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 recordNothing will change the fact that this seat was stolen.
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 recordNothing 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®ion=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-regionPelosi 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.
what's interesting is, unless you're a right wing Christian nut, garland and Gorsuch aren't that much different.Both are pro businessGorsuch is probably better on 4th amendmentGarland was about as watered down a pick as you can make, and the GOP ideologues still blocked it
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 recordNothing 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®ion=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-regionPelosi 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
what's interesting is, unless you're a right wing Christian nut, garland and Gorsuch aren't that much different.Both are pro businessGorsuch is probably better on 4th amendmentGarland 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.
what's interesting is, unless you're a right wing Christian nut, garland and Gorsuch aren't that much different.Both are pro businessGorsuch is probably better on 4th amendmentGarland 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.
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 recordNothing 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®ion=opinion-c-col-right-region&WT.nav=opinion-c-col-right-regionPelosi 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.
