How Does Your Brain Score? Take the Staying Sharp Brain Health Assessment

Reply
Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 6,198
Registered: ‎09-08-2009

Re: Dems Lack of Competence Evident W/Gorsuch

Message 1 of 23 (45 Views)

Centristsin2010 wrote:

mickstuder wrote:
Centristsin2010 wrote:

Thanks for proving my point, Mick.  Anyone can cherry pick items to support their biased views.  Have you dared reading reviews of those who have a different view?

Thats very true - but so is the fact that - if you pick enough Cherries you end up with a Bushel  Yep.  And in the end, you only have a bushel of cheeries....nothing else.

 

For example - Mr Good Golly - Gee  - Aw Shucks - Gorsuch doing his best to Imitate - Eddie Haskell is getting a little obnoxious.  Maybe, but it won't prevent him from being the next Supreme Court Justice.

 

Is he auditioning for Andy of Mayberry or the Supreme Court?  Doesn't matter.

 

No fewer than eight times he punctuated his testimony with “Leave It to Beaver” exclamations of “goodness” — “goodness, no!” “oh, my goodness!” — and, though only 49 years old, spoke in archaic phrases: “since I was a tot,” “a fair and square deal,” “doesn’t give a whit.”

 

Gorsuch made groan-inducing attempts at humor (“they haven’t yet replaced judges with algorithms, though I think eBay’s trying”) and proffered self-deprecating demurrals: “I don’t want to waste your time. . . . I can’t claim I’m perfect, but I try awful hard. . . . I wouldn’t count myself an expert.”

 

Yesterday - I heard him say - a Juror once came up to him after a Trial and said - You Remind Me of a Young - Perry Mason - C'mon who but a Trump Sycophant would talk like this?  Doesn't matter....he'll be the next Supreme Court Justice.

 

He like Trump lacks Credibility in his Public Persona  Doesn't matter....he'll be the next Supreme Court Justice.

 

So how does anyone know what kind of Supreme Court Judge he would be?  We never know.....it's just part of the process.

 

He's  disingenuous at the very least and a Con Man like his President at worst. Obviously, an opinion many might share.  But, it doesn't matter....he'll be the next Supreme Court Justice.



What's the Purpose of the Process then if the Nominee and everyone else as you have repeatedly confirmed - already knows he's going to be confirmed and doesn;t need to give specific answers to specific questions - questions BTW the are routinely asked and answered in Senate hearings on SCOTUS Nominees

Just like the Trump Presidency - it makes even more of a Mockery out of our Democracy

 

The Congressional Research Service provides further statistics on the Senate confirmation process:

From the appointment of the first Justices in 1789 through its consideration of nominee Elena Kagan in 2010, the Senate has confirmed 124 Supreme Court nominations out of 160 received. Of the 36 nominations which were not confirmed, 11 were rejected outright in roll-call votes by the Senate, while nearly all of the rest, in the face of substantial committee or Senate opposition to the nominee or the President, were withdrawn by the President, or were postponed, tabled, or never voted on by the Senate.

This means that 25 of the 36 failed nominations did not receive an up-or-down vote on the floor of the U.S. Senate.

 

This also means that 22.5% of Supreme Court nominations have failed to be confirmed in the U.S. Senate.

 

There used to be a purpose for this exercise - the Republicans have turned the entire Federal Government into a Clown Show - from not allowing a hearing and vote on Garland to this Travesty of a Hearing on Gorsuch

 

I know he's going to be Confirmed and I also know the Country will suffer because of it and I'm surprised folks such as yourself who seem to advocate for the Rights of Minorities and rail against the Bad Behavior of Law Enforcement and the corruptness, complacency and irresponsibility the offices of many District Attorneys and Attorneys Generals are not more concerned about putting another Conservative with a Majority Track Record of advocacy for the Big Guys at the expense of the little guys isn;t more concerned............................the impact of his Judgeship on the Supreme Court is going to mean for all the little guys over the next 4 decades starting with the Muslim Ban and the interpretation of Gun and Healthcare laws and the list goes on

 

Don;t worry - I'll be sure to point them out as they happen and remind you of our current discussions about this Judge

 

 

 

 

 

 

( " Eat Tic Tacs - Grope Woman - Become President " ) " - Anonymous

Trusted Social Butterfly
Posts: 18,052
Registered: ‎06-09-2010

Re: Dems Lack of Competence Evident W/Gorsuch

Message 2 of 23 (49 Views)

mickstuder wrote:
Centristsin2010 wrote:

Thanks for proving my point, Mick.  Anyone can cherry pick items to support their biased views.  Have you dared reading reviews of those who have a different view?

Thats very true - but so is the fact that - if you pick enough Cherries you end up with a Bushel  Yep.  And in the end, you only have a bushel of cheeries....nothing else.

 

For example - Mr Good Golly - Gee  - Aw Shucks - Gorsuch doing his best to Imitate - Eddie Haskell is getting a little obnoxious.  Maybe, but it won't prevent him from being the next Supreme Court Justice.

 

Is he auditioning for Andy of Mayberry or the Supreme Court?  Doesn't matter.

 

No fewer than eight times he punctuated his testimony with “Leave It to Beaver” exclamations of “goodness” — “goodness, no!” “oh, my goodness!” — and, though only 49 years old, spoke in archaic phrases: “since I was a tot,” “a fair and square deal,” “doesn’t give a whit.”

 

Gorsuch made groan-inducing attempts at humor (“they haven’t yet replaced judges with algorithms, though I think eBay’s trying”) and proffered self-deprecating demurrals: “I don’t want to waste your time. . . . I can’t claim I’m perfect, but I try awful hard. . . . I wouldn’t count myself an expert.”

 

Yesterday - I heard him say - a Juror once came up to him after a Trial and said - You Remind Me of a Young - Perry Mason - C'mon who but a Trump Sycophant would talk like this?  Doesn't matter....he'll be the next Supreme Court Justice.

 

He like Trump lacks Credibility in his Public Persona  Doesn't matter....he'll be the next Supreme Court Justice.

 

So how does anyone know what kind of Supreme Court Judge he would be?  We never know.....it's just part of the process.

 

He's  disingenuous at the very least and a Con Man like his President at worst. Obviously, an opinion many might share.  But, it doesn't matter....he'll be the next Supreme Court Justice.



"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in Washington DC, January 21, 2017.
Trusted Social Butterfly
Posts: 18,052
Registered: ‎06-09-2010

Re: Dems Lack of Competence Evident W/Gorsuch

Message 3 of 23 (56 Views)

mickstuder wrote:

Centristsin2010 wrote:

mickstuder wrote:

Centristsin2010 wrote:

Thanks for proving my point, Mick.  Anyone can cherry pick items to support their biased views.  Have you dared reading reviews of those who have a different view?


Sure I read yours everyday....Thank you, I appreciate your "views" of my posts.  But I have not posted anything about Gorsuch's views, experience or past rulings.

 

Maybe you've heard CNN's legal and political analyst Jeffrey Toobin whose said he'd make an excellent judge and has done very well in the hearings?

 

Gotta love our Minnesota Senator, Al Franken, eh?

 


I wonder if this is the same Toobin

 

How to Stop a Trump Supreme Court Nominee


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in Washington DC, January 21, 2017.
Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 6,198
Registered: ‎09-08-2009

Re: Dems Lack of Competence Evident W/Gorsuch

[ Edited ]
Message 4 of 23 (60 Views)
Centristsin2010 wrote:

Thanks for proving my point, Mick.  Anyone can cherry pick items to support their biased views.  Have you dared reading reviews of those who have a different view?

Thats very true - but so is the fact that - if you pick enough Cherries you end up with a Bushel

 

For example - Mr Good Golly - Gee  - Aw Shucks - Gorsuch doing his best to Imitate - Eddie Haskell is getting a little obnoxious

 

Is he auditioning for Andy of Mayberry or the Supreme Court?

 

No fewer than eight times he punctuated his testimony with “Leave It to Beaver” exclamations of “goodness” — “goodness, no!” “oh, my goodness!” — and, though only 49 years old, spoke in archaic phrases: “since I was a tot,” “a fair and square deal,” “doesn’t give a whit.”

 

Gorsuch made groan-inducing attempts at humor (“they haven’t yet replaced judges with algorithms, though I think eBay’s trying”) and proffered self-deprecating demurrals: “I don’t want to waste your time. . . . I can’t claim I’m perfect, but I try awful hard. . . . I wouldn’t count myself an expert.”

 

Yesterday - I heard him say - a Juror once came up to him after a Trial and said - You Remind Me of a Young - Perry Mason - C'mon who but a Trump Sycophant would talk like this?

 

He like Trump lacks Credibility in his Public Persona

 

So how does anyone know what kind of Supreme Court Judge he would be?

 

He's  disingenuous at the very least and a Con Man like his President at worst

 

Source - https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/good-golly-gorsuch-may-turn-out-to-be-a-rascal-on-the-bench/...

( " Eat Tic Tacs - Grope Woman - Become President " ) " - Anonymous

Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 6,198
Registered: ‎09-08-2009

Re: Dems Lack of Competence Evident W/Gorsuch

Message 5 of 23 (72 Views)

Centristsin2010 wrote:

mickstuder wrote:

Centristsin2010 wrote:

Thanks for proving my point, Mick.  Anyone can cherry pick items to support their biased views.  Have you dared reading reviews of those who have a different view?


Sure I read yours everyday....Thank you, I appreciate your "views" of my posts.  But I have not posted anything about Gorsuch's views, experience or past rulings.

 

Maybe you've heard CNN's legal and political analyst Jeffrey Toobin whose said he'd make an excellent judge and has done very well in the hearings?

 

Gotta love our Minnesota Senator, Al Franken, eh?

 


I wonder if this is the same Toobin

 

How to Stop a Trump Supreme Court Nominee

( " Eat Tic Tacs - Grope Woman - Become President " ) " - Anonymous

Trusted Social Butterfly
Posts: 18,052
Registered: ‎06-09-2010

Re: Dems Lack of Competence Evident W/Gorsuch

Message 6 of 23 (77 Views)

mickstuder wrote:

Centristsin2010 wrote:

Thanks for proving my point, Mick.  Anyone can cherry pick items to support their biased views.  Have you dared reading reviews of those who have a different view?


Sure I read yours everyday....Thank you, I appreciate your "views" of my posts.  But I have not posted anything about Gorsuch's views, experience or past rulings.

 

Maybe you've heard CNN's legal and political analyst Jeffrey Toobin whose said he'd make an excellent judge and has done very well in the hearings?

 

Gotta love our Minnesota Senator, Al Franken, eh?

 


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in Washington DC, January 21, 2017.
Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 6,198
Registered: ‎09-08-2009

Re: Dems Lack of Competence Evident W/Gorsuch

Message 7 of 23 (81 Views)

Centristsin2010 wrote:

Thanks for proving my point, Mick.  Anyone can cherry pick items to support their biased views.  Have you dared reading reviews of those who have a different view?


Sure I read yours everyday..........................................and I've listened to the majority of the Gorsuch Hearings and I think the guy is a Snake - CNN shows the Hearings on a Split Screen and posed in the back of Gorsush posed on his Left Shoulder with the cemented on most insincere smile I ever seen is Gorsuch's wife and perfectly posed for the camera over his right shoulder is this Beautiful Black Woman named Mary Elizabeth Taylor, who now works for the Donald Trump Administration in the White House legislative affairs unit.

 

Mary Elizabeth Taylor positioning is extremely notable because Ex- NH Senator Kelly Ayotte is Gorsuch's Official Legislative Iiason and Washington Host but of course Kelly isn;t as Pretty and she is also White and she is also positioned OFF Camera

 

This Supreme Court Issue is about Principle - about not letting what the Repulbicans did to Obama's Nominee Merland Garland go into the History Books without a Major In Kind Rebuttal - this is the Democrat Leaderships One and Only Chance to Make Some Noise about the Fact that the Republicans allowed the American people to be underepresented on the Supreme Court for more than a year for purely indefenesible partisan political reasons -

 

 

( " Eat Tic Tacs - Grope Woman - Become President " ) " - Anonymous

Trusted Social Butterfly
Posts: 18,052
Registered: ‎06-09-2010

Re: Dems Lack of Competence Evident W/Gorsuch

Message 8 of 23 (86 Views)

Thanks for proving my point, Mick.  Anyone can cherry pick items to support their biased views.  Have you dared reading reviews of those who have a different view?


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in Washington DC, January 21, 2017.
Treasured Social Butterfly
Posts: 6,198
Registered: ‎09-08-2009

Re: Dems Lack of Competence Evident W/Gorsuch

Message 9 of 23 (90 Views)
Centristsin2010 wrote:
mickstuder wrote:

Judge Neil Gorsuch, President Donald Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court, may have a sneaking 

 

That’s one conclusion to draw from a troubling anecdote recounted by Jennifer Sisk, a former law student of Gorsuch’s, in a letter sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee ahead of the judge’s confirmation hearing this week.

 

In a class discussion last year, Sisk said that Gorsuch pushed students to consider that women may manipulate employers by becoming pregnant, taking maternity leave and then quitting their jobs.

 

(The judge was teaching a course on legal ethics and professionalism at the University of Colorado Law School.)

 

Companies have to ask women about their motherhood plans to protect themselves, Gorsuch said, according to Sisk’s account. He didn’t raise similar concerns about male employees, she said.

 

Source - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/neil-gorsuch-working-women_us_58cff5afe4b0ec9d29dd9e93?zei&

 

I'm always leary when one claims, "there's one conclusion to draw" as most objective people realize when all facts are on the table, instead of listening to just one side, the one conclusion to draw is often different that the one conclusion they could reach with just one side of the story.

 

Gorsuch's response to the gotcha question was hit out of the park.

 

Are you objective in your consideration of Gorsuch?  Only you know for sure, but your writings here seem to suggest, "there's only one conclusion to draw".

 

 

 

1. Pressed by Sen. Amy Klobuchar on whether he supports TV coverage of Supreme Court proceedings, Neil Gorsuch first joked that he's pretty new to the whole topic.

 

"I've experienced more cameras in the last few weeks than I've experienced in my lifetime," he said.

Pressed a bit more by the Minnesota Democrat, he declined to give a definite answer, saying "I would treat it like I would any other case or controversy. I would want to hear the arguments."

 

According to a new poll from C-SPAN, 76% of Americans support TV coverage of oral arguments in the Supreme Court.

 

2. While Gorsuch didn't have an answer to why an outside group that spent millions of dollars in efforts to advocate against President Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland was now spending millions advocating for his confirmation, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse made his point about "dark money" clear.

 

3. During his confirmation hearing, Neil Gorsuch lamented partisanship in the Supreme Court confirmation process. It's not a new argument for the Colorado judge, who decried a tilt toward ideological voting on nominees in an op-ed shortly after the death in 2002 of his oft-cited mentor Byron White, whose confirmation hearing in 1962 lasted just 90 minutes. 

 

One of those "mistreated" nominees? None other than Merrick Garland, who at the time waited for a year and a half for confirmation to the U.S. Court of Appeals.

 

AND NEVER GOT A HEARING IN THIS CURRENT REPUBLICAN CONTROLLED CONGRESS

 

Gorsuch refused to comment on anything about the way the Republicans handled Garlands nomination

 

4. Confronted again with the case of Alphonse Maddin — the TransAm Trucking driver who was fired for leaving a trailer with frozen breaks, against his employers wishes, because he said he was losing feeling in his limbs in the subzero temperatures — Gorsuch insisted that he believed it was the right legal decision to side with the employer in the matter.  

 

5. Amid allegations by a former student who said the judge taught his ethics class that "many" women manipulate employers for maternity benefits, Illinois Democrat Sen. Dick Durbin asked him to respond. Gorsuch insisted that he often spoke to his classes about inappropriate family planning questions that women are commonly asked in job interviews and was not implying such questions were acceptable. He said he was asking students whether they had been asked such "inappropriate" questions and to consider the array of difficult answers, not whether those answers amounted to a manipulation of the system

 

6. Leahy Grills Gorsuch On Muslim Ban

Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy grilled Judge Gorsuch on the matter of travel bans, referring to both the president's campaign promises to fully ban all Muslims from entering the U.S. and the two executive orders the president signed banning certain refugees and individuals from several Muslim-majority nations.

 

Gorsuch declined to comment as it resembled cases currently being heard in federal courts across the country, but the longtime Democratic senator pressed on and asked about the issue repeatedly.

 

"Is a blanket religious test, is that consistent with the First Amendment?" Leahy asked again.

 

"We have a free exercise clause, which protects the free exercise of religious liberties by all persons in this country," he said. "If you're asking how I would apply it to a specific case, I can't talk about that for obvious reasons."

 

Gorsuch deflected repeatedly, but became heated when insisting that any ruling from his bench would be just.

 

"Anyone, any law is going to get a fair square deal with me," he said. "My job is to treat every litigant as I would wish to be treated."

 

Asked again if he believed the president's national security directives were subject to judicial review, as the president has complained of previously, and Gorsuch answered simply: "No man is above the law."

 

7. Gorsuch Won't Comment on Garland Nomination

Asked about the Judicial Committee's handling of Merrick Garland's Supreme Court nomination last year, Gorsuch expressed his respect of Garland's legal opinion while declining to comment.

 

"I can't get involved in politics and there's judicial canons that prevent me from doing that," he said.

 

"I think it would be imprudent."

 

Garland was nominated over a year ago by then-President Barack Obama to fill the current vacancy on the court but Republicans refused to take up his nomination or give him a hearing, citing election year politics as the reason. Democratic anger remains over how Garland's nomination was handled by the majority and it is a major issue for them in the current confirmation process.

 

8. As a young man studying at Columbia University, Gorsuch was a member of the fraternity on campus known for its degrading treatment of women. Among other things, the fraternity celebrated each time one of its members had sex with a virgin by painting a fire hydrant on frat row. Students on campus targeted the fraternity during a Take Back the Night march because of its reputation as the “date-rape fraternity.” Gorsuch was an ardent supporter of both his fraternity and fraternity culture on campus.

 

He dismissed women who spoke out against the fraternity’s violent misogyny, saying that their “demonstrations and rallies are causes that inspire no one and offer no fresh ideas or important notions for the students or school to consider.”

 

Lest one believe that Gorsuch left his reprehensible views about women in the past, letters have emerged from law students claiming that Gorsuch made inappropriate comments last year about women seeking time off to have children.

 

The students allege that while teaching a course on professional ethics, Gorsuch accused women of abusing employers by joining law firms with the intention of immediately getting pregnant to take advantage of the maternity benefits. Gorsuch went as far as to say that employers must protect themselves from such conniving women by asking about their plans to start a family during the job interview.

 

9.  And on the bench, Gorsuch has consistently ruled against women. He has turned away women seeking redress for sexual harassment and sex discrimination. He joined the original Hobby Lobby decision holding that corporations are people whose religious beliefs trump the right of women to receive insurance coverage for contraceptive care. And he voted to uphold the actions of the Governor of Utah when he eliminated federal funding for Planned Parenthood; the programs that would have lost funding supported health education and STD testing.

 

Sources

 

http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/follow-neil-gorsuch-confirmation-hearing-live-n735561

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/gorsuchs-views-on-women-disqualify-him-for-a-seat_us_58d0525ce4b...

 

( " Eat Tic Tacs - Grope Woman - Become President " ) " - Anonymous

Trusted Social Butterfly
Posts: 18,052
Registered: ‎06-09-2010

Re: Dems Lack of Competence Evident W/Gorsuch

Message 10 of 23 (101 Views)

mickstuder wrote:

Judge Neil Gorsuch, President Donald Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court, may have a sneaking 

 

That’s one conclusion to draw from a troubling anecdote recounted by Jennifer Sisk, a former law student of Gorsuch’s, in a letter sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee ahead of the judge’s confirmation hearing this week.

 

In a class discussion last year, Sisk said that Gorsuch pushed students to consider that women may manipulate employers by becoming pregnant, taking maternity leave and then quitting their jobs.

 

(The judge was teaching a course on legal ethics and professionalism at the University of Colorado Law School.)

 

Companies have to ask women about their motherhood plans to protect themselves, Gorsuch said, according to Sisk’s account. He didn’t raise similar concerns about male employees, she said.

 

Source - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/neil-gorsuch-working-women_us_58cff5afe4b0ec9d29dd9e93?zei&

 

I'm always leary when one claims, "there's one conclusion to draw" as most objective people realize when all facts are on the table, instead of listening to just one side, the one conclusion to draw is often different that the one conclusion they could reach with just one side of the story.

 

Gorsuch's response to the gotcha question was hit out of the park.

 

Are you objective in your consideration of Gorsuch?  Only you know for sure, but your writings here seem to suggest, "there's only one conclusion to draw".

 

 


 


"FAKE 45 #illegitimate" read a sign at the Woman's March in Washington DC, January 21, 2017.