Biden Judicial appointments

Biden nominee ignorant of Constitution

Of Biden’s 97 judicial appointments, only 5 have been white men.

Perhaps knowing enough about the Constitution to pass a citizenship test would be a better basis for choosing judges than race and gender.

18 thoughts on “Biden Judicial appointments

  1. You accuse me of “cheap shots” and then link to this gotcha questioning? The woman being attacked had a momentary brain freeze that can happen to anyone at any time. Her calm answer in response to the attack showed the intellect and temperament of a judge. And I will bet a dollar against a do-nut that she never raped anyone.

    And, trying to embarrass this particular appointee is not enough for you people. Oh no. You suggest that because Biden has appointed a large number of women they must be unqualified. Well, I will let you in on a secret. Biden thinks the Judiciary should be representative of ALL the people and has set out to make that happen. This is the reality he is trying to address. . .

    Liked by 2 people

    1. Brain Freeze? She didn’t know what Articles II and V were about. That’s not a hard question. As a potential Federal Judge, that’s like a carpenter not knowing the difference between a nail and a screw.

      If there were equally qualified candidates for those judgeships deciding the tie for diversity might be excusable, but merit must always be the first consideration. Choosing clearly unqualified judges based primarily on race and gender for a lifetime appointment is cheating the people.


      1. “Choosing clearly unqualified judges based primarily on race and gender for a lifetime appointment is cheating the people.”

        Unless they are a white man.

        It will take decades to purge the army of ideologues and incompetents that Trump put on the bench. The appointees were so bad that they had to ignore the American Bar Association recommendations in the vetting process. Where was your outrage and the massive coverage over the appointment of Matthew Petersen, Jeff Mateer, or Lawrence Van Dyke? Or the NINE judges found NOT QUALIFIED by the ABA?

        Liked by 2 people

        1. The ABA is relentlessly partisan and woke, Rejection by the ABA should be regarded as an endorsement.

          But no, a white man who could not answer basic questions about the Constitution should also be rejected.

          It is amazing even you would defend such appointments. The Constitution should be the core qualification for a Federal judge.


          1. “The ABA is relentlessly partisan and woke”

            That is an extremely stupid and ugly opinion. What a perfect little MAGA-Republican you are.

            What is amazing is how very quick you are to dismiss a person with a track record of service and success because she had a temporary brain freeze in a pressure cooker moment. I am sure you have had similar experience where something you know you knew would not come to the surface. I know I have. I said amazing. Actually, it is not. It is totally in character and to be expected.

            By the way, the ABA has reviewed here credentials and record and rated her qualified. But, I am sure you will repeat your slander and maybe add that they are “corrupt.”

            Liked by 1 person

          2. There’s your proof of the ABA’s bias.

            BTW, she had 3 “brain freezes” when questioned by Kennedy.

            That the ABA finds her qualified tells us more about them than her.


  2. RE: “Perhaps knowing enough about the Constitution to pass a citizenship test would be a better basis for choosing judges than race and gender.”

    This is perfectly normal: Elect an incompetent president, you get incompetent judges.

    Nothing to see here.


      1. You worry too much, or maybe you are a racist. Even if a black woman judge is incompetent — legally speaking — that old black magic makes her good for us.


  3. For people who are okay with a weeping, beer-swilling, blackout drunk on the Supreme Court, you sure get your panties in a twist about a woman who couldn’t answer a couple of questions that are easily answered when not sitting before a review panel.

    As for the ABA being “woke,” that isn’t the insult you think it is. Being woke is the opposite of being asleep. When you are asleep, you are in a dream state. Reality has nothing to do with what you are thinking… if you are thinking at all.

    Personally, I prefer judges who are awake, not in a blackout drunken stupor.

    Liked by 2 people

    1. There’s “woke” and then there’s “Woke”

      Wokeness is not a literal term.

      And who on SCOTUS is a heavy drinker in the last 20 years? DO you really want to grade judicial nominees by what they did in college? I’d be a bit suspicious of a nominee who didn’t like beer.


      1. Kavanaugh admitted under oath that he was a blackout drunk and “still likes beer.” How much he drinks now neither I nor you know. Personally I’m suspicious of former drunks who claim to be sober but who are so emotionally unstable they breakdown weeping at job interviews.

        “Wokeness” is not a word. “Woke” is. And it has a meaning. In the real world, it means “not asleep.”

        Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s