Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
In all fairness, Elena Kagan had very little trigger time in the court room when Obama nominated her for the Supreme Court, and the vast majority of her qualifications were academic, yet she's proved thus far to be a reasonable addition to the 9 and hasn't made any whacked out decisions deviated from the rest of the court in some way that could be attributed to inexperience.
To be perfectly frank, I know approximately dick about this nominee. That said, if this video is the only criteria you're working with, I'd say you don't really have enough information to determine whether this candidate has the legal knowledge, discernment, or raw intellect to adequately perform the functions of a circuit judge.
I'd think an honest, reasonable person would be pretty embarrassed by this.
The people we choose to lead us are a reflection of our society, and as long as we're willing to lower our standards for political advantage, this is what we'll get.
I couldn't watch the whole thing. While it was embarrassing, it's more disturbing.
.
Since you seem to realize that lack of experience makes a difference, why do you support putting unqualified people on the bench?
.....because THAT is what Trump cult members must do........Hell, they even voted for a pussy-grabbing TV star to be POTUS.....
Well get a load of this...
NBC News on Twitter
Is this acceptable to Republicans, and even 45's supporters?
If so, would you have had the same answer if President Obama elected the same type of people?
Wow you found one. I would still take him over any of the activist judges on the bench in HI, CA, NY or IL.
I guarantee if you asked any of those gottya standard questions to any of those judges they would be clueless also.
Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com
I'd think an honest, reasonable person would be pretty embarrassed by this.
The people we choose to lead us are a reflection of our society, and as long as we're willing to lower our standards for political advantage, this is what we'll get.
I couldn't watch the whole thing. While it was embarrassing, it's more disturbing.
.
Since you seem to realize that lack of experience makes a difference, why do you support putting unqualified people on the bench?
.....because THAT is what Trump cult members must do........Hell, they even voted for a pussy-grabbing TV star to be POTUS.....
Don't forget liar, egomaniac, and serial self aggrandizer.
On the other hand, the alternative was the epitome of a corrupt political insider, card carrying member of the G20 corporate elite who presented herself, ironically, as the champion of the little guy. Ah, and let's not forget liar, egomaniac, and serial self aggrandizer.
Every time Trump does something I don't like and threatens to give me buyer's remorse for tossing him my vote last November, well I just think back to what my alternative was and the smile's right back on my face.
In all fairness, Elena Kagan had very little trigger time in the court room when Obama nominated her for the Supreme Court, and the vast majority of her qualifications were academic, yet she's proved thus far to be a reasonable addition to the 9 and hasn't made any whacked out decisions deviated from the rest of the court in some way that could be attributed to inexperience.
To be perfectly frank, I know approximately dick about this nominee. That said, if this video is the only criteria you're working with, I'd say you don't really have enough information to determine whether this candidate has the legal knowledge, discernment, or raw intellect to adequately perform the functions of a circuit judge.
Your mistake regarding Kagan is that a seat in the SCOTUS is VASTLY different than a judgeship since within the SCOTUS the qualifications are PURELY academic, and not regarding experience at a jury trial or the experience in the guidelines of sentencing.
Obama said that this is the new norm, are you calling him a liar?ALL TIME HIGH OF 95,3 MILLION ARE OUT OF THE WORK FORCE. It's been a year now, so when is Trump going to bring that number down? I thought he was supposed to put people back to work.
Record 95.4 Million Americans Are No Longer In The Labor Force As 968,000 Exit In One Month
Record 95.4 Million Americans Are No Longer In The Labor Force As 968,000 Exit In One Month
I'd think an honest, reasonable person would be pretty embarrassed by this.
The people we choose to lead us are a reflection of our society, and as long as we're willing to lower our standards for political advantage, this is what we'll get.
I couldn't watch the whole thing. While it was embarrassing, it's more disturbing.
.
Since you seem to realize that lack of experience makes a difference, why do you support putting unqualified people on the bench?
.....because THAT is what Trump cult members must do........Hell, they even voted for a pussy-grabbing TV star to be POTUS.....
Don't forget liar, egomaniac, and serial self aggrandizer.
On the other hand, the alternative was the epitome of a corrupt political insider, card carrying member of the G20 corporate elite who presented herself, ironically, as the champion of the little guy. Ah, and let's not forget liar, egomaniac, and serial self aggrandizer.
Every time Trump does something I don't like and threatens to give me buyer's remorse for tossing him my vote last November, well I just think back to what my alternative was and the smile's right back on my face.
Would it not have made you smile even more to not have been forced to choose between two such terrible choices?
In all fairness, Elena Kagan had very little trigger time in the court room when Obama nominated her for the Supreme Court, and the vast majority of her qualifications were academic, yet she's proved thus far to be a reasonable addition to the 9 and hasn't made any whacked out decisions deviated from the rest of the court in some way that could be attributed to inexperience.
To be perfectly frank, I know approximately dick about this nominee. That said, if this video is the only criteria you're working with, I'd say you don't really have enough information to determine whether this candidate has the legal knowledge, discernment, or raw intellect to adequately perform the functions of a circuit judge.
Your mistake regarding Kagan is that a seat in the SCOTUS is VASTLY different than a judgeship since within the SCOTUS the qualifications are PURELY academic, and not regarding experience at a jury trial or the experience in the guidelines of sentencing.
What's so different? To do the job of a SCOTUS justice, you have to know the law and the procedures relevant to SCOTUS. To be a circuit judge, you have to know the law and the procedures relevant to being a circuit judge. At some level it's all academic. The benefit you gain from education and the benefit you gain from experience all boils down to knowledge. While knowledge is more quickly attained through real world experience than through reading, there's no reason to assume that the knowledge required to be a circuit judge is somehow immune to absorption via education while the knowledge required to be on the SCOTUS bench isn't.
Sorry, but, in short, I'm not buyin what you're sellin here.
I'd think an honest, reasonable person would be pretty embarrassed by this.
The people we choose to lead us are a reflection of our society, and as long as we're willing to lower our standards for political advantage, this is what we'll get.
I couldn't watch the whole thing. While it was embarrassing, it's more disturbing.
.
Since you seem to realize that lack of experience makes a difference, why do you support putting unqualified people on the bench?
.....because THAT is what Trump cult members must do........Hell, they even voted for a pussy-grabbing TV star to be POTUS.....
Don't forget liar, egomaniac, and serial self aggrandizer.
On the other hand, the alternative was the epitome of a corrupt political insider, card carrying member of the G20 corporate elite who presented herself, ironically, as the champion of the little guy. Ah, and let's not forget liar, egomaniac, and serial self aggrandizer.
Every time Trump does something I don't like and threatens to give me buyer's remorse for tossing him my vote last November, well I just think back to what my alternative was and the smile's right back on my face.
Would it not have made you smile even more to not have been forced to choose between two such terrible choices?
Of course it would have. And it would make me even happier if it began raining champagne, and Olivia Wilde showed up at my door begging me to put a baby in her. But alas, I must find contentment within the context of the world as it exists.
It will take a little time to clean up the Obama mess.ALL TIME HIGH OF 95,3 MILLION ARE OUT OF THE WORK FORCE. It's been a year now, so when is Trump going to bring that number down? I thought he was supposed to put people back to work.
Record 95.4 Million Americans Are No Longer In The Labor Force As 968,000 Exit In One Month
Record 95.4 Million Americans Are No Longer In The Labor Force As 968,000 Exit In One Month
In all fairness, Elena Kagan had very little trigger time in the court room when Obama nominated her for the Supreme Court, and the vast majority of her qualifications were academic, yet she's proved thus far to be a reasonable addition to the 9 and hasn't made any whacked out decisions deviated from the rest of the court in some way that could be attributed to inexperience.
To be perfectly frank, I know approximately dick about this nominee. That said, if this video is the only criteria you're working with, I'd say you don't really have enough information to determine whether this candidate has the legal knowledge, discernment, or raw intellect to adequately perform the functions of a circuit judge.
Your mistake regarding Kagan is that a seat in the SCOTUS is VASTLY different than a judgeship since within the SCOTUS the qualifications are PURELY academic, and not regarding experience at a jury trial or the experience in the guidelines of sentencing.
What's so different? To do the job of a SCOTUS justice, you have to know the law and the procedures relevant to SCOTUS. To be a circuit judge, you have to know the law and the procedures relevant to being a circuit judge. At some level it's all academic. The benefit you gain from education and the benefit you gain from experience all boils down to knowledge. While knowledge is more quickly attained through real world experience than through reading, there's no reason to assume that the knowledge required to be a circuit judge is somehow immune to absorption via education while the knowledge required to be on the SCOTUS bench isn't.
Sorry, but, in short, I'm not buyin what you're sellin here.
You know, there is reason people are not hired right out of college as CEO and COO and such. They have to work their way to those positions gaining experience along the way. Experience matters.
Let me ask you this, if you had to have brain surgery whom would you want to do it it, someone who had never done it before but graduated top of their class at a top med school or someone that had done it successfully 100 times in the past?
In all fairness, Elena Kagan had very little trigger time in the court room when Obama nominated her for the Supreme Court, and the vast majority of her qualifications were academic, yet she's proved thus far to be a reasonable addition to the 9 and hasn't made any whacked out decisions deviated from the rest of the court in some way that could be attributed to inexperience.
To be perfectly frank, I know approximately dick about this nominee. That said, if this video is the only criteria you're working with, I'd say you don't really have enough information to determine whether this candidate has the legal knowledge, discernment, or raw intellect to adequately perform the functions of a circuit judge.
Your mistake regarding Kagan is that a seat in the SCOTUS is VASTLY different than a judgeship since within the SCOTUS the qualifications are PURELY academic, and not regarding experience at a jury trial or the experience in the guidelines of sentencing.
What's so different? To do the job of a SCOTUS justice, you have to know the law and the procedures relevant to SCOTUS. To be a circuit judge, you have to know the law and the procedures relevant to being a circuit judge. At some level it's all academic. The benefit you gain from education and the benefit you gain from experience all boils down to knowledge. While knowledge is more quickly attained through real world experience than through reading, there's no reason to assume that the knowledge required to be a circuit judge is somehow immune to absorption via education while the knowledge required to be on the SCOTUS bench isn't.
Sorry, but, in short, I'm not buyin what you're sellin here.
You know, there is reason people are not hired right out of college as CEO and COO and such. They have to work their way to those positions gaining experience along the way. Experience matters.
Let me ask you this, if you had to have brain surgery whom would you want to do it it, someone who had never done it before but graduated top of their class at a top med school or someone that had done it successfully 100 times in the past?
I think you misunderstand me. I'm not saying that someone with real world experience wouldn't necessarily be preferable, or that experience isn't important. I'm simply pointing out that it's possible that this guy is fully qualified despite his lack of experience. I'm saying that the single metric presented here isn't enough, in and of itself, to determine the man's qualifications.
I can't believe anyone would defend this nominee.
whats the joke here?You leftists are a joke.
Like you really know all about it. lol! You don't know shit except what the media traitors tell you!I can't believe anyone would defend this nominee.
The really sad part is this guy is better than a lot of the Trump nominees
