Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Some would say that Obama got elected on his looks.
It might have been worth a percentage point or two.
Lots of people swooned over his admittedly good looks. Fine by me so long as those swooners are not the ones now expressing horror that some might note Kagan's looks.
Now she is refusing to answer questions about her constitutional views. Even though she criticized other nominees for refusing to answer such questions.
Why is this person being allowed to skate through when we literally know nothing about her?
Now she is refusing to answer questions about her constitutional views. Even though she criticized other nominees for refusing to answer such questions.
Why is this person being allowed to skate through when we literally know nothing about her?
Dude this is a dog and pony show.
bottom line is, the Senate needs to look for disqualifying events like illegal behavior, sedition or if a person is qualified to serve on the court.
The rest of it is posturing. These guys don’t care if she answers the questions. They care about framing the debate so people will understand why it is important to vote for a president that thinks like they do.
Kagan is all of the things that Republicans have said she is: activist/liberal/etc. But is she qualified? We know she is not evil, a law breaker or seditious.
The only thing is, is she qualified? Does she have the scope of knowledge to be a good justice. Does she have the intelligence to be on the court.
Personally I want her on the court about as much as I want emrods. But as far as I have seen, there is nothing that disqualifies her for the court.
bottom line is, the Senate needs to look for disqualifying events like illegal behavior, sedition or if a person is qualified to serve on the court.
The rest of it is posturing. These guys don’t care if she answers the questions. They care about framing the debate so people will understand why it is important to vote for a president that thinks like they do.
Kagan is all of the things that Republicans have said she is: activist/liberal/etc. But is she qualified? We know she is not evil, a law breaker or seditious.
The only thing is, is she qualified? Does she have the scope of knowledge to be a good justice. Does she have the intelligence to be on the court.
Personally I want her on the court about as much as I want emrods. But as far as I have seen, there is nothing that disqualifies her for the court.
yep dog and pony show, nothing more than a Kabuki dance. done deal, just posturing, will get 56 or 57 votes to confirm, I don't agree, but already a done deal.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
