The Next Supreme Court Justice

Started by Surtur41 pages

Ignoring the deeply pathetic hypocrisy over nobody caring Biden or RBG use the term "sexual preference" we have some chilling Orwellian stuff going on too:

Merriam-Webster changes its definition of 'sexual preference' as Barrett gets called out for using term

I know I know, usual suspects will defend it.

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
okay let's find out if you're as special as you think you are

reported

Lets find out if Rob is consistent too. I await him whining "you're trying to get people banned!"

Spoiler alert: he won't be.

Originally posted by dadudemon
My sexual preferences are short petite women or very tall athletic women. Obviously, both types beautiful.

But I'd still bang a average looking gal if she was super smart and kind. But they are not my preference.

My sexual preferences do not include fat women or women with poor hygiene: these two sets often overlap.

So who is offended by this? If anyone is offended by my sexual preferences, I am offended that they take offense to something I don't seem to be able to control.

Nobody is actually offended. Nobody was offended when Obama officials used the term, when LGBT orgs used it, when RBG used it, and when Biden used it earlier this year. They do not find the phrase "sexual preference" offensive they find the person who used it offensive. And since they can't really call her a gang rapist(played that card last time) and they seem to have wisely decided not to go after her for her religion, this is all they have.

The defense has been two things, one was "she is going to be on the SC" as if Biden as president couldn't harm the LGBT community if he truly sought to do so. The other is "he is an ally to the LGBT community" which is retarded as f*ck. It's just stupid, it's like saying a woke white leftist saying the N word is wrong, but because they are an ally to the black community it is not *as* wrong as a republican saying it.

Which is false, there is no "ally clause" here. In fact an "ally" should know better.

And then websters went and literally changed the definition of the word to suit these lunatics. 1984 was seen as a guidebook to these people and not a cautionary tale.

Originally posted by Surtur
Lets find out if Rob is consistent too. I await him whining "you're trying to get people banned!"

Spoiler alert: he won't be.

i didn't try to get him banned, so that's just more of you lying. not surprising

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
pretty sure her clit is more intelligent than the two of you combined, yet half as sensitive...but that's none of my business *sips tea*

*snort*

I'm either going to temp ban several people or nobody. Decisions, decisions...mmm

Can we get to the part where the deep state will assassinate 4 or 5 conservative supreme court justices during the next democratic presidency so they can replace them with leftists.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
Can we get to the part where the deep state will assassinate 4 or 5 conservative supreme court justices during the next democratic presidency so they can replace them with leftists.

Bless you, but no this is silly to think it would ever happen.

What would happen is shapeshifting reptiles kill and replace them. Nobody would know they were gone.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
Can we get to the part where the deep state will assassinate 4 or 5 conservative supreme court justices during the next democratic presidency so they can replace them with leftists.

That's not at all what the deep state would do.

Deep state is all about world domination, MIC, and maintaining the oligarchy.

Killing multiple SCJs would destroy their goals. It creates problems for their goals. And by infuriating the conservatives like that, you'd unite them and accidentally educate them about your goals and then they'd dismantle your power structure.

Originally posted by jaden_2.0
Can we get to the part where the deep state will assassinate 4 or 5 conservative supreme court justices during the next democratic presidency so they can replace them with leftists.

Biden has to win first.

Just be patient though, it's coming.

Originally posted by dadudemon
That's not at all what the deep state would do.

Deep state is all about world domination, MIC, and maintaining the oligarchy.

Killing multiple SCJs would destroy their goals. It creates problems for their goals. And by infuriating the conservatives like that, you'd unite them and accidentally educate them about your goals and then they'd dismantle your power structure.

What if there is a state within the deep state though? A deeper state?

Originally posted by Surtur
What if there is a state within the deep state though? A deeper state?
What? Like a deep state, state of mind? Ethneo? Thoughts...

Originally posted by dadudemon
That's not at all what the deep state would do.

Deep state is all about world domination, MIC, and maintaining the oligarchy.

Killing multiple SCJs would destroy their goals. It creates problems for their goals. And by infuriating the conservatives like that, you'd unite them and accidentally educate them about your goals and then they'd dismantle your power structure.

No no no. This is all wrong. The deep state only hates Trump, remember?

If deep state doesnt have aliens then I really don’t care.

Trump hating, leftist trans aliens.

Originally posted by BackFire
If deep state doesnt have aliens then I really don’t care.
What if it had all the aliens you could rape?

Probably also read Vox.

Originally posted by Old Man Whirly!
What if it had all the aliens you could rape?

*Biden has joined the chat

Biden: How old are they?

Originally posted by Silent Master
*Biden has joined the chat

Biden: How old are they?

Backfire needs no help from anybody raping Aliens...

Biden’s new campaign slogan: If they’re old enough to pee, they’re old enough for me.