Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 93

Thread: Obama Withdraws Judicial Nominee Blocked TWICE by Republicans.....

  1. #41
    Sage
    clownboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Oregon
    Last Seen
    08-17-16 @ 10:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    26,087

    Re: Obama Withdraws Judicial Nominee Blocked TWICE by Republicans.....

    Just wondering, why wait for the second refusal to withdraw her name and try another? This is a one strike and you're out process. Why waste the time and the manpower fussing about the second time?

  2. #42
    Sage
    Slyfox696's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    7,966

    Re: Obama Withdraws Judicial Nominee Blocked TWICE by Republicans.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    No, you didn't. The 2A doesn't say "for the purpose of assembling in a state militia for defense against foreign enemies,"
    It DOES say "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State"...

    nor did anyone who wrote it say it meant that. You're lying. You are very dishonest
    *sigh*

    You can call me dishonest all you want, it won't change the fact I'm right. Again, you're wanting to sidetrack this thread with an argument that has been had for decades. Move on already.

    If you need to lie as often as you do, it says quite a bit about the confidence you have in your own positions.
    Just because you say it, doesn't make it true. There are hundreds of years and thousands of people/arguments which agree with me, just as there is half a century and thousands of people/arguments which agree with you.

    The only person engaging in dishonesty here is you, trying to assert your interpretation of the original wording is superior to any other valid interpretation.

    If you don't want to be called on the dishonest way in which you conduct "debate," then I suggest you not post here.
    And if you don't want positions to be attributed to you which naturally follow the thread of a discussion, then I suggest you not post in those threads. What I find most amusing about you is how you keep transferring your own failures onto me. You're the one who came into the thread defending someone else. You're the one who engaged in the discussion with me. You're the one asserting your interpretation is the only valid one, when hundreds of years and thousands of valid arguments disagree. You're the dishonest one here, and now you're crying about how I naturally assumed your defense against my statement was a stance in favor of the thread topic.

    Kindly remove yourself from the thread you have admitted to having no interest in if my posting bothers you so much.

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    U were saying now?

    Right.....she would follow the precedent of the law. Which like I stated from the get go. She says she does. Talk and actions are two different things. Now as a Private attorney show the link where she has been about the 2nd amendment.

    Barack Obama nominated Caitlin Halligan on September 29, 2010. She now serves as the General Counsel for the New York County District Attorney’s Office. This seat has been vacant for over six years.

    A strong advocate of affirmative action, this lawyer is a radical opponent of the Second Amendment! She has demonstrated that her positions are “activist” oriented!

    According to the Judicial Action Group:

    A thorough examination of Ms. Halligan’s record clearly demonstrates she does not meet the standard appropriate for that of a judge to the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Her appellate briefs in multiple cases on a variety of issues repeatedly petition courts to change public policy and law through activist decisions.”

    Since this was highlighted by some during the nomination process, she has unsuccessfully tried to “distance herself” from that quote. But her failure to provide substantive evidence that would clarify her statements is harmful to the United States, especially to gun owners.

    U.S. Senator Tom Coburn asked Ms. Halligan about her views about tort liability for gun manufacturers. Her response: “I am not familiar with the laws of any other state or federal law, and have no basis for an opinion regarding any such claims that might be brought in other jurisdictions.” However, for a person “not familiar” with the law, how could she have filed an amicus brief on the exact same subject in the Second Court?

    The Washington Times reports: “…numerous discrepancies in Halligan’s hearing before the United States Judiciary Committee. The controversy is over a 2004 New York City bar association report on enemy combatants, which concluded that indefinite detention during wartime is unconstitutional. Ms. Halligan was listed as a signatory on the document but told Senator Jon Kyl, Arizona Republican that she first ‘became aware of the existence of the report’ last summer.”

    The Gun Owners of America and the National Rifle Association have opposed the nomination of Caitlin Halligan.

    Mr. Cox, Executive Director of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action wrote: “The NRA’s opposition is based on Ms. Halligan’s attacks on the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens.”

    John Velleco, Director of Federal Affairs for Gun Owners of America, wrote: “Halligan has proven to us that she places liberal political activism above fealty to the law.”

    The U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee (RPC) writes: “Ms. Halligan’s well-documented record as a committed advocate of extreme liberal positions raises questions about whether she would be a fair and impartial jurist. These concerns are compounded by the fact that Ms. Halligan has been nominated to one of the most important courts in the United States.”

    The Republican National Lawyers Association officially condemns the nomination of Ms. Halligan. Their precise call in a letter sent to Congressional leaders on November 2 is: “The Republican National Lawyers Association opposes the confirmation of Caitlin Halligan to be United States Circuit Judge for the District of Columbia Circuit and urges Senators to oppose her nomination.”

    “Ms. Halligan has provided answers to the (Congressional) Committee that demonstrate both a disturbing lack of candor and an uninformed view of legislation that she, through her public positions, deemed unconstitutional.”

    “…Her record reveals numerous instances where she has advanced an ‘evolving or living constitution’ methodology.”

    The Republican National Lawyers Association letter went on to reprimand Ms. Halligan to the Congressional leadership: “Ms. Halligan’s statements regarding judicial philosophy also raise concerns about her candor. At her Senate Judiciary Committee hearing and in response to questions for the record, she indicated that judges should look to original intent when interpreting the Constitution. She explained in response to a written question from Senator Grassley: ‘A judge should look to domestic legal sources in interpreting the United States Constitution – specifically, the text of the Constitution, the original intent of the framers, and governing precedent.”

    Anti-Gun Caitlin Halligan Court Confirmation Today

    Hows that Happiness you were talkin about now. U happy yet or do you need to see more my liberal brutha.
    I'm still waiting on you to answer my question. You can bold a million things if you want, but you have not once answered my question. I did, however, answer yours with words which came straight from her own mouth.

    How does her arguing on behalf of the state of New York in favor of allowing a state to hold gun manufacturers responsible for illegal gun purchases violate the 2nd Amendment? You can keep quoting all the biased sources you want, and I'll continue to not care. The moment you actually answer my question (or even provide specific evidence of her working against the 2nd Amendment, not just Republican rhetoric that she does) will be the moment I care.
    Last edited by Slyfox696; 03-23-13 at 02:08 PM.

  3. #43
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Obama Withdraws Judicial Nominee Blocked TWICE by Republicans.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    It DOES say "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State"...

    *sigh*

    You can call me dishonest all you want, it won't change the fact I'm right. Again, you're wanting to sidetrack this thread with an argument that has been had for decades. Move on already.

    Just because you say it, doesn't make it true. There are hundreds of years and thousands of people/arguments which agree with me, just as there is half a century and thousands of people/arguments which agree with you.

    The only person engaging in dishonesty here is you, trying to assert your interpretation of the original wording is superior to any other valid interpretation.

    And if you don't want positions to be attributed to you which naturally follow the thread of a discussion, then I suggest you not post in those threads. What I find most amusing about you is how you keep transferring your own failures onto me. You're the one who came into the thread defending someone else. You're the one who engaged in the discussion with me. You're the one asserting your interpretation is the only valid one, when hundreds of years and thousands of valid arguments disagree. You're the dishonest one here, and now you're crying about how I naturally assumed your defense against my statement was a stance in favor of the thread topic.

    Kindly remove yourself from the thread you have admitted to having no interest in if my posting bothers you so much.


    I'm still waiting on you to answer my question. You can bold a million things if you want, but you have not once answered my question. I did, however, answer yours with words which came straight from her own mouth.

    How does her arguing on behalf of the state of New York in favor of allowing a state to hold gun manufacturers responsible for illegal gun purchases violate the 2nd Amendment? You can keep quoting all the biased sources you want, and I'll continue to not care. The moment you actually answer my question (or even provide specific evidence of her working against the 2nd Amendment, not just Republican rhetoric that she does) will be the moment I care.
    Well you asked a dishonest question as I stated She was Anti Gun. Then U tried to play like she wasn't Anti Gun. Course you were also the one that said you couldn't find anything on this woman at all. When clearly there is all kind of stuff out there on her. So much so that you just cant get round that fact and are now complaining about Republican Sources that she is Anti Gun Anti 2nd Amendment. While I am sure all those liberal sources are saying she favors the Second and stands on the side with pro Gun advocates.

    I never stated anything was based off her case out of NY. I stated she carried the same beliefs as Obama did. Hence her nomination. Where did I say this was all based out of her one case or what Grassely stated? No where in this thread did I ever state such.

    But as usual you libs look to deflect when coming out the box. Your focus was on her case over the manufacturers out of New York. My case was she was Anti Gun and an Obama Puppet. Which has been validated. There is no getting round the fact that she is Anti Gun and Anti 2nd Amendment. Despite what she said. Also my point was that Obama had this in the works for the last two years. Which was also validated.

    Now as to you caring. I don't give damn whether you care or not.

  4. #44
    Sage
    samsmart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,316
    Blog Entries
    37

    Re: Obama Withdraws Judicial Nominee Blocked TWICE by Republicans.....

    Quote Originally Posted by MMC View Post
    I think the Repubs were saying just that when the Demos did with Juniors Appoinments. Course while looking to protect the 2nd down the road.
    Because the GOP Senators did it to Clinton.

    And so on back, while the downward spiral of governance continues.
    Also, we need to legalize recreational drugs and prostitution.

  5. #45
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:07 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,503

    Re: Obama Withdraws Judicial Nominee Blocked TWICE by Republicans.....

    Quote Originally Posted by Slyfox696 View Post
    It DOES say "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State"...

    *sigh*

    You can call me dishonest all you want, it won't change the fact I'm right. Again, you're wanting to sidetrack this thread with an argument that has been had for decades. Move on already.
    Speaking of *sigh*, that does not mean what you REWROTE IT INTO meaning.

    And yes, it's an argument which has gone on for decades, and you're on the side of it which is 100% wrong, in every way it can be wrong. And after all of this, I have no reason to chalk it up to being an "honest mistake."


    Just because you say it, doesn't make it true.
    I never claimed that it did. In fact, I explicitly said the arguments were elsewhere to be found. Can you get through a post without lying about something?


    There are hundreds of years and thousands of people/arguments which agree with me
    No, there aren't. There was never the slightest peep of your "argument" before 1940.

    More lies
    .


    just as there is half a century and thousands of people/arguments which agree with you.
    No, that goes all the way back the explicit statements of the Founders and the Framers, as well as comments in federal and Supreme Court decisions throughout the 19th and 20th centuries, including -- INCLUDING -- US v. Miller.

    For you, is this ignorance? Dishonesty? Probably a combination of both, motivated by the latter.


    The only person engaging in dishonesty here is you, trying to assert your interpretation of the original wording is superior to any other valid interpretation.
    Incorrect, and you again attribute to me something I didn't say. I said your interpretation was wrong. It is.


    And if you don't want positions to be attributed to you which naturally follow the thread of a discussion, then I suggest you not post in those threads.
    Oh, you blame ME for YOU accusing me of saying something I did not say. That's on no one but you. Holy flirking snit, the depth of your dishonesty sinks even further.


    What I find most amusing about you is how you keep transferring your own failures onto me. You're the one who came into the thread defending someone else. You're the one who engaged in the discussion with me. You're the one asserting your interpretation is the only valid one, when hundreds of years and thousands of valid arguments disagree. You're the dishonest one here, and now you're crying about how I naturally assumed your defense against my statement was a stance in favor of the thread topic.
    Oh, wow -- you're sobbing and lying at the same time.

    Kindly remove yourself from the thread you have admitted to having no interest in if my posting bothers you so much.
    Oh, you poooooor thing. What's the problem -- accustomed to message boards where people can't see through your dishonest tactics? It all does seem quite practiced, so I assume this isn't your first rodeo.

    Unfortunately, when you play the game, you don't get to choose the opposing team.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  6. #46
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Obama Withdraws Judicial Nominee Blocked TWICE by Republicans.....

    Quote Originally Posted by samsmart View Post
    Because the GOP Senators did it to Clinton.

    And so on back, while the downward spiral of governance continues.
    Yes, but this is still the First time in the last 50 years.....that Obama didn't get one appointed full term. So now that Chain has been broken in that regard. Which Obama now holds that record of being the First to do so to.

  7. #47
    Sage
    samsmart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,316
    Blog Entries
    37

    Re: Obama Withdraws Judicial Nominee Blocked TWICE by Republicans.....

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Just wondering, why wait for the second refusal to withdraw her name and try another? This is a one strike and you're out process. Why waste the time and the manpower fussing about the second time?
    You could just as easily ask that about the Senators filibustering the appointment.
    Also, we need to legalize recreational drugs and prostitution.

  8. #48
    Heavy Hitter


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    63,485

    Re: Obama Withdraws Judicial Nominee Blocked TWICE by Republicans.....

    What's wrong with letting people sue gun manufacturers? Bush screwed up when he gave them immunity.

  9. #49
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:07 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,503

    Re: Obama Withdraws Judicial Nominee Blocked TWICE by Republicans.....

    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    What's wrong with letting people sue gun manufacturers? Bush screwed up when he gave them immunity.
    Because they are no more responsible for what someone chooses to do with their product than GM is responsible for someone running down someone else with a Tahoe.

    This is not difficult.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  10. #50
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Obama Withdraws Judicial Nominee Blocked TWICE by Republicans.....

    Quote Originally Posted by calamity View Post
    What's wrong with letting people sue gun manufacturers? Bush screwed up when he gave them immunity.
    Well for one retailers were part of it. Did you think they should be made part of the package? How is it Right to sue the Gun Manufacturers for something that another individual does? Also when they are not involved in any sale?

Page 5 of 10 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •