Chomper Higgot

China needs food, and the US controls the food China needs. China will fall back on its non interference doctrine while seeking to buy up Russian raw materials and resources. China knows Ukrainian grain is not included in any deal Russia can make.

Placing prisoners of war to act as human shields is a breach of the Geneva Convention. Treating captured Russians humanely and getting that message out to other Russian troops and Russian civilians is a far smarter play, not to exclude far more moral, and in the battle for hearts and minds morality matters.

It’s irrelevant really. She’s highly qualified and she’s nominated.

The Constitution places the nomination of appointees to the SCOTUS firmly in the hands of the President. This President made a campaign promise to appoint a highly qualified black female to the SCOTUS, he’s done exactly what he he promised he would do. The histrionics from the other side of the house is where you’ll find your ‘partisan’ pantomime. I have no problem holding a whole party to account for behavior the whole party supports.

And he kept his campaign promise.

I’m quite certain he’s right now considering his future. Perhaps Biden will get the chance to nominate a second highly qualified judge to the SCOTUS.

I was wondering who that GOP pantomime performance was aimed at, now I know.

Spare a thought for the guy who gets to tell Putin: https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-says-it-has-destroyed-large-russian-landing-ship-2022-03-24/

Thank you Madeleine for your life of public service. RIP.

There is no such thing as the objectively best qualified person for the job. It’s in the President’s purview to choose who he wants, the party with a fondness waving the Confederate Flag, don’t like his choice.

It’s very clear that he looked at the make up of the SCOTUS and decided it needed a highly qualified Black woman on the bench. He chose a fabulously qualified candidate.

While recognizing personal budgets might be tight, maintaining a passport is probably a good investment if you believe your son might at sometime in the future wish to visit or move to the UK.

Judges will n the SCOTUS are not subordinate to anyone. Your wish for the future is on its way.

No more so than Stacey Abrams. What a girl, what a fantastic fight for democracy?!

selection has been race/gender biased since the founding of the SC?! But of course, other people’s gender is another one of those fragility trigger things.

Biden is keeping a campaign promise to appoint a Black woman to the SCOTUS. He won the election with that promise: https://www.reuters.com/world/us/retiring-us-justice-breyer-appear-with-biden-white-house-2022-01-27/

Can you point me to your objections to the last two appointees, one of whom was clearly an over emotional alcoholic with a secret benefactor paying off his huge gambling debts, you might remember him sobbing in outrage at being questioned in the Senate. The other had to be schooled on basic points of constitutional law, a bit of a worry for a SCOTUS judge.

Here’s what he actually did. He nominated a black woman to the SCOTUS, and in doing so triggered a predictable response from the same people who are gerrymandering to reduce the voting rights of minorities pulling books discussing race out of school libraries. Nobody who is not triggered to respond with predictable fragility on matters of race are in the least bit bothered by this appointment.

Not just the resentment, the fragility too.

Welcome on board to the fight for a SCOTUS more representative of the general population. Expanding the number of judges would be an opportunity to achieve more diversity, I’m all for it. Expand the SCOTUS.

I don’t recall you complaining at all during the last three appointments. Despite clear evidence of the corruption you speak of and ample evidence of other reasons not to appoint.

I’m waiting to to pop the cork on a single malt.

It’s perhaps not a good idea to raise the point of female nominees to the SCOTUS being unqualified. The last female appointee was a clear example of lowered standards.

Clearly you care.

Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson brings to the SCOTUS her experience of working as a public defender, representing the poor and those without the means to provide for their own defense council. This is experience no other sitting SCOTUS judge has and is therefore a significant contribution to the court’s makeup. The poor are the most effected by the Justice system, it is high time somebody with experience representing the poor sat on the SCOTUS bench.