just swish that chocolate between your teeth before you kiss your re boyfriend UNT and you'll be fine
Watch it, Splits. I ain't in the in' mood.
just swish that chocolate between your teeth before you kiss your re boyfriend UNT and you'll be fine
You have daydreams of that type of scene, don't you, liberal got?
After listening to much of the confirmation hearing today, I think we could've done a lot worse than Gorsuch.
Seems reasonable and fair. Made me wish more judges would run for Congress or Executive Office.
Emails show Neil Gorsuch was a fan of a leading anti-voting rights activist
President Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee could pose a threat to the voting rights of racial minorities
appears to have ties with an anti-voting rights crusader who popularized misinformation about widespread voter fraud.
Emails released to the Senate Judiciary Committee indicate that Gorsuch is not only familiar with Hans von Spakovsky, a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation known for hyping the voter fraud narrative, but perhaps even a fan of his.
Back in July 2005, von Spakovsky sent out an email to a list of people announcing a speech he was giving at the Ballot Access and Voting Integrity Conference, as Ari Berman reported for The Nation. Gorsuch replied to the email, “Sounds interesting. Glad to see you’re doing this. I may tray [sic] to attend some of it.”
A December 2005 email that Gorsuch received from another contact indicated that von Spakovsky was being considered for the Federal Election Commission. The message’s sender conceded “there will be stories” and that it will be “a little bit of a fight in the press.” Gorsuch responded, writing, “Good for Hans!”
Gorsuch’s tenure in the Justice Department overlapped with von Spakovsky in 2005, when Gorsuch was the principal deputy to the associate attorney general and von Spakovsky was special counsel to Brad Schlozman, the assistant attorney general for civil rights, The Nation reported. Schlozman and
von Spakovsky took control of the Civil Rights Division in the Justice Department and reversed its traditional role of protecting the voting rights of minorities.
http://www.salon.com/2017/03/21/emai...ghts-activist/
Trash's racist DoJ will certainly destroy the civil rights division, just like dubya's did 2001-2008.
The nomination was still stolen from Obama. It should have been Garland.
Such judicial Gore
Neil Gorsuch and the “Frozen Trucker”
The judge’s infamous dissent reveals he may not have the temperament to serve on the Supreme Court.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_a...o_be_like.html
Gorsuch's "textualist" defense is that the law, as he sees it with no context, forces the trucker freeze to death to obey employer's rules, rather than try to save his limbs, and life.
Sheldon Whitehouse’s Shockingly Awesome Gorsuch Statement
Democratic Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, in his opening statement at the Gorsuch nominating hearings, isn’t having it. Gorsuch, he said, will fight for big corporations versus actual ‘humans’ in every arena possible.
Whitehouse eviscerated Gorsuch as a payoff to a big conservative political machine.
The special interests who financed the campaign to put Gorsuch on the court, he said, “obviously think that you will be worth their money”.
Beyond that, he points out, John Roberts sat before the Senate Judiciary Committee and
lied that he would just be an unbiased umpire calling balls and strikes.
Roberts then went on the court and ruled for big business in every case that came before the court which involved big business.
“Once burned, twice shy,” said Whitehouse. Gorsuch will join a court that ruled for big business in everything from class actions to labor to jury systems to voting rights.
Whitehouse listed a litany of cases and their impacts, with this one as a particular kicker, “Help insulate investment bankers against fraud claims? Why not?”
The special interests that financed
this big business takeover of the court is not principled, said Whitehouse, it isn’t intellectual, it is simply a “delivery service” for big business.
Gorsuch is highly qualified, Whitehouse noted. But fundamentally Gorsuch is a payoff to the special interest groups that will profit from his rulings.
It’s important to note here that Whitehouse is making a broader claim about the court. His point isn’t just that Gorsuch should be rejected, but that
Democrats should have no respect for the legitimacy of the court so long as the court serves a role as a cog in a corrupt big business machine.
https://medium.com/@matthewstoller/s...ee8#.hdbw2xg75
iow, Gorsuch is nothing but another VRWC/BigCorp/BigMoney stooge.
executive summary: GORSUCH IS A LIAR
The Judge Gorsuch who spoke in the Senate today is nothing like the man who wrote his opinions
Will the real Neil Gorsuch please stand up?
Nominee Neil Gorsuch spoke for only a little over 15 minutes, and his prepared remarks spent nearly as much time on his pet goat and his black polyester robe as it did on his record as a judge.
Gorsuch did speak long enough to paint of picture of the kind of judge he wanted people watching his hearing to think that he is.
Echoing Chief Justice John Roberts at Roberts’ own confirmation hearing, Gorsuch said that judges should occupy a “modest station.”
He warned that “if judges were just secret legislators, declaring not what the law is but what they would like it to be, the very idea of a government by the people and for the people would be at risk.”
The opinions that define Gorsuch’s tenure as a judge are primarily cases where he pushed for the courts to do more to intervene in policy disputes.
In , Gorsuch urged the courts to grant new rights to religious objectors who did not wish to provide birth control coverage to their employees.
In Gutierrez-Brizuela v. Lynch, Gorsuch complained that a longstanding doctrine requiring courts to defer to federal agencies “seems more than a little difficult to square with the Cons ution of the framers’ design.”
In United States v. Nichols, Gorsuch hinted that he might impose aggressive new limits on agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency if given to opportunity to do so.
So why is Gorsuch selling himself as Mr. Modesty when he has not behaved that way on the bench? One possibility is that he is simply being a cynic.
https://thinkprogress.org/the-judge-...d81#.xf3sbbyir
iow, the Gorsuch before the Senate is NOT the Gorsuch of his trail of rulings, dissents. HE'S LYING
Neil Gorsuch Is Not Another Scalia. He’s the Next John Roberts.
Gorsuch puts a handsome face on an ugly ideology.
Neil Gorsuch has been compared (including by me) to Antonin Scalia, who he called “a lion of the law,” but after two-days of hearings it’s clear he’s closer to John Roberts—another handsome face with an ugly ideology.
When asked about his legal philosophy, Gorsuch invoked the mantra of Justice Byron White, saying “I decide cases.”
He refused to weigh in when asked about controversial cases like Citizens United, saying “I can’t get into politics.”
His personal views, he frequently maintained, were irrelevant to his rulings as a judge.
Yet we know enough about Gorsuch to surmise that he was nominated by Donald Trump to be a smooth-talking advocate on the bench for a far right ideology.
He was hand-picked by the Federalist Society and the Heritage Foundation.
He has close ties to a conservative billionaire and
has praised one of the GOP’s most notorious voter suppression advocates.
He’s criticized liberals for challenging gay marriage bans in the courts.
In the Bush Administration, he praised the Guantanamo prison and defended harsh anti-terror policies.
As a judge, he joined the Hobby Lobby decision restricting a woman’s right to choose and
ruled against a truck driver who abandoned his trailer in subzero temperatures after it broke down.
He’s consistently favored corporate power and corporate influence in the political process.
In fact, a review of his opinions suggests he will be more conservative than Roberts and Alito, second only to Justice Thomas.
https://www.thenation.com/article/ne...-john-roberts/
No disagreement. Still, considering... Could have been a lot worse.
Maybe liberals should see it as no matter who replaced Scalia, chances are the SC has shifted (a bit) leftward.
Or maybe you should shut your cunthole
Agreed.
not at all, Gorsuch will vote 100% of the time with the other 4 VRWC stooges.
I actually like Schumer's latest approach - hold off on confirmation until the FBI investigation into the Trump campaign's potential collusion with Russian interference in the US election is complete. Republicans logic for opposing Garland was that Obama was only going to be president for a year...following that same logic, we need to know the outcome of this investigation before proceeding with a lifetime appointment to the SCOTUS .
Lol schumer is an impotent broke . The confirmation will happen.
He will be bitterly disappointed. No collusion.
It was refreshing to see so many on the left crying about it today. Stay salty. Time for Dems to bend over and take it for a while.
Without invoking the nuclear option?
Take what?
You're getting the too got
Ok. But just to be safe, let's hold off on confirming his SCOTUS nominee untill we see the result of the investigation.
You wouldn't have a problem with simply collecting all the fact before making such an impactful decision, would you mavsfan1000?
It sounds like the investigation will take years. I would just filibuster since the GOP stole the nomination.
You know they don't vote lockstep - look at Roberts TWICE with Obamacare.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)