ACB hearings

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Anybody watching?

Spartacus is on now blathering and getting his face time so we turned it off. I can't stand these things, buncha politicians pretending that a single Supreme Court Justice has anything to do with legislating health care. They act like she's going to be all-powerful, large and in charge, banning abortion, killing your grandma by taking away her health insurance, just wave her regal hand and make/repeal laws.

Now, I know that the politicians aren't stupid enough to actually think this, which means they believe their voters are stupid enough to believe it. Which also means you have to be pretty effing stupid to vote for Democrats, and they know it.
 

Kyle

Having a Beer while the world burns!
PREMO Member
Now, I know that the politicians aren't stupid enough to actually think this, which means they believe their voters are stupid enough to believe it. Which also means you have to be pretty effing stupid to vote for Democrats, and they know it.
Look no further than our resident communists MR, sappy and trannyfor proof positive.
 
Reactions: BOP

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Look no further than our resident communists MR, sappy and trannyfor proof positive.
"Court packing" is another one that makes me laugh. Democrat politicians understand that their voters are largely ignorant and uneducated on civics and the Constitution, so they can revise meanings and make crazy accusations knowing that their Democrat voters will gobble it up, puke it back up, then beg for more. And then they have the nerve to call us the dumb ones... :lol:
 

Kyle

Having a Beer while the world burns!
PREMO Member
"Court packing" is another one that makes me laugh. Democrat politicians understand that their voters are largely ignorant and uneducated on civics and the Constitution, so they can revise meanings and make crazy accusations knowing that their Democrat voters will gobble it up, puke it back up, then beg for more. And then they have the nerve to call us the dumb ones... :lol:
That's what always used to irritate me about the leftist rabble

Never an honest discussion, always silly ****ing word games.
 

Bird Dog

Bird Dog
PREMO Member
Harris and Spartacus are members of the perpetually offended......

What about the ditz from Hawaii talking about healthcare? She has clue no about healthcare...she is covered by a program no American could afford and she want to lecture us on healthcare.....
 

PsyOps

Pixelated
Still blocking me I see, Vrai.

 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
What about the ditz from Hawaii talking about healthcare?
I can't see her face without wanting to punch it. She is almost as condescending and insulting as Barbara Boxer. I don't know how these people get elected. Hawaiians must just be fetishists who like to play "Bad Child and Schoolmarm". Either that or they're all blasted on the chronic and have no idea who she even is.
 

limblips

Well-Known Member
PREMO Member
I can't see her face without wanting to punch it. She is almost as condescending and insulting as Barbara Boxer. I don't know how these people get elected. Hawaiians must just be fetishists who like to play "Bad Child and Schoolmarm". Either that or they're all blasted on the chronic and have no idea who she even is.
Well I guess that fantasy game is over for me now.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
Hawley Scolds Dems for Attempts to Bring Back ‘Religious Tests’ for Judicial Nominees

During the Monday hearings, Hawley condemned these and other instances of judicial nominees being questioned about their faith.

“This is an attempt to broach a new frontier, to set a new standard—actually, it’s an attempt to bring back an old standard that the Constitution of the United States explicitly forbids,” Hawley said. “I’m talking about a religious test for office.”

Hawley added that Senator Feinstein, in Barrett’s 2017 hearing, employed “the very terminology of anti-Catholic bigotry current in this country a century ago. She wasn’t alone. Other senators on this committee [in 2017] asked you if you were an ‘orthodox’ Catholic.”

In a reference to Senator Mazie Hirono (D., Hawaii,) Hawley said, “Another senator said she worried you would be a ‘Catholic’ judge if you were confirmed…I guess as opposed to an American judge.”
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
Dianne Feinstein Opens Barrett Hearings With a Great Big Whopper About Preexisting Conditions


Feinstein asserts that more than 130 million Americans will lose preexisting coverage if the ACA is repealed. Not all Americans will lose preexisting condition coverage. In the 1996 Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPPA), employer-based plans were barred from denying coverage or charging higher premiums based on health status, including gender and age.

It also put into place rules about preexisting conditions. Pregnancy is no longer allowed to be considered one, and it only applies to conditions if a person is diagnosed within the six-month period before obtaining coverage. The maximum waiting period to receive coverage for the condition is 12 months. If you change employers, as long as the coverage gap is not greater than 63 days, it is illegal to impose any preexisting coverage exclusion on your new employer plan. COBRA coverage is also mandated if you leave or lose the job that provided insurance to ensure you can cover any gap greater than 60 days at your employer’s full negotiated premium.

Further, according to FactCheck.org, 6% of Americans get their insurance through the individual market. Meanwhile, 49% get their insurance through employer-based plans. Those Americans would immediately receive the protections under HIPPA for preexisting conditions. HIPPA could easily be amended to eliminate waiting periods in the six-month window that currently exists. The remaining Americans are covered by Medicare and Medicaid, which have their own rules regarding coverage.


Repealing Obamacare would also allow insurance companies to provide a wider range of plan designs. Lower-cost catastrophic plans with discounts for preventative care or prescriptions may be attractive for many younger individuals. The ACA makes those unavailable today outside of short-term gaps. More choice seems like a better way to insure more people.
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
wow sexist much ......


We’re getting a lot of hot takes from progressives today on the first day of confirmation hearings for Judge Amy Coney Barrett before the Senate Judiciary Committee. We’ve heard that Barrett is a “shameless careerist” who lobbied for the gig and some nonsense from a “very gay” feminist about Barrett’s “clown car vagina.”

Now we’re hearing from a lawyer that Barrett’s wardrobe is “inappropriately casual” and a man would never be able to get away with breaking the norms set for the profession.


 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
This is one thing that you'd think our lawmakers would grasp since at least the days of Kennedy - a good lawyer or judge doesn't or shouldn't inject their personal or religious feelings into how they do their job - ESPECIALLY judges. I'd like to ask some of these Senators who were lawyers - ever defend someone you personally thought was guilty? Ever prosecute someone you personally felt was probably innocent? If you haven't, you likely sucked as a lawyer but if you HAVE you MUST KNOW that personal sentiment has nothing to do with your ruling or actions.

Journalists used to do this, but they abandoned that decades ago.

Died in the wool liberals - ones that were NOT lawyers or at least, practiced law before a judge in a courtroom - and their friends in the press - cannot separate the two. They cannot understand how you can be elected Senator or President or put on SCOTUS and leave your PERSONAL FEELINGS behind and simply work within the bounds of the law, because for one, they cannot grasp the idea. For another - I think they have contempt for law they don't like. If George W. Bush ever muttered that he thought prayer in school was a good idea then GASP, he was going to FORCE kids across the nation to pray to his God.

Or maybe - they DO. They do know. In which case they're lying through their teeth when they say some of this stuff.
 

SamSpade

Well-Known Member
"Court packing" is another one that makes me laugh. Democrat politicians understand that their voters are largely ignorant and uneducated on civics and the Constitution, so they can revise meanings and make crazy accusations knowing that their Democrat voters will gobble it up, puke it back up, then beg for more. And then they have the nerve to call us the dumb ones... :lol:
Except of course a few of those working for Joe who KEEP SAYING THAT NOMINATING and approving a justice for SCOTUS "in an election year" is "unconstitutional" and constitutes "packing" the court. This says much - they do personally believe that the tilt of the court should remain - they're enraged that a liberal justice is being replaced by a conservative one, and they say so - this is GINSBURG'S seat by God.

But it's their redefining court packing which is a blatant lie ---


He knows what it means. He does.
 

Louise

Active Member
PREMO Member
Except of course a few of those working for Joe who KEEP SAYING THAT NOMINATING and approving a justice for SCOTUS "in an election year" is "unconstitutional" and constitutes "packing" the court. This says much - they do personally believe that the tilt of the court should remain - they're enraged that a liberal justice is being replaced by a conservative one, and they say so - this is GINSBURG'S seat by God.

But it's their redefining court packing which is a blatant lie ---


He knows what it means. He does.
Welcome to the Democrat Party. It should be renamed the Deep State Plantation Communist Party. They had one of their own assassinated... his name was John Fitzgerald Kennedy. And, they killed his bro, RFK, too. Not a coincidence. Period.
 
Top