Biden's nominee to the supreme court is anti-white and anti-Constitution--and will be confirmed by a cowardly senate

A cancer has been gnawing away at our nation for decades, and we're almost to the end of the game.

The latest symptom of this cancer is biden's nomination of an anti-white, pro-child-pornography communist tool named Ketanji Brown Jackson to a lifetime position on the supreme court.

This woman was able to worm her way into being a judge thanks to every liberal fellow-traveler along the way who pushed her upward.  And worse, everyone along the way who correctly recognized who and what she is, and what she stood for, but did nothing to keep her the hell away from the bench.

So now here we are, with an anti-white, anti-Constitution communist about to be confirmed to a lifetime position on the supreme court (lower case intentional).

Oh, I see some of you are skeptical about that description "anti-white, anti-Constitution."  Got it.  So if we were to play you a speech by the nominee praising a white-hating racist named Derrick Bell--a co-creator of "critical race theory"--would that change your mind?

Black nationalists and black supremacists always begin and end with the premise that whites are evil.

There's no question that our Constitution was conceived and drafted by white men.  Derrick Bell assumes that because the drafters of the Constitution were white males, the Constitution must be biased toward white males, and against blacks and females.

That conclusion does NOT follow, but Bell--and other anti-white race hustlers--don't try to support their claim.  For their moronic supporters it's not necessary to prove the claim.  Rather, to the racists it's enough to say "Whites drafted it, therefore..."

But hasn't U.S. law outlawed segregation and slavery, on Constitutional grounds?  Of course, but according to raaacists like Bell and Brown-Jackson it did so only because that served white purposes.  And Bell claims that the Constitution allows whites to enslave black people again.

Bell’s view of the Constitution, like that of black supremacists, is that outlawing slavery and segregation was simply a trick to lure blacks into lowering their guard.  He believed whites could never be trusted.

Perhaps Brown-Jackson now disagrees with Bell's worldview.  The problem is, not one senator will ask her, for fear of being accused of being raaacist.  And of course if the nominee still believes Bell's views she would never volunteer that.  

Would the nation be well-served by installing a white-hating racist in a lifetime post to the highest court in the land?

The Supreme Court is the final arbiter of what laws--and bureaucratic rules and regulations, like the vax ORDER--will be allowed and what will be rejected.  Whether you believe it or not, five wack-jobs in black robes rule your life, regardless of what laws congress passes.

A female senator, Marsha Blackburn, asked Brown-Jackson if she could define the word "woman."  Straightforward, right?  But Brown-Jackson refused, saying "I'm not a biologist."

Cunning.  What does it tell you if a nominee to the highest court in the U.S. refuses to answer a simple question like "Can you give me a definition of 'woman'?"

We thought the low point was reached when the Dems stole the 2020 election and installed a corrupt, senile career politician. We're beginning to see that the destruction is just beginning.