*HTML is OFF *UBB Code is ON Smilies Legend
Smilies Legend
If you have previously registered, but forgotten your password, click here.
T O P I C R E V I E WRandallCongrats to the new SCOTUS justice Gorsuch! The vote was 54-45, with 4 Dems voting yay.RandallWelcome to the Supreme Court, Justice Gorsach.jwhopLuckily, America dodged the Hillary bullet and President Trump nominated an Originalist, Constitutionalist Supreme Court Justice instead of a far left loon.RandallThat was a huge bullet we dodged!teaselShame that your lot refused to do their jobs for over a year, and confirm Obama's pick.NodeThe seat was stolen, we know this. If Trump has the opportunity in his final year of office to appoint it should be blocked as well. And will be. Machinations of this type do not bode well. Numerous Republicans spoke favorably about Garland when he was up for confirmation in the 1990s, and conservative Chief Justice John Roberts has praised Garland’s judgement.Anytime Judge Garland disagrees, you know you’re in a difficult area," Roberts said.Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, a member of the Judiciary Committee and a vocal proponent of blocking any Obama nominee, said the week before Obama’s announcement that he didn’t believe the president when he said he would select a moderate.But Hatch added, "(Obama) could easily name Merrick Garland, who is a fine man. He probably won’t do that because this appointment is about the election."Garland was a great pick. And deserved an up down vote.jwhopSo did Judge Bork deserve confirmation to the Supreme Court. But, democrats played their usual games and the judge who was most probably the pre-eminent Jurist of the last 100 years wasn't confirmed.NodeBork? So 19th centuryHe opposed the Supreme Court's one man, one vote decision on legislative apportionment.He wrote an article opposing the 1964 civil rights law that required hotels, restaurants and other businesses to serve people of all races.He opposed a 1965 Supreme Court decision that struck down a state law banning contraceptives for married couples. There is no right to privacy in the Constitution, Bork said.And he opposed Supreme Court decisions on gender equality, too.Surely a throwback that guy, your purpose one would suppose, is to point out that at least Bork made it to the vote process[?] he was defeated by a vote of 58 to 42, the largest margin in history. jwhopYeah, Bork was Borked.Now Garland has been Borked.Leftist loons never consider the consequences of their lunacy. Example:Employing the "nuclear option" to confirmation of lower federal court judges and presidential appointments.Now, they screech, howl and shriek when the nuclear option is applied against them.The moral of the story is:Don't start something you don't want used against you.Node quote:Don't start something you don't want used against you. Machinations of this type do not bode well, remember when I already stated that?Bork was unsuitable.Garland was liked by Republicans until Obama chose him. Had Obama chosen Gorsuch CatalinaBorks nomination was voted on by the committee and the Senate.. not buried like Garland's. The Dems never refused to consider any nominee made by a specific President. This Senate promised just thst.. Not only in Obamas last year, for specious "reasons" but also in the case of HRC election they promised to bury her noms too.So, no, Garland was NOT "borked" at all. Get over it🤣
Numerous Republicans spoke favorably about Garland when he was up for confirmation in the 1990s, and conservative Chief Justice John Roberts has praised Garland’s judgement.
Anytime Judge Garland disagrees, you know you’re in a difficult area," Roberts said.
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, a member of the Judiciary Committee and a vocal proponent of blocking any Obama nominee, said the week before Obama’s announcement that he didn’t believe the president when he said he would select a moderate.
But Hatch added, "(Obama) could easily name Merrick Garland, who is a fine man. He probably won’t do that because this appointment is about the election."
Garland was a great pick. And deserved an up down vote.
He opposed the Supreme Court's one man, one vote decision on legislative apportionment.
He wrote an article opposing the 1964 civil rights law that required hotels, restaurants and other businesses to serve people of all races.
He opposed a 1965 Supreme Court decision that struck down a state law banning contraceptives for married couples. There is no right to privacy in the Constitution, Bork said.
And he opposed Supreme Court decisions on gender equality, too.
Surely a throwback that guy, your purpose one would suppose, is to point out that at least Bork made it to the vote process[?] he was defeated by a vote of 58 to 42, the largest margin in history.
Now Garland has been Borked.
Leftist loons never consider the consequences of their lunacy. Example:
Employing the "nuclear option" to confirmation of lower federal court judges and presidential appointments.
Now, they screech, howl and shriek when the nuclear option is applied against them.
The moral of the story is:
Don't start something you don't want used against you.
quote:Don't start something you don't want used against you.
Bork was unsuitable.Garland was liked by Republicans until Obama chose him. Had Obama chosen Gorsuch
So, no, Garland was NOT "borked" at all. Get over it🤣
Copyright 2000-2023 Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000 Ultimate Bulletin Board Version 5.46a
Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000 Ultimate Bulletin Board Version 5.46a