![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
david souter was one of the 5.
and you have a democratic president and senate. why are we talking about this case? did you expect an appointment more conservative than souter? |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
throw a fit and make it difficult. She will get confirmed anyway. They will most likely have to replace another more liberal leaning judge (the group of 4 is old)and I think a losing fight now, makes the next appt. easier to get through. |
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
they knew this was a slam dunk. they still know it's a slam dunk. it was the easy non-controversial choice. pissing on the nominee is part of the fund raising process for "judicial watch" groups. it justifies their existence even when it quixotic. there will always be a "controversy" manufactured. both sides do this. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I'm still trying to figure out how John Roberts sailed through confirmation and then was suddenly Grand Poohbah I mean...wasn't Rose Marie available? |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
presidents nominate. the senate advises and consents (or doesn't). i don't share all his judicial philosophies but there was nothing in his record to indicate he shouldn't have been confirmed. and i've seen nothing completely unexpected in his decisions so far. part of the reason this country works so well is that we have rules that are followed even when our side loses. unlike iran. unlike honduras. outside of anomalies like bush era torture, we generally don't cut corners. john roberts deserved confirmation then as much as sonia sotomayor does now. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I never drop Dick Van Dyke show references and expect them to be left astray |
|
#7
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
apparently i was in full lecture mode. i've rebooted now lol. |
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
than Ginsburg received Republican votes. I think Ginsburg was something like 93 - 5. I think Roberts had somewhere around 20 votes against. And Alito was actually close, 50 something to 40 something. |