Gorsuch confirmed

All that stupid wasted energy makes Democrats look impotent and not too bright.  This was a good judge.  This was NOT the time to be stupid.  There will be an appointment which is off the wall crazy, and after crying wolf continuously, the public will be ambivalent to a real threat.  President Trump could easily make two more appointments before he leaves office, and the probability of the Democrats taking the senate back are low.  Their structural advantage was in the 2016 election, and their bumbling in Wisconsin, and the balance of the midwest on trade issues could have a generation impact.   If you cry wolf all the time without a true basis, you will be ignored.

I cannot believe Senator Leahy went along with this travesty. Such idiocy has made the Democratic Party a running joke. My biggest mistake was listening to MSNBC every evening, and then turning on Fox News for the other side of the coin. They both were in the twilight zone and are detrimental to America. They both radicalize their positions and demean the opponents. What was done to the Judge was unconscionable character attacks when clearly the American Bar Association highly recommended the individual. I do not see a path out of this mess. We have an utterly dangerous President because of this constant nit picking of the irrelevant, while essential issues are buried in distractions. No wonder big money owns this nation. 80% of Americans agree on core issues where a consensus could actually move this nation forward but the extreme right and left has made this nation more like a Latin American third world country controlled by an Oligarchy who plays the citizens against each other.

Glad he was confirmed. How ridiculous of the democrats.

2seaoat wrote: ...when clearly the American Bar Association highly recommended the individual.  .

What a joke! The ABA Federal Judiciary Committee rated Harold Carswell as highly qualified, for godsakes. Remember Carswell? He was the Nixon nominee after Haynsworth got booted. A few years later he got arrested for molesting an undercover cop he picked up in a men's room in Tallahasee.

The ABA Federal Judiciary Committee is nothing but a rubber stamp for any hack with a law degree that gets propped up in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Try and find a judge on the Federal bench that WASN'T rated as qualified by the ABA? They'd approve Assad or Putin if they were members of the bar.

What a stupid comment.

What a stupid comment.


I agree that your comment was lacking the requisite knowledge of how the ABA rates judges. Gorsuch was rated "well qualified". This is the highest qualification by an ABA committee who conducts interviews and reviews a judge's written work and work history.

Just to help you a bit, Justice Thomas was only given a "qualified" rating which is a clear slam of a candidate for the United States Supreme Court. To knowledgeable people the rating difference is clear. To Bumpkins maybe not so much.

2seaoat wrote:What a stupid comment.


  To knowledgeable people the rating difference is clear.  To Bumpkins maybe not so much.

Typical legalistic picking of nits. That's like commenting on the molecules comprising the bark on the trees in the forest instead of the vast sweep of the entire forest.

The ABA is nothing but rubber stamp for anyone who's passed a Bar exam. It's a mutual admiration society for lawyers. And how about Carswell? That ambulatory piece of human feces was rated as qualified and he was a racist scumbag. Nixon nominated him as a slap in the face to the Senate after Haynsworth lost by 10 votes.

Carswell: "I AM A SOUTHERNER BY ANCESTRY, BIRTH, TRAINING, INCLINATION, BELIEF, AND PRACTICE."

He was a racist piece of shit and the ABA still rated him qualified. The ABA Federal Judicial Committee is joke and everyone knows it. Except lawyers.

Nobody on the planet except lawyers gives a shit about the difference between a "highly qualified" rating and a mere "qualified" one. And, although this may come as a great shock to you, lawyers are an insignificant proportion of the American populace--you know, the populace our Senators are supposed to represent.

DUH!

Nobody on the planet except lawyers gives a shit about the difference between a "highly qualified" rating and a mere "qualified" one.

That is who rates judges. Not country bumpkins who have ill informed opinions not based on facts or understanding of a judge's rulings and experience. However, thank you for confirming your breadth of understanding of the judge's qualifications. He was rightfully confirmed as should have judge Garland, but the country bumpkins just cannot get out of the way in either direction.

2seaoat wrote:What a stupid comment.


I agree that your comment was lacking the requisite knowledge of how the ABA rates judges.   Gorsuch was rated "well qualified".   This is the highest qualification by an ABA committee who conducts interviews and reviews a judge's written work and work history.

Just to help you a bit, Justice Thomas was only given a "qualified" rating which is a clear slam of a candidate for the United States Supreme Court.   To knowledgeable people the rating difference is clear.  To Bumpkins maybe not so much.

As far as I know, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, Justice Thomas has never written a judicial opinion in his entire tenure. All he did, apparently, is go along with whatever Scalia said. I'm a little sick of your condescension. And ratings are so overrated.

The GOP has just used the nuclear option to confirm a judge with a possible 40-year tenure who is an appointee of a president who is under investigation by a Senate committee, a House committee, and the FBI.

2seaoat wrote:

That is who rates judges.  Not country bumpkins who have ill informed opinions not based on facts or understanding of a judge's rulings and experience.  However, thank you for confirming your breadth of understanding of the judge's qualifications.   He was rightfully confirmed as should have judge Garland, but the country bumpkins just cannot get out of the way in either direction.

Thank you for confirming your stupidity. STATE bar associations rate judges as well. Judges nominated for the Federal bench have already been rated by their respective State bar associations.

And, naturally, you failed to address either of my points: 1) No one but lawyers gives a damn about ABA ratings and lawyers are an insignificant minority of the populace. 2) If their ratings are so damn good, how did Carswell get a qualified rating?

Of course, now you will deflect because you are not capable of answering a direct question or directly responding to a comment.

You prove the point that post-graduate degrees are nothing but a sham. They damage the ability to reason and substitute an infinite capacity for spinning logical fallacy.

I refuse to believe that anyone who writes as badly as you benefited from any education past the fifth grade. If you have a graduate degree, you should ask for your money back.

I'm a little sick of your condescension. And ratings are so overrated.

I do not take people serious who do not know what they are talking about. Justice Thomas has written opinions. He has not taken part in oral interaction with litigants, and it is my understanding he has NEVER asked a question or participated in the same. That is a historic difference, but he has written decisions. I was correct that a qualified judge was nominated and confirmed. It is not condescension to join a mob in trying to demean a qualified man's credentials. I cannot get specific, but a judge was appointed in the panhandle who was attacked in the PNJ by a mob of idiots who knew nothing. I tore into them and my arrogance and depicting them as bumpkins was brutal. I was right. I knew the man when he was an attorney, and in fact had interacted with him on a project. After he was on the bench, he sent me a PM thanking me for defending his reputation. I simply responded that the truth must be shouted from the rafters to counter untruths and mobs. Now when judge Vinson was chosen to be the knucklehead to rule the ACA unconstitutional, I was rather brutal, and he and his surrogates tried to pop my arrogance, but I correctly a week prior to the Supreme Court decision laid out why the interstate commerce argument was sophomoric analysis and some judges would do better tending to their flowers, and then stated on the PNJ would rule for the constitutionality of the same because it was fully in the powers of congress to tax to achieve a policy goal. For one year after that until the PNJ stopped contributions, I was constantly getting whacked by a small group of rather intelligent folks who were clearly the judge or his clerks......No, when you are right, and the truth is told, it is not condescending behavior, it is the simple truth which some folks just cannot accept.

2seaoat wrote:I'm a little sick of your condescension. And ratings are so overrated.

I do not take people serious who do not know what they are talking about.  Justice Thomas has written opinions.   He has not taken part in oral interaction with litigants, and it is my understanding he has NEVER asked a question or participated in the same.   That is a historic difference, but he has written decisions.   I was correct that a qualified judge was nominated and confirmed.  It is not condescension to join a mob in trying to demean a qualified man's credentials.   I cannot get specific, but a judge was appointed in the panhandle who was attacked in the PNJ by a mob of idiots who knew nothing.   I tore into them and my arrogance and depicting them as bumpkins was brutal.  I was right.  I knew the man when he was an attorney, and in fact had interacted with him on a project.   After he was on the bench, he sent me a PM thanking me for defending his reputation.   I simply responded that the truth must be shouted from the rafters to counter untruths and mobs.   Now when judge Vinson was chosen to be the knucklehead to rule the ACA unconstitutional, I was rather brutal, and he and his surrogates tried to pop my arrogance, but I correctly a week prior to the Supreme Court decision laid out why the interstate commerce argument was sophomoric analysis and some judges would do better tending to their flowers, and then stated on the PNJ would rule for the constitutionality of the same because it was fully in the powers of congress to tax to achieve a policy goal.   For one year after that until the PNJ stopped contributions, I was constantly getting whacked by a small group of rather intelligent folks who were clearly the judge or his clerks......No, when you are right, and the truth is told, it is not condescending behavior, it is the simple truth which some folks just cannot accept.

WTF? More gibberish passing for reasoned argument? Laughable, pathetic.

Time to retire, Pop. The age-related cognitive issues are becoming a problem.

Why are you using a sock?

I refuse to believe that anyone who writes as badly as you benefited from any education past the fifth grade. If you have a graduate degree, you should ask for your money back.


You mean my degree from Trump University does not make me smart. I am getting my money back, but I am so disappointed that a person who does not even understand the judicial rating of judge Grosuch finds my education inadequate. Thank you for helping me get that refund.

Why are you using a sock?

Is that a word which means a person lacks the courage to be just one coward under a screen name. Heck, this new poster just saved me a bunch of money. Trump University just said the check is in the mail. I may be as dumb as a post, but thanks to this poster, I am getting a refund.

I will send you a pm.

Joanimaroni wrote:I will send you a pm.

Like the ones you send to Markle.

Joanimaroni wrote:Why are you using a sock?

Uh...    to keep the mess to a minimum?

Uh... to keep the mess to a minimum?


Yes, we understand your lack of knowledge would create a mess for your other persona, but this keeps it clean. At least you learned something.