

Put in only the most qualified jurists who espouse and can be backed up to support an originalist philosophy of jurisprudence. Stop selecting for factors that don't ****ing matter.

 

So you are against women's rights except in the case of a woman authorizing the killing of her child? Murder is not a right dude.

Yes they are.

I already did.

I already named one, with success. You just don't happen to like the truth.

 

How do you know what each of their chromosome are?
Are you their doctor?

 

You mean congress? They approve a selection.
You know, they are all human and live in today's world. Not in the world of 250 yrs ago. So that's probably a reason.

 

Did I cite a governing body? Shall I look up your comments on the Garland refusal?

The text says what is says. Interpretation doesn't include "well in the 1700's when it was written the word meant X but later we changed it to mean Y so when I analyze what it means when it was written in the 1700's I can claim it meant Y even though it didn't.". If that's what you mean being human in today's world being a reason, that's not a good pick. That's not a good jurist, much less the most qualified of their day.

 

Blackburn argued that "the fact that you can't give me a straight answer about something as fundamental as what a woman is underscores the dangers of the kind of progressive education that we are hearing about."

No, Mr. Blackburn, your question underscores the fact that you are capable of asking a loaded question which is, on it's face, an insult and disrespectful to someone seeking a seat on the Supreme Court.

What kind of question is that? It's disingenuous, it's politically motivated, and it is, above, a loaded question. Not only that, it's vague. What Blackburn is really asking is not contained in the question, so the question is dishonest. He should learn out to articulate what his real question is. Which is no doubt along the lines of "What is your view on the gender issue'. If he had asked that question, that would have been an honest question.

 

How the heck is it a loaded question?

 

Think about it. It's an agenda driven question.

I mean, what is someone supposed to say? I got tits and a vagina? You think this is a question you put to a female Supreme Court Justice?

It's a stupid question, or it's a loaded question. The way to not do that is to actually ask what you are asking, so, what are you asking when you ask that question? The question beckons for qualification, yet Blackburn did not qualify it.

At worse, it's disingenuous/loaded, at best, it's stupid.

It's one or the other, but a legitimate and/or intelligent question befitting someone of her station, it most certainly is not.

 

I don't think that guy would be in any high school I can think of

Any contending woman MMA fighter would rather handily have even Schwarzenegger tapping out in less than 30 seconds. It's like a cat vs a dog. Dogs often kill cats but that's because the cat runs and then gets cornered where it can't fight. A dog who can take a cat that stands its ground is one big and mean animal.



There is something to be said for speed, agility and knowledge over simple strength in any athletic contest and that is at any level. Once again, these are contests between INDIVIDUALS, not whole sexes.

 

Every non woke nominee in the history of nominees would beg for a softball question like that.

 

Personally I don't need to know....but when they ask a Culture to accept their "fantasies" it would be a definite way to sort out the truth! I'm not a doctor, but I did stay at a Holiday Express last night!

 

Sounds like you recognize a difference between a cat and a dog. You know male dogs are a lot bigger and stronger than female dogs. Don't know a lot about cats. But I do know the difference between a man and a women!

 

You restated the same thing multiple times I still disagree with it I'm not going to agree with it just because you say it again.

 

It's a REPUBLICAN leader asking it. What do you expect?

Republicans should be ashamed of yourselves for what YOU have put in charge of the Party that used to have people like George F Will and William F. Buckley as your pundits and boasted the truly great Dwight David Eisenhower, no less, as your overall leader for many years. Doesn't it bother you even a little that your present representatives are generally standing insults to people who were once the best and brightest this country had to offer?