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.
That would make Roberts the complete opposite of the last two justices appointed to the Supreme Court, wouldn't it? It sure does for me.
And you will find I am no fan of Sotomayer. Kagen I honestly don't know enough about to comment.
I'm of the belief all justices should be centrists. I was a huge O'Connor fan. The closest we get to it these days is Kennedy, and he's pretty right-leaning. The whole court is just chock full of ideologues these days. It's completely NOT what the Founders had in mind.
Whats funny is to always hear the wingnuts attack Maddow, because, how can they attack the story in question (whatever it is) because:
A) They have no clue what she is talking about
B) They dont care what she is talking about
All further proof the GOP is a cult, and its leaders simply have to appeal to their fears and prejudices.
Also, big props to Sen. Udall (D-NM) for his comments. Consider that LBJ had to deal with ONE filibuster in 6 years and Harry Reid has had to deal with EIGHTY FOUR since Obama was elected.
Amazing. The tragedy is those who actively practice broken government were rewarded in November by an increasingly clueless public
Let's be honest here, both parties abuse the filibuster.
The 2007-2008 Senate broke the record for filibusters due to the Democrats being the minority party at the time and objecting to Bush-era policies. The Republicans broke this record again in the current Senate session in objection to Obama-era policies as the minority party, but not by a large margin.
The real reason filibusters have increased, is because in the past, Senators were actually forced to carry out their filibusters. Now if there is a "threat" of filibuster the bill is killed. LBJ had to deal with one filibuster because no Senators wanted to actually speak for all hours of the day and night unless the policy was a major one the Senator was against (like Democrats' filibusters by Thurmond and Byrd against the Civil Rights Acts of 1957 and 1964.)
So they filibustered, that isnt breaking the senate.. Its part of the process which has been in place since the beginning of time..
And if they broke it intentionally, then you need to explain to me how the Democrats still managed to do so much damage is such a short period of time..
I note Democrats definition of "breaking" the Senate is, not caving in to stupid Democratic policies.. ooh the humor and whining we are going to see next year.. Let it rip!!
Rachael, oh howdy she is not someone i pay attention to in the least, don't care about anything she has to say, sort of like how some of you don't like beck, except, she is so much worse, and beck is much easier on the eyes!
She is the most bias person out there, well one of them. She also seems to leave very pertinent facts out of discussions ever notice this.
She gets under my skin, she truly feels she has the facts down pat, and no she does not.
And you will find I am no fan of Sotomayer. Kagen I honestly don't know enough about to comment.
I'm of the belief all justices should be centrists. I was a huge O'Connor fan. The closest we get to it these days is Kennedy, and he's pretty right-leaning. The whole court is just chock full of ideologues these days. It's completely NOT what the Founders had in mind.
I am no fan of either off those two women. I believe that Kagan leans a bit farther left than Sotomayor.
Rachael, oh howdy she is not someone i pay attention to in the least, don't care about anything she has to say, sort of like how some of you don't like beck, except, she is so much worse, and beck is much easier on the eyes!
She is the most bias person out there, well one of them. She also seems to leave very pertinent facts out of discussions ever notice this.
She gets under my skin, she truly feels she has the facts down pat, and no she does not.
What you just said about Madcow sounds so much like what the libs say about Beck all the time. At least you seem to understand that we are all alike only on opposite sides.
RM would do better explaining how she got a show on MSNBC
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.
