Judge Gorsuch
-
So I realize some of you are Democrats, Trump haters or just general malcontent but I'm curious as to what will be the basis of the opposition to the Supreme Court nomination here? Is there anything of substance or are you just mad about Merrick Garland?
WSS
www.westsidesteve.com www.myspace.com/westsidestevemusic www.cdbaby.com/artist/westsidestevesimmons -
I don't think the dems have much choice, but that being said, they should pull out any thing to delay it they can. What the republicans did last year, and it was a year ago, to prevent an up or down vote on Garland was horrible representation of what our political system has become. So if they drag it out an extra week or so that would be ok with me.
-
I don't think the dems have much choice, but that being said, they should pull out any thing to delay it they can. What the republicans did last year, and it was a year ago, to prevent an up or down vote on Garland was horrible representation of what our political system has become. So if they drag it out an extra week or so that would be ok with me.
I don't think the dems have much choice, but that being said, they should pull out any thing to delay it they can. What the republicans did last year, and it was a year ago, to prevent an up or down vote on Garland was horrible representation of what our political system has become. So if they drag it out an extra week or so that would be ok with me.
Fair enough. I think merrick.garland should have gotten a hearing too.
But we have one vote for spite.
Next?
WSS
-
I don't think the dems have much choice, but that being said, they should pull out any thing to delay it they can. What the republicans did last year, and it was a year ago, to prevent an up or down vote on Garland was horrible representation of what our political system has become. So if they drag it out an extra week or so that would be ok with me.
I don't think the dems have much choice, but that being said, they should pull out any thing to delay it they can. What the republicans did last year, and it was a year ago, to prevent an up or down vote on Garland was horrible representation of what our political system has become. So if they drag it out an extra week or so that would be ok with me.
Wrong. Educate yourself liberal.... lame duck presidents don't get their choice of a Supreme Court Judge.
You better believe the opposite would have occurred with a Republican prez.
This is not exclusive to a party,
http://thefederalist.com/2016/02/13/ample-precedent-for-rejecting-supreme-court-nominees/
-
I don't think the dems have much choice, but that being said, they should pull out any thing to delay it they can. What the republicans did last year, and it was a year ago, to prevent an up or down vote on Garland was horrible representation of what our political system has become. So if they drag it out an extra week or so that would be ok with me.
Wrong. Educate yourself liberal.... lame duck presidents don't get their choice of a Supreme Court Judge.
You better believe the opposite would have occurred with a Republican prez.
This is not exclusive to a party,
http://thefederalist.com/2016/02/13/ample-precedent-for-rejecting-supreme-court-nominees/
Wrong. Educate yourself liberal.... lame duck presidents don't get their choice of a Supreme Court Judge.
You better believe the opposite would have occurred with a Republican prez.
This is not exclusive to a party,
http://thefederalist.com/2016/02/13/ample-precedent-for-rejecting-supreme-court-nominees/
So....the longest period between getting nominated and having a confirmation hearing before Garland was 100 days set in 1916 for Louis Brandies. Garland went 300+ days without a hearing. Even your article says it, there is a precedent for rejecting, not a precedent for just not having a hearing in a reasonable amount of time.
-
So I realize some of you are Democrats, Trump haters or just general malcontent but I'm curious as to what will be the basis of the opposition to the Supreme Court nomination here? Is there anything of substance or are you just mad about Merrick Garland?
WSS
So I realize some of you are Democrats, Trump haters or just general malcontent but I'm curious as to what will be the basis of the opposition to the Supreme Court nomination here? Is there anything of substance or are you just mad about Merrick Garland?
WSS
It's a shame that a Supreme Court Justice nominee turns into a political circus, no matter what side of the aisle you lean toward. They are supposed to uphold the law of the land, not uphold the wishes of a political party.
I'm an American first. I wish our elected folks would realize that as well.
Sorry I didn't answer your question, I'm simply disgusted with our political system, and have been for a long time.
Karlis Missed -
Is the coming circus any different than usual? One side is never happy with the others picks.
-
So I realize some of you are Democrats, Trump haters or just general malcontent but I'm curious as to what will be the basis of the opposition to the Supreme Court nomination here? Is there anything of substance or are you just mad about Merrick Garland?
WSS
It's a shame that a Supreme Court Justice nominee turns into a political circus, no matter what side of the aisle you lean toward. They are supposed to uphold the law of the land, not uphold the wishes of a political party.
I'm an American first. I wish our elected folks would realize that as well.
Sorry I didn't answer your question, I'm simply disgusted with our political system, and have been for a long time.
I'm with you there Bob. Even though I'm pleased with the idea that the court will stay balanced with Gorsuch.It's a shame that a Supreme Court Justice nominee turns into a political circus, no matter what side of the aisle you lean toward. They are supposed to uphold the law of the land, not uphold the wishes of a political party.
I'm an American first. I wish our elected folks would realize that as well.
Sorry I didn't answer your question, I'm simply disgusted with our political system, and have been for a long time.
WSS
-
So I realize some of you are Democrats, Trump haters or just general malcontent but I'm curious as to what will be the basis of the opposition to the Supreme Court nomination here? Is there anything of substance or are you just mad about Merrick Garland?
WSS
It's a shame that a Supreme Court Justice nominee turns into a political circus, no matter what side of the aisle you lean toward. They are supposed to uphold the law of the land, not uphold the wishes of a political party.
I'm an American first. I wish our elected folks would realize that as well.
Sorry I didn't answer your question, I'm simply disgusted with our political system, and have been for a long time.
It's a shame that a Supreme Court Justice nominee turns into a political circus, no matter what side of the aisle you lean toward. They are supposed to uphold the law of the land, not uphold the wishes of a political party.
I'm an American first. I wish our elected folks would realize that as well.
Sorry I didn't answer your question, I'm simply disgusted with our political system, and have been for a long time.
Stuart
And that's what conservative judges do duh....uphold the law of the land, which in turn is not what liberal judges do.
Open your eyes...did you not hear about the recent ruling from that scumbag judge in Hawaii? These liberal fuckers legislate from the bench.
Upholding the law of the land to liberals is outdated, the Constitution is outdated, the Founding Fathers are outdated.
Put the "conservative' label on Gorsuch if you like but there shouldn't be a label if all judges adhered to upholding the law of the land.
Its only because of liberal judges that we label a judge "conservative".
-
I agree with graham here about his criticism of the left
-
-
she does have a point.
-
originalist.... they said Kagen was an "originalist" too
-
Ted Cruz reminded the gallery that 10 years ago the same body of Senators (including then Barry, Hillary, Joe Biden and Kerry) nominated Gorsuch for the federal court of appeals....
no disaproval then - why now if not for the politicking of the SCOTUS
-
It's a shame that a Supreme Court Justice nominee turns into a political circus, no matter what side of the aisle you lean toward. They are supposed to uphold the law of the land, not uphold the wishes of a political party.
I'm an American first. I wish our elected folks would realize that as well.
Sorry I didn't answer your question, I'm simply disgusted with our political system, and have been for a long time.
Stuart
And that's what conservative judges do duh....uphold the law of the land, which in turn is not what liberal judges do.
Open your eyes...did you not hear about the recent ruling from that scumbag judge in Hawaii? These liberal fuckers legislate from the bench.
Upholding the law of the land to liberals is outdated, the Constitution is outdated, the Founding Fathers are outdated.
Put the "conservative' label on Gorsuch if you like but there shouldn't be a label if all judges adhered to upholding the law of the land.
Its only because of liberal judges that we label a judge "conservative".
Stuart
Put the "conservative' label on Gorsuch if you like but there shouldn't be a label if all judges adhered to upholding the law of the land.
Its only because of liberal judges that we label a judge "conservative".
Did I call it or what!?!? Gorsuch reads the Browns board lol
-
Leave it to feinstein to be worried that Gorsuch adheres to our Constitution writer's intents...instead of
inventing liberal rationalizations to ignore it altogether.
How far the left has sunk. Big serious trouble.
-
Well it's pretty obvious from the bump and stocks of companies that sell stakes, coal oil and dunking stools, that the industry is expecting a return to witch trials.
Good call Senator Feinstein, be sure to park your broom behind the house.
WSS
-
speaking of witches... here's one - a former student of Gorsuch's....claims he made sexist remarks about pregnant women.
Gorsuch found out about the letter she sent out.... at his nomination proceedings...
she's another obaMao appointee - another dirty trick player.
-
This is a case where Gorsuch gave a dissenting opinion that's being held against him. "IF" the facts presented in this article are true and not slanted, which is a good possibility, I'm at a loss to explain what Gorsuch was thinking.
-
Gorsuch's chances of being confirmed in the senate...99.9999%.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login