Frank, I felt he called it straight up the middle. Fair and by the law. Even though Reagan picked him, it doesn't mean he was some staunch conservative.

I've heard nothing in the media since it broke except that he surprised a lot of people with his decisions.

I can only hope the bench gets another like him.

DrMaddVibe wrote:

you ARE good wif numbahs Frank...only four months until the mid-term elections, which would give the people a chance to elect a different set of Senators...GOP decided to withhold debate about Obama's choice for 8 months, until after the Presidential elections, and when Trump won the election, McConnell's majority Senate postponed the process until he took office...

funny (smell) how McConnell thought that was an appropriate length of time then, but not now...

and now, the precedent for a bare majority to approve a nominee has been set...

as for Kennedy, he was conservative at his core, but sided on several social issues with Dems, revealing an independent libertarian streak...you can bet that whomever is nominated will be vetted thoroughly to ensure a similar independent streak is absent...

delta1 wrote:

This is what happens when one reads sound bites instead of everything. McConnell said that in reference to the Presidential election, not mid-terms. Said and meant in a different context.

BTW, thank Harry Really Reid for dumping the super majority for federal judgeships.

Abrignac wrote:

Yet we get the un-qualified extremist Sotomyer.

ZRX1200 wrote:

Oh I forgot, wrong side I can't say that.

ZRX1200 wrote:

Rfenst because it’s not possible to have another view or philosophy that is different than my own yet valid. Those other people are unqualified extremists. I’m the norm. They are the enemy.

The two main schools of thought on the constitution are interesting to me and not unlike the similar schools of thought on the Bible and other such texts. The need to vilify opposing views actually show s mental weakness and fear of that you don’t understand. Beat the other side with logic and knowledge.

I’m no fan of hers but she is definitely qualified and not extreme. In a battle of logic and knowledge my guess is she would bury most of her critics.

teedubbya wrote:

... you really think he would've accepted Obama's nominee if it was just 4 months before a mid-year election? Where 33 Senatorial seats are up for grabs?


...it doesn't really matter...our differences of opinion about who started what and who said what or who did what first doesn't amount to a hill of beans, except to push us apart...I don't think this is worth doing that...

But we will both rue the day when a bare majority of Senators is enough to appoint a US Supreme Court Justice...60 votes forced thoughtful consideration of the qualifications to serve and can help prevent an extreme nominee, left or right, from being appointed...the SCOTUS deserves to be a sane place without the super-partisanship games being played by the other two branches of government.

delta1 wrote: