Dereliction of Duty

D

Dixie - In Memoriam

New member

On Judge Sotomayor

I understand that during her career, she’s written hundreds and hundreds of opinions. I haven’t read a single one of them, and if I’m fortunate before we end this, I won’t have to read one of them.

~ (D) Harry Reid- U.S. Senate Majority Leader

Excuse me Mr. Reid, but what happened to Congress' role of "Advise and Consent" which was so precious under President Bush? It is your JOB to be INFORMED and make an INFORMED decision about this nomination! What the fuck do you mean, you haven't read any of her opinions and hope you don't have to?
 
Translation: "I'm a typical Liberal Democrat, have swallowed the Kool-Aide fully and blindly, and will vote along party lines as I am told to do by my masters."
 
Southern Man said:
Translation: "I'm a typical Liberal Democrat, have swallowed the Kool-Aide fully and blindly, and will vote along party lines as I am told to do by my masters."
Click to expand...

Yes, of course! When they were obstructing every Bush judicial pick, we were all lectured on how they had to fulfill their duty to "advise and consent" and this was such an important principle of our government! Now suddenly, with Obama, that goes out the window... there is no "advise" and the consent is automatic.

This woman could have ruled whites have no constitutional rights when accused by a Latino, but Reid wouldn't know it, because he hasn't even read any of her opinions! Hopes he doesn't have to! It's just another example of the two-faced liberal hypocrisy at work.
 
Dixie said:
Yes, of course! When they were obstructing every Bush judicial pick, we were all lectured on how they had to fulfill their duty to "advise and consent" and this was such an important principle of our government! Now suddenly, with Obama, that goes out the window... there is no "advise" and the consent is automatic.

This woman could have ruled whites have no constitutional rights when accused by a Latino, but Reid wouldn't know it, because he hasn't even read any of her opinions! Hopes he doesn't have to! It's just another example of the two-faced liberal hypocrisy at work.
Click to expand...
Reid is a pussy. Only a pussy would vote for him. What the fuck is wrong with people in Nevada?
 
that is the purpose of the judiciary committee.

now...if members of that committee were to say that, it would be derelict, imo.
 
maineman said:
that is the purpose of the judiciary committee.

now...if members of that committee were to say that, it would be derelict, imo.
Click to expand...

No, that wasn't the case with Bush judicial picks. We heard volumes of liberal interpretation of what Congress' role is in picking a judge, and why we must adhere to it. Congress is supposed to be the "checks and balances" of power, remember? We can't allow a single man (the president) to have that much power, it's not constitutional! This went on and on, for weeks and months... there are probably a dozen threads or so, devoted to explaining why democrats were merely doing their duty, and how it was conscientious and forthright... how we couldn't bare to live in a country where one man had the power to appoint anyone he liked to the court. Harry Reid led the fucking charge with this message!

Now... the Democrat Senate Majority leader, doesn't think it's even important to take a gander at the judges opinions... Obama picked her, that's good enough for Harry!
 
Without reading some of her opinions how else could he make the statement "we could not have anyone more qualified"?
 
My guess is that Harry will read just about as many as Mitch McConnell.

But more to the point, while Harry Reid has a juris doctor and used to be a practicing attorney, he hasn't practiced law in over three decades. That being the case, reading her opinions would be a rather pointless endeavor. That's what staffers, the judiciary committee and the judiciary committee staff are for. That's what interest groups are for.

It quite possible, and in many instances preferable, for a senator to assess a nominee's qualification by relying exclusively on secondary sources as opposed to reading judicial opinions that the senator doesn't have the expertise to evaluate first hand.
 
Dungheap said:
My guess is that Harry will read just about as many as Mitch McConnell.

But more to the point, while Harry Reid has a juris doctor and used to be a practicing attorney, he hasn't practiced law in over three decades. That being the case, reading her opinions would be a rather pointless endeavor. That's what staffers, the judiciary committee and the judiciary committee staff are for. That's what interest groups are for.

It quite possible, and in many instances preferable, for a senator to assess a nominee's qualification by relying exclusively on secondary sources as opposed to reading judicial opinions that the senator doesn't have the expertise to evaluate first hand.
Click to expand...

So basically, what you are saying is, Harry Reid doesn't have the expertise to carry out his constitutionally mandated charge of 'advise and consent' regarding judicial picks? Reid does get a vote in the confirmation, and to lay this all off on the Judiciary Committee, as if it's solely their responsibility, and the Senate Majority leader isn't involved, is just plain ridiculous.

This is the same man who stood there in front of those same microphones, not 5 years ago, and lectured us on how it was his duty and obligation to advise the president on these picks before he could give consent. Every democrat in Congress obstructed Bush's picks because they were "exercising their role" to advise and consent, and those of us who protested, well, we were all being rather unconstitutional about that, because this was clearly the constitutional responsibility of the elected Congressmen!

Now things have changed... Now, the president gets to pick whoever he wishes, and heck, the Democrat Majority Leader, he is just not qualified to make a good judgment, he has been out of the legal loop for so long... he has staffers for that... leave all that stuffy legal mess for the Judiciary Committee to figure out, it's not in Harry's expertise.
 
Dixie said:
No, that wasn't the case with Bush judicial picks. We heard volumes of liberal interpretation of what Congress' role is in picking a judge, and why we must adhere to it. Congress is supposed to be the "checks and balances" of power, remember? We can't allow a single man (the president) to have that much power, it's not constitutional! This went on and on, for weeks and months... there are probably a dozen threads or so, devoted to explaining why democrats were merely doing their duty, and how it was conscientious and forthright... how we couldn't bare to live in a country where one man had the power to appoint anyone he liked to the court. Harry Reid led the fucking charge with this message!

Now... the Democrat Senate Majority leader, doesn't think it's even important to take a gander at the judges opinions... Obama picked her, that's good enough for Harry!
Click to expand...

You are being purposely obtuse. What a surprise.

Newsflash:

The Senate Judiciary Committee is a part of Congress!!!!!!!


Harry Reid as well as every other senator from both sides of the aisle will listen to the members of the committee who are tasked with holding hearings on this nominee... and they will brief their respective caucuses. That is how congress works.... moron.

Did you even TAKE civics in school or did it conflict with your AC&R repair class?:pke:
 
maineman said:
You are being purposely obtuse. What a surprise.

Newsflash:

The Senate Judiciary Committee is a part of Congress!!!!!!!


Harry Reid as well as every other senator from both sides of the aisle will listen to the members of the committee who are tasked with holding hearings on this nominee... and they will brief their respective caucuses. That is how congress works.... moron.

Did you even TAKE civics in school or did it conflict with your AC&R repair class?:pke:
Click to expand...

When President Bush made his picks, it was not left up to the Judiciary Committee, it was Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, telling us that each congressman had to have ample time to read opinions, that the president shouldn't even make a pick, without consulting them, that it was their duty to review any potential pick first, and when the Judiciary Committee was headed by Republicans, that made this congressional 'advise an consent' role even more important!

No, this is how Congress works, maineman... Whenever republicans are in charge and a republican makes a pick, they can be obstructed into submission, because it is the constitutional duty of the democrats to do so, and when democrats are in charge and a democrat makes a pick, there is a big rubber stamp that is rolled out, and anyone who objects is branded a racist.
 
Dixie said:
When President Bush made his picks, it was not left up to the Judiciary Committee, it was Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, telling us that each congressman had to have ample time to read opinions, that the president shouldn't even make a pick, without consulting them, that it was their duty to review any potential pick first, and when the Judiciary Committee was headed by Republicans, that made this congressional 'advise an consent' role even more important!

No, this is how Congress works, maineman... Whenever republicans are in charge and a republican makes a pick, they can be obstructed into submission, because it is the constitutional duty of the democrats to do so, and when democrats are in charge and a democrat makes a pick, there is a big rubber stamp that is rolled out, and anyone who objects is branded a racist.
Click to expand...


Dixie:

Not to question your knowledge of rudimentary civics but just as an FYI I wanted to point out that only the Senate has a role in judicial nominations, not "Congress."

Now, please continue with your obviously well-informed and well-thought out rant about the proper role of "Congress" in considering judicial nominees.
 
Dixie said:
When President Bush made his picks, it was not left up to the Judiciary Committee, it was Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, telling us that each congressman had to have ample time to read opinions, that the president shouldn't even make a pick, without consulting them, that it was their duty to review any potential pick first, and when the Judiciary Committee was headed by Republicans, that made this congressional 'advise an consent' role even more important!

No, this is how Congress works, maineman... Whenever republicans are in charge and a republican makes a pick, they can be obstructed into submission, because it is the constitutional duty of the democrats to do so, and when democrats are in charge and a democrat makes a pick, there is a big rubber stamp that is rolled out, and anyone who objects is branded a racist.
Click to expand...

it sucks losing elections, doesn't it Dix? Get used to it.

THe fact of the matter is: the senate judiciary committee is tasked with holding hearings to determine the fitness of judicial appointments. they will do that. If senators without current legal training wish to spend a lot of time reading judicial opinions, they certainly can, but rest assured, the members of their caucus who do serve on the committee will brief them in great detail and they will then vote. YOu knowledge of the way congress actually works could fit in a coffee cup and there would still be room for a cup of coffee.

blathering gadfly. some things never change.
 
THe fact of the matter is: the senate judiciary committee is tasked with holding hearings to determine the fitness of judicial appointments. they will do that. If senators without current legal training wish to spend a lot of time reading judicial opinions, they certainly can, but rest assured, the members of their caucus who do serve on the committee will brief them in great detail and they will then vote.
Click to expand...

No, the fact of the matter is, Democrats are two-faced slimebucket hypocrites who don't know or care to know the first thing about Obama's judicial picks, other than the fact that HE picked them. The Judiciary Committee, as well as the rest of the Democrats in the Senate, will not spend a second of their time objectively analyzing this pick, they have already decided to confirm, based on the fact that Obama made the selection.
 
Dixie said:
No, the fact of the matter is, Democrats are two-faced slimebucket hypocrites who don't know or care to know the first thing about Obama's judicial picks, other than the fact that HE picked them. The Judiciary Committee, as well as the rest of the Democrats in the Senate, will not spend a second of their time objectively analyzing this pick, they have already decided to confirm, based on the fact that Obama made the selection.
Click to expand...

that's you incredibly biased, incredibly bitter, and outrageously hilarious opinion.

most folks who haven't had to eat as much crow as you have see things a bit differently.
 
Dixie if you don't think their are prick asswhole crooked politicians on both sides then u r dumber than I thought. And I think Jeffro Bodine was smarter than you. You toothless crimson tide cousin impregnator.
 
The super hypocrite surfaces again.....imagine if a Republican said he voted or didn't vote for something because a committee told him to...or maybe his aides told him how to vote or his wife....its all the same thing...
only a lazy idiot votes the way someone tells him how to vote...or a democrat...

and only a fellow Dem is hypocrite enough to defend it....

Harry the pinhead is just another useless Dem, a rubber stamp works just as well and would only cost us a buck and a half...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top