[a little elbow grease]

"Stay clear of Barrett. A law professor at Notre Dame, a very liberal college that even covered religious statues to please Obama. Little or no record of her decisions from the bench."

_______________

I may agree. But may I add .....

Yesterday I was thinking that maybe Trump would nominate her to eventually watch her be a sacrificial lamb" to the sick Dems.' hatred.

In that way, she would not be nominated, Trump then could easily point out how religiously ILL the liberals are........... and he WINS again.

Then he nominates someone who he really wants.

(Just a guess.)

[LS]

Slightly different concern. Prior to Gorsuch, we had 6 Catholics and 3 Jews on the USSC-—but not a single “mainstream” Protestant.

This is significant, for the American Protestant churches were the foundation of the US, remain the overwhelming majority religion of the U.S., and yet have zero representation on the Court. Barrett would be another Catholic.

Were the “quota” people to be taken into consideration, five of the justices should be non-Anglican/Episcopalian Protestants. (Anglicanism and Episcopalianism are top-down in their governance, while most of the other Protestant churches are congregational, i.e., bottom up. I think this DOES at some point play a part in how one views the constitution. “Top-downers” tend to side with the federal government.)

[kenmcg]

” Yesterday I was thinking that maybe Trump would nominate her to eventually watch her be a sacrificial lamb” to the sick Dems.’ hatred.

In that way, she would not be nominated, Trump then could easily point out how religiously ILL the liberals are........... and he WINS again.

Then he nominates someone who he really wants.”

Recall when Sandra Day O’Connor was nominated, they had us believing she was the second coming. What a dud she turned out to be. There is something about the water along the beltway.