S-s-snarky S-s-snippets

I am in rather a dark mood tonight … I even yelled at an animated character, a cute li’l octopus, on television and called her a … well, you get the picture.  Two things in particular stirred my angst tonight, and both, I think, are well deserving of venting a bit of snarky steam.


“Suburban women: Will you please like me? Please. Please. I saved your damn neighborhood, okay? The other thing: I don’t have that much time to be that nice. You know, I can do it, but I gotta go quickly. They want me to be politically correct. I got rid of a regulation that was a disaster and it was really unfair, and you’ve been reading about it for a long time and it’s gotten a lot worse under Obama and Biden. We’re going to see that the women really like Trump a lot. Remember four years ago, they said women will never vote, then I got 52 percent. … You damn well better vote for me Pennsylvania, you better vote.”

These are the words of the incumbent in the Oval Office, spoken during a rally in Johnstown, Pennsylvania on Tuesday night.  First he begs and cajoles, then he threatens.  And this is the person who has ‘led’ this nation into chaos for the past nearly four years and hopes to be given another four years to complete the destruction.

Joe Biden, by the way, is leading in the polls in Pennsylvania by an average of 6 points.


I have not paid particular attention to, nor written about, the hearings taking place in the Senate to determine whether or not to confirm Trump’s nominee to replace Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg in the U.S. Supreme Court.  It’s not that I’m not interested – I am.  It’s not that I don’t think it’s important – I do.  It’s just that from what I have read it is just another … yawn … Republican dog-and-pony show with the outcome predetermined.  I truly have better things to do with my time than watch the Republicans preen and Ms. Barrett deflect.

To date, apparently Ms. Amy Coney Barrett has refused to answer all relevant questions, so … what is there to write about?  Ms. Barrett is 48 years old, so We the People are likely to be saddled with her religious views becoming the law of the land for the next three decades or so.

The burning questions that she has refused to answer are on the topics of the Affordable Healthcare Act (whether the majority of us will be able to afford medical care when and if we need it), Roe v Wade (whether women will retain control of their own bodies, or be subject to a misogynistic rule), and Obergefell v Hodges (whether a significant portion of the population will be allowed to marry the person they love, or whether that, too, will be dictated by a bigoted Supreme Court).  Ms. Barrett has refused to answer how she would rule on any of these topics.  In my book, that removes her from consideration, for we have a right to know who will be deciding how we must live.  And would somebody please tell me WHY Ms. Barrett’s children are front and center in the hearings???  They have no role in this, they have no place here!  Best I can figure, it’s another ‘photo op’ moment like Trump having citizens forcibly removed from the streets of Washington so he could hold a bloody book in front of a damn church!  Send the children home to do their online learning, Amy!  Better yet … go home with them, since you have proven yourself useless.BarrettIn the Republican’s book however, it is a little different.

Here are some of the questions Ted Cruz, a republican senator from Texas asked of Ms. Barrett:

  • Do you speak any foreign languages? (French)
  • Do you play any musical instruments? (Piano)
  • What was it like staying at home during the pandemic with seven children? (Challenging)
  • Why did she and her husband adopt two children from Haiti? (A long story)

Ooooohhh … what relevant questions for a potential Supreme Court Justice who will be expected to make decisions that may mean life or death for us all!  Way to go, Teddy!

Now, one thing I didn’t mention above was Ms. Barrett’s take on climate change, arguably the single most important issue of the day.

“I’m certainly not a scientist. I have read things about climate change. I would not say I have firm views on it.”

Say WHAT?  You have “read things”???  What things?  Details, woman!  How … HOW can anybody in this, the year 2020 with wildfires consuming much of the West Coast, with devastating hurricanes costing lives and untold property damages, and with the average temperature this past summer 92° in an area that usually has a summertime average of 85° … how can any sane person look at the statistics, step outside and attempt to breathe the air, and still have “no firm views”???  This woman is either very, very stupid, else she is already in the pockets of the corporate donors such as Koch Brothers and the fossil fuel industry!

I’m not a scientist, either, but I still possess some parts that Ms. Barrett may be missing:  a brain, eyes, ears, and lungs … all of which tell me that humans, in their greedy quest for more useless money, have begun and continue the destruction of the environment here on planet Earth.

So, in conclusion, Ms. Barrett refuses to voice an opinion on women’s rights, LGBT rights, the right to medical care, and worst yet, she is stupid about the environment.  GET. HER. OUT.

But no, the boot-lickers in the Senate have a majority, albeit a narrow one, and there doesn’t seem to be a single one with the cojones to “just say ‘no’” to Donald Trump.  On top of that, the unconscionably powerful Koch Brothers have thrown their support behind her nomination.  And thus began the beginning of the end of civilization in what was once known as the United States.

And I shall end on that note, for my temper is about to take me where I ought not to go.  Let me just say, though, that if Donald Trump is elected for and seated for another term, I shall renounce my citizenship from the U.S., if not from the entire world.  I can see nothing good in the future of this nation if the people continue to elect and applaud bloody fools and to put corporate profits ahead of people.

35 thoughts on “S-s-snarky S-s-snippets

  1. Trump’s psychofanatics love what he says exactly because they cannot understand it. They get to believe it is wise because they don’t know any different. After all, Trump tells them he is the world’s most intelligent person, and they have absolutely no basis on which to disbelieve him!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Yeah, probably. Most of his 40% base wallow in their ignorance, they wear it like a badge that says, “Look at me, I’m too stupid to understand what the idiot is doing”. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.


  2. Ms. Barrett must have been a real treat to watch in court:
    ‘Well I cannot say, one way or the other whether the defendant standing over a corpse with a bloody knife in their hand and cackling is evidence that even a murder took place,’
    Back to The Flabmiester …he says something. It makes no sense. It is stupid. It is hateful…Sssssssso what else is new. Long ago I gave up reading anything which had the held line Trump says….no point.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. She’s nothing more than a trump kiss up and “good Christian” that she is, certainly doesn’t stop her from the vanity of being a Supreme Court judge who is interested in herself and her own minority beliefs, having than kind of power, not to mention the perks and lastly not doing what is the right “Christian” thing to do in waiting for the next president to appoint, as RGB requested.

    Liked by 1 person

    • I fully agree. As I told Cheryl, her background, her upbringing, her parenting matter not one whit. What matters is how she interprets the law, the Constitution. From all I have seen, she is a racist, a homophobe, a misogynist, and a Trump boot-licker. We damn sure don’t need more of those! It is a dishonour to RBG to put this woman in her seat.

      Liked by 1 person

        • I find that far too often these days I am wishing for someone’s early demise, and Barrett is one of those. Seems the only reasonable solution, for the unconscionable, ignoble GOP have made it clear that they will confirm this bitch who claims to have no opinions about anything, yet has surely been well-coached by Trump’s minions. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

          Liked by 1 person

  4. So, that’s what woke me up last night at 3AM – your snark bubbling down from Ohio. Jim’s son (along with other Floridians) now supports ‘herd immunity’. I am posting onto our front door, “Caution, insane Democrat with mad cow disease lives here.” We already have a doormat which says, “COME BACK WITH A WARRANT.” Inhospitable and ungracious? Just a tad. What’s an old fart hoping to see 80 supposed to do?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Awwww … I’m so sorry I woke you, Larry! If it’s any consolation, sometimes my snark even wakes my friends across the pond! Heh heh … I like your idea for a sign! I may make one like that myself! So far, the bumper stickers on my van parked directly in front of my door seem to keep the riff-raff away: “I Miss Obama”, “Black Lives Matter”, and “CoExist”. Hoping to see 80, eh? I’m 8 months away from 70 and have a distinct feeling I won’t see that! Love you, my friend! I’ll try to be quieter tonight!

      Liked by 1 person

  5. Here’s my snarky question about Barrett. She says that she is an originalist. So she goes by the original intent of the framers of the constitution.

    Surely, the original intent of the framers, was that the supreme court justices would all be male. So, as an originalist, shouldn’t Barrett withdraw?

    And a footnote: I go with the “living constitution” idea, so I am happy to have women justices. But I prefer not to have “originalist” judges, because originalism is absurd.

    Liked by 2 people

    • I fully agree about the ‘Living Constitution’. The framers were smart enough to know that they couldn’t possibly foresee what things might become relevant in the future, that they couldn’t possibly address every situation that would arise for hundreds of years, and thus they provided a means for interpreting and amending the Constitution. It seems, however, that some in the Republican Party would be just as happy to return to the days of 1787, the days of slavery, of women not being allowed to own property or vote.

      Liked by 1 person

  6. 😏I watched while she was asked questions about the fact that she supported Scalia on all precedent issues and what that would mean for her decision making if serving in the senate, and I watched as she stone faced sipped her coffee and refused to answer the question because ‘it wouldn’t be right’. Of course it wouldn’t be ‘right’ to answer any question honestly, forthrightly or with true conviction. Lies are like dust-blowing all over the place and collecting in dark corners where they lie, unseen, until someone shines a light and gets them cleaned up. I don’t know about you but I know very few conservative males who even know how a broom works. Don’t see it. Ain’t there. 🤬

    Liked by 1 person

    • From all I’ve read, and from what you’re telling me, these were not ‘hearings’, but a joke. She answers namby-pamby questions about her personal life … which nobody gives a rat’s ass about … but steadfastly refuses to answer relevant, substantive questions about policy, about law, about justice, about equality and human interest, about civil rights, about … our lives! Heh heh … you’re right about the conservative males knowing how a broom works … or a dishcloth or washing machine!

      Liked by 1 person

  7. Jill, as just typed this on Scottie’s blog, but it seems to fit the mood here. I saw a real life cartoon yesterday on the news. On BBC World News America, a reporter was interviewing voters at the large retirement community, The Villages in Florida. One woman, who is not big on Trump the person, said she is voting for the Republican platform. I wished the reporter had told her the Republican party did not vote on platform at this convention. So, as one reporter on NPR said, the platform is whatever Donald Trump says it is. Keith

    Liked by 1 person

    • Oh yeah … if I had been that reporter, I would have had to say, “WHAT platform??? The only ‘platform’ they have is hate!” I guess it’s good that I didn’t pursue a career in journalism, eh? I’m encouraged, though, to read this morning that some 15 million people have already voted, either by mail or by early in-person voting! As for the trumpeters like the old woman … I find it impossible to understand how their minds work.

      Liked by 1 person

  8. I wonder how many of his audience in Pennsylvania noted he made absolutely no sense at all. What regulation did he overturn, what good did it do for them? Why was it worse (as everything was of course) under Obama and Biden
    I hope Biden stops making a point about Trump being a liar after revelations about the porkies he’s told himself. Though harmless in comparison it does show him to be a hypocrite.
    Amy Coney ( who gets called a rabbit?) Barrett’s views are fairly well known now. She should never have been considered never mind interviewed, yet here she is and we know it’s a formality because the Republicans love and need her views……..Unless some Republicans find the cojones to vote with the Democrats in the hopes of a little forgiveness at the polls. There won’t be of course either cojones nor forgiveness for keeping Trump in power after all that he’s done. Nor should there be any forgiveness for Republicans who espouse Trumpisms in their election fights unless it’s to say they were totally wrong. Nice little Snark today.

    Liked by 2 people

    • Well, since nobody but an avid trumpeter would even attend such an event, it’s doubtful that many in the crowd (the maskless crowd) even noticed. The less sense he makes, the more he rants and spouts garbage, the more they adore him. Nobody is quite sure what regulation he referred to, but I suspect it is the Fair Housing Rule that was intended to end housing discrimination based on race. He overturned it in July, largely to use as a campaign gambit, telling suburbanites that they would no longer have to worry about Blacks and immigrants moving into their neighborhoods. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

      Not sure what lies Biden has told that you’re talking about … clarification?

      I don’t think we’ll need to hope for the republican senators to find their cojones … last I heard, they sold them along with their souls. It seems that, as we all knew anyway, her confirmation will take place next week unless there is some outside intervention … like perhaps a bombing of the Capitol, or a herd of rabid dogs let loose in the Capitol. Sigh. The worst is that we will be stuck with these bigoted, racist, unconscionable Justices for the next 30 years or so. Sigh.

      Thanks … I felt the snark bubbling over last night!

      Liked by 1 person

      • It seems he lied about his position in the finishing class of his law school and also about the number of degrees he got. He claims to have finished in the top half of his class and won an award for Best something ot other, he was actually near the bottom and no award. He claims 3 degrees but in fact just got one. He claims mistake and he misremembered. Rubbish, he lied but how many of us haven’t done that. There’s no comparison in their positions.

        Liked by 1 person

        • Ahhhh … I will have to look into those … oddly, I hadn’t heard of them. However, as you say, those pale in comparison to Trump’s massive lies over the past 4 years, and even as recently as a few hours ago (see a.m. post)

          Liked by 1 person

Comments are closed.