Lindsey Graham rips the JSN ideologues new ones...

[MaggieMae]

Lindsey Graham takes on conservatives
By: Manu Raju
July 24, 2009 04:17 AM EST

When Sen. Lindsey Graham announced his support for Sonia Sotomayor this week, right-wing radio talk show host Mark Levin said it was a sign that Graham is “unreliable ... as a thinker and a leader.”

Wendy Long, counsel for the conservative Judicial Confirmation Network, called it proof that Graham “still lacks courage, statesmanship and an understanding of the Constitution and rule of law.”

“May his antics get the attention they richly deserve.”

The response from Graham: Enjoy life in the minority.

In an interview with POLITICO Thursday, the South Carolina Republican defended his decision to back Sotomayor by laying out a broad critique of conservative activists who push “ideological purity” and refuse to cooperate with a Democratic Congress and White House.

“If we chase this attitude … that you have to say ‘no’ to every Democratic proposal, you can’t help the president ever, you can’t ever reach across the aisle, then I don’t want to be part of the movement because it’s a dead-end movement,” Graham said.

“I have no desire to be up here in an irrelevant status. I’m smart enough to know that this country doesn’t have a problem with conservatives. It has a problem with blind ideology. And those who are ideological-driven to a fault are never going to be able to take this party back into relevancy.”

While a handful of other GOP senators have said they’ll back Sotomayor when her nomination comes to the floor, Graham is the first Republican on the Judiciary Committee to support her.

He may be the only one. Not all of the Republicans on the committee have announced their views, but the two who would seem mostly likely to defect — Sens. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), two veterans who have voted for every Supreme Court nominee they’ve faced in the Senate — have both expressed reservations about Sotomayor.

Hatch said that he’s “troubled” by her nomination, and Grassley said that “people take things into consideration now that they didn’t used to before.” He added: “So obviously, there are other things to consider than just qualifications.”

Graham said that Sotomayor is not the nominee he would have chosen.

But after questioning her extensively during her confirmation hearing — asking about everything from her views on abortion to the charge that she’s a “bully” on the bench — he said Sotomayor deserves his support because a review of her 17-year record proved she was well-qualified, her confirmation would not upset the ideological balance on the court, and Obama is entitled to some latitude in making his pick because he won the election.

Most of all, he said, he wanted to return to the days where ideology was not part of the equation when choosing judicial nominees — citing the 98-0 confirmation of Antonin Scalia in 1986 and the 96-3 confirmation of Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 1993.

More:
Lindsey Graham gives as good as he gets - Manu Raju - POLITICO.com

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"Most of all, he said, he wanted to return to the days where ideology was not part of the equation when choosing judicial nominees — citing the 98-0 confirmation of Antonin Scalia in 1986 and the 96-3 confirmation of Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 1993."

Lindseed should know that Dem killed the process and any chance of reconciliation. I mean how intellectually dishonest is he?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Also, he doesn't answer the main charge: that's she's a racist and really kind of stupid, but he does it because he want to suck Dem balls.

Lindseed, please flip!

 

[Political Junky]

Lindsey Graham takes on conservatives
By: Manu Raju
July 24, 2009 04:17 AM EST

When Sen. Lindsey Graham announced his support for Sonia Sotomayor this week, right-wing radio talk show host Mark Levin said it was a sign that Graham is “unreliable ... as a thinker and a leader.”

Wendy Long, counsel for the conservative Judicial Confirmation Network, called it proof that Graham “still lacks courage, statesmanship and an understanding of the Constitution and rule of law.”

“May his antics get the attention they richly deserve.”

The response from Graham: Enjoy life in the minority.

In an interview with POLITICO Thursday, the South Carolina Republican defended his decision to back Sotomayor by laying out a broad critique of conservative activists who push “ideological purity” and refuse to cooperate with a Democratic Congress and White House.

“If we chase this attitude … that you have to say ‘no’ to every Democratic proposal, you can’t help the president ever, you can’t ever reach across the aisle, then I don’t want to be part of the movement because it’s a dead-end movement,” Graham said.

“I have no desire to be up here in an irrelevant status. I’m smart enough to know that this country doesn’t have a problem with conservatives. It has a problem with blind ideology. And those who are ideological-driven to a fault are never going to be able to take this party back into relevancy.”

While a handful of other GOP senators have said they’ll back Sotomayor when her nomination comes to the floor, Graham is the first Republican on the Judiciary Committee to support her.

He may be the only one. Not all of the Republicans on the committee have announced their views, but the two who would seem mostly likely to defect — Sens. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), two veterans who have voted for every Supreme Court nominee they’ve faced in the Senate — have both expressed reservations about Sotomayor.

Hatch said that he’s “troubled” by her nomination, and Grassley said that “people take things into consideration now that they didn’t used to before.” He added: “So obviously, there are other things to consider than just qualifications.”

Graham said that Sotomayor is not the nominee he would have chosen.

But after questioning her extensively during her confirmation hearing — asking about everything from her views on abortion to the charge that she’s a “bully” on the bench — he said Sotomayor deserves his support because a review of her 17-year record proved she was well-qualified, her confirmation would not upset the ideological balance on the court, and Obama is entitled to some latitude in making his pick because he won the election.

Most of all, he said, he wanted to return to the days where ideology was not part of the equation when choosing judicial nominees — citing the 98-0 confirmation of Antonin Scalia in 1986 and the 96-3 confirmation of Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 1993.

More:
Lindsey Graham gives as good as he gets - Manu Raju - POLITICO.com

As much as I dislike Lindsey Graham, he makes some great points. As long as the GOP is the party of NO, they're doomed.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

My only consolation with the inevitable Sonia Confirmation is that you cant get any further Left than Souter

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Lindseed Graham is the closest thing Republicans have to Al Franken.

He could flip to a Dem and the average IQ of both D and R Senators would rise 10 points

 

[MaggieMae]

"Most of all, he said, he wanted to return to the days where ideology was not part of the equation when choosing judicial nominees — citing the 98-0 confirmation of Antonin Scalia in 1986 and the 96-3 confirmation of Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 1993."

Lindseed should know that Dem killed the process and any chance of reconciliation. I mean how intellectually dishonest is he?

OF course. Blame partisanship in the courts on Dems. What else is new? Of course there was a time when a nominee's political affiliation wasn't even an issue, just as the framers of the Constitution intended.

Lindsey Graham is still a conservative Republican, and as he implied, the current wave of over-the-top conservatism will soon become totally irrelevant in the political process, so you'd better get your heads out of your asses and start recognizing that COMPROMISE in Washington is the ONLY way to get anything done, whether it's something conservatives want or something liberals want. I for one am so happy that there still remain a few Republicans on Capitol Hill with some sanity left.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"Most of all, he said, he wanted to return to the days where ideology was not part of the equation when choosing judicial nominees — citing the 98-0 confirmation of Antonin Scalia in 1986 and the 96-3 confirmation of Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 1993."

Lindseed should know that Dem killed the process and any chance of reconciliation. I mean how intellectually dishonest is he?

OF course. Blame partisanship in the courts on Dems. What else is new? Of course there was a time when a nominee's political affiliation wasn't even an issue, just as the framers of the Constitution intended.

Lindsey Graham is still a conservative Republican, and as he implied, the current wave of over-the-top conservatism will soon become totally irrelevant in the political process, so you'd better get your heads out of your asses and start recognizing that COMPROMISE in Washington is the ONLY way to get anything done, whether it's something conservatives want or something liberals want. I for one am so happy that there still remain a few Republicans on Capitol Hill with some sanity left.

When we get back in power we're going to start a LeftWing Extremists List.

 

[Barb]

"Most of all, he said, he wanted to return to the days where ideology was not part of the equation when choosing judicial nominees — citing the 98-0 confirmation of Antonin Scalia in 1986 and the 96-3 confirmation of Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 1993."

Lindseed should know that Dem killed the process and any chance of reconciliation. I mean how intellectually dishonest is he?

OF course. Blame partisanship in the courts on Dems. What else is new? Of course there was a time when a nominee's political affiliation wasn't even an issue, just as the framers of the Constitution intended.

Lindsey Graham is still a conservative Republican, and as he implied, the current wave of over-the-top conservatism will soon become totally irrelevant in the political process, so you'd better get your heads out of your asses and start recognizing that COMPROMISE in Washington is the ONLY way to get anything done, whether it's something conservatives want or something liberals want. I for one am so happy that there still remain a few Republicans on Capitol Hill with some sanity left.

When we get back in power we're going to start a LeftWing Extremists List.

Are you very young? You've got a long wait.

 

[concept]

Please Lindsaey, you aren't a conservative and you aren't fooling anyone. You need to join the democrap party with your buddy, the sphincter.

 

[concept]

Lindsey Graham takes on conservatives
By: Manu Raju
July 24, 2009 04:17 AM EST

When Sen. Lindsey Graham announced his support for Sonia Sotomayor this week, right-wing radio talk show host Mark Levin said it was a sign that Graham is “unreliable ... as a thinker and a leader.”

Wendy Long, counsel for the conservative Judicial Confirmation Network, called it proof that Graham “still lacks courage, statesmanship and an understanding of the Constitution and rule of law.”

“May his antics get the attention they richly deserve.”

The response from Graham: Enjoy life in the minority.

In an interview with POLITICO Thursday, the South Carolina Republican defended his decision to back Sotomayor by laying out a broad critique of conservative activists who push “ideological purity” and refuse to cooperate with a Democratic Congress and White House.

“If we chase this attitude … that you have to say ‘no’ to every Democratic proposal, you can’t help the president ever, you can’t ever reach across the aisle, then I don’t want to be part of the movement because it’s a dead-end movement,” Graham said.

“I have no desire to be up here in an irrelevant status. I’m smart enough to know that this country doesn’t have a problem with conservatives. It has a problem with blind ideology. And those who are ideological-driven to a fault are never going to be able to take this party back into relevancy.”

While a handful of other GOP senators have said they’ll back Sotomayor when her nomination comes to the floor, Graham is the first Republican on the Judiciary Committee to support her.

He may be the only one. Not all of the Republicans on the committee have announced their views, but the two who would seem mostly likely to defect — Sens. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), two veterans who have voted for every Supreme Court nominee they’ve faced in the Senate — have both expressed reservations about Sotomayor.

Hatch said that he’s “troubled” by her nomination, and Grassley said that “people take things into consideration now that they didn’t used to before.” He added: “So obviously, there are other things to consider than just qualifications.”

Graham said that Sotomayor is not the nominee he would have chosen.

But after questioning her extensively during her confirmation hearing — asking about everything from her views on abortion to the charge that she’s a “bully” on the bench — he said Sotomayor deserves his support because a review of her 17-year record proved she was well-qualified, her confirmation would not upset the ideological balance on the court, and Obama is entitled to some latitude in making his pick because he won the election.

Most of all, he said, he wanted to return to the days where ideology was not part of the equation when choosing judicial nominees — citing the 98-0 confirmation of Antonin Scalia in 1986 and the 96-3 confirmation of Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 1993.

More:
Lindsey Graham gives as good as he gets - Manu Raju - POLITICO.com

As much as I dislike Lindsey Graham, he makes some great points. As long as the GOP is the party of NO, they're doomed.

Party of no?

WTF?

They are the party of "roll over and let the democrats do whatever they want".

Party of no, my ass.

 

[concept]

They need to be the party of NO MORE!!

 

[get_involved]

It was OK when many Democrats voted against Roberts, who was much more qualified than Sotomayor is, but it's not when Republicans have objections. What hypocrites Dems are.

 

[bodecea]

"Most of all, he said, he wanted to return to the days where ideology was not part of the equation when choosing judicial nominees — citing the 98-0 confirmation of Antonin Scalia in 1986 and the 96-3 confirmation of Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 1993."

Lindseed should know that Dem killed the process and any chance of reconciliation. I mean how intellectually dishonest is he?

OF course. Blame partisanship in the courts on Dems. What else is new? Of course there was a time when a nominee's political affiliation wasn't even an issue, just as the framers of the Constitution intended.

That would have to have been VERY early on...before Pres. Adams and the Marbury v. Madison issue.

Lindsey Graham is still a conservative Republican, and as he implied, the current wave of over-the-top conservatism will soon become totally irrelevant in the political process, so you'd better get your heads out of your asses and start recognizing that COMPROMISE in Washington is the ONLY way to get anything done, whether it's something conservatives want or something liberals want. I for one am so happy that there still remain a few Republicans on Capitol Hill with some sanity left.

 

[MaggieMae]

"Most of all, he said, he wanted to return to the days where ideology was not part of the equation when choosing judicial nominees — citing the 98-0 confirmation of Antonin Scalia in 1986 and the 96-3 confirmation of Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 1993."

Lindseed should know that Dem killed the process and any chance of reconciliation. I mean how intellectually dishonest is he?

OF course. Blame partisanship in the courts on Dems. What else is new? Of course there was a time when a nominee's political affiliation wasn't even an issue, just as the framers of the Constitution intended.

Lindsey Graham is still a conservative Republican, and as he implied, the current wave of over-the-top conservatism will soon become totally irrelevant in the political process, so you'd better get your heads out of your asses and start recognizing that COMPROMISE in Washington is the ONLY way to get anything done, whether it's something conservatives want or something liberals want. I for one am so happy that there still remain a few Republicans on Capitol Hill with some sanity left.

When we get back in power we're going to start a LeftWing Extremists List.

What's this "we" business? Your kind will be left in the dust. You and your ilk have become the minority party of haters.

 

[MaggieMae]

It was OK when many Democrats voted against Roberts, who was much more qualified than Sotomayor is, but it's not when Republicans have objections. What hypocrites Dems are.

Graham's comments are not generally about Sotomayor. Pay attention. But since you people have made it so, she is eminently qualified. The final vote for Roberts was 77-22, a landslide, so quitcherbitchen when you're clueless. I love it when a blatant hypocrite has the balls to call someone else a hypocrite.

Supreme Court justices are now decided politically. Jefferson and Madison would have been disgusted.

 

[MaggieMae]

"Most of all, he said, he wanted to return to the days where ideology was not part of the equation when choosing judicial nominees — citing the 98-0 confirmation of Antonin Scalia in 1986 and the 96-3 confirmation of Ruth Bader Ginsburg in 1993."

Lindseed should know that Dem killed the process and any chance of reconciliation. I mean how intellectually dishonest is he?

OF course. Blame partisanship in the courts on Dems. What else is new? Of course there was a time when a nominee's political affiliation wasn't even an issue, just as the framers of the Constitution intended.

That would have to have been VERY early on...before Pres. Adams and the Marbury v. Madison issue.

Lindsey Graham is still a conservative Republican, and as he implied, the current wave of over-the-top conservatism will soon become totally irrelevant in the political process, so you'd better get your heads out of your asses and start recognizing that COMPROMISE in Washington is the ONLY way to get anything done, whether it's something conservatives want or something liberals want. I for one am so happy that there still remain a few Republicans on Capitol Hill with some sanity left.

Let's just say the appointees are generally of the same political persuasion as the president doing so at the time. However, when it reaches time for confirmation hearings, the political circus is relatively new.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

It was OK when many Democrats voted against Roberts, who was much more qualified than Sotomayor is, but it's not when Republicans have objections. What hypocrites Dems are.

Graham's comments are not generally about Sotomayor. Pay attention. But since you people have made it so, she is eminently qualified. The final vote for Roberts was 77-22, a landslide, so quitcherbitchen when you're clueless. I love it when a blatant hypocrite has the balls to call someone else a hypocrite.

Supreme Court justices are now decided politically. Jefferson and Madison would have been disgusted.

She would say that she's imminently qualified

 

[Alan Partridge]

Please Lindsaey, you aren't a conservative and you aren't fooling anyone. You need to join the democrap party with your buddy, the sphincter.

"Lindsey Graham has voted with a majority of his Republican colleagues 93.0% of the time during the current Congress. This percentage does not include votes in which Graham did not vote. See a list of his votes against his party since 1991, a list of all Senators in the 111th Congress with a similar score, or a full list of party voters."

Lindsey Graham | Congressional votes database | washingtonpost.com

 

[MaggieMae]

It was OK when many Democrats voted against Roberts, who was much more qualified than Sotomayor is, but it's not when Republicans have objections. What hypocrites Dems are.

Graham's comments are not generally about Sotomayor. Pay attention. But since you people have made it so, she is eminently qualified. The final vote for Roberts was 77-22, a landslide, so quitcherbitchen when you're clueless. I love it when a blatant hypocrite has the balls to call someone else a hypocrite.

Supreme Court justices are now decided politically. Jefferson and Madison would have been disgusted.

She would say that she's imminently qualified

So I guess you didn't bother to read any of her background. Surprise surprise...