Active Now

DannyPetti
Discussion » Statements » Rosie's Corner » Judge amy honey girl has SEVEN children. She is one of SEVEN children. Clearly having 7 kids qualifies her to be SCOTUS justice?

Judge amy honey girl has SEVEN children. She is one of SEVEN children. Clearly having 7 kids qualifies her to be SCOTUS justice?

So does a 7-children father qualify easily too? As easily as 7-children mother?

Strange qualification. Well not for the GOP. They have their needs they wants they lusts their desires. Some spoken some un.

The more kids you have the better the chance in a GOP administration you will become a judge. Count on it.


You have to be alive I guess but no other requirements than that. Very wide open as to which form of homo saphead they choose. Looisey goosey.

Posted - October 12, 2020

Responses


  • 19938
    I believe I read that all her children are adopted.  Good for her in that respect and good for the children, but not a qualification for a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court.  If it was, Octomom (Nadya Suleman) would be RBG's replacement.
      October 12, 2020 11:58 AM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    I believe two of the seven are adopted. At least that is what one of the republican cheerleaders said when talking about how awesome she is. Fertile is good I guess. A great qualification for a woman whom you know obeys her husband and will obey her daddy dearest vicariously through the dumb cluck duck. She is dangerous and a traitor to women. Phyllis Shafly redux. Yuck. SHE SUCKS. Thank you for your reply L! :) This post was edited by RosieG at October 14, 2020 6:00 AM MDT
      October 13, 2020 5:50 AM MDT
    1

  • 19938
    I agree.
      October 13, 2020 8:22 AM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    Sad that that would replace Ruth Bader Ginsberg. What an insult to her! Thank you for your reply L! :) This post was edited by RosieG at October 14, 2020 9:30 AM MDT
      October 14, 2020 6:00 AM MDT
    1

  • 19938
    There would be very few who could fill RBG's shoes.
      October 14, 2020 9:30 AM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    Very true. But to choose her antithesis? What an insult. She fought all her life for women's rights and this amy dame will strip women of the right over their own bodies without blinking ana eye. She will also vote to repeat the Affordable Health Care Act and will feel swell doing so because she will please the dumb cluck duck. She is such a predictable obedient "good" little girl. She will be on the bench for many decades. Oh joy! Be still my heart! BAH HUMBUG! Thank you for your reply L! :)
      October 15, 2020 3:16 AM MDT
    1

  • 19938
    Well, I guess we'll have to see what she does when she's actually sworn in.  There have been many attempts to repeal Roe v. Wade, none of which have succeeded.  It is currently the law of the land as handed down by the SCOTUS which rarely reverses its own decisions.  As for the ACA, it seems that what they want to do is sever the compulsory individual requirement and leave the rest intact, but there, too, it remains to be seen what will actually occur.  Personally, I was not in favor of it being mandatory.  Buying a health care policy is something that should be up to the individual to decide.  
      October 15, 2020 9:13 AM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    I read that 20 million people who had not been able to afford health care insurance were able to afford the AHCA. That sealed the deal as far as I'm concerned. Because when the uninsured are RUSHED to the emergency room who pays for their care? You and me and everyone else. Our rates go up. I think each person should be responsible for himself and not on the dole letting others pay their way because they are lazy or cheap or selfish. So I guess we disagree. To drive a car you must have driver's license. To get health care you don't need health insurance. I don't think that's fair. Thank you for your reply.
      October 17, 2020 6:42 AM MDT
    0

  • 19938
    I'm opposed to individuals being mandated to buy ACA health insurance.  There being no universal health care, they should be able to buy whatever insurance they want, so long as they're covered.
      October 18, 2020 8:32 PM MDT
    2

  • 113301
    I see. So we disagree. Folks aren't going to be responsible for themselves if they can get away with letting others carry that burden. They are indigents looking for a free ride. Not my cuppa tea. 20 million could afford the AHCA allegedly. Elsewise why weren't they already insured. Different strokes m'dear. No worries. I think forcing people to do "the right thing" is not a bad thing. Sigh.
      October 19, 2020 2:06 AM MDT
    1

  • 19938
    As usual, we can agree to disagree.  :)  Happy Monday. :)
      October 19, 2020 6:56 AM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    Yep! :):):)
      October 19, 2020 10:56 AM MDT
    1