View Poll Results: How goes it with Sotomayor??

Voters
28. You may not vote on this poll
  • BORKING of a lifetime !!!

    5 17.86%
  • Republicshames will roll over.

    4 14.29%
  • Moderate Dems will help in blocking.

    0 0%
  • Anyone who tries will be named a RACIST (BOO! BOO!)

    9 32.14%
  • Obama withdraws her after opposition mounts.

    1 3.57%
  • She gets in and spend 40 years wrecking the place.

    9 32.14%
Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 70

Thread: BORK HER !!!

  1. #11
    Senior Member igitur55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    259
    Thanked: 37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gratewhitehuntr View Post
    One thing at a time. No freebies today

    "The last guy" nominated at least 4 women to the judiciary
    Priscilla Owens
    Carolyn Kuhl
    Janice Brown
    Harriet Miers (supreme court)
    I thought we were talking about the Supreme Court, not other federal courts. I am surprised you want to disinter Harriet Miers ... that was a very unfortunate chapter, and had everything to do with GWB's blatant cronyism, not quotas.

    Quote Originally Posted by gratewhitehuntr View Post
    Some of us OBVIOUSLY don't understand the function of the court according to the Constitution (and not Ms Sotocracker)
    I don't know what to say about this. Would you like to explain?

  2. #12
    what Dad calls me nun2sharp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Kansas city area USA
    Posts
    9,172
    Thanked: 1677

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by igitur55 View Post

    What about Sotomayor's decisions? Tell us why you think a borking is in order.
    I really dont care if they fill the position with a he, she or it. But in her own words she admits openly that she is not there to interpret the constitution but to establish policy through precedent. She is not an elected representative, it is not her place to establish policy.
    Last edited by nun2sharp; 05-27-2009 at 02:46 AM.
    It is easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled. Twain

  3. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to nun2sharp For This Useful Post:

    gratewhitehuntr (05-27-2009), JMS (05-27-2009), jockeys (05-27-2009), TexasBob (05-27-2009)

  4. #13
    Shaves like a pirate jockeys's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    DFW, TX
    Posts
    2,423
    Thanked: 590

    Default

    all I'm gonna say is the word "bork" must have wildly different connotations where you're from than from where I'm from.

  5. #14
    Nemo Me Impune Lacesset gratewhitehuntr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Movin on up !!
    Posts
    1,553
    Thanked: 193

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jockeys View Post
    all I'm gonna say is the word "bork" must have wildly different connotations where you're from than from where I'm from.
    Robert H. Bork was shot down during the Supreme Court vetting process due to statements and opinions he had rendered in past.

    To "Bork" someone means to hang them with their own rope, so to speak.

    To say it another way, he had "painted himself into a corner".
    Or opined rather.

  6. #15
    Shaves like a pirate jockeys's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    DFW, TX
    Posts
    2,423
    Thanked: 590

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gratewhitehuntr View Post
    Robert H. Bork was shot down during the Supreme Court vetting process due to statements and opinions he had rendered in past.

    To "Bork" someone means to hang them with their own rope, so to speak.

    To say it another way, he had "painted himself into a corner".
    Or opined rather.
    that's relieving. it means something WAY different 'round here.

  7. #16
    Senior Member igitur55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    259
    Thanked: 37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gratewhitehuntr View Post
    To "Bork" someone means to hang them with their own rope, so to speak.
    In Juggernaut-speak, to "hit them with their own pimps."

  8. #17
    Never a dull moment hoglahoo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Tulsa, OK
    Posts
    8,922
    Thanked: 1501
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jockeys View Post
    that's relieving. it means something WAY different 'round here.
    Yeah, here too. He must have not realized it could have been misconstrued to mean anything else
    Last edited by hoglahoo; 05-27-2009 at 04:45 PM. Reason: removed the rolling eyes emoticon in oder to give the benefit of the doubt
    Find me on SRP's official chat in ##srp on Freenode. Link is at top of SRP's homepage

  9. #18
    ---
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,230
    Thanked: 278

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by igitur55 View Post
    there is no reason why there should not be more women on the Supreme Court.
    There is no reason why there should not be more people on the Supreme Court with "Z" in their name. Should there be a quota to make it happen?

    Positive discrimination is discrimination.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to Rajagra For This Useful Post:

    jockeys (05-27-2009)

  11. #19
    Senior Member igitur55's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Posts
    259
    Thanked: 37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rajagra View Post
    Should there be a quota to make it happen? Positive discrimination is discrimination.
    Are you telling me there is a quota? From your response to me it sounds like you are in agreement with greatwhitehuntr and Utopian who claim that there is. I don't think anyone has shown that there is one. I am not in favor of quotas, but I will always stand up to discrimination.
    Last edited by igitur55; 05-27-2009 at 05:19 PM.

  12. #20
    ---
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,230
    Thanked: 278

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by igitur55 View Post
    Are you telling me there is a quota? From your response to me it sounds like you are in agreement with greatwhitehuntr and Utopian who claim that there is. I don't think anyone has shown that there is one. I am not in favor of quotas, but I will always stand up to discrimination.
    I have no idea, sorry if I gave that impression. I was merely discussing the logic of what was said. i.e.

    "There is no reason why there should not be"
    is not the same as
    "There is reason why there should be."

Page 2 of 7 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •