Obama's wife

Why do so many Republicans on here complain about Obama's wife ? Barack likes her, what else matters ?


If you want to complain about women, complain about Bill Clinton's choices. Not one looker in the whole bunch. And you can't blame him for wanting to get away from Hillary's cackling. That would drive anybody nuts, especially 24/7.

Another moochelles a tranny thread

bahahahahhahhhaa

It is now, I guess.

Black women trigger most of the posters in this Forum. The thought of a black woman SC Justice has Ted Cruz extremely triggered. Talk shit about his Father or Wife, though, and you can expect Cruz's best blow job.

Obama’s wife Barack?

Black women trigger most of the posters in this Forum. The thought of a black woman SC Justice has Ted Cruz extremely triggered. Talk shit about his Father or Wife, though, and you can expect Cruz's best blow job. Originally Posted by Chung Tran

as usual you are completely wrong. anyone with a brain would not want a minority on the supreme court or any other position just because they are a minority. or female.

they should be considered on the merits alone and if they happen to be a minority, fine.

what Biden and the left are insisting on is a minority who may or may not be the best qualified just because they are a minority .. which is the very definition of racist discrimination.

if you can't see this clearly as overt racism then you either support this racist nonsense or you can't understand what is happening with this idiotic "diversity" movement.

Black women trigger most of the posters in this Forum. The thought of a black woman SC Justice has Ted Cruz extremely triggered. Talk shit about his Father or Wife, though, and you can expect Cruz's best blow job. Originally Posted by Chung Tran

Do you seriously think that Cruz or any other Republican would oppose a Black Female "orginalist, textualist"? No, they would not. This has absolutely nothing to do with color or gender.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Originalism


In the context of United States law, originalism is a concept regarding the interpretation of the Constitution that asserts that all statements in the constitution must be interpreted based on the original understanding "at the time it was adopted". This concept views the Constitution as stable from the time of enactment and that the meaning of its contents can be changed only by the steps set out in Article Five.[1] This notion stands in contrast to the concept of the Living Constitution, which asserts that the Constitution should be interpreted based on the context of current times and political identities, even if such interpretation is different from the original interpretations of the document.[2][3]
Proponents of originalism argue that originalism has historically been the primary method of legal interpretation in America from the time of its founding until the time of the New Deal, when competing theories of interpretation grew in prominence.] Originalism is an umbrella term for interpretative methods that hold to the "fixation thesis", the notion that an utterance's semantic content is fixed at the time it is uttered. Two alternative understandings about the sources of meaning have been proposed:

• The original intent theory, which holds that interpretation of a written constitution is (or should be) consistent with what those who drafted and ratified it intended the meaning to be. This is a depreciated view among originalists. Alfred Avins and Raoul Berger (author of Government by Judiciary) were proponents of this view.
• The original meaning theory, which is closely related to textualism, is the view that interpretation of a written constitution or law should be based on what reasonable persons living at the time of its adoption would have understood the ordinary meaning of the text to be. Antonin Scalia was a proponent of this view, as are Clarence Thomas and Amy Coney Barrett.

Such theories share the view that there is an identifiable original intent or original meaning, contemporaneous with the ratification of a constitution or statute, which should govern its subsequent interpretation. The divisions between the theories relate to what exactly that identifiable original intent or original meaning is: the intentions of the authors or the ratifiers, the original meaning of the text, a combination of the two, or the original meaning of the text but not its expected application.


People who actually understand this, understand that if the Supreme Court uses this theory upholding something that the people of today do not like, they use the Legislative process to change the ruling. Justices should not make law, that is left up to the people through their elected Representatives.


Liberal Justices tend to believe that it is "their" job to change the law if they think it doesn't have value in current times, according to their "feelings". Conservatives Justices, White, Black and Brown understand how the 3 branches of government work. The Legislative branch makes the law. The Judiciary ( SC ) looks at the case in front of them, reads what the Constitution says on the matter, if it does at all in which case it should leave the whole matter up to the Legislature and it applies the words as written, silently suggesting that if the people don't like what they have decided, they vote in people who will change the law.



We will now hear through meetings if the Black female will apply this long held theory or if she will apply her feelings to the case in front of her.


Nominate a Black female "textualist" and I guarantee you Ted Cruz and every other Republican will vote for her as I would.


Stop seeing color in every damn thing! It's disgusting.

Black women trigger most of the posters in this Forum. The thought of a black woman SC Justice has Ted Cruz extremely triggered. Talk shit about his Father or Wife, though, and you can expect Cruz's best blow job. Originally Posted by Chung Tran

I’m pretty sure Cruz and most of not all of the Rs in the Senate would vote for Janice Roger’s Brown to go on the USSC. Oh, wait, they did when George W Bush pushed her nomination, but she got filibustered by none other than Barack Obama and Joe Biden.

I will agree that Cruz won’t be fond of a far left black woman for the court, or any other race or gender with a similar legal background.

I’m pretty sure Cruz and most of not all of the Rs in the Senate would vote for Janice Roger’s Brown to go on the USSC. Oh, wait, they did when George W Bush pushed her nomination, but she got filibustered by none other than Barack Obama and Joe Biden.

I will agree that Cruz won’t be fond of a far left black woman for the court, or any other race or gender with a similar legal background. Originally Posted by AndyDufresne

That’s too far over his head. But it’s a low bar to begin with.

Why do so many Republicans on here complain about Obama's wife ? Barack likes her, what else matters ? Originally Posted by VitaMan

They're jealous. They have never met an intelligent woman that actually respected them, so they have no idea what it's like. Oh...plus, she's black. That really gets on their nerves. lol

That’s too far over his head. But it’s a low bar to begin with. Originally Posted by bambino

Says the guy that literally lives in a conspiracy bubble. But I thought this thread was about Obama's wife. It would take 1000 of you to equal one of her.

https://t.me/TheRealKimShady/45074

Michelle Obama comes across as being pissed off at just about everything and wants to make everyone else as miserable as she is.

I thought this thread was about Obama's wife. It would take 1000 of you to equal one of her. Originally Posted by TechPapi

Unless you measure by waist size. Then it would be 1,000 Michelle's to equal the Bambino.


Funny that the right wingers are so triggered. There has been a near de facto unanimous White Male SC since its inception, but now that a black woman is considered, it's affirmative action for an obviously unqualified choice, even though no one has been nominated yet. Y'all are scared shitless of relinquishing a Seat you feel belongs to you.

Biden should nominate Anita Hill. How great would that be? Make amends for being a bit of a Bastard to her, during the Clarence Thomas hearings, and make Thomas squirm as she takes a seat next to him. It would be great if he found another pubic hair in his Coke.

Says the guy that literally lives in a conspiracy bubble. But I thought this thread was about Obama's wife. It would take 1000 of you to equal one of her. Originally Posted by TechPapi

I think you are being rather generously low with the amount it would take...

Anyway, OP, it is obvious why they don't like her. You're not going to see any threads making fun of the oh so beautiful Barbara Bush when she was 1st lady in this forum for a reason.

They better just hope she doesn't run for president in 2024 or 2028 because I have bad news for them if she does - she will win. This country is changing whether the ignorant racist sexist dinosaurs want to accept that simple fact or not.