By the way, check out this airbrush job.
Posted on 12/25/2010 7:39:05 PM PST by Nachum
Washington —For most of the last two decades, Supreme Court conservatives led by Justice Antonin Scalia dominated the debates during oral arguments. They greeted advocates for liberal causes with sharp and sometimes caustic questions, putting them on the defensive from the opening minute.But the tenor of the debate has changed in recent months, now that President Obama's two appointees to the court, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, have joined the fray and reenergized the liberal wing.Gone are the mismatches where the Scalia wing overshadowed reserved and soft-spoken liberals like now-retired
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
I see their IQ scores every time I look at their faces.
By the way, check out this airbrush job.
Only problem is Kagan should not be hearing or voting on 99 percent of the cases. She has a conflict of interest on most everything. She shouldn’t be sitting on the Supreme Court.
Horror Story: Attack of the left-wing Vagitarians.
I live in the real world. the one where actions have consequences.A world where if one touches an hot object, one gets burned. On November 4, 2008, a majority of those who cast their votes said, via their votes, that they wished to be ruled by evil men and women. This is now happening.Your second paragraph is correct on its face. While they are in power they do a lot of damage. We have no calvery to come riding over the hill to rescue us.
“I only hit post once.”
Not your fault. There’s been an interesting glitch in the system since the server went down a couple of months ago. Double posts, and even double threads. Usually happens somewhere between post 7 and post 20.
+1. That's why the Repubes didn't put up much of a fight at either's confirmation hearings.
I think you mistaken. The House judiciary committee is where investigative/impeachment hearings originate. And the perception of wrong doing can place much political pressure on those involved.
Perhaps I’m not clear on WHO you are talking about impeaching. Or on what wrongdoing charges. Sotomayor and Kagen hold lifetime appointments. They may be loud and aggressive and extremely far to the left, but how does that become official wrongdoing?
Impeachment is very, very serious, and as much as we may not like a thing this Administration or these two new Justices have done, what grounds would there be to impanel an impeachment committee? That isn’t how we settle our political disputes.
You may recall that John Conyers, when he was ranking minority member of the House Judiciary Committee, insisted on holding investigative/impeachment hearings on President Bush? Recall how seriously he was taken? He held his hearings in the basement of the Capitol.
Even when there were clear grounds for what became a successful impeachment of Clinton, he was not only never convicted, but gained public sympathy. His popularity soared. Is that really where we want to go ?
This past election, it seems to me, was about stopping and undoing the federal governments expansive grasp of power. The Congress will have its hands full just working to achieve that. Becoming sidetracked with impeachment hearings and investigations is not really the way to accomplish that. If they are successful, this Administration will hopefully be gone by 1-20-13.
The only possible way I can see to get rid of Sotomayor and/or Kagen would be if the SCOTUS determined that BHO was not eligible to serve as POTUS, thus not eligible to have appointed them. Although, in that case, Biden would become POTUS and would most likely just reaffirm every official action taken by BHO. Like it or not, we have those two for life. Our job is to see that we don’t get any more similar appointments.
“Are you trying to recall the whiny little ACLU lawyer Ginsberg?”
Yup, Ginsberg.
I hope you are wrong about O getting 2 more appointments. All he really needs is one more if it’s the right seat (from his perspective). But look at who Sotomoyer and Kagen replaced: two Republican-appointed liberal Justices who could have retired, but did not, during Bush’s term. Both made a point of sticking around for a Dem president to choose their replacement. Real swell guys. They didn’t do enough damage on the bench, they had to do more in their exits.
We have to pray daily for the good health and steadfastness of Justices Alito, Kennedy, Roberts, Scalia and Thomas. CJ Roberts has been very persuasive w/Kennedy in a way Rehnquist was not.
BTW, I argued more than once as various GOP presidential hopefuls were trashed on these threads that any of them would be better on making SCOTUS appointments than either of the 2 leading Dems, and that ultimately that was the importance of the ‘08 election. I can’t think of a single Dem SCOTUS nominee in my lifetime who’s been rejected, but can think of several Republicans who were (or whose names were withdrawn). It’s a one-way street on those nominations.
I’m not saying the ultimate goal is impeachment or finding any wrong doing. I am saying start investigations (which start in the House)to place pressure for negotiation with the Obama Admin. I guess I’m being to politically sofisicated.
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.