Poll of the Day > Report: Supreme Justice Breyer to Retire...

Topic List
Page List: 1
pionear
01/26/22 1:21:46 PM
#1:


https://news.yahoo.com/breyer-to-retire-from-supreme-court-171756901.html

Well, at least he will be replaced by a 'WOKE' justice by the Dems...?
... Copied to Clipboard!
papercup
01/26/22 1:27:06 PM
#2:


You actually think his replacement won't be held up in the senate for 2 years? lol

---
Nintendo Network ID: papercups
3DS FC: 4124 5916 9925
... Copied to Clipboard!
Revelation34
01/26/22 1:32:52 PM
#3:


Is he going to be replayed by Dreyer?

---
Gamertag: Kegfarms, BF code: 2033480226, Treasure Cruise code 318,374,355, Steam: Kegfarms
... Copied to Clipboard!
Gaawa_chan
01/26/22 1:36:39 PM
#4:


Can't wait for Trump's next appointment in 2025.

Edit: It occurred to me that someone might not realize this is sarcasm.

---
Hi
... Copied to Clipboard!
BlackScythe0
01/26/22 1:56:19 PM
#5:


Gotta do it before midterms
... Copied to Clipboard!
Zeus
01/26/22 2:12:10 PM
#6:


Considering Biden's approval numbers, I can see a justice looking for a heavily-partisan replacement to step down while Democrats still have some measure of control.

---
(\/)(\/)|-|
There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist.
... Copied to Clipboard!
pionear
01/27/22 2:34:32 PM
#7:


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/biden-promises-black-woman-nominee-to-scotus-as-justice-breyer-announces-retirement-live-updates/ar-AATcYK9

Rumor its gonna be the 1st Black Woman
... Copied to Clipboard!
Zeus
01/27/22 5:04:10 PM
#8:


I feel like there's something inherently problematic (if not racist) about specifically choosing something like that as a criteria (and even more so when broadcasting it). Ideally, you should be looking for the best candidate -- although, I realize, SCOTUS nominations (and most government posts) rarely go to the best candidate. A great case-in-point would be Justice Kagan who had zero judicial experience prior to becoming a SCOTUS justice.


---
(\/)(\/)|-|
There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist.
... Copied to Clipboard!
darkknight109
01/27/22 5:35:40 PM
#9:


Zeus posted...
Ideally, you should be looking for the best candidate
For a position like SCOTUS justice, there is no unarguably "best candidate" - just a bunch of very highly qualified candidates. If you can't find a candidate that meets the criteria of "black" (the second or third largest racial group in the US, depending on whether or not you're separating Hispanics from non-Hispanic whites) and "woman" (roughly half the population), it's not because there aren't any who are qualified, it's because you're not looking.

---
Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!
... Copied to Clipboard!
Zeus
01/27/22 5:49:55 PM
#10:


darkknight109 posted...
For a position like SCOTUS justice, there is no unarguably "best candidate" - just a bunch of very highly qualified candidates. If you can't find a candidate that meets the criteria of "black" (the second or third largest racial group in the US, depending on whether or not you're separating Hispanics from non-Hispanic whites) and "woman" (roughly half the population), it's not because there aren't any who are qualified, it's because you're not looking.

That's a facetious and generally weak argument from any number of perspectives. It posits the false idea that everybody is equally qualified -- which certainly isn't the case when you're picking somebody with relatively little experience because they check off certain boxes (be it intangibles like beliefs or something like demographics) over a far more experienced candidate simply because the more experienced candidate is the "wrong" race, gender, orientation, or creed. While there's always going to be gray room when it comes to the "best" candidate (and that can vary depending on expectations), there's obviously going to be some huge variation in terms of quality.

darkknight109 posted...
If you can't find a candidate that meets the criteria of "black" (the second or third largest racial group in the US, depending on whether or not you're separating Hispanics from non-Hispanic whites) and "woman" (roughly half the population), it's not because there aren't any who are qualified, it's because you're not looking.

I feel like this glaringly misleading statement deserves additional criticism. Women make up about 50% of the general population, but only 33% of judges. Meanwhile blacks account for 12-13% of the general population, they only make up THREE-PERCENT of judges. This is across ALL judicial positions, not just the actually relevant ones, where the numbers are going to be smaller. You're literally eliminating NINETY-NINE-PERCENT of all judges on the basis of those two criteria (which, again, are criteria that have NOTHING to do with performance). Now I want you to sit there, think about what you just fucking tried to claim, and justify within your own mind why you're not completely wrong on every conceivable level before trying to convince me of that.

---
(\/)(\/)|-|
There are precious few at ease / With moral ambiguities / So we act as though they don't exist.
... Copied to Clipboard!
darkknight109
01/27/22 6:06:00 PM
#11:


Zeus posted...
It posits the false idea that everybody is equally qualified
No, it doesn't.

Zeus posted...
which certainly isn't the case when you're picking somebody with relatively little experience because they check off certain boxes (be it intangibles like beliefs or something like demographics) over a far more experienced candidate
Who said there are no female black judges with experience? Or that all the candidates who aren't black women are more experienced? That appears to have been something you made up yourself.

Zeus posted...
While there's always going to be gray room when it comes to the "best" candidate (and that can vary depending on expectations), there's obviously going to be some huge variation in terms of quality.
No one is saying that you should be picking a low-quality candidate; in fact, my post explicitly rules that out. I've said that if you can't find a high quality candidate who is also a black woman, it's because you're not looking very hard.

The fact that you don't think there are any female black judges that are qualified says a great deal about you, especially given that several names have already been floated as good candidates.

Zeus posted...
Women make up about 50% of the general population, but only 33% of judges. Meanwhile blacks account for 12-13% of the general population, they only make up THREE-PERCENT of judges.
Congratulations on identifying a big part of the problem this pick is aiming to rectify. You're so close to catching up to the rest of us now.

Zeus posted...
You're literally eliminating NINETY-NINE-PERCENT of all judges on the basis of those two criteria
99% of judges aren't qualified to be SCOTUS judges anyways, so this is just hysteria on your part.

Zeus posted...
Now I want you to sit there, think about what you just fucking tried to claim, and justify within your own mind why you're not completely wrong on every conceivable level before trying to convince me of that.
Based on previous experience, the fact that you're in vehement disagreement is actually one of the most reliable indicators I can think of that my post is correct.

---
Kill 1 man: You are a murderer. Kill 10 men: You are a monster.
Kill 100 men: You are a hero. Kill 10,000 men, you are a conqueror!
... Copied to Clipboard!
KodyKeir
01/28/22 7:03:38 AM
#12:


I think Tucker Carlson is right, we need more diversity on the court and Biden should nominate 6 people to the bench.

---
Why didn't you DODGE‽‽‽
Quoting me will trigger the profanity filter, Not Joking. I've been Scunthorped! Consider yourself warned.
... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List
Page List: 1