So is my mom, and as I noted, she’d almost certainly have excused herself several times if I was on the hot seat. Doesn’t mean her reaction would be “done for the cameras.”
Concerned Republican Alumni of Princeton, a group opposed, as I understand it, to letting women and minorities enroll at the school.
Daniel
Concerned Alumni of Princeton
I hear they eat babies, too.
Only black, hispanic, female babies. Not many of those around, but if you can find one I hear they are good eats.
See, I don’t understand the Republican stance against abortion. When we hear of the women that would be affected by abortion being outlawed, we hear of the poor minorities that will be affected. We never hear of rich white women being adversely affected.
Abortion helps kill off poor blacks and Hispanics. Why the Republicans would oppose it is beyond me. After all, we’re out to kill all of “them”. Banning abortions would just increase the population of “those people”.
A true quandry in my wish to eliminate minorities. I must rethink my Pro-Life views.
The implication that I got from your previous post was that Judge Alito is lying about being uncommitted on Roe, that in fact he is just looking for any half assed excuse to overturn it, thus my response that there are valid reasons to overturn Roe, and should one of them be argued in his courtroom at a later date, he could honestly rule against Roe and it would be consistent with being honestly uncommitted now. I support a woman’s right to chose, but Roe is an awfully flimsy hook to hang it on.
If, as the article states, she did have a migraine, that in itself could be what made her cry. It may not have had to do with the questions at all since migraines can be pretty damn painful.
What lie? Oh, it was 3 days as of yesterday. BFD. Same dif.
That made me laugh out loud. Was it deliberate? Very subtle, if so.
Same with Griswold. What SCOTUS giveth, SCOTUS can taketh away…eth. I like having a little Me time. And I want it in writing dammit.
Hey now, be fair: it’s pretty much just the one crybaby librul. Most of the other liberals in this thread have been telling him to shut the fuck up.
As I am now: lonesome loser, shut the fuck up.
Lieberman’s probably just playing to his base: 
Thank you.
You might want to hold that wink.
And things have changed since the hearings **have actually taken place ** since that quote.
Now, can I say “even Durbin is now talking no filibuster?”
<Warden Samuel Norton> “It’s a miracle!” </wn>
Evasion and lying are not synonyms, as close as they may be in this instance.
Someone’s who has gotten as far in his legal career as Alito, has had ample time to digest Roe and its implications, has a track record on abortion rights and the wholehearted support of the Bush Administration, cannot expect reasonable people to believe that he has no leanings whatsoever on Roe v. Wade and no idea whether he might vote to overturn it.
If someone running for Congress said that he could not answer questions about his support for abortion rights because it would depend on what abortion-related proposal might come up for a vote, the derision would be overwhelming. Supreme Court Justices, as we know full well, are not impartial godlike arbiters of the law but have political and philosophical leanings. We’re entitled to know about those views as much as possible before appointing nominees to lifetime terms.
Linky for second quote: http://www.belleville.com/mld/belleville/news/politics/13611564.htm
Sounds like you know how he’d vote. So your argument that he should answer questions on the matter is moot. What would be the point? Chuckie Schumer made a rambling speech on how the lack of an answer made his decision on the vote harder to determine. Knowing full fucking well how he was going to vote before the nomination was ever hinted at.
It doesn’t matter what Alito’s answer is. You’ll be against it.
If Alito said “I swear on this stack of Bibles that I will never do anything to overturn Roe”, I’ll lay my money on the odds that you would come up with “Yeah, but Bush nominated him, so he’s lying!!!111!!!one!!elenty-one!” Followed by Diogenes bitching about the use of the Bibles.
What the fuck is the point of the hearings? You won’t ever be happy no matter what he says. It’s a waste of time and money. And really, can’t this money be spent on the children?
Everything is about the children. At least the one’s that are born. One good thing about the abortion argument is that anyone Pro-Choice has lost any and all credibility about this second-hand smoke bullshit. It’s not a person, it’s a fetus. Shut the fuck up about the health of the fetus. It’s not a person. I don’t care about it. It’s not a person.
'Scuse me while I light up in the maternity ward. :rolleyes:
Your “entitled” to hear only what the appointee wants to talk about. Your remedy is that you can not vote to confrim him (if you’re a Senator).
Look, we elect Congressmen to vote in particular ways on particular policy issues. We appoint jsutices to be impartial and to look at the facts before they make a ruling. Your comparison of the two branches of gov’t is just plain wrong.
The appointees own political views are irrelevant. Their job is to rule on the law as it exists, not make the law. But if you really want to hear about their personal opinions, you’ll need to convince the opposition party and the myriad interest groups not to go ballistic when they hear those opinions. You want the truth? You can’t handle the truth.
Jesus, google on page 2 is advertising “Cattle Slaughterlines”. 
Anyway, I’m still pissed off at Dio, he called Ted Kennedy a buffalo. That’s insulting to buffaloes worldwide, and as the designated spokesperson for Buffaloes United against Libel, Labels, Sarcasm, Hovercraft, Insults and Terrorism, I demand an apology.