• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Senate GOP Marks a First - Blocking an Obama Judicial Nominee

disneydude said:
and........

The point is.....Republicans cried loud and hard for "an up and down vote".....but when the tables are turned...they prove they are nothing but a bunch of empty rhetoric hypocrites.
Click to expand...

paybacks are a bitch.

the dems started it

they played politics with Bork who clearly had the integrity and the intellect to be on the USSC

they then played race with Estrada
 
Its funny to watch y'all dance around the hypocrisy. Like I said....I don't agree in filibusters regardless of which party is using them.....but to call for an "up or down" vote and play politics around it....and then turn around and play the same game....true....is "payback"....but its also grade-A hypocrisy.
 
disneydude said:
Its funny to watch y'all dance around the hypocrisy. Like I said....I don't agree in filibusters regardless of which party is using them.....but to call for an "up or down" vote and play politics around it....and then turn around and play the same game....true....is "payback"....but its also grade-A hypocrisy.
Click to expand...

so the dems aren't being hypocrites by whining about the GOP giving the dems some payback?

it cuts both ways but it was the dems who engaged in this crap FIRST and on RACIST Grounds
 
disneydude said:
Its funny to watch y'all dance around the hypocrisy. Like I said....I don't agree in filibusters regardless of which party is using them.....but to call for an "up or down" vote and play politics around it....and then turn around and play the same game....true....is "payback"....but its also grade-A hypocrisy.
Click to expand...

No, actually it's not.

Hypocrisy would be if they used the Filibuster ya know.. before, and often.


See what you are doing is just the DNC talking point, that the GOP isn't ALLOWED to use a parliamentary move that sunk and unqualified, political hacks hopes of being a judge. Because they dared to complain about the COPIOUS ABUSE of the system by the dems.

The only thing funny here is watching you try and stand fo ran indefensible standard. The DNC can Filibuster at will, the GOP has to play nice. No.
 
MrVicchio said:
No, actually it's not.

Hypocrisy would be if they used the Filibuster ya know.. before, and often.


See what you are doing is just the DNC talking point, that the GOP isn't ALLOWED to use a parliamentary move that sunk and unqualified, political hacks hopes of being a judge. Because they dared to complain about the COPIOUS ABUSE of the system by the dems.

The only thing funny here is watching you try and stand fo ran indefensible standard. The DNC can Filibuster at will, the GOP has to play nice. No.
Click to expand...


Estrada-ranked well qualified (without any dissent) by the ABA. recommended by all four former Living Dem Solicitor Generals including the CLINTON SG WHOM ESTRADA WORKED FOR

had more court room experience than Kagan and was only nominated for the Appeals court

Keisler-a top supreme court litigator and managing partner at Sidley Austin he founded the federalist society, had worked as a white house counsel for Bush I, then was an extremely well respected professional at the Bush II DOJ where he was head of the civil division and then acting AG. blocked by dems mainly because he was seen as a sure bet supreme court pick by the next GOP administration

the fact that he was the son of liberal Jewish parents hurt him too-there was a perception that a Yale Magna who is a long Island Jew is supposed to be a liberal not one of the most brilliant conservative legal minds in the USA
 
Anyone who founded the Federalist Society does not belong within 1,000 feet of a judges bench as its occupant.
 
haymarket said:
Anyone who founded the Federalist Society does not belong within 1,000 feet of a judges bench as its occupant.
Click to expand...

another Hall of fame stupid post
 
TurtleDude said:
another Hall of fame stupid post
Click to expand...

More personal attacks without one single shred of refutatation. And this from a guy who claims to use common sense and logic.

Apparently you want radical extremists who would repeal the 20th century on our courts as judges? The Federalist Society is one of the most anti-democratic and subversive organizations in modern American society. They are a huge threat to working Americans and anyone who cares about keeping our rights and our form of government.

Perhaps that is why you took offense to my characterization of its founder?
 
Last edited:
haymarket said:
More personal attacks without one single shred of refutatation. And this from a guy who claims to use common sense and logic.

Apparently you want radical extremists who would repeal the 20th century on our courts as judges? The Federalist Society is one of the most anti-democratic and subversive organizations in modern American society. They are a huge threat to working Americans and anyone who cares about keeping our rights and our form of government.

Perhaps that is why you took offense to my characterization of its founder?
Click to expand...

Your characterization that someone like Keisler-who won praise from lawyers and jurists on all sides-is unqualified to sit on a court because he founded an influential (maybe you ought to call up my old friend Akhil Reed Amar and ask him about Keisler-and ARA is hardly a conservative-he also is widely seen as the top constitutional scholar in the USA) rightwing legal society is partisan hackery at its worst

far more qualified than say Kagan or RBG (when she was nominated for the CoA)

its funny how many INTELLIGENT liberal legal scholars have appeared at Federalist SOciety meetings

your silly rant is akin to saying Kgan should have been DQd because she worked for Obama
 
The Federalist Society is part of the war on working people in America. The Federalist Society combines some of the worst aspects of conservatism and libertarianism and the marriage of the two produces a toxic extremism that would destroy America if their agenda would ever be realized.

Turtle - are you now or have you ever been a member of the Federalist Society? I would think you share many of their beliefs, views, political positions and goals based on their website and your own posts here.
 
haymarket said:
The Federalist Society is part of the war on working people in America. The Federalist Society combines some of the worst aspects of conservatism and libertarianism and the marriage of the two produces a toxic extremism that would destroy America if their agenda would ever be realized.

Turtle - are you now or have you ever been a member of the Federalist Society? I would think you share many of their beliefs, views, political positions and goals based on their website and your own posts here.
Click to expand...

]

I was actually asked to be a founding member-I was too busy coaching a varsity sport while attending law school

Funny, the ABA listed both Estrada and Keisler as well qualified-their highest endorsement.

so much for your rant
 
haymarket said:
The Federalist Society is part of the war on working people in America. The Federalist Society combines some of the worst aspects of conservatism and libertarianism and the marriage of the two produces a toxic extremism that would destroy America if their agenda would ever be realized.

Turtle - are you now or have you ever been a member of the Federalist Society? I would think you share many of their beliefs, views, political positions and goals based on their website and your own posts here.
Click to expand...

Oh btw

oh_the_drama.jpg
 
haymarket said:
The Federalist Society is part of the war on working people in America. The Federalist Society combines some of the worst aspects of conservatism and libertarianism and the marriage of the two produces a toxic extremism that would destroy America if their agenda would ever be realized.

Turtle - are you now or have you ever been a member of the Federalist Society? I would think you share many of their beliefs, views, political positions and goals based on their website and your own posts here.
Click to expand...

No, your progressivism, which claims to be "for the working" people is what's destroying America.
 
MrVicchio said:
No, your progressivism, which claims to be "for the working" people is what's destroying America.
Click to expand...

the massive deficits and a massive number of citizens addicted to entitlements are certainly caused by the attitude and policies of the party Haymarket works for
 
TurtleDude said:
the massive deficits and a massive number of citizens addicted to entitlements are certainly caused by the attitude and policies of the party Haymarket works for
Click to expand...

I really believe haymarket thinks he's got the right of it, the problem is that he's so intoxicated by the idea of Government Saving us all, that he's blind to the problems, and how silly he comes across.
 
disneydude said:
Never heard of slate.com....but I checked it out. Not really my style...but thanks for the heads up anyway. As far as the rest of your post....if this were simply an anomaly in the GOP actions, I could understand how one might not view it as hypocritical. However....the GOP is notorious at the "Do as I say...not as I do politics".....

Some things never change.
Click to expand...

This most certainy IS an anomaly. After TWENTY-FOUR some-odd months, the GOP filibusters one EXTREMIST nominee after the filibustering of DOZENS of Bush nominees... umm... sorry, your argument holds NO water at all...
 
TurtleDude said:
the massive deficits and a massive number of citizens addicted to entitlements are certainly caused by the attitude and policies of the party Haymarket works for
Click to expand...

The massive deficits go back to your Party and your President. The cut in revenues - those 47% who do not pay income tax that you are always wailing about - that also comes from a Republican President - Bush - and it was his intention to take them off the tax rolls.

You really do not know your American history very well. In just a few short days you have placed the start of the estate tax in the Gilded Age when it actually started here a century before. You alleged that before the income tax people only paid for the government services they would use and then could not find one source of evidence or information to substantiate it. And now you entire 'this was caused by the democrats is proven to be a gross falsehood which ignores the role of both Bushes in both spending and in cutting taxes on those who you complain about the most.

It seems when you point the finger of blame at the Democrats, three of your own fingers are pointing right back at your own Republican Party.

You Republicans need to read your Shakespeare for the fault lies within yourselves.
 
Last edited:
MrVicchio said:
No, actually it's not.

Hypocrisy would be if they used the Filibuster ya know.. before, and often.


See what you are doing is just the DNC talking point, that the GOP isn't ALLOWED to use a parliamentary move that sunk and unqualified, political hacks hopes of being a judge. Because they dared to complain about the COPIOUS ABUSE of the system by the dems.

The only thing funny here is watching you try and stand fo ran indefensible standard. The DNC can Filibuster at will, the GOP has to play nice. No.
Click to expand...

I agree and disagree. As long as the parlimentary move is allowed...the GOP should be allowed to use it.....just don't pretend by be all "high and mighty" and above it....else the hypocrisy label applies.....as the song goes "This here's just a little Peyton Place and you're all Harper Valley Hypocrites".
 
MrVicchio said:
And this tib bit:

Berkeley's Judge Goodwin Liu - WSJ.com

The guy was a political hack, and no business even being thought of for the bench.
Click to expand...
Empathy has its place in the judicial system, to a certain extent at the lower levels. But absolutely not at the higher level courts, and not at the Supreme Court where the discussion concerns the academics of law, the philosophy of law, the intent of the Founders and judicial precedents.
 
haymarket said:
The massive deficits go back to your Party and your President. The cut in revenues - those 47% who do not pay income tax that you are always wailing about - that also comes from a Republican President - Bush - and it was his intention to take them off the tax rolls.

You really do not know your American history very well. In just a few short days you have placed the start of the estate tax in the Gilded Age when it actually started here a century before. You alleged that before the income tax people only paid for the government services they would use and then could not find one source of evidence or information to substantiate it. And now you entire 'this was caused by the democrats is proven to be a gross falsehood which ignores the role of both Bushes in both spending and in cutting taxes on those who you complain about the most.

It seems when you point the finger of blame at the Democrats, three of your own fingers are pointing right back at your own Republican Party.

You Republicans need to read your Shakespeare for the fault lies within yourselves.
Click to expand...

:) As per the Constitution of the United States of America, all spending bills begin in the House of Representatives.

shall we compare deficit spending based on ownership of the body of government that actually was responsible for it?


now, I'm not gonna give W a free ride - the first stimulus was an utter failure (as stimulus packages based on increased government payouts tend to be), TARP was problematic and beginning the Auto Bailouts was an unmitigated disaster. But if you wan to talk budgets, we need to talk about the House. :)

:) a visualization that makes it fairly easy to grasp - and always leaves me thirsty :mrgreen:

 
Kandahar said:
Ehh, that's what the out-party says about EVERY judicial nominee they don't like and want to filibuster. I'm not a big fan of filibusters in general...judicial or otherwise. The purpose of a filibuster was supposed to be to allow all senators to present their viewpoint, rather than to obstruct the business of the Senate. Our government would function a lot better if filibusters were removed entirely and/or if there was a certain time limit attached to them.
Click to expand...

I agree (for both parties), forcing a super majority on every decision has become a real road block to addressing the country's many problems. It is certainly not representative of we the people where there is rarely agreement on anything that would present a super majority opinion.
 
Catawba said:
I agree (for both parties), forcing a super majority on every decision has become a real road block to addressing the country's many problems. It is certainly not representative of we the people where there is rarely agreement on anything that would present a super majority opinion.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't object to removing the filibuster on regular business, but in the case of judicial nominees, I wouldn't object to a change that would require a 3/5 super-majority to approve judicial appointments. Just too important to leave to a simple majority...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom