Where IS Gorsuch on this axis?
Since the 'Rats are so tightly clustered, one can see where 'Rats would believe that anyone sighlty to the right would be outside of their mainstreaming of Hopium.
Posted on 03/27/2017 7:33:16 AM PDT by rktman
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) said last week that she supports a filibuster to stop the Supreme Court nomination of federal Judge Neil Gorsuch, claiming that he is “way outside the mainstream.”
“We need to have a judge who’s kind of acceptable to both sides,” Warren said on National Public Radio’s Morning Edition Friday. “That’s the reason there’s a 60-vote rule in effect on Supreme Court nominees.”
“I don’t think Neil Gorsuch meets that standard,” Warren said. “Here’s someone — read his record.”
“In every opportunity to choose between corporate interests, big corporations and the little guy — employees, women, consumers — he always chooses the big corporations,” Warren said. “And I think that puts him way outside the mainstream of what we need.”
“So that means you — just to be clear — you would support a filibuster?” Host Rachel Martin asked Warren.
“Oh, absolutely,” Warren said.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Good point. What is mainstream to the liberal Democrats?
Their definition of mainstream is very different from most people’s definition.
The Far Left wants a veto power over all SCOTUS picks.
If Trump had nominated Ralph Nader Warren would have denounced him as a right-wing extremist. Heck, if he had nominated Warren she would have denounced herself. All her remarks were pre-written and just had the name left blank until Trump made his announcement.
Warren: We need to have a judge who’s kind of acceptable to both sides.
Uh, no we don’t. We won, remember?
And yes, he is way outside the mainstream; the mainstream Leftist set of beliefs. All the better for normal Americans.
She says that about every Republican
Where IS Gorsuch on this axis?
Since the 'Rats are so tightly clustered, one can see where 'Rats would believe that anyone sighlty to the right would be outside of their mainstreaming of Hopium.
Paleface Lizzy stole money that was meant for Indians.
She’s just a dirty thief.
Does this ranting bitch find it necessary to show her ass on everything?
Crazy fake conservatives are against him too.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3538404/posts
Sorry squawkahontas, the mainstream has shifted to the right. Progressives throw this mainstream out a lot thinking the masses don’t know better. It’s over.
All the usual suspects are lining up. Boring.
The GOP needs to point out that it is those evil corporations that make this economic engine work and that rich people are also necessary. How many of you have been hired by a poor person? Yet, the Libs always vilify the rich and praise the poor. Why?
In every opportunity to choose between corporate interests, big corporations and the little guy — employees, women, consumers — he always chooses the big corporations,”
This is such horse blank.
You have to know what the legal issues involved in particular cases are.
You have to know what the applicable laws are which apply to the case at hand.
Every case has a plaintiff and a defendant.
Just because someone, one of Elizabeth’s favored little people, sues a big corporation, doesn’t mean that they have a legal case against said corporation under the law.
It’s completely absurd to imply that Judge Gorsuch, upon hearing a case, just rules in favor of some big corporation, whether they are plaintiff or defendant, just because a corporation in involved in the lawsuit.
That “Indian” was actually an Italian dude.
Thanks Liz!
Give us good political cover to nuke the filibuster now for Scalia’s replacement so we can much more easily replace Ginsberg with a solid constitutionalist when she retires.
“Mainstream” - the broad way to hell.
So if they filibuster, then what?
Assuming they try for the nuclear option but that fails, then what?
Then another nominee would be put forward.
But that nominee would not be any more acceptable to the liberals than Gorsuch.
What about the liberals lament from last year, that we need a fully functioning fully staffed Supreme Court?
How far would they take the filibuster against Trump nominees??? Suppose 1 or 2 more Supreme Court justices retire? Would we go down to 7 or even just six Justices, if they don’t allow any Trump nominees through?? But then what about their stated criteria that we need a fully staffed 9 member court?????
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.