Ask Experts Questions for FREE Help !
Ask
    Athos's Avatar
    Athos Posts: 531, Reputation: 55
    Senior Member
     
    #21

    Sep 21, 2020, 02:55 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    Amy Coney Barrett is perfect for Dem talking points . They said in her Circuit Court hearings that she was too Catholic ("the dogma lives loudly within you, and that is a concern" said FrankenFeinstein ..
    Catholic Barrett has claimed her legal career is only "a means to building the Kingdom of God". That's a troubling comment from a jurist who is sworn to not let her religious beliefs interfere with her legal judgement.
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,741, Reputation: 342
    Ultra Member
     
    #22

    Sep 21, 2020, 03:51 PM
    I won't get into a deep theological discussion .Suffice it to say she speaks for and about herself only in her desire to doing justice and God's will in her work .

    But that is ok .....attack her for pronouncing a common belief of Jews and Christians ;that their purpose is to build a Kingdom of God . Go ahead and use that line of reasoning . In fact I hope Quid ,a professed Catholic uses that line of attack against her in heavily Catholic Pennsylvania .

    I guess Ginsburg was troubling too ...

    Presiding Bishop Michael Curry issued the following statement on Sept. 18 following the death of long-serving Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg:
    The late John Fitzgerald Kennedy once said, “while on earth God’s work must truly be our own.”
    The sacred cause of liberty and justice, dignity and equality decreed by God and meant for all has been advanced because while on earth Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg made God’s work her own. Because of her the ancient words of the prophet Micah to do justice, love mercy and walk humbly with God have found fulfillment. May we follow in her footprints. May she rest in the arms of the God who is love and the author of true justice.
    Rest In Peace, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. Shalom.
    The Most Rev. Michael B. Curry
    Presiding Bishop and Primate
    The Episcopal Church
    Wondergirl's Avatar
    Wondergirl Posts: 37,927, Reputation: 5430
    Jobs & Parenting Expert
     
    #23

    Sep 21, 2020, 04:45 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    .....attack her for pronouncing a common belief of Jews and Christians ;that their purpose is to build a Kingdom of God .
    No, Jews don't proselytize.
    I guess Ginsburg was troubling too ...
    Her beliefs didn't interfere with her legal judgment.
    Athos's Avatar
    Athos Posts: 531, Reputation: 55
    Senior Member
     
    #24

    Sep 21, 2020, 04:56 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    I won't get into a deep theological discussion .Suffice it to say she speaks for and about herself only in her desire to doing justice and God's will in her work .

    But that is ok .....attack her for pronouncing a common belief of Jews and Christians ;that their purpose is to build a Kingdom of God . Go ahead and use that line of reasoning . In fact I hope Quid ,a professed Catholic uses that line of attack against her in heavily Catholic Pennsylvania .
    None of your quotes came from potential Supreme Court nominees. Her belief is fine, as long as it doesn't influence her judgement. Stating her belief in a public forum remains troubling.
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,741, Reputation: 342
    Ultra Member
     
    #25

    Sep 21, 2020, 05:32 PM
    No, Jews don't proselytize.
    and neither did she .She was speak of a personal belief for herself ;Not to impose on others . “What does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God?”Micah 6:8
    Any other twisted interpretation is an intention distorting of her words. AND she was not proselytizing ,She was instead addressing the Catholic Students at Catholic Notre Dame university who for the most part believe whatever they do in life is also a means to the end of building God's kingdom.

    But as Meghan McCain already pointed out ;if nominated ,she will be slandered as the left is wont to do to conservative nominees .
    Wondergirl's Avatar
    Wondergirl Posts: 37,927, Reputation: 5430
    Jobs & Parenting Expert
     
    #26

    Sep 21, 2020, 05:41 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    if nominated ,she will be slandered as the left is wont to do to conservative nominees .
    And as the right does to a centrist or left-leaning nominee.
    Athos's Avatar
    Athos Posts: 531, Reputation: 55
    Senior Member
     
    #27

    Sep 21, 2020, 05:51 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Wondergirl View Post
    And as the right does to a centrist or left-leaning nominee.
    In the NEWSPEAK of the right-wing, "slander" is employed when "truth" is meant.
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 172
    Ultra Member
     
    #28

    Sep 21, 2020, 07:49 PM
    Yes slander is telling inconvenient truths
    Wondergirl's Avatar
    Wondergirl Posts: 37,927, Reputation: 5430
    Jobs & Parenting Expert
     
    #29

    Sep 21, 2020, 08:01 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by paraclete View Post
    Yes slander is telling inconvenient truths
    Slander is the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation.
    paraclete's Avatar
    paraclete Posts: 2,706, Reputation: 172
    Ultra Member
     
    #30

    Sep 21, 2020, 09:30 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by Wondergirl View Post
    Slander is the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation.
    You never see the other side , do you?

    What you hear here all the time are slanderous statements
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,741, Reputation: 342
    Ultra Member
     
    #31

    Sep 22, 2020, 04:53 AM
    Slander is the action or crime of making a false spoken statement damaging to a person's reputation.
    exactly ........reference the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings ;or the slandering of Robert Bork forever now called 'borking ' a nominee.
    And as the right does to a centrist or left-leaning nominee.
    I would like to see the comparable example.
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,741, Reputation: 342
    Ultra Member
     
    #32

    Sep 22, 2020, 08:41 AM
    OK Collins and Murkowski are not on board. Collins is losing her race in Maine ;and Murkowski is a RINO from Alaska She is the product of nepotism having been appointed by her dad when he resigned the Senate to become Alaska's Governor . She then was forced to run as an independent because she lost in a primary .Murkowski has won three full terms to the Senate, she has never won a majority of the vote; she won pluralities in each of her three race. Mittens will vote with the majority .There will be a lot of drama about his vote because he likes the attention . But in the end he will vote for the President's choice ,especially if internal polling shows Trump winning re-election . Even if he weren't ;Pence breaks a tie.

    Joe Manchin WVa could cross the aisle . He has been calling out Repubs for hypocrisy. But he voted to confirm Kavanaugh and Gorsuch ;so I kinda doubt he would draw the line on a female nominee . There may be some other Dems who could cross over too . But I suspect they will hold ranks other than perhaps Manchin.
    Wondergirl's Avatar
    Wondergirl Posts: 37,927, Reputation: 5430
    Jobs & Parenting Expert
     
    #33

    Sep 22, 2020, 09:00 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    exactly ........reference the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings ;or the slandering of Robert Bork forever now called 'borking ' a nominee.
    I would like to see the comparable example.
    You had said it, thus I responded.

    tomder: if nominated ,she will be slandered as the left is wont to do to conservative nominees .
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,741, Reputation: 342
    Ultra Member
     
    #34

    Sep 22, 2020, 09:11 AM
    And as the right does to a centrist or left-leaning nominee.
    still waiting
    Wondergirl's Avatar
    Wondergirl Posts: 37,927, Reputation: 5430
    Jobs & Parenting Expert
     
    #35

    Sep 22, 2020, 09:41 AM
    Quote Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    still waiting
    The birther slander, Obama accused by conservatives of not being born in the US. Elizabeth Warren derisively called "Pocahontas" by conservatives. The Pizzagate conspiracy theory slandered Hillary Clinton.
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,281, Reputation: 10853
    Expert
     
    #36

    Sep 22, 2020, 10:10 AM
    Pretty simple. Repubs have the political power to fill a seat and they will either do so before or after they face being swept from office. We've seen this movie before so why the exploding heads by dems? Repubs have promised this for awhile so here it is while dems want to mourn a fallen icon. Cry later dems, make 'em pay at the election like was planned since the dufus took office and make him a one term president the way the tried to do with Obama.

    Getting Joe and dems in power is the best reaction to repub shenanigans. If this latest antic doesn't fire up the dems nothing will, and the dufus would have destroyed both parties.
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,741, Reputation: 342
    Ultra Member
     
    #37

    Sep 22, 2020, 01:05 PM
    ok I'll address them .
    the name calling ....I'll equate that as no more than what Kennedy and other Dems said about Bork during confirmation hearings .
    Robert Bork’s America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens’ doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists would be censored at the whim of government, and the doors of the federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for whom the judiciary is often the only protector of the individual rights that are the heart of our democracy.
    Birthers were the worse of your charges . As a conservative I was there debunking it if you recall.
    Alt Right I completely disassociate with them Pizza-gate was silly .

    Not one of your 3 examples compares to parading a conga line of false accusers to the Senate chamber to smear an associate Justice nominee . That goes for both Kavanaugh and the ridiculous spectacle that the Dems pulled on Clarence Thomas with the debunked Anita Hill accusations .
    Athos's Avatar
    Athos Posts: 531, Reputation: 55
    Senior Member
     
    #38

    Sep 22, 2020, 01:37 PM
    Quote Originally Posted by tomder55 View Post
    Not one of your 3 examples compares to parading a conga line of false accusers to the Senate chamber to smear an associate Justice nominee . That goes for both Kavanaugh and the ridiculous spectacle that the Dems pulled on Clarence Thomas with the debunked Anita Hill accusations .
    Just to clarify - your opinion is just that - an opinion.

    Kavanaugh's accusers have never retracted their accusations.

    Anita Hill likewise. The right (David Brock) wrote a book condemning Anita Hill and later confessed it wasn't true - just character assassination. He apologized to Hill.

    Thomas wrote his own book calling Hill an incompetent and a liar and three other women who made similar claims against Thomas were characterized in his book as "bad employees". Thomas' wife made that bizarre phone call to Hill years later.

    You hardly have the high road here, tom, just another road where you're repeating unfounded charges. Then there's pizzagate, birthers and Pocahontas which you haven't defended. Those latter three have been proven!
    tomder55's Avatar
    tomder55 Posts: 1,741, Reputation: 342
    Ultra Member
     
    #39

    Sep 23, 2020, 04:30 AM
    I did not set out to defend . I use name calling all the time . I don't call Warren Pocahontas . I call her the blond hair blue blue eyed native American .Birther nonsense I debunked when it was an issue
    here is what I wrote here is 2008 :
    Regarding Obama's birth certificate ;


    Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. CodeSec 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth":

    • Anyone born inside the United States
    • Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
    • Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
    • Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
    • Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
    • Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
    • Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
    • A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.

    So even if the evidence shows that he was born outside the US and his Hawaii birth certificate was a fraud ;he would still be qualified .
    https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showth...96#post1349896


    Anita Hill was a liar . I don't care if Kavanaugh's accusers still hold their position. I'm sure if Trump nominated another male there would be a conga line of accusers also .

    The specific thing I challenged was the charge that "As the right does to a centrist or left-leaning nominee." after I said the left smears Republican nominees to the court . It had nothing to do with the politics of a Presidential election . I'm more than willing to concede that smears and innuendo has been a part of the Presidential selection process since the election of 1800 . What is new is the smears against SCOTUS nominees . That did not happen until Bork and the Dems have made it more personal every Repub selection since . Let's not pretend that the left fears a big majority originalist court because they have used the courts as a pseudo-extension of the legislative branch for years .
    talaniman's Avatar
    talaniman Posts: 54,281, Reputation: 10853
    Expert
     
    #40

    Sep 23, 2020, 06:30 AM
    So what? Name calling is a grand tradition carried to great heights by this dufus to include everybody he deems fit. Get over it! Doesn't matter who started it, or why since obviously it's here.

Not your question? Ask your question View similar questions

 

Question Tools Search this Question
Search this Question:

Advanced Search

Add your answer here.


Check out some similar questions!

Ruth h lee watercolor [ 2 Answers ]

I have a watercolor that came through the family that is of a fishing village with a sign that says Ask for Maria. It was done by Ruth H Lee. I was just wondering what the approximate value would be. Thanks!

Babe Ruth Collectibles [ 2 Answers ]

What is the value of a set of books from Quaker Oats,How to throw curves;How to play infield;How to play outfield;How to knock home runs.tips by Babe Ruth?

Babe ruth [ 2 Answers ]

How much is my golden babe ruth card

Babe ruth [ 3 Answers ]

I have a topps 2001-2002 babe ruth card #tn30 I'm just curious if it is worth anything


View more questions Search