I cannot think of anyone else I find so despicable. But maybe there's a person more annoying than he. If so, discuss.

Schooomaahhhhh!!

I almost bumped into him, walknig backwards out of an elevator once. That's my claim to fame.

Turban Durban [name by M. Savage ] Very dangerous lib .

Turban Durban [name by M. Savage ] Very dangerous lib .
pro-civil liberties = pro al-Qa'eda

Schuma is so pathetic, sometimes I feel sorry for him. There are others in the House and Senate that even worse for the country I think.

Schumer is a liar and a political hack. He has no morals.

Durbin is hundreds of times worse, but he has much less power so he is not nearly as dangerous as Schumer.

Schumur is a religious bigot.

He once said that there shouldn't be anymore Catholics on the Supreme Court.

what a bigot.

Schumur is a religious bigot.

He once said that there shouldn't be anymore Catholics on the Supreme Court.

what a bigot.

... Well, it is a representive republic.

... Well, it is a representive republic.

What the hell does that reply have to do with Schumer being a religious bigot?

I think Swiftsloth is constitutionally incapable of condemning the actions of leftists scumbags.

He just can't bring himself to be honest about the left.

What the hell does that reply have to do with Schumer being a religious bigot?

The statement was--There shouldnt be any more Catholics on the supreme court. Lets take a look at the supreme court: 5 Catholics. Out of 9 judges. Thats allows the Catholic view entire Control over the supreme court, when Catholics barely make up a quarter of the population of America.

I think Swiftsloth is constitutionally incapable of condemning the actions of leftists scumbags.


Well, at laest your posts are good for a laugh, and only that. If ever you tried to apply logic to your rants, I think your head might explode.

The statement was--There shouldnt be any more Catholics on the supreme court. Lets take a look at the supreme court: 5 Catholics. Out of 9 judges. Thats allows the Catholic view entire Control over the supreme court, when Catholics barely make up a quarter of the population of America.

The catholic view? Like being anti abortion, you mean?

He once said that there shouldn't be anymore Catholics on the Supreme Court.



I thnk five is enough too.

I thnk five is enough too.

If you're going to disqualify justices because of their background when it has nothing to do with qualifications, you will never again have even an approximation of an objective confirmation process. The judiciary would be an even more politicized mess than it already is.

Funny, I can't recall where this phrase comes from, can someone jog my memory?

The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.

So for you useful idiots religious tests are okay?

Hmmm they are specifically forbidden.

wouldn't you like more Catholics like O'connor and Kennedy?

Yeah you wouldn't have a problem then would you?

Or how abot some Jews like Ginsburg?

How about some evangecals.

And swiftsloth you are a bigot as well as the other guy.

It shouldn't matter if there were 9, 0, or any other number of Catholics on the SCOTUS.










Although, coming from a Catholic background, I don't mind 5+. :D


edit...chalk it up to affirmative action. Catholics, as largely made up of immigrants, were disproportionately underepresented in American sectors of power in the past and now it's time to redress that.

The catholic view? Like being anti abortion, you mean?

To be honest, abortion isnt what concerns me. If any religious group had that much power in the SC, of course there would be much concern. Could you imagine having 5 Islamic, Athiest, Budhist, Puritans?

So for you useful idiots religious tests are okay?

By all means, point to where myself or anyone in this thread said **** about a religious test.


Hmmm they are specifically forbidden.

Wow... Would you like a cookie for that?


wouldn't you like more Catholics like O'connor and Kennedy?

No.


Yeah you wouldn't have a problem then would you?

Yes, I would.


Or how abot some Jews like Ginsburg?

Who would be leaving?


How about some evangecals.

Sure, if they get the nomination and processed.


And swiftsloth you are a bigot as well as the other guy.

You are such a reactionary, but perhaps worse so because you dont even have the common knowledge that most reactionarys have... In example--You dont call someone a bigot when he thinks his own views are well represented enough. Please, stop embarrassing yourself at life.

To be honest, abortion isnt what concerns me. If any religious group had that much power in the SC, of course there would be much concern. Could you imagine having 5 Islamic, Athiest, Budhist, Puritans?

You seem to have left one out.

The statement was--There shouldnt be any more Catholics on the supreme court. Lets take a look at the supreme court: 5 Catholics. Out of 9 judges. Thats allows the Catholic view entire Control over the supreme court, when Catholics barely make up a quarter of the population of America.

Somebody else told me they were all Episcopalians. I never bothered to check.

Anyway, there is obviously little danger of them actually behaving like Catholics. Come to think of it, there is apparently little danger of the Pope acting like a Catholic, or he would have excommunicated them all by now, for reaffirming Roe. Then His Holiness could start on the Senate.

Schumer is indeed annoying, but the distinction of most annoying belongs to Pauley Shore.

You seem to have left one out.

Which one? Note I wasnt putting any up that are already there.

Anyway, there is obviously little danger of them actually behaving like Catholics.

Indeed. Im not saying this is a political topic im going to give any serious thought to. I was simply saying that even if Schumer says stupid ****, I can kinda see where he's coming from on the one regarding there being enough Catholics on the SC. Unless he begins actually taking action to remove or prevent catholics from joining the SC, I can agree with him vocalizing the sentiment that the Catholics are very well represented, and dont need any more members on the SC.

Schumer is indeed annoying, but the distinction of most annoying belongs to Pauley Shore.

Dick Gephardt was annoying. I hated to watch the news when he came on. I'm glad he lost this last time.

Note I wasnt putting any up that are already there.

That's debatable; but what would be your problem with five "Islamics", then?

That's debatable; but what would be your problem with five "Islamics", then?

Same principle reason Im opposed to complete Catholic control. Majority control in general. Cliques are a dangerous thing when they are the majority, and the minorities views dont suite them... And as I said, Im not that concerned, but it does make me raise an eyebrow.

Same principle reason Im opposed to complete Catholic control. Majority control in general.

Didn't you explicitly say that Catholics were a minority and thus over-represented on the court?

Isn't it true you have a problem with too many Catholics on the court because you believe a Catholic worldview would then be imposed from the bench? That's how I read the statement quoted above.

Didn't you explicitly say that Catholics were a minority and thus over-represented on the court?

Catholics arent a minority. However, they can still be overrepresented by having entire vote control, voiding all other groups. I dont think 25% of the nations views should make rules that apply to 100% of the views.


Isn't it true you have a problem with too many Catholics on the court because you believe a Catholic worldview would then be imposed from the bench? That's how I read the statement quoted above.

Yes.

I cannot think of anyone else I find so despicable.


Let me guess you're a Republican/conservative /right-winger.:rolleyes:


But maybe there's a person more annoying than he.


Oh,the Oxyocondon Junkie and Michael Weiner to name only two.

Catholics arent a minority.

Well, they aren't a majority.

Anyway.

My next question for you should be intuitively obvious. But I'll ask it straight.

What is the difference, in principle, between your problem with Minority Group C having too much power, and my problem with Minority Group J having too much power?

Schumur is a religious bigot.

He once said that there shouldn't be anymore Catholics on the Supreme Court.

what a bigot.

I bet Schumer has no problem with the Jews on the court.

Schumur is a religious bigot.

He once said that there shouldn't be anymore Catholics on the Supreme Court.

what a bigot.

I bet Schumer has no problem with the Jews on the court.

To be honest, abortion isnt what concerns me. If any religious group had that much power in the SC, of course there would be much concern. Could you imagine having 5 Islamic, Athiest, Budhist, Puritans?

If they are strict constructionists when it comes to the Constitution, it doesn't matter what their religious beliefs are. This whole argument is a reflection of how politicized the judiciary has become. Apparently, the democrats can't force their agenda on the American people any other way than to have a friendly Supreme Court ready to write legislation when they can't do it themselves.

I bet Schumer has no problem with the Jews on the court.

WN ALERT!