What type of person accepts the nomination under these circumstances?

[olegramps]

The type of person that has the same character as the person who nominated her. None! She is willing to take part in one the most atrocious and outrageous abuses of power that we have will ever experience. The Republicans who are sitting on the committee have show that don't have a shred of decency. They blocked the nomination of every judgeship by Obama and have flooded the courts with extreme right wing radicals who have lifetime appointments and then blocked the his Supreme Court nomination. They talk about the fear of the Democrats expansion of the court, which could only be done with congressional approval, while they are intent on packing the court with with extreme right right ideologues. Hypocrisy is their concept of virtue and unbridled power their god.

[CrispyQ]

1. Gorsuch is just as bad, IMO. -nt

[olegramps]

16. To listen to the Committee Republicans extol her virtue is disgusting and nauseating.

I can only hope that the young people who will inherit this disaster will have the fortitude to restore the honor of our nation that the Republicans have sacrificed to their lust for power.

[drmeow]

36. Agree!

I felt that way at the time. Ambition trump's ethics (no pun Intended).

[Skittles]

54. I absolutely agree

he is a disgrace too

[RKP5637]

2. She and the GOP are all cut from the same hateful and ugly piece of cloth! n/t

[barbtries]

4. the republican type.

#RepublicansSuck

[Sherman A1]

8. Yup

that is precisely who.

[hunter]

5. No person of integrity would accept this nomination.

Above all, a Supreme Court Justice must be a person of integrity.

[Under The Radar]

6. Integrity, empathy and honor are weaknesses to be exploited

...in the eyes of conservatives.

[UTUSN]

7. OP's one of the Eternal Questions: How can a *decent* human ever be a Repuke?

[czarjak]

9. "If you ain't cheating, you ain't trying"? "Any means necessary" "If you can't beat 'em, cheat 'em"

Gotta give it to 'em, they cheated fair and square?

[czarjak]

10. "If you ain't cheating, you ain't trying"? "Any means necessary" "If you can't beat 'em, cheat 'em"

Gotta give it to 'em, they cheated fair and square?

[KS Toronado]

35. In their small minds, they think they are being "fair", hopefully voters will see the truth.

[Blue Owl]

11. A stooge

Not an honorable human being

[GeorgeGist]

12. Certainly not a Christian.

WWJD never entered her mind.

[KS Toronado]

44. WWJD is the question she should be asked over and over again at her confirmation hearings.

[spanone]

13. the person they nominated.

[Mariana]

14. A Christian who believes God wants her to implement his will. nt.

[patphil]

32. Her kind of Christian likes to have God implement her will.

She's all too willing to mold God into her likeness, so she can claim she is doing God's work.

She's a dark one who manipulates religion to elevate her evil intentions.
Can you imagine that, if confirmed, she will actually sit in the chair RBG sat in!

Unbelievable! But, typically Republican.

[druidity33]

52. A Christian who

believes in "speaking in tongues" and the "gift of prophecy". Whaddya wanna bet she was "prophesied" to be on the SC by someone in her church? That she has already been ordained for it (so to speak). Hopefully it works in the same way the Mitt Romney Mormon President prophecy panned out.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

15. Another liar for Jesus

[KS Toronado]

38. A big AMEN!

[jalan48]

17. A greedy thing who believes Jesus wants her on the SCOTUS to do God's work.

[asiliveandbreathe]

18. So now we will have 3 SC judges with an * - just like the impeached one..

May we soon have 15 judges on the SCOTUS...

[olegramps]

23. Perhaps the concept of lifetime appointments should be fully reviewed.

The founders were men who believed in the sacredness of honor regardless of the consequences and could not imagine ideologues being elected to the court. Most unfortunately their and our faith has been misplaced. The court is rapidly losing the respect of the citizens who increasingly regard it as a partisan waste of time and its decisions easily predicted in most cases. I do believe that the Republicans are far more inclined to base their decisions solely on what is the popular Republican ideology of the day than the Democrats. For the foreseeable future it will be a totally worthless rubber stamp bureaucracy.

[asiliveandbreathe]

30. Exactly..lifetime appts should be fully reviewed - imagine a state SC

The Arizona Supreme Court ruled on Friday that it's not unconstitutional for a juvenile criminal defendant convicted of multiple crimes to be sentenced to what amounts to an aggregate prison sentence beyond life expectancy.

U.S. Supreme Court rulings restrict sentencing of juvenile defendants, including prohibiting the death sentence and mandatory life sentences without possibility of parole.

https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/arizona/2020/10/09/arizona-supreme-court-upholds-sentences-for-juveniles-beyond-life-expectancy/5950965002/

I suppose another case, when it reaches the SCOTUS again, will potentially be overturned..by * judges..

As you say - I do believe that the Republicans are far more inclined to base their decisions solely on what is the popular Republican ideology of the day than the Democrats.

[dlk]

31. When the Constitution was written, life expectancy was much shorter

For white males, it was around 38 years.

[DemDaDemDem]

41. Not for the sort of person who'd get a supreme court seat.

The wealthy, as ever, lived longer, and if you made it to 60, you'd likely make it to 75. The constitution doesn't specify lifetime terms, though. It just says that justices "shall hold their offices during good behavior." Nowhere is "good behavior" defined. I'd assume, though, that it doesn't include lying to congress...

[KS Toronado]

48. Welcome to D U! If the senate in Jan. goes after all of Hair-Doo's Judicial appointments

for lying to congress, maybe just maybe we can unpack the SCOTUS

[AlexSFCA]

49. I think good behavior means as long as they are not convicted of crime

[fleabiscuit]

56. Good behavior would be what ever congress determines it to be. nt

[Bettie]

19. Someone for whom

ethics, morals, and integrity are only expected from people they disagree with.

From what I've seen in the last twenty years or so, religion gives people an excuse to pass on actual ethical behavior because if they are lying "for god" it's A-OK.

[musette_sf]

20. A morality-challenged person.

[blueinredohio]

21. Maybe this will bring attention to her cult by the F.B.I.

[kacekwl]

22. Obviously one who has

no JUDGEMENT. Like everyone who has accepted an offer by trump.

[karynnj]

24. Artie believer in their partisan view

She believes that the direction Scalia would move the court is the correct way.

[moondust]

25. Power-hungry trash.

Naive handmaiden to amoral kleptocrats and oligarchs.

[mshasta]

26. Entitlement

Power Hungry-God tell her to do it.

[ananda]

27. A rabid sociopathic ideologue...

... nothing less

[calimary]

28. Someone hellbent on forcing a narrow and unpopular view

upon the vast majority of the rest of us.

[cp]

29. Exactly!

Very good point.

[TruckFump]

33. Repuke, Dogmatic, Husband Controlled, Forced Birther Piece of Shit.

That, IMO, is the sort of dishonest judge with an agenda that accepts the nomination.

[Texin]

34. She is an ideologue, who's stated the bench is a means to "bring about the kingdom of god on Earth."

She has also, by virtue of accepting this nomination, proved that she's a retrumplican whore. The price was a lifelong judicial bench on the highest court in the land.

[jmbar2]

37. A Dominionist Christian who believes God is commanding her

"dominionists believe that Christians “have a biblical mandate to control all earthly institutions — including government — until the second coming of Jesus.”

....

Seven Mountains Dominionism, which holds that Christians must take control of seven “mountains,” or areas of life: family, religion, education, media, entertainment, business and government. Speaking at the Texas GOP Convention in Dallas in May, Rafael Cruz claimed that God inspired the Founders to produce the Constitution, and declared that “biblical values” have made America the greatest country on earth. He encouraged Christian pastors to run for public office at every level, and called upon all Christians to exercise their “sacred responsibility” to vote for candidates who uphold biblical values.

......

https://www.texasobserver.org/dominion-theology/

[Captain Stern]

39. The type of person that can't get the nomination under any other circumstances.

Like more than a few people that have "worked" in this administration.

[somaticexperiencing]

40. Principle based governance. That's what we need and Democrats might do well to take this up...

The principles by which you run your life are important. It could be said that the higher the principle, the better or more enlightened the result. I think we all know in our hearts this is true. That is why "these truths are self-evident". That is why the principles set down by the founders of this nation were and are such gifts and have motivated so many. You know that stirring in your heart that you feel when you hear them.

The Democratic Party in general has advocated principles that the vast majority of Americans believe it for a long time now. They, however, don't necessarily do a great job of selling them. They seem to believe these don't need to be mentioned. When they are mentioned and mentioned forcefully, as at the hearings today, they may not be mentioned in this context.

The principle of principle-based government is, in my opinion, a winner in this day, and in any other day for that matter. In the end, the higher principle wins, for our very survival depends on it. And because the human heart resonates with it.

I think Democrats this year are doing a pretty good job of running on high principle. It's such a relief, after such a blatant sales job to the very worst in human nature exercised so relentlessly by conmen, thieves, and propagandists like Trump. But I think they could do better, by embracing this concept. Not in a powerless way either, mind you. I am not for that at all. The embrace of high principles actually enables you to go tougher, to hang tougher, to appeal to more people, to go as tough as you need to because these principles are so dear.

Not sure anyone will feel these ideas are different, but I think they are. They are a shift. The faster and stronger we become outspoken advocates for the high principles that really matter, like helping your neighbor or working together or playing fair or sticking to your own word, and know that high principles win, the faster we will win. I see it happening, even today, and recommend this final shift to know that high principles work. They do the job. If you hold to them and speak them out. They appeal to the human heart and the very best that exists in America. They are what lift us up. And they are what will help us win.

Call your Senators, particularly those who are Republican, and let them know that you will fight fiercely for high principles, and you expect them to do the same.

[movingviolation]

51. This should be it's own post.

So succinctly puts it. If you are not acting out of a higher principle, you're, well, a republican it seems.
They have no principles. Empty, divisive, selfish, hypoctitical,..all that. Swamp monsters all.

[Lonestarblue]

42. She is exactly where her cult trained her to be--about to get a lifetime appointment to the SC.

Once there, she can carry out her religious cult’s mission of using the legal system to establish legal precedents based on extremist religious views that reflect the views of no more than 20% of the population, if that.

[aquamarina]

43. A zealot

[fescuerescue]

45. True Believers, believe that any means necessary

is acceptable.

[jmowreader]

46. A total hypocrite

Remember, she was one of the people saying President Obama shouldn’t be allowed to choose a Supreme Court justice in the last year of his presidency. And...now here we are.

[colorado_ufo]

47. This has been my thought.

Knowing what RBG did for her and other women; knowing RBG's dying wish, dictated to her granddaughter on her deathbed; as a judge who should have respect for the highest court in the land and the position of Justice, she should have said that she was honored to be considered but felt morally obligated to delay or defer her appointment.

She immediately accepted the nomination, without hesitation. She put ambition ahead of moral stature.

They, the Republicans, held that travesty of a celebration at the Rose Garden BEFORE RBG HAD BEEN LAID TO REST, high-five-ing and hugging each other. There she stood, receiving all the ill-proffered adulation.

There is an old saying that keeps echoing in my mind: "Would she jump in her (RGB's) grave that fast?"

One thing is certain: She could never truly fill RBG's seat.

[Mr.Bill]

50. Well, the last one was

a blackout drunk serial rapist, so nothing would surprise me.

[mnmoderatedem]

53. easy answer

a republican

[intheflow]

55. Her husband told her to go for it.

She's just being a good handmaiden, effectively giving hand jobs to everyone repuke from McConnell to Trump. God knows they are all having wet dreams about her, and as smart as she is, she's too stupid to see how she's being exploited by them only because she's young with a vagina.