Author Topic: Amy Barrett Discussion Thread  (Read 8494 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online 8manpick

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 19129
  • A top quartile binger, poster, and friend
    • View Profile
Re: Amy Barrett Discussion Thread
« Reply #25 on: October 01, 2020, 11:45:34 AM »
That is phenomenal
:adios:

Online star seed 7

  • hyperactive on the :lol:
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 63770
  • good dog
    • View Profile
Re: Amy Barrett Discussion Thread
« Reply #26 on: October 01, 2020, 12:18:52 PM »
Fantastic
Hyperbolic partisan duplicitous hypocrite

Online chum1

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 21894
    • View Profile

Online chum1

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 21894
    • View Profile

Offline sys

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 40472
  • your reputation will never recover, nor should it.
    • View Profile
Re: Amy Barrett Discussion Thread
« Reply #29 on: October 02, 2020, 02:39:27 PM »
she was apparently already infected over the summer.  i wonder if they considered that advantage when she was chosen.
"experienced commanders will simply be smeared and will actually go to the meat."

Offline bucket

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9524
    • View Profile

Offline DaBigTrain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 11636
  • stuxnet, meltdown, spectre, Bitcoin, ffChamp
    • View Profile
Re: Amy Barrett Discussion Thread
« Reply #31 on: October 02, 2020, 10:04:40 PM »
"The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks"

https://blockstream.info/block/000000000019d6689c085ae165831e934ff763ae46a2a6c172b3f1b60a8ce26f

Offline Spracne

  • Point Plank'r
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *
  • Posts: 20950
  • Scholar/Gentleman, But Super Earthy/Organic
    • View Profile
Re: Amy Barrett Discussion Thread
« Reply #32 on: October 02, 2020, 10:05:54 PM »
https://twitter.com/joshscampbell/status/1312217137964969984

Yup, no doubt. I know a guy who attend the same event for Gorsuch, and from the sounds of it there's a lot of hobnobbery.

Offline dal9

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 1782
    • View Profile
Re: Amy Barrett Discussion Thread
« Reply #33 on: October 03, 2020, 10:12:28 AM »
https://twitter.com/joshscampbell/status/1312217137964969984

Yup, no doubt. I know a guy who attend the same event for Gorsuch, and from the sounds of it there's a lot of hobnobbery.


Offline cfbandyman

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9215
  • To da 'ville.
    • View Profile
Re: Amy Barrett Discussion Thread
« Reply #34 on: October 03, 2020, 12:17:42 PM »
https://twitter.com/joshscampbell/status/1312217137964969984

Comeuppance for not following their own "let's see how the voter votes" from 4 goddamn years ago

That and straight up not taking this crap seriously since February
A&M Style: 1/19/13 Co-Champion of THE ED's College Basketball Challenge

The art of the deal with it poors

OG Elon hater with a tesla


Online chum1

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 21894
    • View Profile

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 52962
    • View Profile
Re: Amy Barrett Discussion Thread
« Reply #36 on: October 13, 2020, 01:58:35 PM »
Teacher-Scholar-Activist  :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Absolutely in Chum's BidenVoter Twitter Timeline Wheelhouse of Perpetual rage  :curse: :curse:

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 52962
    • View Profile
Re: Amy Barrett Discussion Thread
« Reply #37 on: October 13, 2020, 02:01:10 PM »
Teacher-Scholar-Activists reaching deep into the dying wish provision(s) of the RGB deathbed confessional U.S. Constitution. 


Offline puniraptor

  • Tastemaker
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 21335
  • nostalgic reason
    • View Profile
Re: Amy Barrett Discussion Thread
« Reply #38 on: October 13, 2020, 02:45:01 PM »
Aren't textualism and originalism conflicting methodologies?

Online wetwillie

  • goEMAW Poster of the WEEK
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 30240
    • View Profile
Re: Amy Barrett Discussion Thread
« Reply #39 on: October 13, 2020, 02:51:39 PM »
We got ourselves another I LIKE BEER! Moment a brewing here?
When the bullets are flying, that's when I'm at my best

Offline catastrophe

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 15101
    • View Profile
Re: Amy Barrett Discussion Thread
« Reply #40 on: October 13, 2020, 03:38:02 PM »
Aren't textualism and originalism conflicting methodologies?
They can be!

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53675
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: Amy Barrett Discussion Thread
« Reply #41 on: October 13, 2020, 03:46:05 PM »

Offline I_have_purplewood

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2740
    • View Profile
Re: Amy Barrett Discussion Thread
« Reply #42 on: October 13, 2020, 09:10:32 PM »
Fifteen minutes later, when the Kansas locker room opened its doors to the media, the Jayhawks were still crying. Literally, bawling. All of them. I've never seen anything like it, and I've seen devastated college locker rooms -- after losses in the Final Four, the national championship game -- ever

Online 8manpick

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 19129
  • A top quartile binger, poster, and friend
    • View Profile
Re: Amy Barrett Discussion Thread
« Reply #43 on: October 13, 2020, 09:17:07 PM »
ugh so cringey

https://twitter.com/kkhasissues/status/1316067910855675909

How is that even close to cringey?
Feigning being impressed that a judge nominated to the highest court can quote cases from “years ago.” Regular lawyer dorks like Spracne and Dickstone can quote cases from years ago.
:adios:

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44805
    • View Profile
Re: Amy Barrett Discussion Thread
« Reply #44 on: October 13, 2020, 10:04:27 PM »
ugh so cringey

https://twitter.com/kkhasissues/status/1316067910855675909

How is that even close to cringey?
Feigning being impressed that a judge nominated to the highest court can quote cases from “years ago.” Regular lawyer dorks like Spracne and Dickstone can quote cases from years ago.

Particularly given that she knew exactly what topics would be at hand. It isn't like there were going to be a bunch of questions about intricate property law precedent.

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44805
    • View Profile
Re: Amy Barrett Discussion Thread
« Reply #45 on: October 13, 2020, 10:06:23 PM »
That being said, from what little I saw she seemed well prepared and quoting RBG about not speaking on hypothetical cases was brilliant.

Offline I_have_purplewood

  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2740
    • View Profile
Re: Amy Barrett Discussion Thread
« Reply #46 on: October 13, 2020, 10:15:07 PM »
ugh so cringey

https://twitter.com/kkhasissues/status/1316067910855675909

How is that even close to cringey?
Feigning being impressed that a judge nominated to the highest court can quote cases from “years ago.” Regular lawyer dorks like Spracne and Dickstone can quote cases from years ago.

Particularly given that she knew exactly what topics would be at hand. It isn't like there were going to be a bunch of questions about intricate property law precedent.

So why would that make anyone cringe?  So many other things that happened today that are so more worthy of a cringe.
Fifteen minutes later, when the Kansas locker room opened its doors to the media, the Jayhawks were still crying. Literally, bawling. All of them. I've never seen anything like it, and I've seen devastated college locker rooms -- after losses in the Final Four, the national championship game -- ever

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44805
    • View Profile
Re: Amy Barrett Discussion Thread
« Reply #47 on: October 13, 2020, 10:31:39 PM »
ugh so cringey

https://twitter.com/kkhasissues/status/1316067910855675909

How is that even close to cringey?
Feigning being impressed that a judge nominated to the highest court can quote cases from “years ago.” Regular lawyer dorks like Spracne and Dickstone can quote cases from years ago.

Particularly given that she knew exactly what topics would be at hand. It isn't like there were going to be a bunch of questions about intricate property law precedent.

So why would that make anyone cringe?  So many other things that happened today that are so more worthy of a cringe.

I think he's saying the dumbing down of expectations of one of the greatest legal minds in the country is cringy, not anything she did.

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53675
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: Amy Barrett Discussion Thread
« Reply #48 on: October 13, 2020, 10:40:49 PM »
reasons I found it cringey:

1) Seemed very staged
2) It's not impressive
3) Notes and preparation aren't weaknesses
4) Republicans jerking themselves off to it

Offline michigancat

  • Contributor
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 53675
  • change your stupid avatar.
    • View Profile
Re: Amy Barrett Discussion Thread
« Reply #49 on: October 13, 2020, 10:50:01 PM »
also granted that all of these hearings are very staged and cringey but that one seemed especially bad.

I thought the conversation with Durbin was actually kind of interesting.