New dumbed down qualifications to sit on SCOTUS

[marke]

It seems a nominee to SCOTUS must be able to avoid answering simple questions that even a third-grader could answer. Here are some possible questions that a potential candidate must be able to demonstrate he or she cannot answer:

In the context of the societal battle over transgender issues, Mrs. Blackburn asked: “Can you provide a definition for the word ‘woman’?”

It wasn’t a trick question, nor one of semantics.

---

“No, I can’t,” Judge Jackson stammered. “Not in this context. I’m not a biologist.”

Mrs. Blackburn’s query was akin to the rhetorical questions “Does a bear (sleep) in the woods?” and “Is the pope Catholic?” And it should have been just as easy for Jackson to answer — regardless of “context.”

Had a judicial nominee of a Republican president offered an equally asinine answer to a Democratic senator’s question, the left-wing late-night TV “comics” would have mined comedic gold from it — and rightly so.

But because Judge Jackson, a leftist activist judge, is the nominee of a liberal Democratic president, and her (not “their”) answer was indefensible, the late-night hosts conspicuously haven’t ridiculed it as they should have. ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel even criticized Mrs. Blackburn for having the temerity to ask the question in the first place.

So, let me help Kimmel, Stephen Colbert, “Saturday Night Live” and the others out with 20 more questions they could have jokingly suggested Judge Jackson be asked — and how she might have answered them:

• “Is that rain or snow?” “I don’t know. I’m not a meteorologist.”

• “Is that low tide or high tide?” “I don’t know. I’m not an oceanographer.”

• “Is this espresso or cappuccino?” “I don’t know. I’m not a barista.”

• “Is that a PC or a Mac?” “I don’t know. I’m not a computer expert.”

• “Is that an Android or an iPhone?” “I don’t know. I have only a landline.”

• “Is that ketchup or mustard?” “I don’t know. I’m colorblind.”

• “Is that an automatic or a standard?” “I don’t know. I’m not a car dealer.”

• “Do cattle produce beef or pork?” “I don’t know. I’m not a rancher.”

• “Is that chicken or turkey?” “I don’t know. I’m not a poultry farmer.”

• “Is that an alligator or a crocodile?” “I don’t know. I’m not a herpetologist.”

• “Is that a bathtub or a hot tub?” “I don’t know. I’m not a plumber.”

• “Is that a noun or a verb?” “I don’t know. I’m not a grammarian.”

• “Is that a crew cut or a mullet?” “I don’t know. I’m not a barber.”

• “Is that a Denny’s or an IHOP?” “I don’t know. I’m not a restaurateur.”

• “Is that bread white or whole wheat?” “I don’t know. I’m not a baker.”

• “Is that a lager or a pilsner?” “I don’t know. I’m not a brewer.”

• “Is that a cabernet or a merlot?” “I don’t know. I’m not a vintner.”

• “Is that a dog or a cat?” “I don’t know. I’m not a veterinarian.”

• “Are those boxers or briefs?” “I don’t know. I’m not Bill Clinton.”

• “Is that a ball or a strike?” “I don’t know. I’m not an umpire.” (Hat tip to Chief Justice John Roberts, of whom Judge Jackson might soon be a colleague)

The bottom line here is this: The real “science denial” today is on the left, and it has nothing at all to do with climate change.

Democrats’ science denial — encapsulated in Judge Jackson’s “I’m not a biologist” — is with respect to genetics and chromosome science.

Facebook’s faux 58 genders notwithstanding, the biological reality is that there are only two — XX and XY (i.e., female and male, respectively) — as has been heretofore unambiguously acknowledged for more than 2,500 years of recorded human history.

Judge Jackson surely knows this. As such, when she ascends to the Supreme Court — as she likely will, because of the Democrats’ Senate majority — she should recuse herself from all Title VII and Title IX sex discrimination cases since she can’t or won’t acknowledge the obvious.

 

[annabenedetti]

 

[Right Divider]

All of that and she's can't define what a "woman" is...

 

[annabenedetti]

In the context of the societal battle over transgender issues, Mrs. Blackburn asked: “Can you provide a definition for the word ‘woman’?”

It wasn’t a trick question, nor one of semantics.

It was a dumb question by Blackburn, meant for showboating, who btw can't tell the difference between the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence.

 

[annabenedetti]

 

[User Name]

It seems a nominee to SCOTUS must be able to avoid answering simple questions that even a third-grader could answer. Here are some possible questions that a potential candidate must be able to demonstrate he or she cannot answer:

In the context of the societal battle over transgender issues, Mrs. Blackburn asked: “Can you provide a definition for the word ‘woman’?”

It wasn’t a trick question, nor one of semantics.

That was a hugely embarrassing moment for the left and a perfect example of how Democrats use political correctness to hamstring themselves into a form of minority groupthink that will effectively marginalize them in politics as well.

The definition of "woman" is obviously "an adult human female." It's so simple and obvious that even a child could answer it, but Judge Jackson didn't dare say it because she has too much "LGBTQI" and other assorted letters on her brain that prevented her from thinking clearly.

This is a perfect example of how the insanity of the left, if unchecked by the left, can cause the political pendulum to swing back to the right as it searches for the middle ground of sanity.

 

[Skeeter]

Dumb politically charged questions worthy of some dodging.

 

[annabenedetti]

That was a hugely embarrassing moment for the left and a perfect example of how Democrats use political correctness to hamstring themselves into a form of minority groupthink that will effectively marginalize them in politics as well.

The definition of "woman" is obviously "an adult human female." It's so simple and obvious that even a child could answer it, but Judge Jackson didn't dare say it because she has too much "LGBTQI" and other assorted letters on her brain that prevented her from thinking clearly.

This is a perfect example of how the insanity of the left, if unchecked by the left, can cause the political pendulum to swing back to the right as it searches for the middle ground of sanity.

Why is it embarrassing for "the left?" Do you think Judge Jackson is "the left?"

 

[User Name]

Dumb politically charged questions worthy of some dodging.

Woman = adult human female is so politically charged that it must be dodged? Seriously?

 

[Skeeter]

The definition of "woman" is obviously "an adult human female." It's so simple and obvious that even a child could answer it, but Judge Jackson didn't dare say it because she has too much "LGBTQI" and other assorted letters on her brain that prevented her from thinking clearly.

In the context of particular statutes the definition of the term can vary. Any question for the judge is best taken in a legal context, not just informal semantics. The Judge had other reasons to answer the question with more caution.

 

[ok doser]

All of that and she's can't define what a "woman" is...

She should be forced to recuse herself from participating in any cases that hinge upon that word

 

[User Name]

Why is it embarrassing for "the left?" Do you think Judge Jackson is "the left?"

Judge Jackson is one of "the left" and a prominent one of them at the moment, being in the spotlight because she has been nominated to the Supreme Court. Middle America will see it and be embarrassed for them, but they should be embarrassed for themselves.

 

[Right Divider]

She should be forced to recuse herself from participating in any cases that hinge upon that word

Or ... maybe... we can just find someone qualified for all cases.

 

[User Name]

In the context of particular statutes the definition of the term can vary. Any question for the judge is best taken in a legal context, not just informal semantics. The Judge had other reasons to answer the question with more caution.

Then she could have said, "In informal semantics, a woman is an adult human female." Problem solved. And you don't have to be a biologist to say it.

You guys are overthinking this. It will come back to haunt you.

 

[annabenedetti]

Judge Jackson is one of "the left" and a prominent one of them at the moment, being in the spotlight because she has been nominated to the Supreme Court. Middle America will see it and be embarrassed for them, but they should be embarrassed for themselves.

What are her defining positions which place her on "the left?" And where does that place start for you? Just left of center, or radical left?

 

[ok doser]

What are her defining positions which place her on "the left?"

She was nominated by Joe the Rapist

duh


And she's a cheerleader for child pornography and pedophilia, which is a defining position of the left today

 

[User Name]

What are her defining positions which place her on "the left?" And where does that place start for you? Just left of center, or radical left?

She is a face of the left at the moment for no other reason than she has been nominated by a Democratic president to replace the liberal justice for whom she served as a clerk on the Supreme Court.

She's also on the left because she cannot define the word "woman," and only a brainwashed lefty would be unable to do that.

 

[annabenedetti]

She is a face of the left at the moment for no other reason than she has been nominated by a Democratic president to replace the liberal justice for whom she served as a clerk on the Supreme Court.

Now she's "the face of the left?" So you don't have any defining positions you can give me which place her on the left?

Ted Cruz telling her “I think you’re the only Supreme Court nominee in history who has been unable to answer the question,” when she was the only Supreme Court nominee in history asked this question, when so recently Judge Coney Barrett couldn't even name all five freedoms in the First Amendment is so indicative of the difference between the two confirmation hearings.

Do you not see Blackburn tossed out a gotcha question, meant to provide red meat to the transphobic conservative base and Judge Jackson could see this? I guarantee even if she answered the question satisfactorily for the right, it wouldn't sway a single GOP senator to vote for her who wasn't already going to vote for her.

 

[User Name]

Now she's "the face of the left?" So you don't have any defining positions you can give me which place her on the left?

I said she is "a face of the left" at the moment for obvious reasons.

Do you not see Blackburn tossed out a gotcha question, meant to provide red meat to the transphobic conservative base and Judge Jackson could see this?

The simple definition of the word "woman," which everyone knows anyway and for which there is no point in pretending that one doesn't know, is not "transphobic." Wow.

I guarantee even if she answered the question satisfactorily for the right, it wouldn't sway a single GOP senator to vote for her who wasn't already going to vote for her.

Probably, but if she had simply answered the question straightforwardly she would have avoided much embarrassment for herself and for everyone who is left of center politically. Instead, by avoiding the question and pretending that she couldn't define a simple word, Judge Jackson gave Sen. Blackburn exactly what she was hoping to get!

 

[Skeeter]

Judge Jackson gave Sen. Blackburn exactly what she was hoping to get!

Blackburn and others were hoping to get either that or a quote to use back against trans supporters. Even Judge Jackson said "a woman is not a male who thinks he is a woman".