The court is balanced between good and bad. I dread this one getting in replacing one of the bad with worse. At the least Republicans should do want the RATS already did to them: filibusterer.
bump
FIFA hires these types of referee’s all the time!
The court is balanced between good and bad. I dread this one getting in replacing one of the bad with worse. At the least Republicans should do want the RATS already did to them: filibusterer.
she was nominated because she is unqualified...and has no judicial record...And Repubilcans on committee will not defend the country or the constitution.
Thoroughly unqualified is a requirement for the progressive liberal movement see Obama&Co.
About the only time I can think of where an umpire should clearly act contrary to the official rules would be if necessary to counteract the actions of another umpire who was grossly out of line. For example, if the Home Plate Umpire called "strike" on the first nine pitches, all of which rolled over the plate before motionless batters, and the umpire suddenly had a heart attack and needed to be replaced, it might be appropriate for the replacement umpire, after openly consulting with both teams' managers, to announce he would call strike on the first nine pitches from the other pitcher.
The practical effect of such an announcement would be that both teams would get to play a fair eight-inning game. While the second umpire's actions would be even more clearly contrary to the rules of baseball than the first's, in fact they would achieve a result far more consistent with the rules than any other course of action. Note, however, that the second umpire should be open about what he's doing. Allowing umpires to make up for "mistakes" of other umpires without having to declare that they are doing so, or what the supposed mistakes are, would turn sports judging into a free-for-all.