WhatFinger

We couldn’t permit a five-vote liberal majority on the Supreme Court. It would have been a disaster for the country

For fark’s sake, the Garland nomination was spiked over ideological balance on the court, not because it was an election year


For fark’s sake, the Garland nomination was spiked over ideological balance on the court, not because it was an election year One of the reasons Republicans tend to lose in public debates is that, even when they’re on the right side and doing the right thing, they don’t seem willing to defend their actions on the sheer merits. And often when this is the case it comes back to bite you later. In 2016, the nation faced a near catastrophe when Antonin Scalia died, leaving the prospect of Barack Obama appointing a liberal replacement who would shift the Supreme Court’s ideological balance to the left. Had that happened, unions could still force non-members to pay dues, and Jack Phillips would have had to bake that gay wedding cake, and pro-life pregnancy centers would be forced to give out the phone numbers of abortion clinics.
Read Full Article...

Welcome to CFP’s Comment Section!

The Comment section of online publications is the new front in the ongoing Cancel Culture Battle.

Big Tech and Big Media are gunning for the Conservative Voice—through their Comment Sections.

Canada Free Press wishes to stay in the fight, and we want our fans, followers, commenters there with us.

We ask only that commenters keep it civil, keep it clean.

Thank You for your patience and for staying aboard the CFP ‘Mother Ship’.

READ OUR Commenting Policy


CFP Comments

Commenting is not available in this channel entry.

Comments




Recommended by Canada Free Press


Subscribe

Sponsored