Have I mentioned that left wingers are insane?

And of course incapable of actually trying to defend their beliefs with rational arguments.

Here’s just one example of hundreds you can find in less than an hour. Spend a could days and you could list thousands. Left wingers are nasty hateful SOBs who lash out violently when you dare to oppose them, their heroes, or their idiotic beliefs.

Click on the picture to go to the Breitbart article, and you’ll see that the nut job pictured has literally ZERO comments that back up any position Biden’s handlers’ horrid SCOTUS nominee holds. All he does is go on an insane rant when a Republican very effectively shows how completely unfit that nominee is, even to be a simple magistrate in Podunk County anywhere. Part of what set the loon off was this question by Tom Cotton and then his follow up comment to the non answer given:

“Should the United States strengthen or weaken sentences for child pornographers?” Cotton asked, to which Jackson responded, “Senator, that is not a simple question, and the reason is because what this country does in terms of penalties is in Congress’s province.”

“You all decide. You decide what the penalties are,” Jackson continued. “You decide what the factors are that judges use to sentence. If you determine that any set of penalties is insufficient, then it is in your purview to make that determination.”

“There are many crimes that Congress has determined warrant mandatory minimum penalties, warrant other kinds of penalties, and that is in your purview to determine,” the judge added.

Sen. Cotton reacted by stating, “I have to say, judge, I think whether or not we should strengthen or weaken sentences for child pornographers is a pretty simple question, but I’ll move on.”

Indeed it is a simple question, and in my world judge nominees, just like political candidates, would be forced to answer ALL questions directly. There would be no allowance at all for non answers like this, and in fact a hearing would be stopped and the nominee dismissed from consideration immediately if it happened 3 times. The requirement to answer would include reasonable hypothetical questions and questions that refer to previous SCOTUS decisions. Such as “Do you believe the founders and/or the legislators after them who passed amendments wrote in “penumbras of emanations”??? And “When do you believe human life begins?”

And of course, if a nominee says something as brain dead stupid as not being able to define a woman because she’s “not a biologist”, that nominee is disqualified immediately and laughed out of the hearing room, and is removed from any official position she currently holds.

And the memes display exactly why the left wing loon in the first picture here can only go on an insane rant. You can’t defend the sheer stupidity by doing much other than attacking those pointing it out.