So, Obama gets to put a third dullard to the Supreme Court?

[Valerie]

even scalia himself was thrilled with obama's elena kagan appointment




Justice David Souter, Scalia's longtime colleague on the court, had just announced his retirement, creating a vacancy for President Obama to fill. Scalia figured that as senior adviser to the new president, I might have some influence on the decision -- or at least enough to pass along a message.

"I have no illusions that your man will nominate someone who shares my orientation," said Scalia, then in his 23rd year as the court's leading and most provocative conservative voice. "But I hope he sends us someone smart."

A little taken aback that he was engaging me on the subject, I searched for the right answer, and lamely offered one that signaled my slight discomfort with the topic. "I'm sure he will, Justice Scalia."

He wasn't done. Leaning forward, as if to share a confidential thought, he tried again.

"Let me put a finer point on it," the justice said, in a lower, purposeful tone of voice, his eyes fixed on mine. "I hope he sends us Elena Kagan."

David Axelrod: A surprise request from Justice Scalia - CNN.com

 

[peach174]

Scala's death is another wound for America given IBM's subversiveness.

The previous two 'justices' that ABM appointed weren't just liberal hacks, they were flat-out below average intelligence persons. It was his way of spitting on The Constitution. Will he get to appoint a third dullard, or can this be stalled?

you're out of your mind, loony ton.

poor little partisan hack. at least people on the left know that Scala was wrong about everything but was smart. you idiots can't even begin to have a discussion on these issues.

but thanks for your "expertise".

The Left thinks that he was wrong.
Those on right think that he was correct.
It's a point of view

Maybe you should do some research on the harmful effects that Social Democracy has done both here and in Europe.

except his view wasn't reflective of any of the case law that came before him THAT is one of the first rules of our common law system. so it was more than not agreeing with him. he was outright wrong based on all rules of constitutional construction that came before him.

maybe you should do some research into our body of constitutional case law and not worry about me.

I lived through the years and saw how the left changed it to where it is now.
This is the exact reason the Supreme Court has become all about ideology & activism rather than ruling strictly on the Constitution and why we have had these fights on both sides of wanting a conservative or liberal.
The Supreme Court should be a neutral separate part of the Government based only on the Constitution.

 

[Valerie]

Great comeback! I'm impressed! Who typed that for you? A first grader? Let me know when you come up with a good comeback and I'll respond. Otherwise you are wasting my time.

ZZZzzz you're a waste of time indeed...........

 

[jillian]

even scalia himself was thrilled with obama's elena kagan appointment




Justice David Souter, Scalia's longtime colleague on the court, had just announced his retirement, creating a vacancy for President Obama to fill. Scalia figured that as senior adviser to the new president, I might have some influence on the decision -- or at least enough to pass along a message.

"I have no illusions that your man will nominate someone who shares my orientation," said Scalia, then in his 23rd year as the court's leading and most provocative conservative voice. "But I hope he sends us someone smart."

A little taken aback that he was engaging me on the subject, I searched for the right answer, and lamely offered one that signaled my slight discomfort with the topic. "I'm sure he will, Justice Scalia."

He wasn't done. Leaning forward, as if to share a confidential thought, he tried again.

"Let me put a finer point on it," the justice said, in a lower, purposeful tone of voice, his eyes fixed on mine. "I hope he sends us Elena Kagan."

David Axelrod: A surprise request from Justice Scalia - CNN.com

and his closest friend on the court was ruth bader Ginsberg. that's what the loons don't get.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Scalia's death is another wound for America given Obama's subversiveness.

The previous two 'justices' that Obama appointed weren't just liberal hacks, they were flat-out below average intelligence persons. It was his way of spitting on The Constitution. Will he get to appoint a third dullard, or can this be stalled?

I don't think you understand the meaning of the word, "subversiveness". You may not agree with the president's nomination, but the president has the constitutional authority to nominate a person to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court.

The Senate has the power to consent or not consent to the appointment of the president's nominee. If some senators disapprove of the nominee, then they should cast their votes to withhold consent. They will be answerable for their votes to their constituents. That's the way our system works.

If the Senate stalls a vote, then members of the Senate will be viewed as obstructionists ... power hungry wolves. There is no political advantage to be gained by stalling.

I know you don't understand context. Spare me the lecture, lady.

I don't have to "spare" you anything. This is a discussion board and you initiated a discussion. You may encourage the senators to stall, if you think that's the way to achieve your agenda. But the senators, those with a small amount of intelligence, will likely conduct a cost/benefit analysis. Stalling isn't going to further your agenda; it will only place a spotlight on obstructionism and will result in a backlash.

Go ahead. Encourage the senate to stall, stall, stall ... and if that happens, expect the voters to respond and to unseat the obstructionists.

Trust me..after the midterm shellacking you dems received real Americans will cheer on any and all obstructions the republicans may choose to stop your messiah.
Americans are through with the leftist agenda and the RINOs.
If things get hinky there will be violence.....you can count on it.

 

[Papageorgio]

Great comeback! I'm impressed! Who typed that for you? A first grader? Let me know when you come up with a good comeback and I'll respond. Otherwise you are wasting my time.

ZZZzzz you're a waste of time indeed...........

Yes you are bitch, that's why I ignore 99% of your worthless posts, at least jillian is almost entertaining.

 

[jillian]

Scalia's death is another wound for America given Obama's subversiveness.

The previous two 'justices' that Obama appointed weren't just liberal hacks, they were flat-out below average intelligence persons. It was his way of spitting on The Constitution. Will he get to appoint a third dullard, or can this be stalled?

I don't think you understand the meaning of the word, "subversiveness". You may not agree with the president's nomination, but the president has the constitutional authority to nominate a person to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court.

The Senate has the power to consent or not consent to the appointment of the president's nominee. If some senators disapprove of the nominee, then they should cast their votes to withhold consent. They will be answerable for their votes to their constituents. That's the way our system works.

If the Senate stalls a vote, then members of the Senate will be viewed as obstructionists ... power hungry wolves. There is no political advantage to be gained by stalling.

I know you don't understand context. Spare me the lecture, lady.

I don't have to "spare" you anything. This is a discussion board and you initiated a discussion. You may encourage the senators to stall, if you think that's the way to achieve your agenda. But the senators, those with a small amount of intelligence, will likely conduct a cost/benefit analysis. Stalling isn't going to further your agenda; it will only place a spotlight on obstructionism and will result in a backlash.

Go ahead. Encourage the senate to stall, stall, stall ... and if that happens, expect the voters to respond and to unseat the obstructionists.

Trust me..after the midterm shellacking you dems received real Americans will cheer on any and all obstructions the republicans may choose to stop your messiah.
Americans are through with the leftist agenda and the RINOs.
If things get hinky there will be violence.....you can count on it.

so the majority of the electorate who elected barak Obama twice aren't real americans?

and you don't think you're a loon?

 

[jillian]

Great comeback! I'm impressed! Who typed that for you? A first grader? Let me know when you come up with a good comeback and I'll respond. Otherwise you are wasting my time.

ZZZzzz you're a waste of time indeed...........

Yes you are bitch, that's why I ignore 99% of your worthless posts, at least jillian is almost entertaining.

yes, every female who calls the rightwingnut hacks on their lunacy is a bitch. we get it.

 

[Valerie]

they hate women... especially smart women like us.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Scalia's death is another wound for America given Obama's subversiveness.

The previous two 'justices' that Obama appointed weren't just liberal hacks, they were flat-out below average intelligence persons. It was his way of spitting on The Constitution. Will he get to appoint a third dullard, or can this be stalled?

I don't think you understand the meaning of the word, "subversiveness". You may not agree with the president's nomination, but the president has the constitutional authority to nominate a person to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court.

The Senate has the power to consent or not consent to the appointment of the president's nominee. If some senators disapprove of the nominee, then they should cast their votes to withhold consent. They will be answerable for their votes to their constituents. That's the way our system works.

If the Senate stalls a vote, then members of the Senate will be viewed as obstructionists ... power hungry wolves. There is no political advantage to be gained by stalling.

I know you don't understand context. Spare me the lecture, lady.

I don't have to "spare" you anything. This is a discussion board and you initiated a discussion. You may encourage the senators to stall, if you think that's the way to achieve your agenda. But the senators, those with a small amount of intelligence, will likely conduct a cost/benefit analysis. Stalling isn't going to further your agenda; it will only place a spotlight on obstructionism and will result in a backlash.

Go ahead. Encourage the senate to stall, stall, stall ... and if that happens, expect the voters to respond and to unseat the obstructionists.

Trust me..after the midterm shellacking you dems received real Americans will cheer on any and all obstructions the republicans may choose to stop your messiah.
Americans are through with the leftist agenda and the RINOs.
If things get hinky there will be violence.....you can count on it.

so the majority of the electorate who elected barak Obama twice aren't real americans?

and you don't think you're a loon?

And using your own logic it appears Americans have seen Barry for what he is,as displayed in the midterm results.
You're a simple minded fool who attempts to use an election as a mandate...but only when it benefits your side.

 

[Papageorgio]

they hate women... especially smart women like us.

I love women, especially smart women, I find them refreshing and challenging. You and Jill just don't make the grade. Hell, jillian's comebacks are so weak they aren't worth responding to. Keep trying, if you come up with a good comeback, I'll will actually lower myself and respond to you. Doubt I'll need to.

 

[sealybobo]

awwwwww.... how cute. are you one of the psychotics who is pretending he was killed by dems?

quiet.

How stupid are you? I don't believe a God decides your life. I don't think Dems have anything to do with his death. You make decisions based on your faith in God.

that's almost a complete thought. congratulations.

Well I am way ahead of you.

only in rightwingnuthackworld. but that's ok. we expect nothing less from you.

now let's see another attempt at a pithy comeback, little boy.

Great comeback! I'm impressed! Who typed that for you? A first grader? Let me know when you come up with a good comeback and I'll respond. Otherwise you are wasting my time.

Here you are again claiming to be fair and balanced but in every circumstance we find you defending the right wing nut jobs. Does Jillian bring it out of you? Maybe you should go back to talking about things you know a little something about like sports. Politics isn't your bag man. Now, feel free to come back at me with how my opinion doesn't matter because I don't pay taxes on my weed, you dumb ass.

 

[jillian]

Scalia's death is another wound for America given Obama's subversiveness.

The previous two 'justices' that Obama appointed weren't just liberal hacks, they were flat-out below average intelligence persons. It was his way of spitting on The Constitution. Will he get to appoint a third dullard, or can this be stalled?

I don't think you understand the meaning of the word, "subversiveness". You may not agree with the president's nomination, but the president has the constitutional authority to nominate a person to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court.

The Senate has the power to consent or not consent to the appointment of the president's nominee. If some senators disapprove of the nominee, then they should cast their votes to withhold consent. They will be answerable for their votes to their constituents. That's the way our system works.

If the Senate stalls a vote, then members of the Senate will be viewed as obstructionists ... power hungry wolves. There is no political advantage to be gained by stalling.

I know you don't understand context. Spare me the lecture, lady.

I don't have to "spare" you anything. This is a discussion board and you initiated a discussion. You may encourage the senators to stall, if you think that's the way to achieve your agenda. But the senators, those with a small amount of intelligence, will likely conduct a cost/benefit analysis. Stalling isn't going to further your agenda; it will only place a spotlight on obstructionism and will result in a backlash.

Go ahead. Encourage the senate to stall, stall, stall ... and if that happens, expect the voters to respond and to unseat the obstructionists.

Trust me..after the midterm shellacking you dems received real Americans will cheer on any and all obstructions the republicans may choose to stop your messiah.
Americans are through with the leftist agenda and the RINOs.
If things get hinky there will be violence.....you can count on it.

low turnout.... GOP does well when people don't vote.

that won't happen now and you don't/can't win national elections.

 

[sealybobo]

they hate women... especially smart women like us.

I love women, especially smart women, I find them refreshing and challenging. You and Jill just don't make the grade. Hell, jillian's comebacks are so weak they aren't worth responding to. Keep trying, if you come up with a good comeback, I'll will actually lower myself and respond to you. Doubt I'll need to.

Well this shows fair and balance in you papa. I love Jillian but I can't stand Valerie, if she is who I think she is. She's fucking nuts. So at least I'll give you that you aren't completely one sided. I never thought you were anyways. I know you just lean to the right. Certainly not a right winger.

Or am I confusing Valerie with Stephanie. I can't keep track. Hey Val, do you think I'm a pedophile? Are you the crazy bitch who thinks that?

 

[jillian]

they hate women... especially smart women like us.

I love women, especially smart women, I find them refreshing and challenging. You and Jill just don't make the grade. Hell, jillian's comebacks are so weak they aren't worth responding to. Keep trying, if you come up with a good comeback, I'll will actually lower myself and respond to you. Doubt I'll need to.

your idea of smart is women who are rightwingnut hacks like you. otherwise, you've proven you haven't a clue what smart is.

if your posts were worth decent discussion you'd get that like others'. but as I said, you're a hack just to be ridiculed.

 

[sealybobo]

Scalia's death is another wound for America given Obama's subversiveness.

The previous two 'justices' that Obama appointed weren't just liberal hacks, they were flat-out below average intelligence persons. It was his way of spitting on The Constitution. Will he get to appoint a third dullard, or can this be stalled?

I don't think you understand the meaning of the word, "subversiveness". You may not agree with the president's nomination, but the president has the constitutional authority to nominate a person to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court.

The Senate has the power to consent or not consent to the appointment of the president's nominee. If some senators disapprove of the nominee, then they should cast their votes to withhold consent. They will be answerable for their votes to their constituents. That's the way our system works.

If the Senate stalls a vote, then members of the Senate will be viewed as obstructionists ... power hungry wolves. There is no political advantage to be gained by stalling.

I know you don't understand context. Spare me the lecture, lady.

I don't have to "spare" you anything. This is a discussion board and you initiated a discussion. You may encourage the senators to stall, if you think that's the way to achieve your agenda. But the senators, those with a small amount of intelligence, will likely conduct a cost/benefit analysis. Stalling isn't going to further your agenda; it will only place a spotlight on obstructionism and will result in a backlash.

Go ahead. Encourage the senate to stall, stall, stall ... and if that happens, expect the voters to respond and to unseat the obstructionists.

Trust me..after the midterm shellacking you dems received real Americans will cheer on any and all obstructions the republicans may choose to stop your messiah.
Americans are through with the leftist agenda and the RINOs.
If things get hinky there will be violence.....you can count on it.

low turnout.... GOP does well when people don't vote.

that won't happen now and you don't/can't win national elections.

I actually hope they don't let Obama appoint a judge. That'll turn out the vote alright. We'll use that like Bush used 9-11 and the Iraq war to win 2004.

 

[jillian]

they hate women... especially smart women like us.

I love women, especially smart women, I find them refreshing and challenging. You and Jill just don't make the grade. Hell, jillian's comebacks are so weak they aren't worth responding to. Keep trying, if you come up with a good comeback, I'll will actually lower myself and respond to you. Doubt I'll need to.

Well this shows fair and balance in you papa. I love Jillian but I can't stand Valerie, if she is who I think she is. She's fucking nuts. So at least I'll give you that you aren't completely one sided. I never thought you were anyways. I know you just lean to the right. Certainly not a right winger.

Or am I confusing Valerie with Stephanie. I can't keep track. Hey Val, do you think I'm a pedophile? Are you the crazy bitch who thinks that?

steffie is a nutjob. val is centrist.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Another position women have been an abject disaster just like they have as SOS

 

[sealybobo]

they hate women... especially smart women like us.

I love women, especially smart women, I find them refreshing and challenging. You and Jill just don't make the grade. Hell, jillian's comebacks are so weak they aren't worth responding to. Keep trying, if you come up with a good comeback, I'll will actually lower myself and respond to you. Doubt I'll need to.

your idea of smart is women who are rightwingnut hacks like you. otherwise, you've proven you haven't a clue what smart is.

if your posts were worth decent discussion you'd get that like others'. but as I said, you're a hack just to be ridiculed.

And he isn't that much of a right wing nutjob but what he is is a right wing apologist and one of those schmucks where no matter what the GOP does, all he will ever come back with is, "yea well what about the democrats". So he can't defend the GOP but he will certainly caucus for them.

 

[jillian]

they hate women... especially smart women like us.

I love women, especially smart women, I find them refreshing and challenging. You and Jill just don't make the grade. Hell, jillian's comebacks are so weak they aren't worth responding to. Keep trying, if you come up with a good comeback, I'll will actually lower myself and respond to you. Doubt I'll need to.

Well this shows fair and balance in you papa. I love Jillian but I can't stand Valerie, if she is who I think she is. She's fucking nuts. So at least I'll give you that you aren't completely one sided. I never thought you were anyways. I know you just lean to the right. Certainly not a right winger.

Or am I confusing Valerie with Stephanie. I can't keep track. Hey Val, do you think I'm a pedophile? Are you the crazy bitch who thinks that?

if you think he's a centrist, i'll take another look at him, but I haven't seen him do anything but post rightwing talking points.