The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

#OccupyResoluteDesk, #OccupySCOTUS?

Posted on | January 27, 2016 | 64 Comments

by Smitty

Shall not eight years of the personal pronoun pumping pipsqueak have been enough? The price of Her Majesty’s election, despite being the least suitable person since Barack Obama, may become apparent:

While at a rally in Decorah, Iowa, on Tuesday, a reporter asked Clinton what she thought about nominating President Obama to the highest court.
“Wow, what a great idea, nobody has ever suggested that to me,” Clinton said.

Ho Lee Focaccia with turkey, avocado and mayonnaise, Batman. If the thought of listening to that anti-Constitutional jackwagon on the SCOTUS bench, getting paid to lift his leg against all we hold dear until he decides he’s bored and retires, isn’t enough to galvanize conservatives into action (and I mean more than mere blog posts) then I daresay we deserve the abuse.
It’s clear that our country is mismanaged by a homo bureaucratus infestation, where the motto is “fail upward”, but enough is enough.

via Instapundit

Category: Barack Obama, Democrats, Hillary Clinton, Instapundit

Comments

64 Responses to “#OccupyResoluteDesk, #OccupySCOTUS?”

  1. Ilion
    January 28th, 2016 @ 8:46 am

    EBL,

    Whether you intend it or not (*), you question insinuates that my position with respect to Obama, Jindal, Rubio and Cruz not being natural born citizens is merely a matter of whose partisan I am, such that if I supported, say, Cruz, I’d “conclude” the opposite (**).

    Or, to put it another way, your question insinuates that I am as intellectually dishonest as certain persons in this thread who are viciously attacking me for having stated a truth that their partisanship cannot allow.

    (*) and, since you’re not being nasty, as certain other are, I am more than willing to believe you do not intend it

    (**) Ironically (well, it’s not ironic to me, though it may be to you, and it certainly is to the fools attacking me), if it weren’t for the fact that he isn’t a natural born US citizen — and doesn’t care to discover the truth, indicating that he will no more honor the Constitution that Obama has — I’d consider Cruz to be the best available choice.

  2. Ilion
    January 28th, 2016 @ 8:53 am

    RINOs are not conservatives.
    .
    People were are “mostly just nostalgic, always a few decades behind the times” are not “ideologically conservative”; they are (mental) prisoners of “liberalism”, which is why they always cave to the leftists.
    .
    With respect to definitions, you’re trying to eat your cake and have it too.
    .
    And *Jackson* was so “small government” that he used government violence to round up half my father’s ancestors — stole their land and all they had built after accepting the inevitability of becoming civilized — and shipped them off to the wilderness.

  3. Art Deco
    January 28th, 2016 @ 10:57 am

    that you have no valid reason to believe he was born in Hawaii.

    Nothing bar that his mother, father, and maternal side grandparents were all residents of Honolulu (and the surviving documentation of that is multifarious); his long-form birth certificate issued by the State of Hawaii; the birth announcements in the Honolulu papers that week which named the hospital; the testimony of his parents’ surviving friends (among them Gov. Abercrombie), available documentation of interviews of BO Sr by immigration officialdom in 1961, etc etc etc.

    If I have no valid reason to believe he was born in Honolulu, I have no valid reason to believe anyone was born any particular place he claims to have been born.

    Quit with the pretense that there’s anything of value between your ears.

  4. Art Deco
    January 28th, 2016 @ 11:01 am

    No, the notion that Obama was born anywhere but Honolulu is a stupid internet meme, and, at this juncture, evidence of an essential unseriousness on the part of the person so promoting. That mentality finds its home among James Fetzer acolytes (re the Kennedy Assassination and 9/11), not among serious students of current affairs.

  5. trangbang68
    January 28th, 2016 @ 12:52 pm

    replacing Ginzberg or Breyer with anyone this side of Stalin wouldn’t make much difference. Replacing Scalia with any liberal would be disastrous. Kennedy also is problematic because he’s an often squishy swing vote. Another Sotomeyer or the other dyke would be bad.
    I don’t trust Trump an iota on judges

  6. trangbang68
    January 28th, 2016 @ 1:02 pm

    Obama on the SCOTUS would be Affirmative Action married to the Peter Principle

  7. Art Deco
    January 28th, 2016 @ 2:57 pm

    I think the Peter Principle was manifest already when he was chairman of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge.

  8. Ilion
    January 28th, 2016 @ 3:24 pm

    So, what you are asserting is that Mrs Obama was shilling for “a stupid internet meme” way back in 2008.
    And, I point out, once again, that this is not the actual issue, no matter how often you intellectually dishonest tools of the lefts try to make it so.

  9. Ilion
    January 28th, 2016 @ 3:26 pm

    How about you quit with the pretense that you’re anything other than a bought-and-paid leftist?

  10. Ilion
    January 28th, 2016 @ 3:54 pm

    So, *that* is your Trump card?
    Oh, that’s right. I keep forgetting — you are not intellectually honest.

  11. Finrod Felagund
    January 29th, 2016 @ 3:41 pm

    I give you facts, you respond with an ad hominem attack. Who’s being “intellectually honest” here? Not you.

    Funny how the only people here that have a problem with me are you and the leftist trolls that follow me in.

  12. Ilion
    January 29th, 2016 @ 4:14 pm

    Oh, you pitiful little hypocrite.

  13. Finrod Felagund
    January 29th, 2016 @ 4:39 pm

    More lame ad hominem.

  14. Ilion
    January 31st, 2016 @ 10:18 am

    … not only a pathetic hypocrite, but a pathetic hypocrite who seems not even to know (*) what ‘ad hominen’ means (but then, that was obvious a couple of posts ago).

    (*) though, admittedly, it may be “doesn’t care” rather than “doesn’t know”