10-06-2005, 10:54 AM
|
#1
|
|
First Line Centre
|
Not sure why this hasn't been debated yet.
I dislike Bush as much as the next rationale person, but I've got to hand it to him this time, he's managed to p*ss almost everybody off with this appointment.
What runs through this guys head? Anything? Or is just the wind whistling through his ears.
So is Harriet a true believer or a bush puppet?
|
|
|
|
10-06-2005, 11:37 AM
|
#2
|
|
CP Pontiff
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: A pasture out by Millarville
|
p*ssing everyone off means he hit the center of the target.
It's the other guy, Roberts, thats suspicious. Only one side hates him!!!
Cowperson
__________________
Dear Lord, help me to be the kind of person my dog thinks I am. - Anonymous
|
|
|
|
|
10-06-2005, 12:28 PM
|
#3
|
|
Retired
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Cowperson@Oct 6 2005, 05:37 PM
p*ssing everyone off means he hit the center of the target.
It's the other guy, Roberts, thats suspicious. Only one side hates him!!!
Cowperson
|
I don't think so cow, a lot of people are completely unsure of what she will actually do, because they don't know her views on those hot button issues.
Obviously the parties involved want to actually know what they are voting for, and I don't think that is unreasonable in anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
10-06-2005, 12:33 PM
|
#4
|
|
CP Pontiff
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: A pasture out by Millarville
|
Quote:
Originally posted by CaramonLS@Oct 6 2005, 11:28 AM
I don't think so cow, a lot of people are completely unsure of what she will actually do, because they don't know her views on those hot button issues.
Obviously the parties involved want to actually know what they are voting for, and I don't think that is unreasonable in anyway.
|
I was kidding.
I don't think its possible to pick a popular candidate in a polarized nation. Whatever name comes up, there will be hell to pay.
EDIT: This is a pretty amusing column on the polarization of American politics . . . . enough paranoia to go around.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/06/...ain917324.shtml
Cowperson
__________________
Dear Lord, help me to be the kind of person my dog thinks I am. - Anonymous
|
|
|
|
|
10-06-2005, 12:43 PM
|
#5
|
|
Fearmongerer
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
|
Agreed Cow.
Has there ever been a nominee that made both sides "happy"??
IMO only, i have a feeling that this woman may be the sacrificial lamb who doesn't get confirmed, and then WHAMMO, Bush comes in with someone that is hardcore right wing, and with one nominee already denied, they (the Dems) will almost have to confirm the following nominee. Otherwise they look like they are obstructing the business of government. Its a strategy that may just work as well.
Too bad.
|
|
|
|
|
10-06-2005, 02:17 PM
|
#6
|
|
Scoring Winger
|
Yea for constantly being branded an Idiot by the left, that Bush is one sneaky customer.
Nominating the Stealth justice was a brilliant move.
|
|
|
|
|
10-06-2005, 02:38 PM
|
#7
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Djibouti
|
Quote:
Originally posted by transplant99@Oct 6 2005, 11:43 AM
IMO only, i have a feeling that this woman may be the sacrificial lamb who doesn't get confirmed, and then WHAMMO, Bush comes in with someone that is hardcore right wing, and with one nominee already denied, they (the Dems) will almost have to confirm the following nominee. Otherwise they look like they are obstructing the business of government. Its a strategy that may just work as well.
Too bad.
|
My understanding is that any nominee will be confirmed due to the numbers in the Senate and House, unless the Dem's decide to filibuster, which I can't see them doing for fear of the very possibility you bring up.
The thing that has me shaking my head is that he nominated someone for the Supreme Court who has never been a judge before 
|
|
|
|
|
10-06-2005, 03:17 PM
|
#8
|
|
Franchise Player
|
Mike F, it isn't that uncommon to have someone nominated who has never been a judge before. Anyways the Supreme Court shares little in common with the average trail court in the States. I think I read that 1/3 of all nominees have never been a judge before.
|
|
|
|
|
10-06-2005, 03:19 PM
|
#9
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Clinching Party
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Mike F@Oct 6 2005, 02:38 PM
The thing that has me shaking my head is that he nominated someone for the Supreme Court who has never been a judge before
|
I thought the same thing but I heard on the television that it has happened 19 times (I think that was the number) before. One of the current sitting SC judges wasn't a judge before getting appointed, iirc.
|
|
|
|
|
10-06-2005, 05:11 PM
|
#10
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Kalispell, Montana
|
Quote:
Originally posted by transplant99@Oct 6 2005, 06:43 PM
Agreed Cow.
Has there ever been a nominee that made both sides "happy"??
IMO only, i have a feeling that this woman may be the sacrificial lamb who doesn't get confirmed, and then WHAMMO, Bush comes in with someone that is hardcore right wing, and with one nominee already denied, they (the Dems) will almost have to confirm the following nominee. Otherwise they look like they are obstructing the business of government. Its a strategy that may just work as well.
Too bad.
|
I think you're on the right track, but I think it goes the other way. She's going to be confirmed, largely supported by democrats.
Only the far right of the Republicans who don't mind committing political suicide are going to vote against her.
The dems realize this is a great chance to avoid a right wing extremist being appointed, and they will vote accordingly. A few democratic Senators have already publicly pledged support for her.
I know nothing about the woman, so I have no opinion either way, but we can only hope that she turns out to be as good a justice as O'Connor was.
__________________
I am in love with Montana. For other states I have admiration, respect, recognition, even some affection, but with Montana it is love." - John Steinbeck
|
|
|
|
|
10-06-2005, 05:12 PM
|
#11
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Kalispell, Montana
|
Quote:
Originally posted by RougeUnderoos@Oct 6 2005, 09:19 PM
I thought the same thing but I heard on the television that it has happened 19 times (I think that was the number) before. One of the current sitting SC judges wasn't a judge before getting appointed, iirc.
|
39.
Head still shaking Mike F?
__________________
I am in love with Montana. For other states I have admiration, respect, recognition, even some affection, but with Montana it is love." - John Steinbeck
|
|
|
|
|
10-06-2005, 05:36 PM
|
#12
|
|
Franchise Player
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Djibouti
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Displaced Flames fan@Oct 6 2005, 04:12 PM
39.
Head still shaking Mike F?
|
Absolutely.
This wasn't an anti-Bush thing, I just find it extremely odd that you would give someone a lifetime appointment to the highest court without them having any experience as a judge
|
|
|
|
|
10-07-2005, 07:44 AM
|
#13
|
|
CP Pontiff
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: A pasture out by Millarville
|
Quote:
Originally posted by Mike F@Oct 6 2005, 04:36 PM
Absolutely.
This wasn't an anti-Bush thing, I just find it extremely odd that you would give someone a lifetime appointment to the highest court without them having any experience as a judge
|
If I'm not mistaken, one half of all Supreme Court Justices ever appointed have had NO prior judicial experience.
Most Chief Justices, including Roberts, are nominated to the highest position on the Court without any previous experience on the Court; indeed some, like John Marshall and Earl Warren, without any prior judicial experience.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_Justice...e_United_States
Cowperson
__________________
Dear Lord, help me to be the kind of person my dog thinks I am. - Anonymous
|
|
|
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:46 PM.
|
|
