Graham booed over Gorsuch vote

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) speaks at a town hall in Charleston, South Carolina.


http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2017/04/01/lindsey-graham-gorsuch-vote-town-hall-sot.cnn

Gorsuch is a good judge. Two wrongs do not make a right.

I saw this and must say, agree with him or not, he had the courage to say what he thought . . . . . that I appreciate!

BTW, I mostly do not agree with Senator Graham often . . .

2seaoat wrote:Gorsuch is a good judge.  Two wrongs do not make a right.

Screw #45, screw Gorsuch and screw all republicans. We've had enough republican wrongs since November. Any Dem that supports Gorsuch needs to find himself a new party.

Gorsuch has been notably non-forthcoming during meetings with key Democrats, and I don't for a minute buy his constant rejoinder that he can't say where he stands on ANYthing because there could always be a case to come before him involving that issue.  There are ways to express yourself without endangering your perceived neutrality.  Gorsuch is a wolf in sheep's clothing.

And yes, Sea, two wrong do not make a right, but I still have to say I feel like vomiting every time I hear a Repug or Con railing against Democratic "obstructionism," especially as to this nomination.  Are you kidding me??? They wrote the BOOK on obstruction.

He is a good judge. Roberts found the Affordable Care Act constitutional because he is a good judge. This is simply stupid. If it makes people feel good, great. Garland should be sitting on the Supreme Court right now. He was a good judge. What the Republicans did was morally wrong. Elections have consequences, but to suggest that a judge is a wolf in sheep skin when his role model is Byron White is really not fairly characterizing the judge. I would have preferred that Garland was appointed. Not because of his future judicial stands, but because it was good for this nation. I am not one bit happy about a non extreme judge being put through this. You do realize the next appointment could be a crazy MF who is not a good judge.......I am so sorry that the middle has been gutted out of the Republican and Democratic parties........It used to be you could find a liberal Republican and a conservative Democrat......bipartisan cooperation is the way to govern, but if the nuclear option is used on a Supreme Court justice, it will be a disaster for America.

2seaoat wrote:It used to be you could find a liberal Republican and a conservative Democrat......bipartisan cooperation is the way to govern, but if the nuclear option is used on a Supreme Court justice, it will be a disaster for America.

Exactly. Yet another republican disaster for America. Just keep stalling and see who president Pence comes up with. Stall all the way till 2020 if needed.

Silly snowflakes.

PkrBum wrote: Silly snowflakes.

Sissified pill popper

PkrBum wrote: Silly snowflakes.

If you have a point to make, why don't you make it instead of just spewing childish insults, you damn coward.

Sit down at your keyboard, write a paragraph or two, maybe a hundred words, that makes a point. Then hit the preview button and edit it for precision and clarity. Then do that again and again until you've got something that makes a coherent argument. Any damn fool can pop off with insults.

This thread is "Graham gets booed over Gorsuch vote". Why is that good or bad? Is Gorsuch a good nominee or do the Dems have a point for what happened to Garland?  Is "silly snowflakes" the best you can do?

You're either too gutless or too dumb to make a cogent argument. Typical conservative, stupid and mean-spirited. Grow up.

This is what I was speaking directly to... immediately above my comment:

"Just keep stalling and see who president Pence comes up with. Stall all the way till 2020 if needed."

I think I nailed it.

PkrBum wrote:This is what I was speaking directly to... immediately above my comment:

"Just keep stalling and see who president Pence comes up with. Stall all the way till 2020 if needed."

I think I nailed it.

You thought wrong again, steroid boy.

Tuff shit.

PkrBum wrote:Tuff shit.

Roid rage again.

An investigation, or mere allegations have somehow in these media times been elevated to proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The media did this to SOS Clinton, they did it to President Obama, and now they are doing it to President Trump. Everybody needs to turn off MSNBC and take a chill pill. If there is probable cause and a crime has been committed our system actually works.

A good judge who has recommendations from the ABA should not be caught up in revenge or getting even. Sure, I may not agree with some of his decisions, but I respect his integrity and his record.

2seaoat wrote:An investigation, or mere allegations have somehow in these media times been elevated to proof beyond a reasonable doubt.  The media did this to SOS Clinton, they did it to President Obama, and now they are doing it to President Trump.  Everybody needs to turn off MSNBC and take a chill pill.  If there is probable cause and a crime has been committed our system actually works.

A good judge who has recommendations from the ABA should not be caught up in revenge or getting even.  Sure, I may not agree with some of his decisions, but I respect his integrity and his record.

Orin Hatch is full of B.S. while he tries to defend the GOPutin double standard.

2seaoat wrote:
A good judge who has recommendations from the ABA should not be caught up in revenge or getting even.  Sure, I may not agree with some of his decisions, but I respect his integrity and his record.

You're missing the entire point of all this. It's not about his qualifications, it about what the Republicans did to Garland, who was equally--if not more--qualified. That cannot go unanswered.

2seaoat wrote:Gorsuch is a good judge.  Two wrongs do not make a right.

No, he's not. He's a right-wing extremist in the mold of Scalia...some even say to the right of Scalia.

Floridatexan wrote:

2seaoat wrote:Gorsuch is a good judge.  Two wrongs do not make a right.

No, he's not.  He's a right-wing extremist in the mold of Scalia...some even say to the right of Scalia.  

It looks like they will have to go nuclear.

2seaoat wrote:He is a good judge.  Roberts found the Affordable Care Act constitutional because he is a good judge.  This is simply stupid.   If it makes people feel good, great.  Garland should be sitting on the Supreme Court right now.  He was a good judge.  What the Republicans did was morally wrong.   Elections have consequences, but to suggest that a judge is a wolf in sheep skin when his role model is Byron White is really not fairly characterizing the judge.   I would have preferred that Garland was appointed.  Not because of his future judicial stands, but because it was good for this nation.   I am not one bit happy about a non extreme judge being put through this.   You do realize the next appointment could be a crazy MF who is not a good judge.......I am so sorry that the middle has been gutted out of the Republican and Democratic parties........It used to be you could find a liberal Republican and a conservative Democrat......bipartisan cooperation is the way to govern, but if the nuclear option is used on a Supreme Court justice, it will be a disaster for America.

Why is this man even under consideration in the midst of 3 separate investigations into Trump's Russian ties?  Garland should have been confirmed, but the GOP leadership refused to even consider him.  Scalia died February 13, 2016.  There was plenty of time THEN to appoint Garland.  The Roberts court also ruled in the Citizens United and McCutcheon cases...both disasters in my book.  They spent years and millions obstructing everything Obama proposed...and now you're advocating bipartisanship?  Get a grip.  The disaster has already befallen the country, and it's sitting in the White House, unless it's a golfing weekend.  Gorsuch ruled in favor of Hobby Lobby.  He's another right-wing religious zealot...a supposed strict constutionalist...no doubt a member of the Federalist Society.  No...NO...HELL NO!

http://prospect.org/article/five-worst-roberts-court-rulings

Please show me one decision the judge has made which shows what you have alleged. It is the very same hysteria which resulted in Donald Trump's election. Crowing about how stupid he was and how large Hillary's poll numbers were, and how he would never be elected. I will read any case you have which proves what you allege, but I just see it as one more smear campaign which in the politics of today, both sides engage. He has one decision which has been overturned. He is NOT a crazy. Elections have consequences. President Obama had one of his nominations stolen, but to attack a good justice with imaginary wrongs.....is wrong. Again, Please give me one cite of his decision which confirms your position.

Referring to high-court cases that Gorsuch believes cede too much power to agencies, he wrote: "There's an elephant in the room with us today. We have studiously attempted to work our way around it and even left it unremarked. But the fact is Chevron and Brand X permit executive bureaucracies to swallow huge amounts of core judicial and legislative power and concentrate federal power in a way that seems more than a little difficult to square with the Constitution of the framers' design. Maybe the time has come to face the behemoth."

This is a core belief of mine. I believe that state, local, and federal government have bureaucracies which steal discretion and power to create tyranny where we were once a free nation. I would love to give you some examples of these abuses in Illinois, and in Florida by local government who simply say this is MY interpretation of a rule or regulation, and this goes unchallenged by 99% of the people and creates bureaucratic tyranny over the citizens of this country. I have taken the state of Illinois to court on those abuses, and I am about to do the same in Florida. For all those who think government does only good, I can show you that government can do bad.

Just as an example, when I bought the islands in Illinois, I went to the Department of natural resources because they had recorded a memorandum that the prior owner had violations. I went to Springfield and said I want to purchase the property and want to clear up any violations. They said there were 85 violations. It was the most absurd list I had every seen and it was clear they had a hard on for the prior owner. I simply said this list is absurd. I am going to buy the property, but I am going to file a declaratory judgment to review each of the 85 alleged violations. They asked me to hold up, and would give me an updated list. The list was five items which were nothing and my willingness to take them to court for abusing the prior property owner gutted the gorilla who was in the room. I was not done, because I learned the State wanted to buy the islands, but the State of Illinois was broke and they figured they would destroy the value by regulatory condemnation. I filed suit asking for all emails between state agencies and argued they were conducting a ricco criminal conspiracy.....they were.....they settled the lawsuit immediately and they still make my life difficult, their motives have been exposed.

I do not think the Hobby Lobby decision was horrible law. It is clear that there are simple ways to provide contraceptions to those employees, which is all the decision said......alternatives......which were found quickly. No....he is a solid judge.

Folks who attack Hobby Lobby do not see what a nothing case it was, as it was about the ease of alternatives when religious freedom was involved. Yet, the same folks that cry what a horrible decision it was have no problem in the fact that the Robert's court ruled to allow peyote and illegal drug in religious ceremonies, but that decision which is consistent with some political slants, was attacked by conservative groups, and Roberts was all but tar and feathered when he made the correct ruling on the Affordable Care Act.

No, as much as Scalia was wrong headed on issues, his defense of the fourth amendment turned the Supreme Court on the growing Police State where officers thought they knew the law and that the exceptions to the fourth amendment were a blank check......Scalia said simply NO. To paint any judge with such a broad brush is wrong. Now Thomas is very weak base on his record and is fair game, but Robert's, Scalia, and Gorsuch are recognized legal scholars.