Comments by "Joe Blow" (@JoeBlow_4) on "Washington Post" channel.

These clowns are sealing their fate for 2020. Trump pulls their strings like puppet master. It's so fun to watch.
21
problem was they were in building 2 which is a "gun free zone", so gun control certainly contributed to their deaths.
16
DeWayne Craddock. 40 year old black employee, a registered democrat who was shooting in a "gun free zone". Seems that gun control resulted in the deaths of a lot of people. This story will disappear because he was black and a democrat and didn't use an AR-15 but used a .45. Nothing to see here, be on your way.
10
The left clowns have sealed their fate for 2020. Prepare for Trump for four more. It's astounding how these asshats can't get out of their own way.
6
It's not the same. In 2016, when Obama was president, he didn't have the Senate. Trump has the Senate. And BTW, there were NO instances before Obama's presidency (since at least 1900) of the president not nominating and/or the Senate failing to confirm a nominee, in a presidential election year. Since 1900 there have been NINE justices appointed in an election year by the sitting president. That is how it ALWAYS has been done. Obama's non-appointment was the anomaly, not the norm. He tried and failed to get his guy in. Trump will try and we'll see if he has the votes.
5
Today's vote is second only to the day Trump won. I never get tired of liberal tears.
4
Can't wait to see this asshat against Trump. It's going to be brutal.
3
@thedebate4836 The left of today is not the liberal you're talking about. The left of today are Marxists bent on destroying the country.
3
@MrTStat His point was the "woke" people only question Christians as to whether their beliefs will color their rulings. Jews don't get asked that. "Justice should not depend on the judge you get, but on what the law requires." "A judge that likes every ruling he or she makes is not a good judge, I'd argue that's a terrible judge. A good Judge will not like every decision he or she makes because the law will not always follow his or her opinions, and a judge should not draw attention to itself, but apply the law" - Antonin Scalia
3
@Sally Brookner "A judge that likes every ruling he or she makes is not a good judge, I'd argue that's a terrible judge. A good Judge will not like every decision he or she makes because the law will not always follow his or her opinions, and a judge should not draw attention to itself, but apply the law." - Antonin Scalia (Her Mentor).
3
@thedebate4836 The problem is though, they are leading your party. it is their agenda that is being promulgated, not the mainstream liberal ideals. Read the Black Lives Matter manifesto on their home page. They are looking to do away with the nuclear family. They are avowed Marxists and are proud of that fact. Antifa burning cities isn't doing moderate liberals any favors.
2
@L Franco not to the Dems. They'll sweep this under the rug in two days.
2
The Crypt keeper here needs to tighten those dentures before speaking.
2
Deep State Cope harder.
1
@nunya busiess Sorry that you can't handle differing opinions snowflake. Move somewhere where they don't allow divergent thought. Most people aren't afraid of people who think differently then them.
1
Deep State Cope harder.
1
Deep State Free speech is an American God-given right, not a Russian one nitwit. So get back in the basement and yell upstairs for your mom to make more mac and cheese. Leave the debating to us grown ups.
1
Kwum aix 400 years? Apparently you can predict the future until 2189? Just teasing. The SC has been around for 231 years.
1
@stevemack7110 You know that no one believes that. But I truly wish you the best. I mean that. I really mean that. Trump will trounce Bernie.
1
@richlopez5896 They don't have anyone close to beating Trump. I'm guessing they lose the house as well with all these socialists.
1
Thoughts and prayers to all the crisis actors who will be out of work by tomorrow because the shooter, DeWayne Craddock is a black 40 year old registered Democrat who used a handgun.
1
@webx135 It's not a justification, it's a fact. It's how it has ALWAYS been done. Obama was the odd-man-out. There is no justifiable reason Trump should NOT nominate. ALL of his predecessors did, including Obama. The problem for Obama was he didn't have the Senate votes to get what he wanted. Trump does.
1
@thedebate4836 It's definitely a choice one should think about instead of merely taking a cursory glance at things. These are important matters.
1
@thedebate4836 Some brother. That's a bit over the top. But clearly, the dems have lost their collective minds. No offense intended.
1
mrsme1234 It was only a matter of time before this horseshit started being spouted. Nice job.
1
and a black registered democrat shooter. This will be gone by tomorrow.
1
@L Franco my black friends are republican.
1
Either Amy Barrett or Joan Larsen would be great. So the short list is about 5 or 6, but I'm hoping it's one of those two. I hope it's not Britt Grant or Allison Eid, but if they're the options, they're better than a leftist.
1
@LightInTheIgnorance I support doing away with Roe v. Wade because it was overreaching and an improper interpretation of the Due Process Clause. I'm not addressing whether abortion should or shouldn't be legal. The decision was a bad decision because it was too broad as well. The majority argued that the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment provided a "right to privacy" that protects a pregnant woman's right to choose whether or not to have an abortion. It was a stretch to use the right to privacy. Also, it didn't take into account the rights of the unborn. Ruth Bader Ginsburg hated Roe v. Wade. She said many times it was too sweeping. Clinton almost didn't nominate her because he heard feminists didn't like her. She said it was breathtakingly broad and counter-productive. People now want to rewrite history but liberals did not want her on the bench. Barrett will get the same attention in the beginning until she makes some ruling the left can live with (like Roberts lately), and this will blow over.
1
@LightInTheIgnorance I didn't think you did, I merely wanted another position to be able to be seen in the thread.
1
@Leehamism It isn't questioning one's beliefs that is being pointed out here. It is in that line of questioning, they are insinuating the person will make legal rulings based upon their religious beliefs which is antithetical to being a judge. Judges ALWAYS have to make rulings based upon the law that might be against their personal religious beliefs. The OP is suggesting that the left always does this to Christians but not to potential judges of other faiths. Christians are often required to remind them that they will rule based upon law not their personal beliefs but never once has a Jewish person been asked "Will your adherence to the Sabbath affect rulings you make involving that day?, or some such religious based question. The left suggests that Christians are always tempted to let their personal beliefs color their jurisprudence.
1
@whiteyobanion1104 Religious people can be on the court, they merely can't make rulings based upon their beliefs. That is why we have a Constitution. "It is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favors." -George Washington "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams "We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Our constitution was made for a moral and religious people... it is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." -John Quincy Adams "The God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?" - Thomas Jefferson "We Recognize No Sovereign but God, and no King but Jesus!" - John Adams "The God who gave us life gave us liberty. Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God?" - Thomas Jefferson There are hundreds more quotes demonstrating the religiosity of the founders, they just knew to separate their beliefs from political duty. So you can't suggest the founders "would disapprove".
1
@Leehamism The reason Ginsberg was against Roe v. Wade wasn't for religious reasons, even though she was religious. It was because she thought it was overreaching and counter-productive. In fact, Clinton almost did not nominate her because feminists didn't like her. Now people want to canonize her as some Roe v. Wade flag bearer. She HATED Roe v. Wade, as do I, not because of abortion, but because it is bad law. It was a misinterpretation of the "right to privacy" in the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. Neither Ginsberg nor I, nor probably Barrett, dislike Roe v. Wade because of abortion; we dislike it because it wasn't reasoned properly. /opinion.
1
@ai5shaa or that having a dead body in your trunk and holding Glover's money might mean you're in it deeper than you let on.
1
@Sinn3r1 I think she was fired when they found Fernandez Bowman's body in the trunk of her car. She said she didn't know him but he was allegedly the brother of an "associate" of Glover's.
1
@puddlemini The request to investigate the Bidens was an appropriate request. Yes, Biden is a political foe, but also his son was in the employ of a corrupt company and was being paid $83,000 a month to be on the board of a company all while knowing NOTHING about the oil industry. Why does no one comment on Joe's threat to withhold BILLIONS of dollars of aid unless Ukraine fired the prosecuter investigating the company employing his son? He publicly BRAGGED about threatening to withhold the money unless Ukraine stopped investigating his son's employer. Again, his SON was paid $83,000 a MONTH by an oil company with a corrupt owner and he knew NOTHING about the oil industry. The president has not only a right, but a DUTY to investigate that. The fact Biden is an adversary is only important if you assume it's the ONLY reason Trump was investigating. This can of worms for Biden just opened, believe me. The senate will tackle this issue head on and Joe is in some serious trouble.
1