Smiling happy faces. Not.
Posted on 05/27/2009 8:56:17 AM PDT by Lucky9teen
Smiling happy faces. Not.
The policies of the pubbies when they controlled both Houses of Congress and the White House for 6 years had nothing to do with the '06 debacle ... and, having learned their lesson, the nomination of a complete RINO for the '08 run wasn't a contributing factor either ...
Sorry, Eagle, most of the wounds were self inflicted. It's kinda hard to motivate people when both sides are shouting "vote for me, I'm not the other guy." and your guys have pretty much been drifting aimlesly for 8 years.
"Court is Where Policy is Made"
She don’t look healthy. Good.
Senator Biden was the first questioner. Instead of the softball questions he’d promised to ask, he threw a beanball straight at my head, quoting from a speech I’d given four years earlier at the Pacific Legal Foundation and challenging me to defend what I’d said. ”I find attractive the arguments of scholars such as Stephen Macedo, who defend an activist Supreme Court that would strike down laws restricting property rights.” That caught me off guard, and I had no recollection of making so atypical a statement, which shook me up even more. “Now, it would seem to me what you were talking about,” Senator Biden went on to say, “is you find it attractive the fact that they are activists and they would like to strike down existing laws that impact on restricting the use of property rights, because you know, that is what they write about.”pp 235-236 of "My Grandfather's Son" by Clarence ThomasSince I didn’t remember making the statement in the first place, I didn’t know how to respond to it. All I could say in reply was that “it has been some time since I have read Professor Macedo … But I don’t believe that in my writings I have indicated that we should have an activist Supreme Court.” It was, I knew, a weak answer. Fortunately, though, the young lawyers who had helped prepare me for the hearing had loaded all of my speeches into a computer and at the first break in the proceedings they looked this one up. The senator, they found, had wrenched my words out of context. I looked at the text and saw that the passage he’d read out loud had been immediately followed by two other sentences: “But the libertarian argument overlooks the place of the Supreme Court in a scheme of separation of powers. One does not strengthen self-government and the rule of law by having the non-democratic branch of the government make policy.” The point I’d been making was the opposite of the one that Senator Biden claimed I had made.
“Democrats don’t improve with age.”
NOT!
Can she pass the physical?
Biden is reprehensible. Thank you for posting that—I think I’ll buy Justice Thomas’ book.
Or the theme from the old Love Boat show.
Or the theme from the old Love Boat show.
Okay - Willis gets my vote.
ROTFL!
I wonder if Thomas corrected Biden afterward?
Biden’s chickens are going to come home to roost.
This Justice nomination is also HIS administration’s nomination. Biden must be made to answer for the “difference”.
Also see new tagline.
Normal Americans kiss women on their LEFT cheek, 0 kisses her right. Probably a Muslim tradition.
The entire transcripts are here http://etext.virginia.edu/users/yitna/:
Now again, no one is proposing to take us all the way back to this so called Lochner era, but there are those who wish to employ the same reasoning that was used in that era. Today’s natural law proponents of what they term “New economic rights and new property rights” have called into question many of the most important laws enacted in this century — laws protecting the environment, or water and our air, laws regulating child care and senior citizens’ facilities, and even called into question the constitutionality of the Social Security system.
Now, Judge Thomas, you have made it abundantly clear that you do not subscribe to the most extreme of these views. But you have said that you find some of these views, to quote you, “attractive” and that you support the idea, quote, “of an activist Supreme Court that would strike down laws regulating economic rights,” end of quote. And again, this is a version of natural law, a vision of natural law, that we have moved far beyond and that most Americans have no desire to return to.
(edit)
SEN. BIDEN: ...Judge, because of your youth, and God bless you for it — I never thought I’d be sitting here talking about the youth of a nominee to the Supreme Court, but I am. Heck, you’re six, seven years younger than — I’m 48. How old are you, Judge, 42, 43?
JUDGE THOMAS:
Well, I’ve aged over the last 10 weeks, but — (laughter) — 43.
SEN. BIDEN:
Forty-three years old. Because of your youth, Judge, you will be the first Supreme Court justice the Senate will ever have confirmed, if it does, that will most likely write more of his opinions in the 21st century than he will write in the 20th century. To acknowledge that fact alone, Judge, is to recognize the unique significance of your nomination and the care with which this committee must look at it...
—
As Clarence Thomas said in his book, the full context of the quote was brought to his attention at the break. The formallity of the proceeding didn’t give him an opportunity to respond immediately. I’ll have to look at the full transcripts to see what came up and what else the Democrats may have said that would be appropriate to this latest nomination hearing.
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.