Wrongthink On Climate Change (scam) Disqualifies ACB For Supreme Court Or Something

Climate cultists have received the talking points from the high poobahs in the Cult of Climastrology, as we see from this letter to the editor of the Chicago Sun Times

Climate change answer disqualifies Barrett for Supreme Court

Amy Coney Barrett has forfeited her right to be on the U.S. Supreme Court due to her convoluted answer to the simple question about climate change.

The confirmation process is a sham in many ways. Because the outcome is a forgone conclusion, it has ceased to be a deliberative process on judicial philosophy. The senators make each question a political speech and the candidate finds clever ways to say nothing – as an homage to her mentor, Donald Trump.

When asked a clear ”yes or no” scientific question about climate change, she should have jumped at the chance to give a clear answer — but she did not. She replied that it is a “very contentious matter of public debate.” Settled science is clear and visible proof abounds — so she is either grossly uniformed or she lied.

Does she think that antibiotics cure infections, or is that a matter of “public debate” as well?

Some Republicans deny climate science because their backers are in the fossil fuel industry; Trump makes light of Covid 19 because it hurts his re-election chances, but that doesn’t change the facts. A basic requirement for a candidate to the U. S. Supreme Court would be the intelligence and reasoning power to base decisions on verifiable facts. According to her testimony, Ms. Barrett is not such a person; she is a political hack who does not qualify to be on the highest court.

Whoa, that’s a lot of talking points. We got the sham point in. We have the antibiotics one in (funny, the majority of anti-vaxxers tend to vote Democrat). But, see, because ACB isn’t a card carrying member of the CoC and refuses to toe the line she has “forfeited her right’ to be a Supreme Court Justice. If this sounds like a cult and looks like a cult, it’s a cult.

The writer, Carol Kraines, Deerfield, sure seems to show up quite a bit in letters and such. Here, here, here, and many, many more. Just a big old Trump hater, who, strangely, doesn’t seem to offer anything on how she’s living the carbon neutral life.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

11 Responses to “Wrongthink On Climate Change (scam) Disqualifies ACB For Supreme Court Or Something”

  1. Professor Hale says:

    So the political activists on the Left prefer their judges to side with them ideologically on every issue instead of deciding cases on their merits, based on the cases that actually are presented in court. This is not a shocking new turn of events as evidenced by the 4 lock step votes the Supremes had on leftist agenda issues. Now they only have three party line votes against 5 who decide based on the merits.

  2. Est1950 says:


    I am thinking more of using the postwar Nuremberg Trials as a template. Felonies were committed as were treasonous behaviors. The guilty should be arrested, tried, convicted and forced to do time.

    Why stop with the police. We should defund White People.

    And a commission to review all of the federal judges that have been appointed, and kick those out that aren’t qualified.

    How about a “truth and consequences “ commission instead. At the very least, there need to be a lot of people banned from government service for life, including all federal LEO’s who committed crimes or abused authorities because they thought the admin would cover for them.

    He certainly does not mean leftists or BIDEN/OBAMA. He means Trump. Only the right has committed any crimes in government. Not the leftists.

    Robert Reich, a UC Berkeley professor of public policy and a former labor secretary in the Clinton administration made his argument for a “Truth and Reconciliation Commission” this weekend on Twitter as he lamented when “this nightmare,” referring to Trump’s president.

    His idea of blacklisting Trump supporters and launching a massive censorship campaign sparked plenty of supportive responses on the left. But Reich later slammed critics in another post, claiming they were “responding to this tweet as if it’s a radical, undemocratic idea.”

    America you have a group of Media QUADROBILLIONAIRES CONTROLLING ELECTIONS AROUND THE WORLD. Not just in the USA. These people are not Americans and yet we allow them to censor our own American leaders Left and Mostly Right.


    As you can see the plans by the left is NAZI style repercussions if the left wins and with the help of Social Media Controlled by foreign interests if you have wrong think you will no longer be a citizen of the USA. You will be a criminal.

    This is not without precedent. These sorts of tribunals were set up in South Africa after Apartheid was defeated and the Nazi’s pre WW2. The left once again takes a strategy from the worst times in history to prove how Evil and Monstrous their plans are for YOU.

  3. Dana says:

    Judge Barrett did not deny that global warming climate change exists; she stated that what, if anything, to do about it was politically contentious.

    Of course, in my admittedly quick perusal of the Constitution, I was unable to find the provision which states that not agreeing with global warming climate change believers is a bar from holding public office, but perhaps I simply missed it.

  4. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    TEACH (scam) is in high dudgeon over a letter sent to the Chicago Sun-Times, suggesting it came from “on high” of the DemComSoc movement, LOL.

    Our next Supreme Court Justice was successfully and hilariously mocked by a Swedish teenager: “To be fair, I don’t have any ‘views on climate change’ either. Just like I don’t have any ‘views’ on gravity, the fact that the earth is round, photosynthesis or evolution…But understanding and knowing their existence really makes life in the 21st century so much easier.”

    • formwiz says:

      Wow, Bitchi Longstocking is another Noel Coward.

      If Sir Noel had been a fool, petulant, self-righteous, and ill-informed.

  5. Elwood P. Dowd says:

    TEACH (scam) types: Carol Kraines, Deerfield, sure seems to show up quite a bit in letters and such. Here, here, here, and many, many more. Just a big old Trump hater…

    where she wrote in a letter to the editor (NYT): The Democratic front-runners won’t beat Donald Trump. Joe Biden is a good guy and someone whom people trust, but he’s sadly too old for this. Elizabeth Warren is smart and articulate, but somewhat strident and pretty far left. Kamala Harris is a good debater, but I think she has the Hillary likability problem.

    TEACH (scam) should do better homework… LOL

    • formwiz says:

      As always, Jeffery pulls out his LOL when he knows it’s an exercise in futility.

      And Ms Kraines is almost as big a fool as Bitchi if she really believes Gropin’ Joe Biden is a good guy and someone whom people trust, Fauxcahontas is smart and articulate, and Chlamydia is a good debater.

  6. Hairy says:

    Teach the average American has a carbon footprint of about 17 tons
    Offsets for that would cost about $120/$150
    To offset “long fossil fueled trips” would add about 2% to your ticket price

  7. Jl says:

    Good, Hairy John-now you just need to come up with a valid reason to enact a carbon tax. And as asked before, if the same number of people take their “long fossil fueled trips” as before even while paying a tax, what good does that do? Besides nothing

Pirate's Cove