quote:

Originally posted by Floyd D. Barber:
Hello, McFly,

[FLASH_VIDEO]<iframe frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/wlCLt_Shbu4" width="560"></iframe>[/FLASH_VIDEO]

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:
During this past week we have learned that Neil Gorsuch is entirely qualified for the Supreme Court. We have learned he is personable, likable, and highly qualified. We have also learned he is smarter than most of the Senators who interviewed him.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
It's hilarious to watch someone like Al Franken, who isn't even a lawyer, much less a judge, try to spar with a man like Gorsuch.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
It's hilarious to watch someone like Al Franken, who isn't even a lawyer, much less a judge, try to spar with a man like Gorsuch.

quote:

Originally posted by Spokane228:

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
It's hilarious to watch someone like Al Franken, who isn't even a lawyer, much less a judge, try to spar with a man like Gorsuch.

After watching the hearings, I think one of the prerequisites for sitting on the Judicial Committee should be a law degree.

The Dem from Hawaii sounded like a seventh grader.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
It's hilarious to watch someone like Al Franken, who isn't even a lawyer, much less a judge, try to spar with a man like Gorsuch.

quote:

Originally posted by nhtagmember:
that was pretty funny

Franken needs to go back to someplace where he is smarter than others around him - I am probably thinking a pre-K class might be a better challenge

and Leaky trying to one-up - you could tell that his whole life has been a waste of time...he just doesn't get it - he's an addle- minded old fool that doesn't know when to quit

quote:

Originally posted by stickman428:
...REemocrates "You are perpetually pissed off insufferable little cuntly asshole and you just lost the presidency. They have to do something to energize their base of criminally insane fools.

Nuke em.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
It's hilarious to watch someone like Al Franken, who isn't even a lawyer, much less a judge, try to spar with a man like Gorsuch.

quote:

While we on this site get it, the left do not see Franken and Leahy as fools. You see, they are asking the hard questions. :roll eyes:

When in reality, this entire hearing is a dog and pony show. Gorsuch is clean, they know it, so they are putting on a show, pandering to the constituents, and thumbing their nose at what is best for the US.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
Floyd, that Crowder video is a hoot.

quote:

Originally posted by pbslinger:
Trying to figure out the dims angle on how they are treating Gorsuch. If they filibuster a very qualified candidate just because their view of the Constitution differs, they are setting another bad precedence.

The nuclear option was developed by them but Republicans never opposed their Supreme Court nominees, so they didn't have to use it for that. I have little doubt they would have and in hindsight maybe it would have been better to have forced them to. It didn't seem risky for them to establish this precedence when they invoked the nuclear option, since it appeared they'd be in power for a long time and the opposition wouldn't be in a position to apply it.

They will argue till the cows come home that somehow the nuclear option was appropriate for lower court judges, but isn't for Supreme Court picks. Possibly there is some argument for this, but it has to be more than just that Supreme court picks are more important.

If they filibuster Gorsuch, they likely wish the Repubs to go nuclear option now for some reason. It may be because they want to sue and delay as long as possible. They may get a stay from a lower court and leave seats open for an extended time, possibly after the 2020 election. If they do sue a nuclear option seated justice, I hope the judge functions until a SC decision rendered the pick null.

They may risk that the entire nuclear option was Unconstitutional and disallow filling the Supreme Court during this administration. They would hope that this would only apply to Supreme court picks and wouldn't impact the lower court picks they already seated, or the ruling wouldn't apply retroactively.

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
It's hilarious to watch someone like Al Franken, who isn't even a lawyer, much less a judge, try to spar with a man like Gorsuch.

quote:

Originally posted by David W:

quote:

Originally posted by parabellum:
It's hilarious to watch someone like Al Franken, who isn't even a lawyer, much less a judge, try to spar with a man like Gorsuch.

Franken is bumbling idiot, wait,wait let me get my pamphlet out and teach you about law Mr. Gorsuch. When he doesn't get his way he cries about wasting his time. WTF is wrong with people voting this man back into office year after year?

quote:

Originally posted by wishfull thinker:

quote:

Originally posted by stickman428:
...REemocrates "You are perpetually pissed off insufferable little cuntly asshole and you just lost the presidency. They have to do something to energize their base of criminally insane fools.

Nuke em.

Your post is remarkably rude and insensitive to the party out of power and also ends with a resort to violence; I like how you think-it's the only way to be sure.

quote:

Originally posted by berto:

quote:

Originally posted by pbslinger:
Trying to figure out the dims angle on how they are treating Gorsuch. If they filibuster a very qualified candidate just because their view of the Constitution differs, they are setting another bad precedence.

The nuclear option was developed by them but Republicans never opposed their Supreme Court nominees, so they didn't have to use it for that. I have little doubt they would have and in hindsight maybe it would have been better to have forced them to. It didn't seem risky for them to establish this precedence when they invoked the nuclear option, since it appeared they'd be in power for a long time and the opposition wouldn't be in a position to apply it.

They will argue till the cows come home that somehow the nuclear option was appropriate for lower court judges, but isn't for Supreme Court picks. Possibly there is some argument for this, but it has to be more than just that Supreme court picks are more important.

If they filibuster Gorsuch, they likely wish the Repubs to go nuclear option now for some reason. It may be because they want to sue and delay as long as possible. They may get a stay from a lower court and leave seats open for an extended time, possibly after the 2020 election. If they do sue a nuclear option seated justice, I hope the judge functions until a SC decision rendered the pick null.

They may risk that the entire nuclear option was Unconstitutional and disallow filling the Supreme Court during this administration. They would hope that this would only apply to Supreme court picks and wouldn't impact the lower court picks they already seated, or the ruling wouldn't apply retroactively.

The Senate creates its own rules and procedures aside from what's actually set out in the constitution (treaties, amendments, expulsion, etc). Many rules and procedures are/were longstanding and not subject to mere politics. The dems broke with that tradition when they removed the 60 vote barrier to Obama's nominees. There's nothing sacred about keeping it only for SCOTUS. There's nothing to sue over.