Total Posts:64|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Obama's Supreme Court Shortlist

bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 1:34:37 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
Obama's Supreme Court shortlist:

Obama"s shortlist includes Sri Srinivasan, a U.S. Court of Appeals judge for the District of Columbia circuit; Merrick Garland, chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit; Attorney General Loretta Lynch; Neal Katyal, a Georgetown law professor who spent one year as Obama"s acting solicitor general; Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson; Solicitor General Don Verrilli; and former Attorney General Eric Holder.

[https://www.yahoo.com...]

Thoughts? Comments? Reactions?
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
bsh1
Posts: 27,504
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 1:39:43 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
I was right about Loretta Lynch, Neal Katyal,and Jeh Johnson.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
imabench
Posts: 21,220
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 1:47:47 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
Im surprised that Holder is on the list but after reviewing his credentials he seems to be at least a decent candidate
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 2:00:43 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 1:34:37 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Obama's Supreme Court shortlist:

Obama"s shortlist includes Sri Srinivasan, a U.S. Court of Appeals judge for the District of Columbia circuit; Merrick Garland, chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit; Attorney General Loretta Lynch; Neal Katyal, a Georgetown law professor who spent one year as Obama"s acting solicitor general; Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson; Solicitor General Don Verrilli; and former Attorney General Eric Holder.

[https://www.yahoo.com...]

Thoughts? Comments? Reactions?

Ugh. I've not jumped on the anti-Obama train, but if he makes a recess appointment of any of those choices I will. If he makes a recess appointment Holder I will literally leave the country. I hope that the Republicans block him at every turn, and hold as many pro forma sessions as is required to do so.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
thett3
Posts: 14,356
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 2:10:42 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 2:00:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 1:34:37 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Obama's Supreme Court shortlist:

Obama"s shortlist includes Sri Srinivasan, a U.S. Court of Appeals judge for the District of Columbia circuit; Merrick Garland, chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit; Attorney General Loretta Lynch; Neal Katyal, a Georgetown law professor who spent one year as Obama"s acting solicitor general; Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson; Solicitor General Don Verrilli; and former Attorney General Eric Holder.

[https://www.yahoo.com...]

Thoughts? Comments? Reactions?

Ugh. I've not jumped on the anti-Obama train, but if he makes a recess appointment of any of those choices I will. If he makes a recess appointment Holder I will literally leave the country. I hope that the Republicans block him at every turn, and hold as many pro forma sessions as is required to do so.

Imagine replacing Big Tony with Loretta Lynch...ugh.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 2:17:50 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 2:00:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 1:34:37 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Obama's Supreme Court shortlist:

Obama"s shortlist includes Sri Srinivasan, a U.S. Court of Appeals judge for the District of Columbia circuit; Merrick Garland, chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit; Attorney General Loretta Lynch; Neal Katyal, a Georgetown law professor who spent one year as Obama"s acting solicitor general; Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson; Solicitor General Don Verrilli; and former Attorney General Eric Holder.

[https://www.yahoo.com...]

Thoughts? Comments? Reactions?

Ugh. I've not jumped on the anti-Obama train, but if he makes a recess appointment of any of those choices I will. If he makes a recess appointment Holder I will literally leave the country. I hope that the Republicans block him at every turn, and hold as many pro forma sessions as is required to do so.

The White House has said they will wait for the Senate to be back in session.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 2:21:43 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 2:10:42 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:00:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 1:34:37 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Obama's Supreme Court shortlist:

Obama"s shortlist includes Sri Srinivasan, a U.S. Court of Appeals judge for the District of Columbia circuit; Merrick Garland, chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit; Attorney General Loretta Lynch; Neal Katyal, a Georgetown law professor who spent one year as Obama"s acting solicitor general; Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson; Solicitor General Don Verrilli; and former Attorney General Eric Holder.

[https://www.yahoo.com...]

Thoughts? Comments? Reactions?

Ugh. I've not jumped on the anti-Obama train, but if he makes a recess appointment of any of those choices I will. If he makes a recess appointment Holder I will literally leave the country. I hope that the Republicans block him at every turn, and hold as many pro forma sessions as is required to do so.

Imagine replacing Big Tony with Loretta Lynch...ugh.

That would mostly piss me off because she's so inexperienced, and it's such a diversity appointment. Janice Rogers Brown is a black women who is ideologically aligned with Scalia, and Amalya Lyle Kearse is a titan, an incredibly achieved woman and a trailblazer who is infinitely more qualified for the position. The only reason that Loretta Lynch is getting the nomination over either of them is because she ideologically aligns with Obama, and because she is an Obama lackey who has been catapulted to the top solely through his patronage.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
thett3
Posts: 14,356
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 2:28:10 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 2:21:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:10:42 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:00:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 1:34:37 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Obama's Supreme Court shortlist:

Obama"s shortlist includes Sri Srinivasan, a U.S. Court of Appeals judge for the District of Columbia circuit; Merrick Garland, chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit; Attorney General Loretta Lynch; Neal Katyal, a Georgetown law professor who spent one year as Obama"s acting solicitor general; Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson; Solicitor General Don Verrilli; and former Attorney General Eric Holder.

[https://www.yahoo.com...]

Thoughts? Comments? Reactions?

Ugh. I've not jumped on the anti-Obama train, but if he makes a recess appointment of any of those choices I will. If he makes a recess appointment Holder I will literally leave the country. I hope that the Republicans block him at every turn, and hold as many pro forma sessions as is required to do so.

Imagine replacing Big Tony with Loretta Lynch...ugh.

That would mostly piss me off because she's so inexperienced, and it's such a diversity appointment. Janice Rogers Brown is a black women who is ideologically aligned with Scalia, and Amalya Lyle Kearse is a titan, an incredibly achieved woman and a trailblazer who is infinitely more qualified for the position. The only reason that Loretta Lynch is getting the nomination over either of them is because she ideologically aligns with Obama, and because she is an Obama lackey who has been catapulted to the top solely through his patronage.

I don't expect him to pick someone who aligns with Scalia politically. Why would he? When Ginsburg or whoever else dies and Trump is in office he isn't going to pick someone that far left. It's unfortunate and it's kind of pissing all over their legacies but that's the country we're living in. Personally I expect him to pick Srinivasan unless one of the other people on his short list is gay or a lesbian, because the points he'd get from appointing the first Indian-American judge will help to feed his addiction to virtue signalling
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 2:36:26 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 2:28:10 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:21:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:10:42 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:00:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 1:34:37 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Obama's Supreme Court shortlist:

Obama"s shortlist includes Sri Srinivasan, a U.S. Court of Appeals judge for the District of Columbia circuit; Merrick Garland, chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit; Attorney General Loretta Lynch; Neal Katyal, a Georgetown law professor who spent one year as Obama"s acting solicitor general; Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson; Solicitor General Don Verrilli; and former Attorney General Eric Holder.

[https://www.yahoo.com...]

Thoughts? Comments? Reactions?

Ugh. I've not jumped on the anti-Obama train, but if he makes a recess appointment of any of those choices I will. If he makes a recess appointment Holder I will literally leave the country. I hope that the Republicans block him at every turn, and hold as many pro forma sessions as is required to do so.

Imagine replacing Big Tony with Loretta Lynch...ugh.

That would mostly piss me off because she's so inexperienced, and it's such a diversity appointment. Janice Rogers Brown is a black women who is ideologically aligned with Scalia, and Amalya Lyle Kearse is a titan, an incredibly achieved woman and a trailblazer who is infinitely more qualified for the position. The only reason that Loretta Lynch is getting the nomination over either of them is because she ideologically aligns with Obama, and because she is an Obama lackey who has been catapulted to the top solely through his patronage.

I don't expect him to pick someone who aligns with Scalia politically. Why would he? When Ginsburg or whoever else dies and Trump is in office he isn't going to pick someone that far left. It's unfortunate and it's kind of pissing all over their legacies but that's the country we're living in. Personally I expect him to pick Srinivasan unless one of the other people on his short list is gay or a lesbian, because the points he'd get from appointing the first Indian-American judge will help to feed his addiction to virtue signalling

Amalya Lyle Kearse is a moderate liberal though, a Carter nominee and a sort of a cipher-like character. She's not aligned with Scalia, she's just established. The virtue-signalling is insane; the man has been a judge for less than half a decade! Don't we have enough experienced jurists in play? Do we need to pack the court with novices?
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Raisor
Posts: 4,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 2:47:18 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 2:28:10 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:21:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:10:42 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:00:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 1:34:37 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Obama's Supreme Court shortlist:

Obama"s shortlist includes Sri Srinivasan, a U.S. Court of Appeals judge for the District of Columbia circuit; Merrick Garland, chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit; Attorney General Loretta Lynch; Neal Katyal, a Georgetown law professor who spent one year as Obama"s acting solicitor general; Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson; Solicitor General Don Verrilli; and former Attorney General Eric Holder.

[https://www.yahoo.com...]

Thoughts? Comments? Reactions?

Ugh. I've not jumped on the anti-Obama train, but if he makes a recess appointment of any of those choices I will. If he makes a recess appointment Holder I will literally leave the country. I hope that the Republicans block him at every turn, and hold as many pro forma sessions as is required to do so.

Imagine replacing Big Tony with Loretta Lynch...ugh.

That would mostly piss me off because she's so inexperienced, and it's such a diversity appointment. Janice Rogers Brown is a black women who is ideologically aligned with Scalia, and Amalya Lyle Kearse is a titan, an incredibly achieved woman and a trailblazer who is infinitely more qualified for the position. The only reason that Loretta Lynch is getting the nomination over either of them is because she ideologically aligns with Obama, and because she is an Obama lackey who has been catapulted to the top solely through his patronage.

I don't expect him to pick someone who aligns with Scalia politically. Why would he? When Ginsburg or whoever else dies and Trump is in office he isn't going to pick someone that far left. It's unfortunate and it's kind of pissing all over their legacies but that's the country we're living in. Personally I expect him to pick Srinivasan unless one of the other people on his short list is gay or a lesbian, because the points he'd get from appointing the first Indian-American judge will help to feed his addiction to virtue signalling

Jeez, there is literally no one Obama could pick that some people won't twist to fit their narrative.

Srinavasan is a topic pick because he is a well respected moderate that was unanimously approved by the Senate for the D.C. Circuit court.

And get off your high horse- some people actually have convictions about the value of diversity. Just because you can't fathom thinking diversity in government is important doesn't mean that those who do are "addicted to virtue signalling."
thett3
Posts: 14,356
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 2:49:29 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 2:47:18 AM, Raisor wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:28:10 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:21:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:10:42 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:00:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 1:34:37 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Obama's Supreme Court shortlist:

Obama"s shortlist includes Sri Srinivasan, a U.S. Court of Appeals judge for the District of Columbia circuit; Merrick Garland, chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit; Attorney General Loretta Lynch; Neal Katyal, a Georgetown law professor who spent one year as Obama"s acting solicitor general; Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson; Solicitor General Don Verrilli; and former Attorney General Eric Holder.

[https://www.yahoo.com...]

Thoughts? Comments? Reactions?

Ugh. I've not jumped on the anti-Obama train, but if he makes a recess appointment of any of those choices I will. If he makes a recess appointment Holder I will literally leave the country. I hope that the Republicans block him at every turn, and hold as many pro forma sessions as is required to do so.

Imagine replacing Big Tony with Loretta Lynch...ugh.

That would mostly piss me off because she's so inexperienced, and it's such a diversity appointment. Janice Rogers Brown is a black women who is ideologically aligned with Scalia, and Amalya Lyle Kearse is a titan, an incredibly achieved woman and a trailblazer who is infinitely more qualified for the position. The only reason that Loretta Lynch is getting the nomination over either of them is because she ideologically aligns with Obama, and because she is an Obama lackey who has been catapulted to the top solely through his patronage.

I don't expect him to pick someone who aligns with Scalia politically. Why would he? When Ginsburg or whoever else dies and Trump is in office he isn't going to pick someone that far left. It's unfortunate and it's kind of pissing all over their legacies but that's the country we're living in. Personally I expect him to pick Srinivasan unless one of the other people on his short list is gay or a lesbian, because the points he'd get from appointing the first Indian-American judge will help to feed his addiction to virtue signalling

Jeez, there is literally no one Obama could pick that some people won't twist to fit their narrative.

Srinavasan is a topic pick because he is a well respected moderate that was unanimously approved by the Senate for the D.C. Circuit court.

I never said that he wasn't, nor that he was a bad pick. I know nothing about the guy, only that if Obama did pick him it would not be for those reasons.


And get off your high horse- some people actually have convictions about the value of diversity. Just because you can't fathom thinking diversity in government is important doesn't mean that those who do are "addicted to virtue signalling."

Nobody actually has that conviction. It's all signalling.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Raisor
Posts: 4,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 2:52:42 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 2:49:29 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:47:18 AM, Raisor wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:28:10 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:21:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:10:42 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:00:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 1:34:37 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Obama's Supreme Court shortlist:

Obama"s shortlist includes Sri Srinivasan, a U.S. Court of Appeals judge for the District of Columbia circuit; Merrick Garland, chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit; Attorney General Loretta Lynch; Neal Katyal, a Georgetown law professor who spent one year as Obama"s acting solicitor general; Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson; Solicitor General Don Verrilli; and former Attorney General Eric Holder.

[https://www.yahoo.com...]

Thoughts? Comments? Reactions?

Ugh. I've not jumped on the anti-Obama train, but if he makes a recess appointment of any of those choices I will. If he makes a recess appointment Holder I will literally leave the country. I hope that the Republicans block him at every turn, and hold as many pro forma sessions as is required to do so.

Imagine replacing Big Tony with Loretta Lynch...ugh.

That would mostly piss me off because she's so inexperienced, and it's such a diversity appointment. Janice Rogers Brown is a black women who is ideologically aligned with Scalia, and Amalya Lyle Kearse is a titan, an incredibly achieved woman and a trailblazer who is infinitely more qualified for the position. The only reason that Loretta Lynch is getting the nomination over either of them is because she ideologically aligns with Obama, and because she is an Obama lackey who has been catapulted to the top solely through his patronage.

I don't expect him to pick someone who aligns with Scalia politically. Why would he? When Ginsburg or whoever else dies and Trump is in office he isn't going to pick someone that far left. It's unfortunate and it's kind of pissing all over their legacies but that's the country we're living in. Personally I expect him to pick Srinivasan unless one of the other people on his short list is gay or a lesbian, because the points he'd get from appointing the first Indian-American judge will help to feed his addiction to virtue signalling

Jeez, there is literally no one Obama could pick that some people won't twist to fit their narrative.

Srinavasan is a topic pick because he is a well respected moderate that was unanimously approved by the Senate for the D.C. Circuit court.

I never said that he wasn't, nor that he was a bad pick. I know nothing about the guy, only that if Obama did pick him it would not be for those reasons.

...

Obama would overlook the obvious political upshots of a candidate because he has blinders on to issues other than diversity? That is....just terrible political analysis.



And get off your high horse- some people actually have convictions about the value of diversity. Just because you can't fathom thinking diversity in government is important doesn't mean that those who do are "addicted to virtue signalling."

Nobody actually has that conviction. It's all signalling.

Ok, I guess it makes coping with reality easier to just believe everyone you disagree with are disingenuous liars. Lump me in with that crowd too I guess.
thett3
Posts: 14,356
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 2:53:11 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 2:36:26 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:28:10 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:21:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:10:42 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:00:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 1:34:37 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Obama's Supreme Court shortlist:

Obama"s shortlist includes Sri Srinivasan, a U.S. Court of Appeals judge for the District of Columbia circuit; Merrick Garland, chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit; Attorney General Loretta Lynch; Neal Katyal, a Georgetown law professor who spent one year as Obama"s acting solicitor general; Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson; Solicitor General Don Verrilli; and former Attorney General Eric Holder.

[https://www.yahoo.com...]

Thoughts? Comments? Reactions?

Ugh. I've not jumped on the anti-Obama train, but if he makes a recess appointment of any of those choices I will. If he makes a recess appointment Holder I will literally leave the country. I hope that the Republicans block him at every turn, and hold as many pro forma sessions as is required to do so.

Imagine replacing Big Tony with Loretta Lynch...ugh.

That would mostly piss me off because she's so inexperienced, and it's such a diversity appointment. Janice Rogers Brown is a black women who is ideologically aligned with Scalia, and Amalya Lyle Kearse is a titan, an incredibly achieved woman and a trailblazer who is infinitely more qualified for the position. The only reason that Loretta Lynch is getting the nomination over either of them is because she ideologically aligns with Obama, and because she is an Obama lackey who has been catapulted to the top solely through his patronage.

I don't expect him to pick someone who aligns with Scalia politically. Why would he? When Ginsburg or whoever else dies and Trump is in office he isn't going to pick someone that far left. It's unfortunate and it's kind of pissing all over their legacies but that's the country we're living in. Personally I expect him to pick Srinivasan unless one of the other people on his short list is gay or a lesbian, because the points he'd get from appointing the first Indian-American judge will help to feed his addiction to virtue signalling

Amalya Lyle Kearse is a moderate liberal though, a Carter nominee and a sort of a cipher-like character. She's not aligned with Scalia, she's just established. The virtue-signalling is insane; the man has been a judge for less than half a decade! Don't we have enough experienced jurists in play? Do we need to pack the court with novices?

Well to be fair, if she's a Carter nominee she's probably quite old...the court is so politicized now that any president wants to pick the youngest person they could get through
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
thett3
Posts: 14,356
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 2:57:21 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 2:52:42 AM, Raisor wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:49:29 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:47:18 AM, Raisor wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:28:10 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:21:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:10:42 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:00:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 1:34:37 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Obama's Supreme Court shortlist:

Obama"s shortlist includes Sri Srinivasan, a U.S. Court of Appeals judge for the District of Columbia circuit; Merrick Garland, chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit; Attorney General Loretta Lynch; Neal Katyal, a Georgetown law professor who spent one year as Obama"s acting solicitor general; Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson; Solicitor General Don Verrilli; and former Attorney General Eric Holder.

[https://www.yahoo.com...]

Thoughts? Comments? Reactions?

Ugh. I've not jumped on the anti-Obama train, but if he makes a recess appointment of any of those choices I will. If he makes a recess appointment Holder I will literally leave the country. I hope that the Republicans block him at every turn, and hold as many pro forma sessions as is required to do so.

Imagine replacing Big Tony with Loretta Lynch...ugh.

That would mostly piss me off because she's so inexperienced, and it's such a diversity appointment. Janice Rogers Brown is a black women who is ideologically aligned with Scalia, and Amalya Lyle Kearse is a titan, an incredibly achieved woman and a trailblazer who is infinitely more qualified for the position. The only reason that Loretta Lynch is getting the nomination over either of them is because she ideologically aligns with Obama, and because she is an Obama lackey who has been catapulted to the top solely through his patronage.

I don't expect him to pick someone who aligns with Scalia politically. Why would he? When Ginsburg or whoever else dies and Trump is in office he isn't going to pick someone that far left. It's unfortunate and it's kind of pissing all over their legacies but that's the country we're living in. Personally I expect him to pick Srinivasan unless one of the other people on his short list is gay or a lesbian, because the points he'd get from appointing the first Indian-American judge will help to feed his addiction to virtue signalling

Jeez, there is literally no one Obama could pick that some people won't twist to fit their narrative.

Srinavasan is a topic pick because he is a well respected moderate that was unanimously approved by the Senate for the D.C. Circuit court.

I never said that he wasn't, nor that he was a bad pick. I know nothing about the guy, only that if Obama did pick him it would not be for those reasons.

...

Obama would overlook the obvious political upshots of a candidate because he has blinders on to issues other than diversity? That is....just terrible political analysis.

Fair enough, I should've said it wouldn't be primarily for those reasons.




And get off your high horse- some people actually have convictions about the value of diversity. Just because you can't fathom thinking diversity in government is important doesn't mean that those who do are "addicted to virtue signalling."

Nobody actually has that conviction. It's all signalling.

Ok, I guess it makes coping with reality easier to just believe everyone you disagree with are disingenuous liars. Lump me in with that crowd too I guess.

Oh calm down. The left typically doesn't care about actual diversity--anyone who has a dissenting opinion is severely shamed, or worse. What the left is interested in is a bunch of people who look different but think exactly alike.

Maybe you're interested in diversity and if you are more power to you, but yeah I'm not fooled for even half a second that the dominant progressive left has any interest in it. It's all about virtue signalling.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 3:06:07 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 2:57:21 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:52:42 AM, Raisor wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:49:29 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:47:18 AM, Raisor wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:28:10 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:21:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:10:42 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:00:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 1:34:37 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Obama's Supreme Court shortlist:

Obama"s shortlist includes Sri Srinivasan, a U.S. Court of Appeals judge for the District of Columbia circuit; Merrick Garland, chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit; Attorney General Loretta Lynch; Neal Katyal, a Georgetown law professor who spent one year as Obama"s acting solicitor general; Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson; Solicitor General Don Verrilli; and former Attorney General Eric Holder.

[https://www.yahoo.com...]

Thoughts? Comments? Reactions?

Ugh. I've not jumped on the anti-Obama train, but if he makes a recess appointment of any of those choices I will. If he makes a recess appointment Holder I will literally leave the country. I hope that the Republicans block him at every turn, and hold as many pro forma sessions as is required to do so.

Imagine replacing Big Tony with Loretta Lynch...ugh.

That would mostly piss me off because she's so inexperienced, and it's such a diversity appointment. Janice Rogers Brown is a black women who is ideologically aligned with Scalia, and Amalya Lyle Kearse is a titan, an incredibly achieved woman and a trailblazer who is infinitely more qualified for the position. The only reason that Loretta Lynch is getting the nomination over either of them is because she ideologically aligns with Obama, and because she is an Obama lackey who has been catapulted to the top solely through his patronage.

I don't expect him to pick someone who aligns with Scalia politically. Why would he? When Ginsburg or whoever else dies and Trump is in office he isn't going to pick someone that far left. It's unfortunate and it's kind of pissing all over their legacies but that's the country we're living in. Personally I expect him to pick Srinivasan unless one of the other people on his short list is gay or a lesbian, because the points he'd get from appointing the first Indian-American judge will help to feed his addiction to virtue signalling

Jeez, there is literally no one Obama could pick that some people won't twist to fit their narrative.

Srinavasan is a topic pick because he is a well respected moderate that was unanimously approved by the Senate for the D.C. Circuit court.

I never said that he wasn't, nor that he was a bad pick. I know nothing about the guy, only that if Obama did pick him it would not be for those reasons.

...

Obama would overlook the obvious political upshots of a candidate because he has blinders on to issues other than diversity? That is....just terrible political analysis.

Fair enough, I should've said it wouldn't be primarily for those reasons.




And get off your high horse- some people actually have convictions about the value of diversity. Just because you can't fathom thinking diversity in government is important doesn't mean that those who do are "addicted to virtue signalling."

Nobody actually has that conviction. It's all signalling.

Ok, I guess it makes coping with reality easier to just believe everyone you disagree with are disingenuous liars. Lump me in with that crowd too I guess.

Oh calm down. The left typically doesn't care about actual diversity--anyone who has a dissenting opinion is severely shamed, or worse. What the left is interested in is a bunch of people who look different but think exactly alike.

Maybe you're interested in diversity and if you are more power to you, but yeah I'm not fooled for even half a second that the dominant progressive left has any interest in it. It's all about virtue signalling.

Whoever he picks would still need to be qualified though. He's not going to just go pick any random Jaquen off the street just because they look different.
thett3
Posts: 14,356
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 3:10:29 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 3:06:07 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:57:21 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:52:42 AM, Raisor wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:49:29 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:47:18 AM, Raisor wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:28:10 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:21:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:10:42 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:00:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 1:34:37 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Obama's Supreme Court shortlist:

Obama"s shortlist includes Sri Srinivasan, a U.S. Court of Appeals judge for the District of Columbia circuit; Merrick Garland, chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit; Attorney General Loretta Lynch; Neal Katyal, a Georgetown law professor who spent one year as Obama"s acting solicitor general; Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson; Solicitor General Don Verrilli; and former Attorney General Eric Holder.

[https://www.yahoo.com...]

Thoughts? Comments? Reactions?

Ugh. I've not jumped on the anti-Obama train, but if he makes a recess appointment of any of those choices I will. If he makes a recess appointment Holder I will literally leave the country. I hope that the Republicans block him at every turn, and hold as many pro forma sessions as is required to do so.

Imagine replacing Big Tony with Loretta Lynch...ugh.

That would mostly piss me off because she's so inexperienced, and it's such a diversity appointment. Janice Rogers Brown is a black women who is ideologically aligned with Scalia, and Amalya Lyle Kearse is a titan, an incredibly achieved woman and a trailblazer who is infinitely more qualified for the position. The only reason that Loretta Lynch is getting the nomination over either of them is because she ideologically aligns with Obama, and because she is an Obama lackey who has been catapulted to the top solely through his patronage.

I don't expect him to pick someone who aligns with Scalia politically. Why would he? When Ginsburg or whoever else dies and Trump is in office he isn't going to pick someone that far left. It's unfortunate and it's kind of pissing all over their legacies but that's the country we're living in. Personally I expect him to pick Srinivasan unless one of the other people on his short list is gay or a lesbian, because the points he'd get from appointing the first Indian-American judge will help to feed his addiction to virtue signalling

Jeez, there is literally no one Obama could pick that some people won't twist to fit their narrative.

Srinavasan is a topic pick because he is a well respected moderate that was unanimously approved by the Senate for the D.C. Circuit court.

I never said that he wasn't, nor that he was a bad pick. I know nothing about the guy, only that if Obama did pick him it would not be for those reasons.

...

Obama would overlook the obvious political upshots of a candidate because he has blinders on to issues other than diversity? That is....just terrible political analysis.

Fair enough, I should've said it wouldn't be primarily for those reasons.




And get off your high horse- some people actually have convictions about the value of diversity. Just because you can't fathom thinking diversity in government is important doesn't mean that those who do are "addicted to virtue signalling."

Nobody actually has that conviction. It's all signalling.

Ok, I guess it makes coping with reality easier to just believe everyone you disagree with are disingenuous liars. Lump me in with that crowd too I guess.

Oh calm down. The left typically doesn't care about actual diversity--anyone who has a dissenting opinion is severely shamed, or worse. What the left is interested in is a bunch of people who look different but think exactly alike.

Maybe you're interested in diversity and if you are more power to you, but yeah I'm not fooled for even half a second that the dominant progressive left has any interest in it. It's all about virtue signalling.

Whoever he picks would still need to be qualified though. He's not going to just go pick any random Jaquen off the street just because they look different.

I never implied that he would or that the guy was not a good pick. I'm not knowledgeable or smart enough to know who should be on the Supreme Court. What I'm saying is that the temptation to select the first Indian judge will likely prove too much for Obama to resist.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 3:12:41 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 3:10:29 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 3:06:07 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:57:21 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:52:42 AM, Raisor wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:49:29 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:47:18 AM, Raisor wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:28:10 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:21:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:10:42 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:00:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 1:34:37 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Obama's Supreme Court shortlist:

Obama"s shortlist includes Sri Srinivasan, a U.S. Court of Appeals judge for the District of Columbia circuit; Merrick Garland, chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit; Attorney General Loretta Lynch; Neal Katyal, a Georgetown law professor who spent one year as Obama"s acting solicitor general; Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson; Solicitor General Don Verrilli; and former Attorney General Eric Holder.

[https://www.yahoo.com...]

Thoughts? Comments? Reactions?

Ugh. I've not jumped on the anti-Obama train, but if he makes a recess appointment of any of those choices I will. If he makes a recess appointment Holder I will literally leave the country. I hope that the Republicans block him at every turn, and hold as many pro forma sessions as is required to do so.

Imagine replacing Big Tony with Loretta Lynch...ugh.

That would mostly piss me off because she's so inexperienced, and it's such a diversity appointment. Janice Rogers Brown is a black women who is ideologically aligned with Scalia, and Amalya Lyle Kearse is a titan, an incredibly achieved woman and a trailblazer who is infinitely more qualified for the position. The only reason that Loretta Lynch is getting the nomination over either of them is because she ideologically aligns with Obama, and because she is an Obama lackey who has been catapulted to the top solely through his patronage.

I don't expect him to pick someone who aligns with Scalia politically. Why would he? When Ginsburg or whoever else dies and Trump is in office he isn't going to pick someone that far left. It's unfortunate and it's kind of pissing all over their legacies but that's the country we're living in. Personally I expect him to pick Srinivasan unless one of the other people on his short list is gay or a lesbian, because the points he'd get from appointing the first Indian-American judge will help to feed his addiction to virtue signalling

Jeez, there is literally no one Obama could pick that some people won't twist to fit their narrative.

Srinavasan is a topic pick because he is a well respected moderate that was unanimously approved by the Senate for the D.C. Circuit court.

I never said that he wasn't, nor that he was a bad pick. I know nothing about the guy, only that if Obama did pick him it would not be for those reasons.

...

Obama would overlook the obvious political upshots of a candidate because he has blinders on to issues other than diversity? That is....just terrible political analysis.

Fair enough, I should've said it wouldn't be primarily for those reasons.




And get off your high horse- some people actually have convictions about the value of diversity. Just because you can't fathom thinking diversity in government is important doesn't mean that those who do are "addicted to virtue signalling."

Nobody actually has that conviction. It's all signalling.

Ok, I guess it makes coping with reality easier to just believe everyone you disagree with are disingenuous liars. Lump me in with that crowd too I guess.

Oh calm down. The left typically doesn't care about actual diversity--anyone who has a dissenting opinion is severely shamed, or worse. What the left is interested in is a bunch of people who look different but think exactly alike.

Maybe you're interested in diversity and if you are more power to you, but yeah I'm not fooled for even half a second that the dominant progressive left has any interest in it. It's all about virtue signalling.

Whoever he picks would still need to be qualified though. He's not going to just go pick any random Jaquen off the street just because they look different.

I never implied that he would or that the guy was not a good pick. I'm not knowledgeable or smart enough to know who should be on the Supreme Court. What I'm saying is that the temptation to select the first Indian judge will likely prove too much for Obama to resist.

As long as he's as qualified or more qualified than the others, I'm fine with that,
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 3:20:17 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 2:53:11 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:36:26 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:28:10 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:21:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:10:42 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:00:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 1:34:37 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Obama's Supreme Court shortlist:

Obama"s shortlist includes Sri Srinivasan, a U.S. Court of Appeals judge for the District of Columbia circuit; Merrick Garland, chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit; Attorney General Loretta Lynch; Neal Katyal, a Georgetown law professor who spent one year as Obama"s acting solicitor general; Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson; Solicitor General Don Verrilli; and former Attorney General Eric Holder.

[https://www.yahoo.com...]

Thoughts? Comments? Reactions?

Ugh. I've not jumped on the anti-Obama train, but if he makes a recess appointment of any of those choices I will. If he makes a recess appointment Holder I will literally leave the country. I hope that the Republicans block him at every turn, and hold as many pro forma sessions as is required to do so.

Imagine replacing Big Tony with Loretta Lynch...ugh.

That would mostly piss me off because she's so inexperienced, and it's such a diversity appointment. Janice Rogers Brown is a black women who is ideologically aligned with Scalia, and Amalya Lyle Kearse is a titan, an incredibly achieved woman and a trailblazer who is infinitely more qualified for the position. The only reason that Loretta Lynch is getting the nomination over either of them is because she ideologically aligns with Obama, and because she is an Obama lackey who has been catapulted to the top solely through his patronage.

I don't expect him to pick someone who aligns with Scalia politically. Why would he? When Ginsburg or whoever else dies and Trump is in office he isn't going to pick someone that far left. It's unfortunate and it's kind of pissing all over their legacies but that's the country we're living in. Personally I expect him to pick Srinivasan unless one of the other people on his short list is gay or a lesbian, because the points he'd get from appointing the first Indian-American judge will help to feed his addiction to virtue signalling

Amalya Lyle Kearse is a moderate liberal though, a Carter nominee and a sort of a cipher-like character. She's not aligned with Scalia, she's just established. The virtue-signalling is insane; the man has been a judge for less than half a decade! Don't we have enough experienced jurists in play? Do we need to pack the court with novices?

Well to be fair, if she's a Carter nominee she's probably quite old...the court is so politicized now that any president wants to pick the youngest person they could get through

That's asinine. Ginsburg was appointed in her 60's, with thirteen years experience as a judge. Our political leaders are sacrificing the competence of our nations highest court in order to use it as an organ to extend their political influence past their term if they nominate Srinivasan, who isn't even 40 and has only been a judge for 4 years, because they have to 'catch them all'. Just look at the credentials of anyone from the Warren court and back: they are all much more impressive than what is considered 'passable' in this day and age. We should be nominating the older, more experienced members of our judiciary to serve on the highest court, even those who have taken senior status. We just don't because it's seen as a 'double whammy' if you nominate a sitting federal judge: you then get to fill the vacancy which you created.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 3:23:57 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 3:12:41 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/15/2016 3:10:29 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 3:06:07 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:57:21 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:52:42 AM, Raisor wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:49:29 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:47:18 AM, Raisor wrote:
And get off your high horse- some people actually have convictions about the value of diversity. Just because you can't fathom thinking diversity in government is important doesn't mean that those who do are "addicted to virtue signalling."

Nobody actually has that conviction. It's all signalling.

Ok, I guess it makes coping with reality easier to just believe everyone you disagree with are disingenuous liars. Lump me in with that crowd too I guess.

Oh calm down. The left typically doesn't care about actual diversity--anyone who has a dissenting opinion is severely shamed, or worse. What the left is interested in is a bunch of people who look different but think exactly alike.

Maybe you're interested in diversity and if you are more power to you, but yeah I'm not fooled for even half a second that the dominant progressive left has any interest in it. It's all about virtue signalling.

Whoever he picks would still need to be qualified though. He's not going to just go pick any random Jaquen off the street just because they look different.

I never implied that he would or that the guy was not a good pick. I'm not knowledgeable or smart enough to know who should be on the Supreme Court. What I'm saying is that the temptation to select the first Indian judge will likely prove too much for Obama to resist.

As long as he's as qualified or more qualified than the others, I'm fine with that,

He's been a judge for a grand total of four years. Even among the 'diversity picks', he's remarkably green. Any position which he held, he was appointed to by Obama. There is a plethora of more experienced candidates to chose from.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
Raisor
Posts: 4,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 3:24:33 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 2:57:21 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:52:42 AM, Raisor wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:49:29 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:47:18 AM, Raisor wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:28:10 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:21:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:10:42 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:00:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 1:34:37 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Obama's Supreme Court shortlist:

Obama"s shortlist includes Sri Srinivasan, a U.S. Court of Appeals judge for the District of Columbia circuit; Merrick Garland, chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit; Attorney General Loretta Lynch; Neal Katyal, a Georgetown law professor who spent one year as Obama"s acting solicitor general; Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson; Solicitor General Don Verrilli; and former Attorney General Eric Holder.

[https://www.yahoo.com...]

Thoughts? Comments? Reactions?

Ugh. I've not jumped on the anti-Obama train, but if he makes a recess appointment of any of those choices I will. If he makes a recess appointment Holder I will literally leave the country. I hope that the Republicans block him at every turn, and hold as many pro forma sessions as is required to do so.

Imagine replacing Big Tony with Loretta Lynch...ugh.

That would mostly piss me off because she's so inexperienced, and it's such a diversity appointment. Janice Rogers Brown is a black women who is ideologically aligned with Scalia, and Amalya Lyle Kearse is a titan, an incredibly achieved woman and a trailblazer who is infinitely more qualified for the position. The only reason that Loretta Lynch is getting the nomination over either of them is because she ideologically aligns with Obama, and because she is an Obama lackey who has been catapulted to the top solely through his patronage.

I don't expect him to pick someone who aligns with Scalia politically. Why would he? When Ginsburg or whoever else dies and Trump is in office he isn't going to pick someone that far left. It's unfortunate and it's kind of pissing all over their legacies but that's the country we're living in. Personally I expect him to pick Srinivasan unless one of the other people on his short list is gay or a lesbian, because the points he'd get from appointing the first Indian-American judge will help to feed his addiction to virtue signalling

Jeez, there is literally no one Obama could pick that some people won't twist to fit their narrative.

Srinavasan is a topic pick because he is a well respected moderate that was unanimously approved by the Senate for the D.C. Circuit court.

I never said that he wasn't, nor that he was a bad pick. I know nothing about the guy, only that if Obama did pick him it would not be for those reasons.

...

Obama would overlook the obvious political upshots of a candidate because he has blinders on to issues other than diversity? That is....just terrible political analysis.

Fair enough, I should've said it wouldn't be primarily for those reasons.




And get off your high horse- some people actually have convictions about the value of diversity. Just because you can't fathom thinking diversity in government is important doesn't mean that those who do are "addicted to virtue signalling."

Nobody actually has that conviction. It's all signalling.

Ok, I guess it makes coping with reality easier to just believe everyone you disagree with are disingenuous liars. Lump me in with that crowd too I guess.

Oh calm down. The left typically doesn't care about actual diversity--anyone who has a dissenting opinion is severely shamed, or worse. What the left is interested in is a bunch of people who look different but think exactly alike.


This monolithic portrait of the left is as accurate as a monolithic portrait of the right by reference to the tea party would be. There are internal divisions on the left just as there are on the right. I actually don't disagree that there are serious and real issues with far-left social politics that do discourage speech. Obama doesn't even come close to falling within that camp.

That being said, the right is much more dogmatic than the left, there are so many litmus tests to be a "good conservative;" even the standard left positions don't rise to this standard. Most of the social positions that are now more or less required by left politicians have only come about in the past five years and track public opinion (e.g. gay rights), and a lot of those positions are even leaking into the GOP for that fact.

The Democratic Party is the only party that has any real space for moderates, though it has seen some of the same polarization the right has seen. Moderate Republicans get labeled with political slurs - It's a real issue to be called a "RINO" or, one you I think prefer, "cuckservative?" The right is much more "toe the line" than the left, and I think you only have to look at the Republican vs Democratic primaries to see that.

Maybe you're interested in diversity and if you are more power to you, but yeah I'm not fooled for even half a second that the dominant progressive left has any interest in it. It's all about virtue signalling.

There's nothing to respond to in this. I think it is preposterous to think that the first black president doesn't actually care about diversity in government.

I think you have read too many greentext stories and are confusing strawman parody with reality.
thett3
Posts: 14,356
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 3:25:28 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 3:20:17 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:53:11 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:36:26 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:28:10 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:21:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:10:42 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:00:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 1:34:37 AM, bsh1 wrote:
Obama's Supreme Court shortlist:

Obama"s shortlist includes Sri Srinivasan, a U.S. Court of Appeals judge for the District of Columbia circuit; Merrick Garland, chief judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia circuit; Attorney General Loretta Lynch; Neal Katyal, a Georgetown law professor who spent one year as Obama"s acting solicitor general; Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson; Solicitor General Don Verrilli; and former Attorney General Eric Holder.

[https://www.yahoo.com...]

Thoughts? Comments? Reactions?

Ugh. I've not jumped on the anti-Obama train, but if he makes a recess appointment of any of those choices I will. If he makes a recess appointment Holder I will literally leave the country. I hope that the Republicans block him at every turn, and hold as many pro forma sessions as is required to do so.

Imagine replacing Big Tony with Loretta Lynch...ugh.

That would mostly piss me off because she's so inexperienced, and it's such a diversity appointment. Janice Rogers Brown is a black women who is ideologically aligned with Scalia, and Amalya Lyle Kearse is a titan, an incredibly achieved woman and a trailblazer who is infinitely more qualified for the position. The only reason that Loretta Lynch is getting the nomination over either of them is because she ideologically aligns with Obama, and because she is an Obama lackey who has been catapulted to the top solely through his patronage.

I don't expect him to pick someone who aligns with Scalia politically. Why would he? When Ginsburg or whoever else dies and Trump is in office he isn't going to pick someone that far left. It's unfortunate and it's kind of pissing all over their legacies but that's the country we're living in. Personally I expect him to pick Srinivasan unless one of the other people on his short list is gay or a lesbian, because the points he'd get from appointing the first Indian-American judge will help to feed his addiction to virtue signalling

Amalya Lyle Kearse is a moderate liberal though, a Carter nominee and a sort of a cipher-like character. She's not aligned with Scalia, she's just established. The virtue-signalling is insane; the man has been a judge for less than half a decade! Don't we have enough experienced jurists in play? Do we need to pack the court with novices?

Well to be fair, if she's a Carter nominee she's probably quite old...the court is so politicized now that any president wants to pick the youngest person they could get through

That's asinine. Ginsburg was appointed in her 60's, with thirteen years experience as a judge. Our political leaders are sacrificing the competence of our nations highest court in order to use it as an organ to extend their political influence past their term if they nominate Srinivasan, who isn't even 40 and has only been a judge for 4 years, because they have to 'catch them all'. Just look at the credentials of anyone from the Warren court and back: they are all much more impressive than what is considered 'passable' in this day and age. We should be nominating the older, more experienced members of our judiciary to serve on the highest court, even those who have taken senior status. We just don't because it's seen as a 'double whammy' if you nominate a sitting federal judge: you then get to fill the vacancy which you created.

I think it's quite obvious that the institution is on its last legs, and it no longer even pretends to be an objective and principled high court. It's obviously just a glorified legislative body that the people have no control over and whose membership is dictated entirely by whichever a septuagenarian happens to keel over first. It's only a matter of time before a president just ignores them and the people will probably support him when that happens.

The ancient and noble traditions of common law are all but extinguished everywhere. Even I have basically no respect for the Supreme Court anymore
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 3:26:00 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
My bad, he hasn't even been a judge for three years! And this isn't a case like Kagan, where he's an immensely respected scholar.
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 3:27:07 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 3:23:57 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 3:12:41 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/15/2016 3:10:29 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 3:06:07 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:57:21 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:52:42 AM, Raisor wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:49:29 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:47:18 AM, Raisor wrote:
And get off your high horse- some people actually have convictions about the value of diversity. Just because you can't fathom thinking diversity in government is important doesn't mean that those who do are "addicted to virtue signalling."

Nobody actually has that conviction. It's all signalling.

Ok, I guess it makes coping with reality easier to just believe everyone you disagree with are disingenuous liars. Lump me in with that crowd too I guess.

Oh calm down. The left typically doesn't care about actual diversity--anyone who has a dissenting opinion is severely shamed, or worse. What the left is interested in is a bunch of people who look different but think exactly alike.

Maybe you're interested in diversity and if you are more power to you, but yeah I'm not fooled for even half a second that the dominant progressive left has any interest in it. It's all about virtue signalling.

Whoever he picks would still need to be qualified though. He's not going to just go pick any random Jaquen off the street just because they look different.

I never implied that he would or that the guy was not a good pick. I'm not knowledgeable or smart enough to know who should be on the Supreme Court. What I'm saying is that the temptation to select the first Indian judge will likely prove too much for Obama to resist.

As long as he's as qualified or more qualified than the others, I'm fine with that,

He's been a judge for a grand total of four years. Even among the 'diversity picks', he's remarkably green. Any position which he held, he was appointed to by Obama. There is a plethora of more experienced candidates to chose from.

Don't you think there's value in having a mixture of youth and experience on the bench? I don't want 9 old people up there dictating everything. I'd want them to be as different as possible to insure a range of ideas.
Of course, I don't know anything about whomever we're talking about right now, so I don't know if he in particular is a good candidate.
thett3
Posts: 14,356
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 3:29:39 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 3:24:33 AM, Raisor wrote:

This monolithic portrait of the left is as accurate as a monolithic portrait of the right by reference to the tea party would be. There are internal divisions on the left just as there are on the right. I actually don't disagree that there are serious and real issues with far-left social politics that do discourage speech. Obama doesn't even come close to falling within that camp.

That being said, the right is much more dogmatic than the left, there are so many litmus tests to be a "good conservative;" even the standard left positions don't rise to this standard. Most of the social positions that are now more or less required by left politicians have only come about in the past five years and track public opinion (e.g. gay rights), and a lot of those positions are even leaking into the GOP for that fact.

The Democratic Party is the only party that has any real space for moderates, though it has seen some of the same polarization the right has seen. Moderate Republicans get labeled with political slurs - It's a real issue to be called a "RINO" or, one you I think prefer, "cuckservative?" The right is much more "toe the line" than the left, and I think you only have to look at the Republican vs Democratic primaries to see that.

Yeah, the left is very accepting of dissenting opinions. That's why it's rightists who are constantly out to ruin other peoples lives based on their political beliefs, right? Oh, wait...

Say what you will about the Republican party, but when Bernie Sanders came to Liberty University he received nothing but respect and polite applause. How do you think Trump would be treated on any university campus?
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 3:30:39 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 3:29:39 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 3:24:33 AM, Raisor wrote:

This monolithic portrait of the left is as accurate as a monolithic portrait of the right by reference to the tea party would be. There are internal divisions on the left just as there are on the right. I actually don't disagree that there are serious and real issues with far-left social politics that do discourage speech. Obama doesn't even come close to falling within that camp.

That being said, the right is much more dogmatic than the left, there are so many litmus tests to be a "good conservative;" even the standard left positions don't rise to this standard. Most of the social positions that are now more or less required by left politicians have only come about in the past five years and track public opinion (e.g. gay rights), and a lot of those positions are even leaking into the GOP for that fact.

The Democratic Party is the only party that has any real space for moderates, though it has seen some of the same polarization the right has seen. Moderate Republicans get labeled with political slurs - It's a real issue to be called a "RINO" or, one you I think prefer, "cuckservative?" The right is much more "toe the line" than the left, and I think you only have to look at the Republican vs Democratic primaries to see that.

Yeah, the left is very accepting of dissenting opinions. That's why it's rightists who are constantly out to ruin other peoples lives based on their political beliefs, right? Oh, wait...

Say what you will about the Republican party, but when Bernie Sanders came to Liberty University he received nothing but respect and polite applause. How do you think Trump would be treated on any university campus?

Better than he was treated at his own debate for telling facts.
Raisor
Posts: 4,461
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 3:32:20 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 3:23:57 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 3:12:41 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/15/2016 3:10:29 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 3:06:07 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:57:21 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:52:42 AM, Raisor wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:49:29 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:47:18 AM, Raisor wrote:
And get off your high horse- some people actually have convictions about the value of diversity. Just because you can't fathom thinking diversity in government is important doesn't mean that those who do are "addicted to virtue signalling."

Nobody actually has that conviction. It's all signalling.

Ok, I guess it makes coping with reality easier to just believe everyone you disagree with are disingenuous liars. Lump me in with that crowd too I guess.

Oh calm down. The left typically doesn't care about actual diversity--anyone who has a dissenting opinion is severely shamed, or worse. What the left is interested in is a bunch of people who look different but think exactly alike.

Maybe you're interested in diversity and if you are more power to you, but yeah I'm not fooled for even half a second that the dominant progressive left has any interest in it. It's all about virtue signalling.

Whoever he picks would still need to be qualified though. He's not going to just go pick any random Jaquen off the street just because they look different.

I never implied that he would or that the guy was not a good pick. I'm not knowledgeable or smart enough to know who should be on the Supreme Court. What I'm saying is that the temptation to select the first Indian judge will likely prove too much for Obama to resist.

As long as he's as qualified or more qualified than the others, I'm fine with that,

He's been a judge for a grand total of four years. Even among the 'diversity picks', he's remarkably green. Any position which he held, he was appointed to by Obama. There is a plethora of more experienced candidates to chose from.

Rehnquist lacked any judicial experience, many respected justices did not have any experience.

"Altogether, nine, or slightly more than half, of the 17 men who have held the position of Chief Justice were appointed without prior judicial experience."

http://law.marquette.edu...

Also, as I argued to thett, diversity is at the bottom of the list of political reasons for Obama to nominate Srinivasan.
Skepsikyma
Posts: 8,286
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 3:32:43 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 3:27:07 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/15/2016 3:23:57 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 3:12:41 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/15/2016 3:10:29 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 3:06:07 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:57:21 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:52:42 AM, Raisor wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:49:29 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:47:18 AM, Raisor wrote:
And get off your high horse- some people actually have convictions about the value of diversity. Just because you can't fathom thinking diversity in government is important doesn't mean that those who do are "addicted to virtue signalling."

Nobody actually has that conviction. It's all signalling.

Ok, I guess it makes coping with reality easier to just believe everyone you disagree with are disingenuous liars. Lump me in with that crowd too I guess.

Oh calm down. The left typically doesn't care about actual diversity--anyone who has a dissenting opinion is severely shamed, or worse. What the left is interested in is a bunch of people who look different but think exactly alike.

Maybe you're interested in diversity and if you are more power to you, but yeah I'm not fooled for even half a second that the dominant progressive left has any interest in it. It's all about virtue signalling.

Whoever he picks would still need to be qualified though. He's not going to just go pick any random Jaquen off the street just because they look different.

I never implied that he would or that the guy was not a good pick. I'm not knowledgeable or smart enough to know who should be on the Supreme Court. What I'm saying is that the temptation to select the first Indian judge will likely prove too much for Obama to resist.

As long as he's as qualified or more qualified than the others, I'm fine with that,

He's been a judge for a grand total of four years. Even among the 'diversity picks', he's remarkably green. Any position which he held, he was appointed to by Obama. There is a plethora of more experienced candidates to chose from.

Don't you think there's value in having a mixture of youth and experience on the bench? I don't want 9 old people up there dictating everything. I'd want them to be as different as possible to insure a range of ideas.
Of course, I don't know anything about whomever we're talking about right now, so I don't know if he in particular is a good candidate.

No. A random selection of old people aren't particularly wise. But old people who have extensive legal experience, and a record of experiences by which to judge their competency when vetting the nominee? Yes. If a young person manages to by some miracle to get similar judicial experience (10 years minimum), then maybe. But those cases pretty much never happen. Experience and a record which testifies to competence are important. Those things are much more common in old people, and the older they are, the more extensive they are.

Besides, what makes you think that old people can't make good decisions? That's awfully ageist of you...
"The Collectivist experiment is thoroughly suited (in appearance at least) to the Capitalist society which it proposes to replace. It works with the existing machinery of Capitalism, talks and thinks in the existing terms of Capitalism, appeals to just those appetites which Capitalism has aroused, and ridicules as fantastic and unheard-of just those things in society the memory of which Capitalism has killed among men wherever the blight of it has spread."
- Hilaire Belloc -
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 3:34:38 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 3:32:43 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 3:27:07 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/15/2016 3:23:57 AM, Skepsikyma wrote:
At 2/15/2016 3:12:41 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/15/2016 3:10:29 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 3:06:07 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:57:21 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:52:42 AM, Raisor wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:49:29 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 2:47:18 AM, Raisor wrote:
And get off your high horse- some people actually have convictions about the value of diversity. Just because you can't fathom thinking diversity in government is important doesn't mean that those who do are "addicted to virtue signalling."

Nobody actually has that conviction. It's all signalling.

Ok, I guess it makes coping with reality easier to just believe everyone you disagree with are disingenuous liars. Lump me in with that crowd too I guess.

Oh calm down. The left typically doesn't care about actual diversity--anyone who has a dissenting opinion is severely shamed, or worse. What the left is interested in is a bunch of people who look different but think exactly alike.

Maybe you're interested in diversity and if you are more power to you, but yeah I'm not fooled for even half a second that the dominant progressive left has any interest in it. It's all about virtue signalling.

Whoever he picks would still need to be qualified though. He's not going to just go pick any random Jaquen off the street just because they look different.

I never implied that he would or that the guy was not a good pick. I'm not knowledgeable or smart enough to know who should be on the Supreme Court. What I'm saying is that the temptation to select the first Indian judge will likely prove too much for Obama to resist.

As long as he's as qualified or more qualified than the others, I'm fine with that,

He's been a judge for a grand total of four years. Even among the 'diversity picks', he's remarkably green. Any position which he held, he was appointed to by Obama. There is a plethora of more experienced candidates to chose from.

Don't you think there's value in having a mixture of youth and experience on the bench? I don't want 9 old people up there dictating everything. I'd want them to be as different as possible to insure a range of ideas.
Of course, I don't know anything about whomever we're talking about right now, so I don't know if he in particular is a good candidate.

No. A random selection of old people aren't particularly wise. But old people who have extensive legal experience, and a record of experiences by which to judge their competency when vetting the nominee? Yes. If a young person manages to by some miracle to get similar judicial experience (10 years minimum), then maybe. But those cases pretty much never happen. Experience and a record which testifies to competence are important. Those things are much more common in old people, and the older they are, the more extensive they are.

Besides, what makes you think that old people can't make good decisions? That's awfully ageist of you...

Never said they couldn't. But they'll forever be missing a valuable and often insightful perspective held only by someone younger.
thett3
Posts: 14,356
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/15/2016 3:35:00 AM
Posted: 9 months ago
At 2/15/2016 3:30:39 AM, EndarkenedRationalist wrote:
At 2/15/2016 3:29:39 AM, thett3 wrote:
At 2/15/2016 3:24:33 AM, Raisor wrote:

This monolithic portrait of the left is as accurate as a monolithic portrait of the right by reference to the tea party would be. There are internal divisions on the left just as there are on the right. I actually don't disagree that there are serious and real issues with far-left social politics that do discourage speech. Obama doesn't even come close to falling within that camp.

That being said, the right is much more dogmatic than the left, there are so many litmus tests to be a "good conservative;" even the standard left positions don't rise to this standard. Most of the social positions that are now more or less required by left politicians have only come about in the past five years and track public opinion (e.g. gay rights), and a lot of those positions are even leaking into the GOP for that fact.

The Democratic Party is the only party that has any real space for moderates, though it has seen some of the same polarization the right has seen. Moderate Republicans get labeled with political slurs - It's a real issue to be called a "RINO" or, one you I think prefer, "cuckservative?" The right is much more "toe the line" than the left, and I think you only have to look at the Republican vs Democratic primaries to see that.

Yeah, the left is very accepting of dissenting opinions. That's why it's rightists who are constantly out to ruin other peoples lives based on their political beliefs, right? Oh, wait...

Say what you will about the Republican party, but when Bernie Sanders came to Liberty University he received nothing but respect and polite applause. How do you think Trump would be treated on any university campus?

Better than he was treated at his own debate for telling facts.

False. The debate crowd was obviously stupid and obnoxious, but I don't think you can even imagine the kind of sh!tshow that would happen if Trump tried to speak at a college campus. Leftists interrupted his rally to raise money for the *veterans* at least three times. The left is far more interested in shutting down those who disagree with them and there are all sorts of studies that prove this. People who block individuals on social media for expressing an opinion they disagree with are overwhelmingly leftists. Partisan bias is far stronger for those on the left than those on the right.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right