Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 01/09/2006 4:18:42 PM PST by new yorker 77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last
To: new yorker 77
Ask the nominee how he would have ruled in the case of Bush v. Gore.

They've never gotten over it. And it's driven them around the bend thinking about what might have been.

2 posted on 01/09/2006 4:19:43 PM PST by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: new yorker 77

The Left is absolutely obsessed with hatred from 2000.

Has any SCOTUS nominee ever been accused of lying even before he has had a chance to speaK?


4 posted on 01/09/2006 4:22:06 PM PST by digger48
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: new yorker 77

I wish they would, I'd love to hear Alito say: Florida Dem's pet judges broke the law when they approved selective recounts. What should have happened is that Harris should have ARRESTED them, rather than defer the issue to the SC.


5 posted on 01/09/2006 4:24:57 PM PST by wvobiwan (It's OUR Net! If you don't like it keep your stanky routers off it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: new yorker 77
I assume that this was originally written sometime during the Ruth Ginsburg hearings and they have simply substituted the necessary names to make it current.</sarcasm>
6 posted on 01/09/2006 4:25:36 PM PST by carlr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: new yorker 77
Where was this mouth breathing a$$hole while Ruth Bader Ginsburg was refusing to answers questions -- "for one reason or another".

Semper Fi

8 posted on 01/09/2006 4:26:21 PM PST by river rat (You may turn the other cheek, but I prefer to look into my enemy's vacant dead eyes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: new yorker 77
Ask the nominee how he would have ruled in the case of Bush v. Gore. Does he agree that the court was right to intervene

All the Supreme Court did was FORCE the Florida supreme court to FOLLOW THIER OWN LAW REGARDING RECOUNTS!!!! And since it was a 7-0 decision, what in the world does this question have to do with Alito? Or the price of milk at Wal-mart, for that matter.....

9 posted on 01/09/2006 4:26:37 PM PST by dirtbiker (I've tried to see the liberal point of view, but I couldn't get my head that far up my a$$....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: new yorker 77

I would advise the Senators to ask the questions they think are important. If they are not satisfied with the response, their recourse is to vote against confirming the nominee.

Very simple process..


12 posted on 01/09/2006 4:33:12 PM PST by IamConservative (Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but most times will pick himself up and carry on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: new yorker 77
LOL. It's not too often that I come across such blatantly obvious hysterical rewriting of the future.
15 posted on 01/09/2006 4:34:30 PM PST by crazyhorse691 (Diplomacy doesn't work when seagulls rain on your parade. A shotgun and umbrella does.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: new yorker 77
John Nichols is a blithering idiot. The clearest way to prove that is to refer to the Jdiciary Committee hearings on Ruth Bade Ginsburg. She repeatedly refused to answer questions about cases that might come before the Court. And in her long, sorry career as a lawyer and then a judge, that is one thing that she got right.

This fool is claiming that Justices should prejudice themselves before they sit down to decide a case. If that's the kind of Justices he wants -- public bigots -- thank God his side hasn't won any presidential elections in recent memory.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column on Newsbusters.org: "AP Poll Biased: Anti-Bush, Anti-Republican"

16 posted on 01/09/2006 4:34:30 PM PST by Congressman Billybob (Hillary! delendum est.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: new yorker 77

An obvious and bare faced slander of a good and honorable man, who is eminently qualified to sit on the bench of the USSC. The democrats are desperate and realize they have nothing more to offer but obstruction, so they're doing their level best to invent something, anything, to embarrass Bush and subvert the will of the American people. The Democrat Party has become a cesspool of partisan corruption, but let's hope the confirmation process has not become so utterly and hopelessly corrupted thereby that this ploy is allowed to succeed.


17 posted on 01/09/2006 4:40:10 PM PST by Jack Hammer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: new yorker 77

The author of this article, John Nichols, is in distress from the 2000 elections. Would you be kind enough to tell him Bush won, and if he can't get over that, to please leave and go to France or Canada, or just leave. Also, tell him to STFU, and go away already, I'm sick of these clowns and their bullsh**. Give me a break.


18 posted on 01/09/2006 4:43:36 PM PST by geezerwheezer (get up boys, we're burnin' daylight!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: new yorker 77

I pray that the Lord make an end of the communist slandering by what once was called the free press. They deserve to go bankrupt, the sooner the better.


19 posted on 01/09/2006 4:44:18 PM PST by kindred (Lord,thou art God, which hast made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is:)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: new yorker 77

That is so an election behind. Instead they could ask him if Kerry spent Xmas in Cambodia or if Teresa is named Heinz-Kerry or just Heinz.


21 posted on 01/09/2006 4:48:06 PM PST by rod1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: new yorker 77

But, their Favorite Justice O'Connor ruled with the Majority in Bush v. Gore.

Tsk. Can't make up their minds.

I'd rather hear what he thinks about the Florida Courts surpassing the Legislatures of Florida.


22 posted on 01/09/2006 4:50:19 PM PST by Soul Seeker (Mr. President: It is now time to turn over the money changers' tables.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: new yorker 77

Wow, when are the Dementiacrats going to get over Bush vs. Gore? Let's face it, this is what drives the Democratic reflexive and knee jerk opposition to EVERYTHING Bush does, especially Iraq. If Gore had gone into Iraq, or Clinton, Democrats would be demanding the Noble Peace Prize for them. But because they can't get over Florida 2000, the Dems just attack, attack, attack on everything Bush does because they're so emotionally stunted they can't get over it.

So what is the Nation envisioning with this? A scenario along these lines?

Wacko Dem. Obstructionist Senator: "Judge Alito, would you have allowed Florida law to be thwarted all in an attempt by the Gore campaign to fabricate enough votes to take an election in which they were NEVER ahead in Florida once all the votes were in?"

Judge Alito: "No, the Supreme Court was right to defer to Florida state election law and the principle of equal protection as a means to ending an empasse in the 2000 election."

Wacko Dem. obstructionist Senator: "So you're saying you wouldn't have allowed non-stop recounting and devining of over-votes, under-votes and no-votes to discern they were meant for Gore until enough were found to give Gore the presidency even if it was 5 years later?? You're filibusted buddy!"


23 posted on 01/09/2006 4:51:04 PM PST by MikeA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: new yorker 77
Does Alito believe it is possible to reconcile the high court's intervention in an electotal battle with a strict constructionist reading of the Constitution that says Congress, not the court, is charged with settling disputed contests at the federal level?

And I thought it was a state issue as to how Florida was going to vote for its electors. The Federal issue would have been if electors tied, or flipped, or were bribed when voting in the Electoral College. Otherwise, it was a State issue.

-PJ

26 posted on 01/09/2006 4:53:39 PM PST by Political Junkie Too (It's still not safe to vote Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: new yorker 77
Ask the nominee how he would have ruled in the case of Bush v. Gore. Does he agree that the court was right to intervene, for the first time in history, to stop the counting of the ballots that could have determined the result of a presidential contest?

That was a 9-0 decision, wasn't it?

These people are loons. (With apologies to the loons with wings)

28 posted on 01/09/2006 4:57:04 PM PST by don-o (Don't be a Freeploader. Do the right thing. Become a Monthly Donor!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: new yorker 77
Does he believe that Justices Antonin Scalia, whose sons were associated with firms that represented George W. Bush's campaign, and Clarence Thomas, whose wife was working with Bush's transition team, should have recused themselves from the deliberations? Does he worry that the decision to intervene in the case might have damaged the court's reputation as an independent body that stands apart from the partisan politics associated with the executive branch?

How far down the Judicial food chain are we allowed to go? Is The Nation worried that Bob Butterworth, the Florida State Attorney General, was the Florida chairman of the Gore/Lieberman 2000 Committee? At least Katherine Harris was not a part of the Bush election team, it only fell to her to certify the election according to Florida law. They made a big deal out of Harris following Florida law, but had no problem with the highest elected prosecutor heading the Gore team.

-PJ

33 posted on 01/09/2006 5:05:02 PM PST by Political Junkie Too (It's still not safe to vote Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: new yorker 77

These people are so petty and small minded. It would not surprise me, if the swimmer asks him to reveal whether he wears boxers or briefs.


35 posted on 01/09/2006 5:12:29 PM PST by babydoll22 (If you stop growing as a person you live in your own private hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: new yorker 77
"Senators Sould Press Alito on Bush v. Gore"

I don't think "Sould" is a word. Doesn't anybody at the Nation poofread anymore?

36 posted on 01/09/2006 5:13:38 PM PST by melt (Someday, they'll wish their Jihad... Jihadn't.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson