Nothing on Gorsuch?

RaceBannon · February 2017

I was sure he was a white nationalist racist homophobe.

And stupid of course

AlCzervik · February 2017

I'm watching Jimmy Stewart in "Mr. Smith goes to Washington." Maybe later.

2001400ex · February 2017

I'm hearing he was the most transparent pick ever and bi partisan. Trump is going to work with Democrats and it's gonna be yuge.

LoneStarDawg · February 2017

The guy seemed solid and terrified of trump

greenblood · February 2017

Ozone is shaking and about to vomit

dhdawg · February 2017

perfectly acceptable pick to replace kennedy, or Ginsburg. Much better than I even expected. and very much unlike someone you'd expect trump to pick. We do need to hear his opinion of the NSA on the record

Nothing will change the fact that this seat was stolen.

GrundleStiltzkin · February 2017

dhdawg said:
perfectly acceptable pick to replace kennedy, or Ginsburg. Much better than I even expected. and very much unlike someone you'd expect trump to pick. We do need to hear his opinion of the NSA on the record

Nothing will change the fact that this seat was stolen.

That was a ballsy role of the dice. Strictly partisan political maneuver, and they dumb-lucked into a win on it.

dhdawg · February 2017

what's interesting is, unless you're a right wing Christian nut, garland and Gorsuch aren't that much different.
Both are pro business
Gorsuch is probably better on 4th amendment

Garland was about as watered down a pick as you can make, and the GOP ideologues still blocked it

BearsWiin · February 2017

dhdawg said:
perfectly acceptable pick to replace kennedy, or Ginsburg. Much better than I even expected. and very much unlike someone you'd expect trump to pick. We do need to hear his opinion of the NSA on the record

Nothing will change the fact that this seat was stolen.

This guy seems to like him:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/31/opinion/why-liberals-should-back-neil-gorsuch.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-right-region&region=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region

Pelosi drew a hard line in the sand on him during her CNN Town Hall this evening, which was an understandable play but one I think that will come back to bite her if she pushes it. Pick your battles; this isn't a winnable one.

dhdawg · February 2017

BearsWiin said:

dhdawg said:
perfectly acceptable pick to replace kennedy, or Ginsburg. Much better than I even expected. and very much unlike someone you'd expect trump to pick. We do need to hear his opinion of the NSA on the record

Nothing will change the fact that this seat was stolen.
This guy seems to like him:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/31/opinion/why-liberals-should-back-neil-gorsuch.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-right-region&region=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region

Pelosi drew a hard line in the sand on him during her CNN Town Hall this evening, which was an understandable play but one I think that will come back to bite her if she pushes it. Pick your battles; this isn't a winnable one.

I get it. but it's still a stolen seat. there can't just be no political price

2001400ex · February 2017

dhdawg said:
what's interesting is, unless you're a right wing Christian nut, garland and Gorsuch aren't that much different.
Both are pro business
Gorsuch is probably better on 4th amendment

Garland was about as watered down a pick as you can make, and the GOP ideologues still blocked it

Only thing GOP cares about is that he is pro life and hates gay people. Rest is meaningless.

BearsWiin · February 2017

dhdawg said:

BearsWiin said:

dhdawg said:
perfectly acceptable pick to replace kennedy, or Ginsburg. Much better than I even expected. and very much unlike someone you'd expect trump to pick. We do need to hear his opinion of the NSA on the record

Nothing will change the fact that this seat was stolen.
This guy seems to like him:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/31/opinion/why-liberals-should-back-neil-gorsuch.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-right-region&region=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region

Pelosi drew a hard line in the sand on him during her CNN Town Hall this evening, which was an understandable play but one I think that will come back to bite her if she pushes it. Pick your battles; this isn't a winnable one.
I get it. but it's still a stolen seat. there can't just be no political price

I don't disagree. But extract the pound of flesh elsewhere, not here. Fighting the battle over this particular appointment won't go well for Democrats. Better to hit hard somewhere else where they're weaker and the Dems are stronger. Kinda like Weinberger's policy of horizontal escalation in the early 1980's regarding the Sovs.

PurpleJ · February 2017

REAL Hitler would have gotten his own People's Court in there.

Disappointed!

greenblood · February 2017

BearsWiin said:

dhdawg said:
perfectly acceptable pick to replace kennedy, or Ginsburg. Much better than I even expected. and very much unlike someone you'd expect trump to pick. We do need to hear his opinion of the NSA on the record

Nothing will change the fact that this seat was stolen.
This guy seems to like him:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/31/opinion/why-liberals-should-back-neil-gorsuch.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-right-region&region=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region

Pelosi drew a hard line in the sand on him during her CNN Town Hall this evening, which was an understandable play but one I think that will come back to bite her if she pushes it. Pick your battles; this isn't a winnable one.

Pelosi can do whatever she wants without consequence. Outside of killing somebody and having to work while in prison, her ticket is punched easily on every election.

dhdawg · February 2017

2001400ex said:

dhdawg said:
what's interesting is, unless you're a right wing Christian nut, garland and Gorsuch aren't that much different.
Both are pro business
Gorsuch is probably better on 4th amendment

Garland was about as watered down a pick as you can make, and the GOP ideologues still blocked it
Only thing GOP cares about is that he is pro life and hates gay people. Rest is meaningless.

as I said, unless you're a right wing Christian nut.

Sledog · February 2017

dhdawg said:

2001400ex said:

dhdawg said:
what's interesting is, unless you're a right wing Christian nut, garland and Gorsuch aren't that much different.
Both are pro business
Gorsuch is probably better on 4th amendment

Garland was about as watered down a pick as you can make, and the GOP ideologues still blocked it
Only thing GOP cares about is that he is pro life and hates gay people. Rest is meaningless.
as I said, unless you're a right wing Christian nut.

Pro 2A.

TierbsHsotBoobs · February 2017

I'm fine with Gorsuch.

Sharing this anyway though because it's funny:

Sledog · February 2017

dhdawg said:

BearsWiin said:

dhdawg said:
perfectly acceptable pick to replace kennedy, or Ginsburg. Much better than I even expected. and very much unlike someone you'd expect trump to pick. We do need to hear his opinion of the NSA on the record

Nothing will change the fact that this seat was stolen.
This guy seems to like him:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/31/opinion/why-liberals-should-back-neil-gorsuch.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-right-region&region=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region

Pelosi drew a hard line in the sand on him during her CNN Town Hall this evening, which was an understandable play but one I think that will come back to bite her if she pushes it. Pick your battles; this isn't a winnable one.
I get it. but it's still a stolen seat. there can't just be no political price

Stolen how? There has never been an appointment that late in a last term. It was voted on by the people. Your side lost.

TierbsHsotBoobs · February 2017

Sledog said:

dhdawg said:

BearsWiin said:

dhdawg said:
perfectly acceptable pick to replace kennedy, or Ginsburg. Much better than I even expected. and very much unlike someone you'd expect trump to pick. We do need to hear his opinion of the NSA on the record

Nothing will change the fact that this seat was stolen.
This guy seems to like him:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/31/opinion/why-liberals-should-back-neil-gorsuch.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-right-region&region=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region

Pelosi drew a hard line in the sand on him during her CNN Town Hall this evening, which was an understandable play but one I think that will come back to bite her if she pushes it. Pick your battles; this isn't a winnable one.
I get it. but it's still a stolen seat. there can't just be no political price
Stolen how? There has never been an appointment that late in a last term. It was voted on by the people. Your side lost.

Troomps hate facts:

http://www.scotusblog.com/2016/02/supreme-court-vacancies-in-presidential-election-years/
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/feb/14/marco-rubio/do-presidents-stop-nominating-judges-final-year/

dhdawg · February 2017

Sledog said:

dhdawg said:

BearsWiin said:

dhdawg said:
perfectly acceptable pick to replace kennedy, or Ginsburg. Much better than I even expected. and very much unlike someone you'd expect trump to pick. We do need to hear his opinion of the NSA on the record

Nothing will change the fact that this seat was stolen.
This guy seems to like him:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/31/opinion/why-liberals-should-back-neil-gorsuch.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-right-region&region=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region

Pelosi drew a hard line in the sand on him during her CNN Town Hall this evening, which was an understandable play but one I think that will come back to bite her if she pushes it. Pick your battles; this isn't a winnable one.
I get it. but it's still a stolen seat. there can't just be no political price
Stolen how? There has never been an appointment that late in a last term. It was voted on by the people. Your side lost.

where'd you find this horseshit? brietbart?

2001400ex · February 2017

Sledog said:

dhdawg said:

BearsWiin said:

dhdawg said:
perfectly acceptable pick to replace kennedy, or Ginsburg. Much better than I even expected. and very much unlike someone you'd expect trump to pick. We do need to hear his opinion of the NSA on the record

Nothing will change the fact that this seat was stolen.
This guy seems to like him:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/31/opinion/why-liberals-should-back-neil-gorsuch.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=opinion-c-col-right-region&region=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-region

Pelosi drew a hard line in the sand on him during her CNN Town Hall this evening, which was an understandable play but one I think that will come back to bite her if she pushes it. Pick your battles; this isn't a winnable one.
I get it. but it's still a stolen seat. there can't just be no political price
Stolen how? There has never been an appointment that late in a last term. It was voted on by the people. Your side lost.

As already noted. Not even close to true.

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Nothing on Gorsuch?

Comments