Posted on 09/14/2005 4:43:55 AM PDT by OXENinFLA
What the heck does that mean, "appears to be"???
The so called document has no number on it as Durban stated.
Super Duper...can't wait : )
It certainly didn't matter in the eminent domain case that recently overturned a previous USSC ruling.
BIDEN: That is not true, Judge. Justice Ginsburg violated that rule, according to you. Justice Ginsburg said precisely what position she agreed on.
Did she, in fact, somehow compromise herself when she answered that question?
ROBERTS: She said no hints, no forecasts, no previews.
BIDEN: No, no. Judge, she specifically, in response to a question whether or not she agreed with the majority or minority opinion in Moore v. the City of Cleveland said explicitly: I agree with the majority, and here's what the majority said and I agree with it.
My question to you is: Do you agree with it or not?
ROBERTS: Well, I do know, Senator, that in numerous other cases -- because I read the transcript...
BIDEN: So did I.
ROBERTS: ... she took the position that she should not comment.
Justice O'Connor took the same position. She was asked about a particular case.
BIDEN: Oh, Judge...
(CROSSTALK)
ROBERTS: She said, It's not correct for me to comment.
Now, there's a reason for that.
BIDEN: But you're going from the...
SPECTER: Wait a minute, Senator Biden. He's not finished his answer.
BIDEN: He's filibustering, Senator. But OK, go ahead.
(LAUGHTER)
SPECTER: No, he's not. No, he's not.
(CROSSTALK)
ROBERTS: That's a bad word, Senator.
I'm now watching CSPAN for the 1st time in over a month , WHOA , some of the callers are on the "KoolAid IV drip" , whoever gets the next SCOTUS nod will be ripped apart
heh..
never has been, never will be :)
What is truly amazing is that these Senators had all summer to put together their game plan and this is the best that they could do? Their "slips" are showing! (lack of intelligence)
Excellent point!
From my understanding Biden asked an eight minute question and than told Roberts he was filibustering when he only made responded with a two sentence answer.
Whomever it was, I think an acorn hit him on the head!
LOL LOL LOL! No I don't, but I am delighted that Senator Schumer took acting lessons! I also was laughing when I read that he made 49 references to himself in a speech that was ostensibly not about himself.
As an aside I think nominees to the court should answer any question except a question about a case pending before the court. Not a case that might happen, but one pending.
I see nothing wrong with asking a candidate for the SCOTUS if Roe was a good holding. It would behoove the American people to hear just what garbage was produced by the Roe court.
Something for you to read while you wait (though off subject, sorry OX):
http://www.abcnews.go.com/US/HurricaneKatrina/story?id=1123495&page=1
Unfortunately, the current climate would result in a borking or estradification of an honest judicial conservative.
Agreed on the kool-aid. I happened to catch the planned parenthood chick on Washington Journal...talking about why "we" need to oppose Roberts - if she's against him, I will take that as a pretty good thing.
Perhaps.
"No, no, no, this question is too short and doesn't talk about me enough! Fix it!"
That would Leahy.
Sounds like an SNL skit in the making! LOL!
Anyone see Schumer on Larry King Live last night? He was surprisingly good humored and I think he MAY just vote for Roberts. What say ye all?
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.