MovieChat Forums > Ketanji Brown Jackson Discussion > Critical Race Theory, Cool with Child Po...

Critical Race Theory, Cool with Child Porn, and Doesn't Know What a Woman Is...

posted 3 years ago by Connie93 (826)
12 replies | jump to latest

I thought Ketanji was nice...at first. But when they found that quote on Critical Race theory, I knew we were dealing with a woke woman, with an ideology unsuited to the highest bench in the land.

Her shameful defense of letting a young gay pedophile get off was repugnant.

And her refusal to define what a woman is...well, I was done with her totally at that point.

Ketanji was only selected because she ticks the black box and the woman box, but she has neither the judicial temperment or record to be a justice on the Supreme Court.

I would vote for NO, and I hope enough Demoncrats will do the same to make sure that this threat to America's future does't get a life time appointment on the court.

[–] Ranb (9633) 3 years ago

Is she bursts into tears and proclaims that she likes beer, will that make her good enough for you?

[–] Connie93 (826) 3 years ago

I didn't like Kavanaugh either....he wasn't supreme court material in temperment. Not sure about his judicial record/philosophy...but that was embarrassing too

[–] AnubisRaydeen (7897) 3 years ago

No. But bursting into tears for anything at all will solidify her as "amazing and qualified" among the Left. Emotions being what fills their sails.

I think there are way worse candidates. I can look past most of Katanji's bad positions but not her stance of Critical Race Theory. That one is bad. It's a shame. The next one will likely be less qualified still.

[–] Leodicaprio (6426) 3 years ago

I mean one candidate did burst into tears multiple times and it wasnt the left wing one.c are to try again clown?

[–] Ranb (9633) 3 years ago

So the same liberals who criticized Kavanaugh for crying will approve of Jackson crying? I don't think so.

[–] liscarkat (18410) 3 years ago

She's checking off woke boxes. When she has said everything the left wants her to say, she'll be nominated. Let's hope she'll be a proper justice and not just a lib puppet.

[–] Devilman (448) 3 years ago

Welcome to 21st Century America were the definition of humans in the next few years will be "The Biological Godless Robot"...we're doomed.

[–] ducksoup (3933) 3 years ago

"But when they found that quote on Critical Race theory," which was totally unobjectionable, in context:

"I also try to convince my students that sentencing is just plain interesting on an intellectual level, in part because it melds together myriad types of law — criminal law, of course, but also administrative law, constitutional law, critical race theory, negotiations, and to some extent, even contracts. And if that’s not enough to prove to them that sentencing is a subject is worth studying, I point out that sentencing policy implicates and intersects with various other intellectual disciplines as well, including philosophy, psychology, history, statistics, economics, and politics."

But Ted Cruz isn't a real legislator, he's just a gotcha guy. Ought to comb any academic work of his, I bet it's just thinly veiled layers of plagiarism, like a Napoleon pastry.

I mean look at the abortion of a quote he was unembarrassed to be photographed with that he pulled out on the Senate floor. Disgusting.

[–] Connie93 (826) 3 years ago

critical race theory has no place in any context.

It is TOTALLY OBJECTIONAL.

[–] ducksoup (3933) 3 years ago

>ted cruz has no place in any context

FTFY.

[–] Connie93 (826) 3 years ago

he was elected to the senate. and he can be voted out.

A supreme court appointment is A LIFETIME APPOINTMENT!

She's not lifetime material. She's not even 5 years material.

She's: I've seen enough, and I never want to see or hear from you again!

[–] ducksoup (3933) 3 years ago

I haven't been paying attention to these hearings, so I really can't respond to the rest of it. But in terms of that MISQUOTE (and let's call it what it is), it is typical behavior from Ted Cruz and his ilk, and it is not worth citing as evidence of anything except pure laziness. If you can't find a real issue, make something up. That's exactly what he's doing here. I can't understand why anyone would fall for it, as you apparently have.