Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-23-2011, 01:09 PM
 
16,545 posts, read 13,455,215 times
Reputation: 4243

Advertisements

Quote:
WASHINGTON — The American Bar Association has secretly declared a significant number of President Obama’s potential judicial nominees “not qualified,” slowing White House efforts to fill vacant judgeships — and nearly all of the prospects given poor ratings were women or members of a minority group, according to interviews.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/23/us...MYAJJoejzkc+3w

Birds of a feather I guess. Obama isn't qualified to be POTUS what makes anyone think that his picks for judges would be qualified???
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-23-2011, 01:35 PM
 
29,981 posts, read 42,939,504 times
Reputation: 12828
Are any of us really shocked? This is the lowering of the bar, quite literally, I expect from Obama. Quality is not a consideration, only agenda.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2011, 01:46 PM
 
Location: Sarasota, FL
1,695 posts, read 3,045,219 times
Reputation: 1143
Obama has been submitting all those under consideration for nomination to the panel. Bush wouldn't do that - he didn't submit names to the ABA panel, so a comparison between the Buh nominees & the Obama nominees really cannot be made. The ABA panel made its recommendation on a nominee after the person was already nominated to be a Judge. Bush stopped submitting names because he felt the panel was too liberal.

Another point here is something I've noticed - the quality of lawyers/judges has been going steadily downhill. This reflects that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2011, 01:47 PM
 
16,545 posts, read 13,455,215 times
Reputation: 4243
Quote:
Originally Posted by lifelongMOgal View Post
Are any of us really shocked? This is the lowering of the bar, quite literally, I expect from Obama. Quality is not a consideration, only agenda.
I'm not shocked at all and I would bet that the last 2 that Obama snuck in weren't qualified as well.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2011, 02:15 PM
 
12,669 posts, read 20,449,229 times
Reputation: 3050
Quote:
Originally Posted by SourD View Post
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/23/us...MYAJJoejzkc+3w

Birds of a feather I guess. Obama isn't qualified to be POTUS what makes anyone think that his picks for judges would be qualified???
Haahaaa to funny!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2011, 02:16 PM
 
6,137 posts, read 4,862,292 times
Reputation: 1517
Well the American Bar Association must be racist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2011, 02:23 PM
 
59,053 posts, read 27,318,346 times
Reputation: 14285
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coachgns View Post
Obama has been submitting all those under consideration for nomination to the panel. Bush wouldn't do that - he didn't submit names to the ABA panel, so a comparison between the Buh nominees & the Obama nominees really cannot be made. The ABA panel made its recommendation on a nominee after the person was already nominated to be a Judge. Bush stopped submitting names because he felt the panel was too liberal.

Another point here is something I've noticed - the quality of lawyers/judges has been going steadily downhill. This reflects that.
The statement I bolded isn't quite the truth.

"The number of Obama prospects deemed “not qualified” already exceeds the total number opposed by the group during the eight-year administrations of Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush; the rejection rate is more than three and a half times as high as it was under either of the previous two presidencies, documents and interviews show.

"That outcome has added a new twist to a long-running friction in the politics of judicial nominations. During recent Republican administrations, conservatives have made political hay of accusing the A.B.A. of liberal bias against conservative potential judges. In 2001, Mr. Bush stopped sending the group names of prospects before he selected them, so the panel instead rated them after their nomination. In 2009, Mr. Obama restored the panel’s role in the prenomination selection process, which dates to the Eisenhower administration."

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/23/us...er=rss&emc=rss

As can be seen Bush DID submit names but stopped is much different then what is claimed.

The ABA is one of the biggest political contributors to the dem party.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2011, 02:30 PM
 
9,617 posts, read 6,065,647 times
Reputation: 3884
Very good catch of the half-truth Quick Enough. Thanks. Dem' Dems are so good at messaging.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2011, 02:38 PM
 
Location: OCEAN BREEZES AND VIEWS SAN CLEMENTE
19,893 posts, read 18,447,268 times
Reputation: 6465
Quote:
Originally Posted by SourD View Post
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/23/us...MYAJJoejzkc+3w

Birds of a feather I guess. Obama isn't qualified to be POTUS what makes anyone think that his picks for judges would be qualified???
Talking about Birds of a Feather, yes they really do stick Together.

Wow talk about lowering the bar, what an understatement. No surprises here, really think Obama has our best interest in mind! really.
Guess quality and sincerity does not matter to any of these whacos.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-23-2011, 02:52 PM
 
Location: Sarasota FL
6,864 posts, read 12,080,222 times
Reputation: 6744
'I don't care if they are unqualified, just find me a bunch of blacks and women that agree with my agenda and policies. I'll appoint them when Congress is not in session'.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:44 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top