unbillievable Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 How do Republicans expect to accomplish anything if they keep nominating Justices who care more about the law than pushing an agenda? They should have followed Obama's example.
Nanker Posted February 2, 2017 Author Posted February 2, 2017 Wow. The dude tells his girl to go !@#$ the Supreme Court Nominee! How progressive.
Benjamin Franklin Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 (edited) LOL LOL LOL LOL That's like trying to teach a dog to sit still with a steak on his nose....impossible. They're bred with a genetic makeup that vests complete and absolute authority with the government (when it suits their needs).Are you talking about Democrats or Republicans? That's basically what hospice is...at least when my aunt went through it. She gave up on her cancer treatment (side note: it was the correct decision. She had cancer of everything but the lungs) and went in to hospice, which was: no food, no water, just pain management. Assisted suicide by starvation and dehydration. It was inhumanely brutal. Hospice is not starvation. Hospice is helping someone die with dignity. It is not assisting in death. If you are in hospice and want to eat hamburgers every day, that's fine. But it won't cure the stage 4 cancer you've decided to give in to. Hospice is choosing the best quality of life you can until you die, when you know your death is imminent. Clinically, hospice is symptom management for terminally ill patients. We need a lot more people to choose it but we all fear death too much. Gorsuch is not against hospice. Only someone ignorant of what hospice is would be against it. Edited February 2, 2017 by Benjamin Franklin
LeviF Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 Wow. The dude tells his girl to go !@#$ the Supreme Court Nominee! How progressive. Judging by "her" jaw, hands, and feet, this dude is quite progressive indeed.
PastaJoe Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 Breaking News: President Trump said he would "totally destroy" limits on political activity by tax-exempt churches. Will Gorsuch agree.based on religious freedom and free speech or disagree based on separation of church and state? And should they remain tax-exempt?
LeviF Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 Breaking News: President Trump said he would "totally destroy" limits on political activity by tax-exempt churches. Will Gorsuch agree.based on religious freedom and free speech or disagree based on separation of church and state? And should they remain tax-exempt? Question: when did churches begin to have limits on their political activity?
Benjamin Franklin Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 Breaking News: President Trump said he would "totally destroy" limits on political activity by tax-exempt churches. Will Gorsuch agree.based on religious freedom and free speech or disagree based on separation of church and state? And should they remain tax-exempt? A) Whatever that means from Trump. B) Trump may one day understand that the legislative body makes the laws.* *If Congress reminds him.
Taro T Posted February 2, 2017 Posted February 2, 2017 Breaking News: President Trump said he would "totally destroy" limits on political activity by tax-exempt churches. Will Gorsuch agree.based on religious freedom and free speech or disagree based on separation of church and state? And should they remain tax-exempt? Link? No idea what you (& likely he, too) mean by the bolded.
Nanker Posted February 2, 2017 Author Posted February 2, 2017 Father Daniel J. Berrigan says hello Pasta. He'd like you to give Hill a pinch on the cheek for him.
B-Man Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 Why Supreme Court Nominations Prompt Scorched-Earth Warfare by Jonah Goldberg When the court becomes another Legislative branch, such battles are inevitableRead more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/444565/neil-gorsuch-nomination-supreme-court-fights-senate God Bless Harry Reid by Dr. Charles KrathammerRead more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/444561/senate-filibuster-abolished-harry-reid-mitch-mcconnell-benefits
B-Man Posted February 3, 2017 Posted February 3, 2017 POLL: Majority of Americans approve of Gorsuch’s Supreme Court nomination. Rasmussen (who? ) reports that “Voters See Gorsuch in the Judicial Mainstream.” I guess this means Senate Democrats who try to block his nomination are way out of the American mainstream.
B-Man Posted February 8, 2017 Posted February 8, 2017 SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER: Neil Gorsuch Needs 60 Votes. FLASHBACK: They don’t call it “the Reid Option” for nothin’.
KD in CA Posted February 8, 2017 Posted February 8, 2017 POLL: Majority of Americans approve of Gorsuch’s Supreme Court nomination. Rasmussen (who? ) reports that “Voters See Gorsuch in the Judicial Mainstream.” I guess this means Senate Democrats who try to block his nomination are way out of the American mainstream. The Party of No!
B-Man Posted February 8, 2017 Posted February 8, 2017 WHEN YOU’RE A DEMOCRAT WHO SAYS SOMETHING NICE ABOUT NEIL GORSUCH, the smears are pretty much inevitable. Not so much to discredit you in particular, as to encourage others to toe the line.
B-Man Posted February 14, 2017 Posted February 14, 2017 Review: None of Gorsuch’s opinions overturned by Supreme Court Nominee shows pattern of checking executive power http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/feb/12/neil-gorsuchs-opinions-never-overturned-by-supreme/ Good luck Chuck..................
Nanker Posted February 14, 2017 Author Posted February 14, 2017 I'm really looking forward to Schumer and Warren and Franken - the new Three Stooges having their aides and staff interns getting ahold of (by any means necessary) Gorsuch's phone records, his Internet history of sites visited, his Netflix account records, and sworn testimony of his garage collectors and mailmen. Then of course, they'll find some bimbo who used to clerk for him and have her swear that he made inappropriate sexist, racist, homophobic remarks to her all the while resisting his unwanted sexual advances. As fair compensation for her sworn testimony and to assuage the lingering trauma of her hellish ordeal, she'll end up as Professor Emeritus at some liberal law school - though that's a redundant description. Seen it happen before.
B-Man Posted February 23, 2017 Posted February 23, 2017 Democrats continue their “60 vote standard for SCOTUS nominees” myth THE HILL: Poll: Senate Should Confirm Gorsuch.
DC Tom Posted February 23, 2017 Posted February 23, 2017 Democrats continue their “60 vote standard for SCOTUS nominees” myth THE HILL: Poll: Senate Should Confirm Gorsuch. I was going to point out that if the Democrats truly believed this, they're be pushing to remove Clarence Thomas from the bench, as he was confirmed with less than 60 votes. But then I remembered that the Democrats don't even recognize Thomas's existence, being a conservative black man, if they can avoid it.
B-Man Posted February 27, 2017 Posted February 27, 2017 FOLLOWING IN THE TRADITION OF WILLIAM O. DOUGLAS AND THURGOOD MARSHALL: Ruth Bader Ginsburg Signals She’ll Stay on Supreme Court as Long as She Can.
Recommended Posts