Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!
Hahahahaha....
Does she even have a license to practice law ??
I know she failed the Bar and I believe more than once...
Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!
Again...
Hahahahahahahaha...
We have different smilies ??
Some, I see...
Hillary is already far to the right of Justice Stevens. She's also 62 years old, and we need someone on the court who can be there as long as those two idiots Chimpy appointed, Opie Roberts and Sammy the Fish Alito.
If I were the President, I'd consider appointing Bill Clinton, just to cause Repuke heads to explode. But after two open heart surgeries, he's not a likely candidate for 35 years on the bench either.
Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!
Originally Posted by ELVIS
Guess you missed all the bullshit about Hillary and the Rose Law Firm in Arkansas, in your right wing propaganda indoctrination class?
This just in from Talk Radio News Service via the Thom Hartmann Show...... The White House has confirmed that Hillary will NOT be nominated for the Supreme Court.
Imagine
No I didn't...Guess you missed all the bullshit about Hillary and the Rose Law Firm in Arkansas, in your right wing propaganda indoctrination class?
I'm just trying to recall what I read at thomhartmannsucksmikemalloysdick.com...
president ford, sounds familiar.
No relation! I would never work for the BCE!president ford, sounds familiar.
No I didn't...
I'm just trying to recall what I read at thomhartmannsucksmikemalloysdick.com...
Oh hell. If that were an actual site, FORD probably couldn't handle it without some Extenze.
Anyways, I think whomever gets appointed should have judge experience under their belt. Hillary does not. Glad the White House squashed this rumor quickly.
Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!
Yeah, after they threw it out there...
exactly
Nah, I love Thom and Mike, but not in THAT way. Only for their talk radio. And besides, they're both happily married. To their wives, not to each other!
And now, for some names of actual contenders for the job........
Apr 12, 4:42 PM EDT
Source: Judge Sidney Thomas on Supreme Court list
By BEN FELLER
Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON (AP) -- President Barack Obama's candidates for the Supreme Court include a new name, federal appeals court Judge Sidney Thomas of Montana, and at least six others who were considered contenders when Obama chose his first high court nominee last year, The Associated Press has learned.
Among the others under consideration are former Georgia Chief Justice Leah Ward Sears, federal appeals court judges Diane Wood and Merrick Garland, Solicitor General Elena Kagan, Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm and Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano.
The president is seriously reviewing about 10 people as a potential nominee to replace Justice John Paul Stevens, who is retiring this summer.
Seven of those names are now confirmed to the AP by the administration.
A senior administration official said the president's consideration is not just centered on the three people receiving the most public attention: Wood, Kagan and Garland. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because no announcements have been made about the people Obama is considering for the court.
Thomas, 56, of Billings, Mont., serves on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, the largest of the nation's appellate courts.
He was nominated to the federal bench in July 1995 by then-President Bill Clinton and confirmed by the Senate in January 1996. He comes from Western roots - born in Bozeman, Mont., bachelor's degree from Montana State University, law degree from the University of Montana. Thomas worked in private practice in Billings and was an adjunct community college law professor there for years before becoming a federal judge.
The White House on Monday quickly ended speculation about another potential nominee: Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton. Her named had been floated as a possibility by Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, but White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Obama "is going to keep her as his secretary of state."
Obama's list includes three people whom he interviewed as finalists when the court had an opening last year - Wood, Kagan and Napolitano. The president ultimately nominated federal Judge Sonia Sotomayor to replace retiring Justice David Souter. She was later confirmed in a 68-31 vote by the Senate.
With his second nomination in less than a year, Obama is in a far different position.
He has the experience of having gone through a successful search, and a ready-made list of names from that effort. But administration officials say Obama is also intent not to rely on the candidates from last time and that new ideas are in the mix, cautioning about an over-reliance on conventional wisdom.
So far, most of the known candidates under Obama's review are familiar within Washington's political and legal circles. They are:
-Wood, an appeals court judge in Chicago who has worked at the State Department, the Justice Department and in private practice. Like Obama, she taught at the University of Chicago Law School.
-Kagan, who stepped down as dean of Harvard Law School to become the nation's first female solicitor general. Like Obama, she has her law degree from Harvard and taught at the University of Chicago Law School.
-Granholm, the Michigan governor and former federal prosecutor and Michigan attorney general.
-Napolitano, the homeland security chief who is a former Arizona governor and a former federal prosecutor.
-Garland, of the federal appeals court in Washington, a former high-ranking Justice Department official.
-Sears, the first black female to serve as the chief justice of the Georgia Supreme Court, who is now in private practice after a long career on the bench.
exactly what i was going to say.
what exactly does pete's brother want? the most liberal member of the supreme court retires, one of the more liberal presidents we've had in a while gets to appoint, and he's upset with someone relatively moderate like hillary?
while i'm sure he'd prefer the second coming of scalia, that might not be the most reasonable request...
Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!
No, but "Kennedy's seat" is now more and more important. The Senate will be more close to even after this November so Barry had better choose someone reasonable if he doesn't want the confirmation process to go on after that.
Last edited by knuckleboner; 04-13-2010 at 08:15 PM. Reason: .
Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!
Please insert the word "better" between "had" and "choose" in my post above before the Typo Police get me.
i feel that hilary does not have "judicial" experience. even tho she is well schooled, i feel she has used her husband to increase her political "clout". she has been on the shady side of plenty of illegal situations throughout her career. i would have to googlepedia to find out which corps. have purchased her votes over the years, but she simply seems that her moral compass direction would be easily "influenced" on the bench.
Why should a Democratic president have to choose someone that right wingers consider "reasonable" when Repuke presidents choose right wing radicals like Scalia, Thomas, and Opie Roberts? We could use some left wing judges, just to balance out those lunatics.
Not that I expect Obama to go with a true Liberal. Unfortunately.
What's a true liberal ??
That would be Me, Gregory.
Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!
Nah...
Liberals like to hand out fish...
Conservatives teach people to fish...
If ye are saying that I am a conservative, then ye need to readeth the Gospels again. My disciples were already fishermen when they met Me, and all I ever told them to do in that regard was to cast their nets on the other side of the boat.Nah...
Liberals like to hand out fish...
Conservatives teach people to fish...
As for the "hand out fish" part, remember when I fed a standing room only crowd with one kid's picnic basket?
sooo.............where is this picinic basket?
rsz_davidleebutt.jpg
yeah, i can agree with most of this.
Last edited by knuckleboner; 04-13-2010 at 08:17 PM. Reason: .
true, i'd expect a little moderation. but i'm still assuming a left-leaning pick. the republicans would set a dangerous precedent if you have a liberal justice retiring during a democratic presidency and democratic senate and they filibuster a moderate liberal choice based on ideology.
Whoever Obama chooses will be rejected by the Republicans, period. The typical BS times ten with the mid-term elections in Nov.
This will be a complete cluster fuck and worse than Sotomayor's grilling. All confirmation hearings have that drama to them. Remember Thomas' pubic hair on the coke can but this one, in this political climate, will take it to a whole different level. Sadly, the Demos don't have the balls for confrontation and all the Repubs want to do is say no.
Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!
Most Democrats do, but unfortunately it is their so called "leadership" which is lacking. I only had one Judas to deal with. Thy Democrats have dozens of them.
Christ, don't get me started on Reid and Pelosi
Say no to idiotic choices, that is.
I remember during W's presidency...the dems were screaming "moderation" for SCOTUS choices.
Now isn't the shoe on the other foot or is it a one-way street?
No, because unlike you, I want a moderate or middle of the road Justice(s). Extremes either way are no good and most people in this country are somewhere in the middle. Just because Fox News and your right wings heroes say otherwise, doesn't mean it's so.
:rolleyes4:
Yeah....riiiiiight. :rolleyes4:
You've been foolishly misled...again.Just because Fox News and your right wings heroes say otherwise, doesn't mean it's so.
Sure....they're not playing up the Rove fear like tactics for ratings.......sure. Wake up and get an original thought, dude. Could Rush or Beck even do a 5 min show if they didn't try to use scare tactics? Fox News would be off the air in a day if they didn't slant the news to their point of view and keep perpetuating fear.
Foolishly misled? Says the guy that posts op-ed's about the liberals covertly taking over the tea baggers.........how's the view in Gloomdom?
Truth hurts, huh?
You gotta have some truth first.........be afraid, very afraid.
The truth is there are millions of us Commie Libs meeting in secret to take over everything, we even have a secret handshake......sorry I can't say anymore but ever notice on Tuesdays no libs are around....OK, that's all I can say.
You should be asking yourself that question.
Hey Jackass! You need to [Register] or log in to view signatures on ROTHARMY.COM!
Funny Brie references the Bush appointment(s)...didn't he try to nominate is CLEANING LADY to the Supreme Court?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote