Reid to oppose Roberts nomination. - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

Archaea · 09-20-2005, 06:32 PM

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,169924,00.html

Here's a point of contention for me.

Republicans catch heat for nominating somebody like Roberts to replace Rehnquist, yet Republicans didn't do anything to oppose an obviously radical liberal in Ginsburg.

Democrats won't ever nominate a middle of the roader or a conservative, while Republicans will nominate from time to time, liberals or middle of the roaders.

There is absolutely no sense of integrity in this nomination process ever demonstrated by the Democratic National Party, Reid included.

SoCalCoug · 09-20-2005, 08:03 PM

I read somewhere that for the nominations that turned out to be Souter and Ginsburg, Clinton talked to Orrin Hatch, told him who he was thinking about nominating, and asked him who he thought would be confirmable. Hatch suggested Ginsburg and Souter.

That might explain the lack of serious challenges to their nominations.

Archaea · 09-20-2005, 08:37 PM

IIRC.

Ginsburg was Clinton's only appointee. No, if you understand the Ginsburg rule, justices refuse to answer on sensitive issues, and the Senate lives with it. I believe you're in error about Ginsburg, but I'm not the master of all sources, so I reserve the right to be wrong.

Archaea · 09-21-2005, 08:55 PM

http://www.dkosopedia.com/index.php/Supreme_Court

Clinton got his very, extremely liberal appointees and the Republicans played ball. Bush has potential moderates causing the Dems to go ballistic, a la Kennedy and Reid.

09-20-2005, 06:32 PM	#1
Archaea Assistant to the Regional Manager Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: The Orgasmatron Posts: 24,338	Reid to oppose Roberts nomination. http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,169924,00.html Here's a point of contention for me. Republicans catch heat for nominating somebody like Roberts to replace Rehnquist, yet Republicans didn't do anything to oppose an obviously radical liberal in Ginsburg. Democrats won't ever nominate a middle of the roader or a conservative, while Republicans will nominate from time to time, liberals or middle of the roaders. There is absolutely no sense of integrity in this nomination process ever demonstrated by the Democratic National Party, Reid included. __________________ Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα

09-20-2005, 08:03 PM	#2
SoCalCoug Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Orange County, California Posts: 3,059	I read somewhere that for the nominations that turned out to be Souter and Ginsburg, Clinton talked to Orrin Hatch, told him who he was thinking about nominating, and asked him who he thought would be confirmable. Hatch suggested Ginsburg and Souter. That might explain the lack of serious challenges to their nominations. __________________ Get your stinking paws off me, you damned, dirty Yewt! "Now perhaps as I spanked myself screaming out "Kozlowski, say it like you mean it bitch!" might have been out of line, but such was the mood." - Goatnapper "If you want to fatten a pig up to make the pig MORE delicious, you can feed it almost anything. Seriously. The pig is like the car on Back to the Future. You put in garbage, and out comes something magical!" - Cali Coug

09-20-2005, 08:37 PM	#3
Archaea Assistant to the Regional Manager Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: The Orgasmatron Posts: 24,338	Souter was a Bush 1 appointee IIRC. Ginsburg was Clinton's only appointee. No, if you understand the Ginsburg rule, justices refuse to answer on sensitive issues, and the Senate lives with it. I believe you're in error about Ginsburg, but I'm not the master of all sources, so I reserve the right to be wrong. __________________ Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα

09-21-2005, 08:55 PM	#4
Archaea Assistant to the Regional Manager Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: The Orgasmatron Posts: 24,338	Breyer was Clinton's other appointee http://www.dkosopedia.com/index.php/Supreme_Court Clinton got his very, extremely liberal appointees and the Republicans played ball. Bush has potential moderates causing the Dems to go ballistic, a la Kennedy and Reid. __________________ Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα