Texsox Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jul 20, 2005 -> 10:16 AM) You can almost see the disappointment in the media that Bush nominated this guy. They wanted someone who was gonna cause a brawl and they didn't get it. Could you imagine how much material Rush would have had with a good fight. You are absolutely right. His rating would have gone even higher, I'll bet he and Hannity, Savage, Ingram, and all the many others are crying in their martinis.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jul 20, 2005 -> 09:19 AM) More than abortion, I'd like to hear his opinion on eminent domain if that ever comes up again... I'm sick of hearing about abortion. Seems that people have this knee-jerk reaction when they hear the words "Supreme Court" to think of or talk about Roe vs Wade. There're a lot more issues which are a lot more important to this country than abortion. In my estimation abortion is pretty far down on the list of what's imoportant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 QUOTE(Texsox @ Jul 20, 2005 -> 09:20 AM) Could you imagine how much material Rush would have had with a good fight. You are absolutely right. His rating would have gone even higher, I'll bet he and Hannity, Savage, Ingram, and all the many others are crying in their martinis.. By media I mean all forms of media both TV, print and radio. They can all kiss my ass, we've had enough fighting for now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CanOfCorn Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jul 20, 2005 -> 03:22 PM) I'm sick of hearing about abortion. Seems that people have this knee-jerk reaction when they hear the words "Supreme Court" to think of or talk about Roe vs Wade. There're a lot more issues which are a lot more important to this country than abortion. In my estimation abortion is pretty far down on the list of what's imoportant. You are correct with your estimation. Unfortunately, you are one of a few that feel that way. It still is a hot button topic almost 35 years past Roe v. Wade. And that is the one that most people still latch onto. The thing about Roe v. Wade, though, is the underlying tone of it...rights. It's not the death of a "child" that really makes it a hot button topic, but rights of the mother compared to rights of the unborn. How far do said rights stretch? It's such a sticky situation and a very important one. It's a slippery slope either way it's decided. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jul 20, 2005 -> 10:23 AM) By media I mean all forms of media both TV, print and radio. They can all kiss my ass, we've had enough fighting for now. Of course. But it's the opinion shows that really take off during national debates. Whether the Sunday morning tv news shows or the AM radio talkers. They all thrive on controversy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxy Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 Did you guys see the picture of Roberts' 4 year old dancing (while wearing saddle shoes--poor fashion choice) as Bush announced the nomination? Also worthy of mention was his wife's Jackie-O pink suit (I honeslty do like that one). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 20, 2005 Author Share Posted July 20, 2005 George Bush seems to be catering to his base... Hoosiers. Turns out Roberts spent time growing up in the Long Beach area of Michigan City. Supreme Court nominee grew up in Long Beach By Andrew Tallackson The News-Dispatch Roberts at La Lumier. He was in the Class of '73 Those who know judge aren't surprised bu Bush's choice Even in his formative years, those who knew John Roberts Jr. could tell great things were in store for him. Betsy Swan was his classmate at Notre Dame Catholic School. She was Betsy Starr then, and Roberts' sharp intellect impressed teachers and students. "We would have our own little spelling bees," Swan recalled Tuesday night, "and we would be lined up at the chalkboard. A few of us thought we were pretty good. But we knew if John Roberts was there, he would win hands down. "You could tell he was going to be something some day, but he wasn't over the top. He was as normal as any one of us. He was just a very easy person to talk to." President Bush chose Roberts, a federal appeals court judge, on Tuesday as his first nominee for Supreme Court. The native of Buffalo, N.Y., moved with his family to the same block as Starr's family, which was Stop 28 in Long Beach. Starr, who now lives in Crown Point, Ind., even remembers her mother, a volunteer at Notre Dame School, being part of the welcome crew to make Roberts feel at home. Starr and Roberts were among the eighth-grade graduating class at Notre Dame in 1969. From there, she went to Marquette High School for one year before switching to Elston High School. He went to La Lumiere School, graduating at the top of his class in 1973. He also worked summers at Bethlehem Steel, where his father was an executive. Retired La Lumiere Headmaster Lawrence Sullivan was a math teacher when Roberts attended the school. He said Roberts was involved in student council, was on the wrestling team and during his senior year was captain of the football team, as well as the team's most valuable defensive player. He was on the athletic council, a newspaper co-editor, dorm proctor and was involved in drama, chorale and yearbook. "He was a guy who was always at the top of his class," Sullivan said. "He was a person of extremely high character. He was the kind of person who led by example, the light for all others to follow." Sullivan said former La Lumiere football coach Chris Balawender attended the school the same time as Roberts. The two would have "deep, dark" political conversations. "His knowledge of politics and philosophy," Sullivan said, "made him someone people enjoyed talking to." Sullivan was in South Carolina when the news first hit that Supreme Court justice Sandra Day O'Connor had plans to retire. "I wondered then if John had an outside chance," he said, "so when the news about John first came on at around 6:45 tonight, I said, 'wow'. "This is exceedingly thrilling." Starr said she was thrilled to see Roberts on TV as well. "It didn't surprise me that he was a candidate for that position because he was so level-headed," she said. "I think a lot of the kids in my class, and the teachers, would agree he was just a pleasant person, very approachable and extremely bright." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 Dear Texsox and all your buddies at Soxtalk.com, This much is clear already. Judge Roberts is no Sandra Day O'Connor. Last night we learned that President Bush wants to replace a woman who voted to uphold Roe v. Wade with a man who argued against Roe v. Wade, and that sends a clear signal that this White House remains bent on opening old wounds and dividing America. There are big questions that must be answered involving Judge Roberts' judicial philosophy as demonstrated over his short time on the appellate court. The Senate must learn whether he has a clear, consistent commitment to upholding Constitutional standards like civil rights, the right to privacy, and Roe v. Wade. These issues are in serious question if you take even a cursory glance at his record. We need to ask the tough questions to determine whether John Roberts is the nominee who will give America a Court that is fair, independent, ethical and committed to Constitutional freedoms rather than an ideological agenda, and I promise you I will do everything in my power to assure that no question is sidestepped. Throughout every step of the confirmation process, I will keep you informed about the questions that need to be asked, the answers we need to demand, and the principles we need to defend. It's impossible to overstate the importance of this moment. As the U.S. Senate discharges one of its most important responsibilities, I will be active and vigilant. I hope you will do the same, beginning right now. Start by sharing a few words about your personal feelings on the importance of this Supreme Court nomination. You can submit your comments or questions here: http://www.johnkerry.com/action/share/ Thank you, John Kerry P.S. In the days ahead, we'll be featuring on our johnkerry.com website a cross-section of the comments submitted and contacting you with important information and action requests as events demand. Sign up here if you want to get the latest information. Recruit your friends and neighbors, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 I'm sorry... but that letter is f***ed up. Period. John Kerry is an asswipe - and all the politicing is SICK on this issue. The ink ain't even dry on his nomination and already they want every f***ing American to know that they will drag out his dirty underwear all over America to be sure he won't fight abortion. Whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jul 20, 2005 -> 03:07 PM) I'm sorry... but that letter is f***ed up. Period. John Kerry is an asswipe - and all the politicing is SICK on this issue. The ink ain't even dry on his nomination and already they want every f***ing American to know that they will drag out his dirty underwear all over America to be sure he won't fight abortion. Whatever. Does this mean you are in favor of dividing America with this choice Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 He could have picked winodj and it would have pissed off the Democrats, who basically just want to s*** on any "conservative" choice. These people get voted in 99-0 in their current positions, but hell no, that's NEVER good enough to move on. Hypocritical douchebag f*cks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 Please don't take John Kerry, who's obviously rerunning in a doomed campaign for President, too seriously. What he said was "I'm going to do my best to make sure that we ask this guy tough questions and get honest answers." And then, he'll vote for him. Which is the right thing to do. The Democrats need to ask this guy, tough direct questions about his views on the constitutionality of this or that. Only then, if Roberts answers honestly - which he probably will, can anyone really say if the guy is too conservative or just right. The only thing he's ruled on that I really have a problem with is Hamdan v Rumsfeld where he supported the notion of trying foreigners in military courts with fewer rights than Saddam Hussein even has in his own trial. That concerns me. The rest, is the rest. I think Dems also know, if people try to corner him - he will more likely become more Conservative as a result (e.g. Clarence Thomas) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jul 20, 2005 -> 03:33 PM) He could have picked winodj and it would have pissed off the Democrats, who basically just want to s*** on any "conservative" choice. These people get voted in 99-0 in their current positions, but hell no, that's NEVER good enough to move on. Hypocritical douchebag f*cks. meow.. hiss, hisssss... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NUKE_CLEVELAND Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 QUOTE(winodj @ Jul 20, 2005 -> 02:47 PM) Please don't take John Kerry, who's obviously rerunning in a doomed campaign for President, too seriously. What he said was "I'm going to do my best to make sure that we ask this guy tough questions and get honest answers." And then, he'll vote for him. Which is the right thing to do. The Democrats need to ask this guy, tough direct questions about his views on the constitutionality of this or that. Only then, if Roberts answers honestly - which he probably will, can anyone really say if the guy is too conservative or just right. The only thing he's ruled on that I really have a problem with is Hamdan v Rumsfeld where he supported the notion of trying foreigners in military courts with fewer rights than Saddam Hussein even has in his own trial. That concerns me. The rest, is the rest. I think Dems also know, if people try to corner him - he will more likely become more Conservative as a result (e.g. Clarence Thomas) Wino. We've been through this before. Military courts are the proper place to try foreign enemy combatants. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balta1701 Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 QUOTE(YASNY @ Jul 20, 2005 -> 08:13 AM) Considering that Justice Ginsburg was overwhelmeingly approved, even though she is a flaming liberal, maybe the damn Democrats need to take the high road that the Republicans took during her nomination. It seems the Republicans didn't worry about the philosophical standings of Ginsberg. Maybe the powers that be in the the Democratic Party need to worry a bit more about being "uniters and not dividers". There's actually a reason for this. According to Orrin Hatch's own biography, when Clinton was trying to pick his first nominee, he had other people in mind other than Ginsburg. Clinton then went to Hatch and asked him how he felt about the person Clinton was considering. Hatch responded that the name Clinton had would provoke a major fight, and countered by asking if Clinton had looked at either Ruth Bader Ginsburg or Stephen Breyer. Breyer became Clinton's second nominee. That's the story from Hatch's own autobiography. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 QUOTE(kapkomet @ Jul 20, 2005 -> 03:33 PM) He could have picked winodj and it would have pissed off the Democrats, who basically just want to s*** on any "conservative" choice. These people get voted in 99-0 in their current positions, but hell no, that's NEVER good enough to move on. Hypocritical douchebag f*cks. So why even have hearings? Just pass him through. After all it's only the Supreme Court. We should have the same standards there as every other court in America. Come on Kap, you can't seriously believe that just because he was pushed through with a bunch of others in a negotiated deal to fill those vacancies, that he should get a free pass to the Supreme Court? Or did you forget our douchbags negotiated a deal to approve a group of nominees and finally end a log jam? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rex Kickass Posted July 20, 2005 Share Posted July 20, 2005 QUOTE(NUKE_CLEVELAND @ Jul 20, 2005 -> 04:03 PM) Wino. We've been through this before. Military courts are the proper place to try foreign enemy combatants. All I'm saying is that he oughta get the same rights as Saddam Hussein. Like being present for his own trial. Like making witnesses against him testify under oath. Otherwise, it's a kangaroo damn court. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jul 20, 2005 -> 05:43 PM) There's actually a reason for this. According to Orrin Hatch's own biography, when Clinton was trying to pick his first nominee, he had other people in mind other than Ginsburg. Clinton then went to Hatch and asked him how he felt about the person Clinton was considering. Hatch responded that the name Clinton had would provoke a major fight, and countered by asking if Clinton had looked at either Ruth Bader Ginsburg or Stephen Breyer. Breyer became Clinton's second nominee. That's the story from Hatch's own autobiography. Wait isn't Hatch a Republican? Did Clinton ask a Republican for his recommendation before nominating somone? :rolly Wow, I wonder if Bush considered that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mplssoxfan Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 QUOTE(Balta1701 @ Jul 20, 2005 -> 05:43 PM) There's actually a reason for this. According to Orrin Hatch's own biography, when Clinton was trying to pick his first nominee, he had other people in mind other than Ginsburg. Clinton then went to Hatch and asked him how he felt about the person Clinton was considering. Hatch responded that the name Clinton had would provoke a major fight, and countered by asking if Clinton had looked at either Ruth Bader Ginsburg or Stephen Breyer. Breyer became Clinton's second nominee. That's the story from Hatch's own autobiography. The true meaning of "Advice and Consent", methinks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 21, 2005 Author Share Posted July 21, 2005 QUOTE(Texsox @ Jul 20, 2005 -> 07:35 PM) Wait isn't Hatch a Republican? Did Clinton ask a Republican for his recommendation before nominating somone? :rolly Wow, I wonder if Bush considered that? Before the nomination... http://www.wpherald.com/storyview.php?Stor...13-100955-4453r and after... http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?.../w142749D44.DTL damn Bush for not meeting with Dems Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilMonkey Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 QUOTE(Texsox @ Jul 21, 2005 -> 12:35 AM) Wait isn't Hatch a Republican? Did Clinton ask a Republican for his recommendation before nominating somone? :rolly Wow, I wonder if Bush considered that? And just who do you think someone like Teddy Kennedy would have suggested that Bush nominate? Bush has already been 'advised' that just about anyone he picked would be in for a long fight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 21, 2005 Author Share Posted July 21, 2005 Here is one of the quickest ways to secure my vote Ann Coulter saids Roberts wrong pick Now if only Molly Ivans would hate on Roberts, I would be sold. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted July 21, 2005 Author Share Posted July 21, 2005 Wow, Tex isn't the only one with high level connections... The Chairman of the RNC is emailing me personally. Dear Michael, Tonight, President Bush made one of the most important announcements of his Presidency: his nomination of Judge John G. Roberts Jr. to be a United States Supreme Court Justice. Judge Roberts is a highly qualified man with sterling judicial credentials. He is fair-minded and compassionate and understands his job is to faithfully interpret the Constitution, not to legislate from the bench. President Bush selected Judge Roberts after an unprecedented outreach effort, consulting with Democrats and Republicans alike. He has been thorough, thoughtful and deliberate throughout the entire process. Now he needs your help. To ensure Judge Roberts is confirmed by the U.S. Senate, I need you to do three things. 1. Call your senators, tell them Roberts has your support and deserves theirs. 2. Sign our petition in support of the timely confirmation of Judge Roberts. 3. Call talk radio, write a letter to the editor of your local paper and tell your friends and neighbors why you support the President's choice. Judge Roberts has a record that demonstrates a commitment to faithfully applying the Constitution and not legislating from the bench. For more information on the nominee go to www.JudgeRoberts.com The bottom line is the President needs your help. By taking the actions above, your elected officials, your party and your friends, family, and neighbors will know you stand with the President in support of this outstanding nominee. It is imperative you do all you can to help Judge Roberts become the next Supreme Court Justice. Thank you for all your hard work. Sincerely, Ken Mehlman, RNC Chairman :sleep Glad this went to my junkmail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 QUOTE(EvilMonkey @ Jul 20, 2005 -> 07:54 PM) And just who do you think someone like Teddy Kennedy would have suggested that Bush nominate? Bush has already been 'advised' that just about anyone he picked would be in for a long fight. Are you equating Hatch with Kennedy? I would think that meeting with a more moderate Dem would be smarter. There are always two political fights going on. The public and the private. Bush could, and maybe has, spoken with moderate Dems and gotten their pulse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texsox Posted July 21, 2005 Share Posted July 21, 2005 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Jul 20, 2005 -> 08:20 PM) Wow, Tex isn't the only one with high level connections... The Chairman of the RNC is emailing me personally. :sleep Glad this went to my junkmail. I signed up with the Bush campaign and both Texas Senators, have voted GOP in several races, donated to GOP candidates, and for some reason I cannot stay on their mailing lists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.