Harriet Miers SCJ

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
161

[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
Don’t you feel dumber just typing it?

I thought the word was so ridiculous that is was funny.

I don’t feel and ‘dumber’ than you do for typing ‘dumber’.

ROTFLMFAO!

I think Fitzmas is even more stupid sounding (not dumber since it is not a word) than Freeptard.

I found this on DU’s site and laughed so hard tears were coming from my eyes:

http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/index.php/Moran

The comedy of these realms is us unreal.[/quote]

As to “dumber,” please refer to the dictionary:

162

Miers withdraws…

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051027/ap_on_go_su_co/miers_withdraws;_ylt=ApVVS7tQ2rr6e2iYhyma2Dis0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--

What happened to an ‘up or down vote’?

F politicians.

Bush just messed up that arguement for his own party.

Good luck with the next nominee.

ROTFLMFAO!

163

Can’t say I’m surprised, or displeased – though the tenor of some of the critiques was over the top.

Harriet Miers Withdraws
Nomination to High Court
By JACOB M. SCHLESINGER
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
October 27, 2005 9:16 a.m.

WASHINGTON – President Bush’s controversial Supreme Court nominee, White House counsel Harriet Miers, suddenly withdrew her nomination this morning.

The move came after repeated attacks from conservatives worried that she wouldn’t be an ally for them on the bench, and from critics across the spectrum about whether the president’s long-time friend and personal lawyer – who had no experience as a judge and little with constitutional issues – was qualified to serve on the court.

It came also as she missed a deadline set yesterday to submit new answers to questions to the Senate Judiciary Committee, where a bipartisan group of senators had said her first submission last week was insufficient.

The White House issued a statement from President Bush saying “today, I have reluctantly accepted Harriet Miers’ decision to withdraw her nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States.”

“I understand and share her concern, however, about the current state of the Supreme Court confirmation process,” the president continued." “It is clear that Senators would not be satisfied until they gained access to internal documents concerning advice provided during her tenure at the White House – disclosures that would undermine a President’s ability to receive candid counsel. Harriet Miers’s decision demonstrates her deep respect for this essential aspect of the Constitutional separation of powers – and confirms my deep respect and admiration for her.”

On Wednesday, Ms. Miers had been scheduled to return a second questionnaire to the Senate Judiciary Committee. It was ordered up by the panels’ top Republicans and Democrats after they described her earlier committee submission as inadequate, incomplete and inaccurate.

Sen. Arlen Specter, who was to preside at Ms. Miers’s confirmation hearings, told her Wednesday to expect to be questioned about White House’s policies on the war on terror and whether she can be independent of President Bush if confirmed. For example, Mr. Specter said in a letter of preview questions for Ms. Miers, "What assurances can you give the Senate and the American people that you will be independent, if confirmed, and not give President Bush any special deference on any matter involving him which might come before the court?‘’

Write to Jacob M. Schlesinger at jacob.schlesinger@wsj.com

164

[quote]rainjack wrote:

Name a single damn time religion has been “imposed” on anyone. I’ll wait for you to cite a single incident in your lifetime that will support your bullshit position. You can’t. So spare me the bullshit about religion “imposing” anything on anyone. If the truth be known the courts have “imposed” more shit on us than religion has.

You really need to try harder, vroom. It is getting to be a little tiring owning you so effortlessly.

[/quote]

I realize that this was not aimed at me, but I thought I would take up your challenge.

Answer this: why can’t I get mail on sunday?

165

[quote]jnd wrote:
I realize that this was not aimed at me, but I thought I would take up your challenge.

Answer this: why can’t I get mail on sunday?[/quote]

Why can’t I get any mail on Saturday OR Sunday?

Why can’t I get UPS on Saturday or Sunday?

What is your point?

Others taking a day off is an imposition of religion on your life? Does that mean your day off is imposing your religion on others?

Try again.

166

[quote]rainjack wrote:
jnd wrote:
I realize that this was not aimed at me, but I thought I would take up your challenge.

Answer this: why can’t I get mail on sunday?

Why can’t I get any mail on Saturday OR Sunday?

Why can’t I get UPS on Saturday or Sunday?

What is your point?

Others taking a day off is an imposition of religion on your life? Does that mean your day off is imposing your religion on others?

Try again. [/quote]

I wish I was nearly as smart as you think you are.

Why is SUNDAY a day of no mail? Why are many liquor stores closed on SUNDAY?

You can correct me if I am wrong- but it has something to do with resting on the seventh day…

Perhaps wednesday should be the day that people take off…

Try again is so very condescending- or was that your intention?

167

To say that taking a day off is an imposition of religion on your life is just silly.

Hell - the names of the days of the week could be a religous imposition on you if you want to go that far.

But I’m thinking that if you have to stretch that far to make an argument for religion invading everyone’s life - you don’t have that much to argue about.

168

[quote]jnd wrote:

Why is SUNDAY a day of no mail? Why are many liquor stores closed on SUNDAY?

You can correct me if I am wrong- but it has something to do with resting on the seventh day[/quote]

Why do we have the Christmas holiday off from work?

These policies are reflections of what the people want or expect - no one is going to come into work on Christmas whether it is an official holiday or not. In the past, Sundays were treated the same way.

You don’t like it, go call your local representative. But is it an imposition of religion on you - nope, just democratic process at work. Look around you - all kinds of public morality laws at work - you being imposed upon by those as well?

Are people imposing their views on me because I have to pay a higher property tax than I would like? Nope. Democracy produces winners and losers. I lose on property tax levels, you lose on the old Blue Laws.

169

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
Can’t say I’m surprised, or displeased – though the tenor of some of the critiques was over the top.

Harriet Miers Withdraws
Nomination to High Court
By JACOB M. SCHLESINGER
Staff Reporter of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
October 27, 2005 9:16 a.m.

WASHINGTON – President Bush’s controversial Supreme Court nominee, White House counsel Harriet Miers, suddenly withdrew her nomination this morning.

The move came after repeated attacks from conservatives worried that she wouldn’t be an ally for them on the bench, and from critics across the spectrum about whether the president’s long-time friend and personal lawyer – who had no experience as a judge and little with constitutional issues – was qualified to serve on the court.

It came also as she missed a deadline set yesterday to submit new answers to questions to the Senate Judiciary Committee, where a bipartisan group of senators had said her first submission last week was insufficient.

The White House issued a statement from President Bush saying “today, I have reluctantly accepted Harriet Miers’ decision to withdraw her nomination to the Supreme Court of the United States.”

“I understand and share her concern, however, about the current state of the Supreme Court confirmation process,” the president continued." “It is clear that Senators would not be satisfied until they gained access to internal documents concerning advice provided during her tenure at the White House – disclosures that would undermine a President’s ability to receive candid counsel. Harriet Miers’s decision demonstrates her deep respect for this essential aspect of the Constitutional separation of powers – and confirms my deep respect and admiration for her.”

On Wednesday, Ms. Miers had been scheduled to return a second questionnaire to the Senate Judiciary Committee. It was ordered up by the panels’ top Republicans and Democrats after they described her earlier committee submission as inadequate, incomplete and inaccurate.

Sen. Arlen Specter, who was to preside at Ms. Miers’s confirmation hearings, told her Wednesday to expect to be questioned about White House’s policies on the war on terror and whether she can be independent of President Bush if confirmed. For example, Mr. Specter said in a letter of preview questions for Ms. Miers, "What assurances can you give the Senate and the American people that you will be independent, if confirmed, and not give President Bush any special deference on any matter involving him which might come before the court?‘’

Write to Jacob M. Schlesinger at jacob.schlesinger@wsj.com [/quote]

Too bad, she seemed like a competent person.

170

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
jnd wrote:

Why is SUNDAY a day of no mail? Why are many liquor stores closed on SUNDAY?

You can correct me if I am wrong- but it has something to do with resting on the seventh day

Why do we have the Christmas holiday off from work?

These policies are reflections of what the people want or expect - no one is going to come into work on Christmas whether it is an official holiday or not. In the past, Sundays were treated the same way.

You don’t like it, go call your local representative. But is it an imposition of religion on you - nope, just democratic process at work. Look around you - all kinds of public morality laws at work - you being imposed upon by those as well?

Are people imposing their views on me because I have to pay a higher property tax than I would like? Nope. Democracy produces winners and losers. I lose on property tax levels, you lose on the old Blue Laws.

[/quote]
You have not answered the question. Shutting down all gov’t on SUNDAY is a reflection of ONE religion’s idea of which day should be used for rest. I am at a loss to explain why yoyu don’t see that as an imposition.

BTW, I have no problem with Sundays and Christmas off- I am just pointing out that this is a reflection of the choices made based on ONE religious group and their preference.

As far as laws- I think they necessary, but they are not arbitrary- having sunday (instead of saturday or tuesday) off is entirely arbitrary.

171

[quote]rainjack wrote:
To say that taking a day off is an imposition of religion on your life is just silly.

Hell - the names of the days of the week could be a religous imposition on you if you want to go that far.

But I’m thinking that if you have to stretch that far to make an argument for religion invading everyone’s life - you don’t have that much to argue about. [/quote]

People like you crack me up.

YOU: Give me an example of blah, blah, blah.

ME: Here is an example.

YOU: Not good enough.

ME: huh?!?!?

I wasn’t arguing- simply showing you an example of how one religion dictates something completely arbitrary like which day of the week that I cannot renew my drivers license, or buy a car.

Just because my example isn’t exciting (religious kooks forcing me to pray to their god) doesn’t make it irrelevant.

But I recognize your type- you are an excellent example of what happens when individual’s fall prey to the onfirmation bias.

172

[quote]jnd wrote:

You have not answered the question. Shutting down all gov’t on SUNDAY is a reflection of ONE religion’s idea of which day should be used for rest. I am at a loss to explain why yoyu don’t see that as an imposition.[/quote]

Might it be because that ONE religion tends to be in the majority in the particular democratic process - so answer your own question with some common sense.

Now you are getting it. And, lots of places don’t have Blue Laws and the like any more because the people no longer like them. Ain’t democracy grand?

[quote]As far as laws- I think they necessary, but they are not arbitrary- having sunday (instead of saturday or tuesday) off is entirely arbitrary.
[/quote]

No, not completely arbitrary - Sunday wasn’t selected out of hat. It was selected because it comported with the local community’s observation of Sunday being a day of limited activity and also disapproval of sale of certain ‘bad’ things like alcohol.

173

That should be Confirmation bias…

174

[quote]jnd wrote:
I wasn’t arguing- simply showing you an example of how one religion dictates something completely arbitrary like which day of the week that I cannot renew my drivers license, or buy a car.[/quote]

I am wondering how the DMV being closed the weekend is an example of religion imposing on your life.

Every custom and most holidays have religious roots that are centuries old. To some how equate habit with religous zealots dictating how you will live your life is indeed laughable to me.

I believe it is irrelevant. Everyone takes a day off. Europe takes like 3 days off per week. But that is beside the point - much like your entire line of reasoning. But you believe whatever it takes to make you think you are right - I could care less.

[quote]But I recognize your type- you are an excellent example of what happens when individual’s fall prey to the onfirmation bias.
[/quote]

For me to disagree with the crap you have pulled out of left field in your last few posts is not confirmation bias. It is me just calling bullshit on what you consider to be a knockout punch.

If you take what I said in context - I was not asking for proof that religous customs and holidays have invaded our everyday lives over the last 5 or 6 centuries. I was asking for proof that religion has been imposed on us like vroom had said would happen if a religous zealot was sitting on the USSC.

SO you need to try harder to make me guilty of confirmation bias.

175

Thought this might help you to understand things:

Impose 1a : to establish or apply by authority

You are hilarious.

Is this how you discuss an issue?

You: Dude I just knocked you out. Booyah!

I will concede that you think you are right and that no one can change your mind about anything. Good luck with things.

176

[quote]jnd wrote:
Thought this might help you to understand things:

Impose 1a : to establish or apply by authority [/quote]

You give me a definition of something that you evidently think applies to when someone takes a day off. What “things” am I to understand from this? It does nothing but confirm my contention that you are tlking about something totally out of context from what I was saying.

I think you can get your ass kicked for saying Booyah around here. But I never said I knocked you out. I have merely said that the DMV being closed on the weekends is not a religous imposition, and that, in order to prove my original statement wrong, you would have to try harder than you did. I also said that you would have to try harder than merely throwing out a pseudo-intellectual buzzword to prove me guilty of the bias you accuse. I am not saying that I am not bias. I am just saying that you need to try harder to prove it.

If your attempt was to change my mind - then you have failed. In order to succeed at that you will indeed have to try much much harder than you have in your most recent posts.

Let me know how that goes for you.