Ted Kennedy.....Just ask a question and then just STFU and listen to the answer!

[Yeticus_Rex]

@Fear Itself

@Yeticus Rex

If you were being interviewed for a job, would your interviewer treat you this way?

So how do you account for the grandstanding of the Republican senators who use their time, not to ask questions, but to pontificate about anti-abortion windbaggery?

I never said that neither side was guilty of this, both sides have been self-absorbed one way or the other…I was simply stating that Kennedy did that PLUS made the attempt of mischaracterizing Roberts by past works in a DIFFERENT capacity. Biden might have gone down that same road, but I was not able to watch Biden…I was only able to see Kennedy. That is why my OP is worded as such.

So, I have less of a problem with an interviewer talking about him/herself and his/her accomplishments, but I do have a bigger problem with those who try to mischaracterize my own accomplishments through their own prejudiced notions. I now agree that overall, like others have said, this is a waste of time.

@This Year's Model

So is Kennedy.

And that, my friend, is the sound created by millions of air molecules bouncing off of your eardrums when pressured by something flying over your head.

Oh, he’s a conservative?
p:mad:q

@asterion

David Brooks column this morning takes a nice, humorous look at the hearings so far.

Nice link, asterion…kinda reminds me of our poker tournament commentary.

[Zoe]

elucidator: See, thing is, most of us lefties don’t really pay that much attention to the accidental Kennedy, he just doesn’t matter that much, we look upon him with a bemused mixture of vexation and nostalgia…

Youngster!

To your room…

[duffer]

@elucidator

See, thing is, most of us lefties don’t really pay that much attention to the accidental Kennedy, he just doesn’t matter that much, we look upon him with a bemused mixture of vexation and nostalgia.

I know. That’s why I said it in the post immediately before yours. I’m guessing you won’t see this post either.

[duffer]

@RTFirefly

he was representing the United States of America - we, the freakin’ people.

So was Janet Reno. What the hell is your point? There are 300 million people in this country. Do you think anyone can represent everyone’s interests?

If Christ were in charge, we’d hear from non-Christians. If Ghandi were in charge we’d hear from Christians*. And the atheist/Communist/Wiccan/militant-feminist/ActUp/Bhuddist/Taoist/SF’ers(initials used to attempt to avoid a search leading to this site)/ChickFucks/Muslims/etc**, would all kick in a few complaints. Do you really think there will ever be someone that can represent every single person? (Maybe I’m taking it to literally. Just pointing out no matter who is in charge, there will be millions upset they don’t have a gravy life)

*Out of these, we have the Baptists, Catholics (that are divided between Roman and Orthodox), Lutherans (that can’t agree with each other, hence the different synods), Mormons, Jehova’s Witnesses, Methodists, and a slew of differences in how each of the above mentioned and omitted sects practice their faiths. There will never be universal happiness in how things are handled. There will always be people that complain about government. Therefore, I’m hoping the SDMB becomes a publicly traded stock. It will get me one step closer to being rich enough to rule all of you.

[uglybeech]

Good Lord, haven’t you people seen a congressional hearing before? It’s always that way: Speech-pontification-obligatory-question (sometimes just a token interrogative inflection at the end of a long speech). I don’t see how it’s any different from some of the Republicans’ five-minute “Is it true that you’re wonderful?” speeches.

[Zoe]

So.

What are the odds that the second nomination will be Anita Hill?

[duffer]

Now that would be pure comedy gold.