Anyone going to watch the Presidential debates?

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Status
Not open for further replies.

Giuliano

Well-Known Member
Aug 4, 2019
5,978
3,676
113
Carlisle
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The second most concerning thing from the debate is Biden refused to say that he wouldn't pack the court.
Why not ask Mitch McConnell about packing the court? He blocked so many of Obama's nominees for federal judge positions, it seriously impaired how the courts operated.

I was surprised that Trump bragged about how many judges he had appointed and criticized Obama for not filling the vacancies. I was surprised too that Biden didn't call him on it.

McConnell laughed about how he had blocked so many of Obama's nominees.

Mitch McConnell laughs about stopping Obama hiring judges, allowing Trump to fill courts with conservatives

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell boasted about blocking former president Barack Obama's judicial appointments, a two-year effort that allowed Donald Trump and a Republican-controlled congress to stack courts with conservative judges and create a conservative majority on the nation's high court.

Fox host Sean Hannity told the Kentucky senator that he was shocked that the Obama administration "left so many vacancies and didn't try to fill those positions".

"I'll tell you why," Mr McConnell said, laughing. "I was in charge of what we did the last two years of the Obama administration."

Mr Hannity said: "I will give you full credit for that, and by the way, take a bow."

When he took office, the president inherited more than 100 vacancies, many of them lifetime appointments. More than a quarter of all active judges sitting on appeals courts were nominated by Mr Trump.
I wonder what Trump is trying to do nominating another Catholic to the Supreme Court. There are already five (not counting Gorsuch who was raised Catholic but is now Episcopalian). If confirmed, that would mean six out of the nine would be Catholics. Talk about packing the court! It's so strange: Evangelicals support Trump more than Catholics do, but Trump's idea of a Supreme Court is six Catholics, one Episcopalian, and two Jews? Ha, and the evangelicals applaud him.
 

lforrest

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Admin
Aug 10, 2012
5,546
6,793
113
Faith
Christian
Why not ask Mitch McConnell about packing the court? He blocked so many of Obama's nominees for federal judge positions, it seriously impaired how the courts operated.

I was surprised that Trump bragged about how many judges he had appointed and criticized Obama for not filling the vacancies. I was surprised too that Biden didn't call him on it.

McConnell laughed about how he had blocked so many of Obama's nominees.

Mitch McConnell laughs about stopping Obama hiring judges, allowing Trump to fill courts with conservatives

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell boasted about blocking former president Barack Obama's judicial appointments, a two-year effort that allowed Donald Trump and a Republican-controlled congress to stack courts with conservative judges and create a conservative majority on the nation's high court.

Fox host Sean Hannity told the Kentucky senator that he was shocked that the Obama administration "left so many vacancies and didn't try to fill those positions".

"I'll tell you why," Mr McConnell said, laughing. "I was in charge of what we did the last two years of the Obama administration."

Mr Hannity said: "I will give you full credit for that, and by the way, take a bow."

When he took office, the president inherited more than 100 vacancies, many of them lifetime appointments. More than a quarter of all active judges sitting on appeals courts were nominated by Mr Trump.
I wonder what Trump is trying to do nominating another Catholic to the Supreme Court. There are already five (not counting Gorsuch who was raised Catholic but is now Episcopalian). If confirmed, that would mean six out of the nine would be Catholics. Talk about packing the court! It's so strange: Evangelicals support Trump more than Catholics do, but Trump's idea of a Supreme Court is six Catholics, one Episcopalian, and two Jews? Ha, and the evangelicals applaud him.

Packing the court means adding judges. I would take a palpist any day instead of a baby butcher.

There should be an amendment on the number of judges and term limits for Congress. Good luck with that though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bobby Jo

JohnDB

Well-Known Member
Feb 7, 2010
4,344
2,837
113
TN
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Here's a thought...

If Joe actually wins and does a repeat of Obama...
The american voters will elect republican senators and house members everywhere in an effort to stop him. Just like they did with Obama.
Then it's possible to see an impeachment of SCOTUS judges... which would make the court even more conservative than ever before.
 

lforrest

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Admin
Aug 10, 2012
5,546
6,793
113
Faith
Christian
Samuel Chase was the only supreme court justice to be impeached, but was acquitted by the Senate.

His crime, he was partisan. We need judges to be under the threat of impeachment these days.
 

April_Rose

Well-Known Member
Sep 15, 2020
8,520
7,824
113
34
Ohio
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Samuel Chase was the only supreme court justice to be impeached, but was acquitted by the Senate.

His crime, he was partisan. We need judges to be under the threat of impeachment these days.





I had to look that word up and read that a few times but now that I understand it I couldn't agree with you more.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bobby Jo

lforrest

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Admin
Aug 10, 2012
5,546
6,793
113
Faith
Christian
When did Biden pick up the word "Inshallah"? Which means "If Allah wills it"

Must have picked it up from Obama.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bobby Jo

April_Rose

Well-Known Member
Sep 15, 2020
8,520
7,824
113
34
Ohio
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
When did Biden pick up the word "Inshallah"? Which means "If Allah wills it"







I don't know but to be quite frank with you there is a lot of things about him that I do not understand. He doesn't even understand it. He's admitted it before. I don't even want to begin to understand it though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bobby Jo

Seven of Nine

Well-Known Member
Sep 28, 2020
733
636
93
North Texas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I wonder what Trump is trying to do nominating another Catholic to the Supreme Court. There are already five (not counting Gorsuch who was raised Catholic but is now Episcopalian). If confirmed, that would mean six out of the nine would be Catholics. Talk about packing the court! It's so strange: Evangelicals support Trump more than Catholics do, but Trump's idea of a Supreme Court is six Catholics, one Episcopalian, and two Jews? Ha, and the evangelicals applaud him.

I don't think a person's religion should be a deciding factor when nominating SC Justices or when voting for the President, Senators, or federal, state and local representatives. I don't want a person to be in a leadership position like these if their religious beliefs will impair their judgment and cause them to exhibit personal bias and prejudices against people they don't personally like and they don't agree with politically. They need to be politically impartial, bipartisan, and they must honor our established laws and the Constitution. They must be capable of setting aside their feelings to do what's best for the people they represent and do what's best for America. If they can't do that, then they shouldn't be elected.

I don't want one particular religious group to be promoted by the federal government, granted political influence in exchange for political support, and given special privileges/preferential treatment that other religious groups are denied. I especially don't like how Trump is coddling non-religious conservatives and conservative evangelicals in exchange for their undying loyalty to him. I don't like how these conservatives have seemingly thrown their moral convictions in the trash bin in unwavering support for Trump while simultaneously pretending that the unethical behavior of Biden and other Democrats is a serious moral issue for them. I don't want to hear "I didn't vote for a pastor when I voted for Trump," or "I didn't vote for a theologian-in-chief when I voted for Trump," or "I didn't vote for Trump because he's a saint or a choir boy" anymore either.
 
Last edited:

April_Rose

Well-Known Member
Sep 15, 2020
8,520
7,824
113
34
Ohio
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You know what I was wondering? What if Obama was still president today? Things probably would be even worse. He would probably be an advocate for BLM and if anybody disagreed with him he would probably have them put to death.
 

Giuliano

Well-Known Member
Aug 4, 2019
5,978
3,676
113
Carlisle
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Packing the court means adding judges. I would take a palpist any day instead of a baby butcher.
What language.
There should be an amendment on the number of judges and term limits for Congress. Good luck with that though.
I think it could mean either. There is no need to worry about this. Biden was being cagey at the debate. He's not in favor of packing the court. It would be lunacy to do that. I'm guessing he refused to answer it at the debate as a way of intimidating Republicans for their wanting to pack the court now while Trump is still President.

Biden gave his reasons last year for not adding more justices, and I can't see why he'd change his mind. There are radical Democrats who might like the idea, but I can't see Biden agreeing to it.

If Republicans Confirm New Justice, Scholars Say Democratic Court Packing Is Possible

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden hasn't commented publicly on expanding the court since Ginsburg's death. But he previously dismissed the idea, warning of reprisal if and when Republicans regain control.

"I'm not prepared to go on and try to pack the court, because we'll live to rue that day," he told Iowa Starting Line early in the primary race last year. A few months later, during a Democratic primary debate, Biden once again rejected the idea. "I would not get into court packing," Biden said. "We add three justices. Next time around, we lose control, they add three justices. We begin to lose any credibility the court has at all."

In remarks Sunday on the future of the Supreme Court, Biden did not discuss court packing. And on Sunday morning, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi demurred when asked whether a Democratic majority would consider expanding the court as reprisal for a late-term Trump appointment.

"Let's just win the election," Pelosi told ABC's George Stephanopoulos. "Let's hope that the president will see the light."

But other Democrats have been less reticent. "Mitch McConnell set the precedent. No Supreme Court vacancies filled in an election year," Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts wrote Friday. "If he violates it, when Democrats control the Senate in the next Congress, we must abolish the filibuster and expand the Supreme Court."

Even before Ginsburg's death, several Democratic presidential hopefuls had said they were open to the idea, including Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Kamala Harris of California, now the vice presidential nominee.
Roosevelt didn't like the Supreme Court he inherited, and he wanted to increase the number of justices. The Democrats in the Senate said no. Why would Democrats in Congress resist it when a Democratic President wanted to rig the court? They didn't think any President should have that much power. People are overreacting to this anyway. It won't be the end of the world if Trump appoints another justice to the Supreme Court. Okay, maybe the Democrats don't like it, but it's nothing to get that upset about and it's not that important that we need to change the Constitution.

You say you want an amendment? It sounds as if you don't like the current American constitution which gives Congress the right to determine how many justices there are in the Supreme Court. Biden also would be nuts to say he wanted to pack the Supreme Court -- the Democrats don't control the Senate and may not after the election -- it looks like it's going to be 50-50 to me. Why create unnecessary problems then by inflaming them?

And what are you afraid of anyway? Are you afraid the Republicans will lose control of the Senate, that Democrats will control the House and Senate along with the White House? You want to change the rules because they might win? Hmmm.

Term limits? First of all, with a lot of turnover, you have a constant bunch of inexperienced newbies. It also increases the clout of lobbyists and big money campaign fundraisers. There are already enough people in Congress who are there so they can get high-paying jobs in lobbying firms after serving a few years in Congress -- term limits would make that worse.

Lastly, why do you want to restrict who people are allowed to vote for? If they want to vote someone back into office, why shouldn't they be allowed to? It is a democracy, isn't it? Or do you mistrust the American voters? I wouldn't mind if Mitch McConnell lost his seat -- he's been there for 36 years -- but that's not my business. If the people of Kentucky want to re-elect him, I think they should be allowed to, even if I don't like him.

Biden aims to reduce the current animosity between the two parties, so I can't see him inflaming the Republicans by trying to rig the Supreme Court. What many people today don't realize is that Biden tries to get along with Republicans in a bipartisan way. I remember how he and Senator Specter conducted themselves in the heated confirmation hearing of Clarence Thomas. I thought they both were trying to keep things as calm as possible. If anything, I'd criticize Biden for being too "bipartisan" in that hearing. He agreed not to get the testimony about what movies Thomas had checked out to view. I thought the American people deserved to know what kind of movies Thomas watched.

One of my biggest problem with Biden is how he seems to want to get along with everyone. I think maybe that's why his son Hunter turned out to be someone who embarrassed his father. He can be tough, yes; but that's only after he's tried to get along with someone and the other person shows no signs of wanting to cooperate.
 

Seven of Nine

Well-Known Member
Sep 28, 2020
733
636
93
North Texas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You know what I was wondering? What if Obama was still president today? Things probably would be even worse. He would probably be an advocate for BLM and if anybody disagreed with him he would probably have them put to death.

Barack Obama can't be the President today because he's already served two presidential terms. And no, he wouldn't put anyone who disagreed with him to death. He was in the Oval Office for eight years and he endured the taunts of making him a "one-term President" and racist remarks referring to him as a monkey and his wife as an "ape in heels." He showed himself to be a man of integrity with one wife and two daughters who he fathered with his one wife. He didn't have any extramarital affairs, no porn star or playboy model mistresses, no forced legal settlements, and no sex scandals, such as paying off a mistress, bragging about forcibly grabbing women between their legs or watching naked and half-dressed young girls backstage of beauty pageants. As far as I'm concerned, Obama is an honorable man and he upheld the integrity of the presidency.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Giuliano

MattMooradian

Well-Known Member
Apr 3, 2020
196
140
63
MUNSTER, Indiana
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I ended up watching most of the debate. Primarily to see for myself if all the stories of Biden being neurologically impaired were true. He spoke fine and displayed no significant signs of neurological impairment. Either, the stories of his aphasia were outright lies from right-wingers or the stroke was minor and he has completely recovered his speech.
 

lforrest

Well-Known Member
Staff member
Admin
Aug 10, 2012
5,546
6,793
113
Faith
Christian
What language.

I think it could mean either. There is no need to worry about this. Biden was being cagey at the debate. He's not in favor of packing the court. It would be lunacy to do that. I'm guessing he refused to answer it at the debate as a way of intimidating Republicans for their wanting to pack the court now while Trump is still President.

Biden gave his reasons last year for not adding more justices, and I can't see why he'd change his mind. There are radical Democrats who might like the idea, but I can't see Biden agreeing to it.

If Republicans Confirm New Justice, Scholars Say Democratic Court Packing Is Possible

Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden hasn't commented publicly on expanding the court since Ginsburg's death. But he previously dismissed the idea, warning of reprisal if and when Republicans regain control.

"I'm not prepared to go on and try to pack the court, because we'll live to rue that day," he told Iowa Starting Line early in the primary race last year. A few months later, during a Democratic primary debate, Biden once again rejected the idea. "I would not get into court packing," Biden said. "We add three justices. Next time around, we lose control, they add three justices. We begin to lose any credibility the court has at all."

In remarks Sunday on the future of the Supreme Court, Biden did not discuss court packing. And on Sunday morning, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi demurred when asked whether a Democratic majority would consider expanding the court as reprisal for a late-term Trump appointment.

"Let's just win the election," Pelosi told ABC's George Stephanopoulos. "Let's hope that the president will see the light."

But other Democrats have been less reticent. "Mitch McConnell set the precedent. No Supreme Court vacancies filled in an election year," Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts wrote Friday. "If he violates it, when Democrats control the Senate in the next Congress, we must abolish the filibuster and expand the Supreme Court."

Even before Ginsburg's death, several Democratic presidential hopefuls had said they were open to the idea, including Sens. Cory Booker of New Jersey, Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota, Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts and Kamala Harris of California, now the vice presidential nominee.
Roosevelt didn't like the Supreme Court he inherited, and he wanted to increase the number of justices. The Democrats in the Senate said no. Why would Democrats in Congress resist it when a Democratic President wanted to rig the court? They didn't think any President should have that much power. People are overreacting to this anyway. It won't be the end of the world if Trump appoints another justice to the Supreme Court. Okay, maybe the Democrats don't like it, but it's nothing to get that upset about and it's not that important that we need to change the Constitution.

You say you want an amendment? It sounds as if you don't like the current American constitution which gives Congress the right to determine how many justices there are in the Supreme Court. Biden also would be nuts to say he wanted to pack the Supreme Court -- the Democrats don't control the Senate and may not after the election -- it looks like it's going to be 50-50 to me. Why create unnecessary problems then by inflaming them?

And what are you afraid of anyway? Are you afraid the Republicans will lose control of the Senate, that Democrats will control the House and Senate along with the White House? You want to change the rules because they might win? Hmmm.

Term limits? First of all, with a lot of turnover, you have a constant bunch of inexperienced newbies. It also increases the clout of lobbyists and big money campaign fundraisers. There are already enough people in Congress who are there so they can get high-paying jobs in lobbying firms after serving a few years in Congress -- term limits would make that worse.

Lastly, why do you want to restrict who people are allowed to vote for? If they want to vote someone back into office, why shouldn't they be allowed to? It is a democracy, isn't it? Or do you mistrust the American voters? I wouldn't mind if Mitch McConnell lost his seat -- he's been there for 36 years -- but that's not my business. If the people of Kentucky want to re-elect him, I think they should be allowed to, even if I don't like him.

Biden aims to reduce the current animosity between the two parties, so I can't see him inflaming the Republicans by trying to rig the Supreme Court. What many people today don't realize is that Biden tries to get along with Republicans in a bipartisan way. I remember how he and Senator Specter conducted themselves in the heated confirmation hearing of Clarence Thomas. I thought they both were trying to keep things as calm as possible. If anything, I'd criticize Biden for being too "bipartisan" in that hearing. He agreed not to get the testimony about what movies Thomas had checked out to view. I thought the American people deserved to know what kind of movies Thomas watched.

One of my biggest problem with Biden is how he seems to want to get along with everyone. I think maybe that's why his son Hunter turned out to be someone who embarrassed his father. He can be tough, yes; but that's only after he's tried to get along with someone and the other person shows no signs of wanting to cooperate.
Trump isn't threatening to pack the court, he is filling a vacancy. The democrats show their partisanship by making that threat. And with their record I have no doubt it would be done if they had the white house and Senate but were being restrained by the court upholding the constitution.
 

Seven of Nine

Well-Known Member
Sep 28, 2020
733
636
93
North Texas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I ended up watching most of the debate. Primarily to see for myself if all the stories of Biden being neurologically impaired were true. He spoke fine and displayed no significant signs of neurological impairment. Either, the stories of his aphasia were outright lies from right-wingers or the stroke was minor and he has completely recovered his speech.

Biden stood upright and alert while Trump stood like he was constipated and he constantly interrupted. I don't think he didn't like the fact that he wasn't the center of attention and I don't think he liked being told off either. Neither Biden or Wallace would be his Yes-Man and kiss his feet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MattMooradian

historyb

Well-Known Member
Mar 10, 2011
2,990
2,701
113
52
in a house
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I ended up watching most of the debate. Primarily to see for myself if all the stories of Biden being neurologically impaired were true. He spoke fine and displayed no significant signs of neurological impairment. Either, the stories of his aphasia were outright lies from right-wingers or the stroke was minor and he has completely recovered his speech.

Biden was going down hill but Trump saved him many times. It is very easy to see that Biden has dementia, when he talks and they are not prepared talking points he can't hold his own. He just said recently he was around for 180 years and one time one the trail he said vote for him for vice president and vote for Obama, he said vote often. He never had a stroke, Biden is literally losing his mind
 
Status
Not open for further replies.