Paul: re crack pipes

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

no republican ever said that ( hearing voices again). what they’re saying, is that it’s wrong ( and obviously illegal) to ignore potentially better candidates based on gender and skin color


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'll ask again. Did they say that when Trump said he would only pick a candidate approved by the Federalist Society?

And how about when Reagan said he would only pick a woman? Was it obviously illegal then?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

I'll ask again. Did they say that when Trump said he would only pick a candidate approved by the Federalist Society?

And how about when Reagan said he would only pick a woman? Was it obviously illegal then?

saying you’ll pick one that conservatives will like, is a little different than saying your pick will be a certain gender and color.

does any president pick one whose politics aren’t similar to the presidents?

i was a tad young when reagan made that announcement. but it was a stupid thing for him to declare. it’s blatantly unconstitutional.

You asked this already, and I gave the same answer, which answers your question as it was asked, and is consistent with my view on Biden. If you'd care to ask the same question again, perhaps you can flag my response here and just refer back to it, that'll save us both some time.

Picking someone of a certain gender or race for political reasons (like Trump picking Barrett) is one thing. Declaring way ahead of time that only one race/gender will be considered, is something else. It's stupid when Reagan did it, and it's stupid fo Biden to do it.

Does anyone here, or on Bidens team, ask themselves why his approval ratings are where they are?


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

saying you’ll pick one that conservatives will like, is a little different than saying your pick will be a certain gender and color.

does any president pick one whose politics aren’t similar to the presidents?

i was a tad young when reagan
made that announcement. but it was a stupid thing for him to declare. it’s blatantly unconstitutional.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

The Constitution does not set any qualifications for service as a Justice, thus the President may nominate any individual to serve on the Court.

But obviously conservatism is the principle that in groups are protected but not bound by law and out groups are not protected but bound.

Because, originalism…….

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

The Constitution does not set any qualifications for service as a Justice, thus the President may nominate any individual to serve on the Court.

But obviously conservatism is the principle that in groups are protected but not bound by law and out groups are not protected but bound.

Because, originalism…….

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

i’ll make it as simple as i can…

if it’s ok for Biden to say white men can’t apply for this job, it’s equally ok for someone else to say that blacks can’t apply for another job.

Unless whites are not equal
to blacks.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

i’ll make it as simple as i can…

if it’s ok for Biden to say white men can’t apply for this job, it’s equally ok for someone else to say that blacks can’t apply for another job.

Unless whites are not equal
to blacks.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

There are two types of people in this country.

1. People who see opportunities for minority populations as progress that makes us proud.

2. People who see minority populations gaining equality as a threat.

Group 1 are Americans.
Group 2 are Republicans.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

There are two types of people in this country.

1. People who see opportunities for minority populations as progress that makes us proud.

2. People who see minority populations gaining equality as a threat.

Group 1 are Americans.
Group 2 are Republicans.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Right. That's why Republicans are in favor of school choice, and why democrats hate school choice. This is why Republicans make the case for the benefit of intact families, and why liberals incentivize fatherlessness.

Second time, why did Democrats get so miserable when Republicans were celebrating the lowest black unemployment ever? If what you posted is even a little bit true, wouldn't congressional democrats celebrate that?

For Gods sake, even the congressional black caucus acted like someone just ran over their dog. Even they couldn't celebrate that. Because democrats care about winning, not about blacks getting ahead.

All you have is hyper-partisan nonsense Pete. Things that make great bumper stickers for thoughtless liberal livestock, but which are laughable.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Right. That's why Republicans are in favor of school choice, Do you mean private schools?and why democrats hate school choice. This is why Republicans make the case for the benefit of intact families, and why liberals incentivize fatherlessness. You mean by increasing benefits for people who have more children?

Second time, why did Democrats get so miserable when Republicans were celebrating the lowest black unemployment ever? If what you posted is even a little bit true, wouldn't congressional democrats celebrate that?That is a lie. You always throw that out but when asked to explain what exactly Trump did for Blacks you say opportunity zone which were shown to have limited benefit to Blacks but more to the developers while ignoring the ways his policies are furthering racial segregation, not to mention stoking racial divisions and violence.

For Gods sake, even the congressional black caucus acted like someone just ran over their dog. Even they couldn't celebrate that. Because democrats care about winning, not about blacks getting ahead.

All you have is hyper-partisan nonsense Pete. That was funny. You're the most divisive person here Things that make great bumper stickers for thoughtless liberal livestock, but which are laughable.

At least you're good for a laugh here.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Right. That's why Republicans are in favor of school choice, and why democrats hate school choice. This is why Republicans make the case for the benefit of intact families, and why liberals incentivize fatherlessness.

Second time, why did Democrats get so miserable when Republicans were celebrating the lowest black unemployment ever? If what you posted is even a little bit true, wouldn't congressional democrats celebrate that?

For Gods sake, even the congressional black caucus acted like someone just ran over their dog. Even they couldn't celebrate that. Because democrats care about winning, not about blacks getting ahead.

All you have is hyper-partisan nonsense Pete. Things that make great bumper stickers for thoughtless liberal livestock, but which are laughable.

School choice is about moving my tax dollars to private institutions, just like for profit prisons.
Republicans claim to be for intact families but oppose any help that doesn’t have a cliff at the upper end.
Republicans consistently oppose healthcare reform, claiming that it will cost too much, but we already pay for it, I just want the money to pay for health care not an insurance executive's third mansion.
That the Republican Party thinks that a minuscule number of black candidates is worth bragging about should tell you all you need to know
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

There are two types of people in this country.

1. People who see opportunities for minority populations as progress that makes us proud.

2. People who see minority populations gaining equality as a threat.

Group 1 are Americans.
Group 2 are Republicans.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Exactly.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

saying you’ll pick one that conservatives will like, is a little different than saying your pick will be a certain gender and color.

does any president pick one whose politics aren’t similar to the presidents?

i was a tad young when reagan made that announcement. but it was a stupid thing for him to declare. it’s blatantly unconstitutional.

You asked this already, and I gave the same answer, which answers your question as it was asked, and is consistent with my view on Biden. If you'd care to ask the same question again, perhaps you can flag my response here and just refer back to it, that'll save us both some time.

Picking someone of a certain gender or race for political reasons (like Trump picking Barrett) is one thing. Declaring way ahead of time that only one race/gender will be considered, is something else. It's stupid when Reagan did it, and it's stupid fo Biden to do it.

Does anyone here, or on Bidens team, ask themselves why his approval ratings are where they are?


Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Trump said he would pick someone "choosen" by the Federalist society. Reagan said a woman. You and your ilk (I think that is a scummy word but one you throw out there frequently so I'll use it) shows the hypocrisy of the Rs.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by PaulS

I'll ask again. Did they say that when Trump said he would only pick a candidate approved by the Federalist Society?

And how about when Reagan said he would only pick a woman? Was it obviously illegal then?

I'll explain again.....it was not racist to announce that a pick for the supreme court would be a constitutionalist....it was not racist to say a pick for a supreme court would be a woman....it is incredibly racist to state that a person would be picked based on their skin color at the exclusion of other individuals who do not meet your skin color litmus test

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by scottw

I'll explain again.....it was not racist to announce that a pick for the supreme court would be a constitutionalist....it was not racist to say a pick for a supreme court would be a woman....it is incredibly racist to state that a person would be picked based on their skin color at the exclusion of other individuals who do not meet your skin color litmus test

And I’ll say again.

Your in dream land ! if you think any black women were on Ron’s list when he picked his women !

But feel free to think otherwise
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by wdmso

And I’ll say again.

Your in dream land ! if you think any black women were on Ron’s list when he picked his women !

But feel free to think otherwise
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I guess this above your comprehension level....