Comments on: Day 1 of Sotomayor hearings: ‘Balls and strikes.’

By: Bilbo Hussein Baggins

Bilbo Hussein Baggins — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 05:42:25 +0000

evangenital says:
Sessions had his “balls” in a twist this morning.

It is rather ironic that the most racist person in Congress, someone who was actually turned down as a judge because of his racism, has the nerve to call Sonia Sotomayor a racist.

Sessions is a mean spirited, evil, petty little man.

By: EugeneDebs

EugeneDebs — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 03:17:15 +0000

looktothehills

You ignorant racist piece of garbage. You embarass all decent people.

By: Brain From Planet Arous

Brain From Planet Arous — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 02:55:06 +0000

A lot of Balls, Bats, Diamond Shapes, mounds, and Catcher’s Mitts between all of the Demublicans and Republicrats.

By: ralph the wonder locust

ralph the wonder locust — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 02:27:04 +0000

Wow. How did the troll get voted down so quickly, so close to the end of the thread?

Nice work, TPers.

By: Wayne A. Schneider

Wayne A. Schneider — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 01:28:31 +0000

Nor does his know his movies.

By: pete

pete — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 01:22:18 +0000

As a troll, GOPtroll, you’re not even human.

By: the great GOPsby

the great GOPsby — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 01:09:28 +0000

as a minnesottan, pete, you’re good for shit – that shitty movie starring governator “jingle all the way.”

By: pete

pete — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:52:17 +0000

I’m just pleased to see Senator Franken, ralph. As a Minnesotan I was pretty pissed about being short one Senator.

By: ralph the wonder locust

ralph the wonder locust — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:36:18 +0000

Great to see SENATOR FRANKEN on the Judiciary Committee, and I hope he’s a good a Senator as Sheldon Whitehouse has turned out to be.

By: Chickenbone Bill

Chickenbone Bill — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:30:44 +0000

Wonder how many of Repubs Senators got a warm,wet feeling between their loins in hearing the word “Balls” used frequently today?

By: Wiz

Wiz — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:21:09 +0000

The Republicans credibility on “judical activism”, was eliminated when the Supreme Court picked George Bush as President. The Consititution says nothing about the court picking the President. Republicans should piss their pants in pure guilt if they even say the words “judical activism”.

By: pete

pete — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:16:08 +0000

You got that right, Wiz. The GOoPers have even forgotten, or never learned, that empathy is one of the chief defining characteristics of a human being. It take a twisted freak to demean it.

By: pags2

pags2 — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:14:32 +0000

The reason why cases end up in the SCOTUS is because a law is ambiguous and needs to be interpreted; the law may violate the US Constitution on its face or in its application; or there is a point of procedure under the rules of the federal courts. The real battle for the SCOTUS is disguised under the “strict construction” argument. In reality, the Republicans want strict construction on certain matters but not on others. They are hypocrites. The Democrats adhere to the idea that the Constitution is not mired in concrete that was poured in 1789 so the Court cannot just look back to the document and how it might have been interpreted in 1789 but our current ideas of what is justice. The Dems believe that the law should adapt to modern times so the past is merely a departure point in interpreting the law. Sometimes the liberal justices go too far in their holdings such as the abortion case. The question is always interpreting the law without trying to make law. Some cases do not lend themselves to a matter of interpreting a law because the facts are unusual or make new claims under rights already specified in the Constitution.

By: Wiz

Wiz — Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:01:06 +0000

Repubs would find something to criticize anyone that Obama had nominated. It is part of their “party of no” creed. In this case it is the empathy, with the next one it will be something else. Additionally Senator Sessions has a personal axe to grind, getting even for his rejection as a federal judge for being a racist, and he is apparantly more than willing to embrace his racism.

By: pete

pete — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 23:51:37 +0000

It has nothing to do with the topic but, Cenk had a great line:

“That’s what happens when your party is down to a bunch of dumbasses“.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6gV8Cx7cSw&feature=channel_page

By: pete

pete — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 23:42:19 +0000

“Balls and strikes” is the perfect metaphor for the Reichwhiners. It matches their “white and black” worldview while it supports the authority figure even when the video shows the pitch, called a strike, is in the dirt.

GOP politics, just like the major leagues, doesn’t allow replay to overturn the decision no matter how wrong it is.

By: katy

katy — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 23:16:23 +0000

thanks dixie… i’ve been away most day…

will take some time through the evening to figure it out…

By: dixie blood

dixie blood — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 23:14:32 +0000

#20 katy,

I flamed out on this earlier on another thread here and I still would like to see just what you just suggested happen. Then we would have a total vote count available too.

This is the thread and it’s quite lively:

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/07/13/reed-starting-hipper-christian-coalition/comment-page-4/#comment-5723309

I confess to my misunderstandings in my posts there. I still think this new and fun feature can be improved.

By: Purple State

Purple State — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 23:09:28 +0000

looktothehills says:

You can have her. She is nothing but a totem pole for hispanics. Our SCOTUS is mostly consisted of conservative judges.

So…what baseball analogy would that be? An intentional walk during a 5-4 game?

By: katy

katy — Mon, 13 Jul 2009 23:09:11 +0000

hey… just noticed the new ‘vote’ buttons… great! … but…

wouldn’t it be FAIR to have a count for each UP or DOWN vote?

not everyone’s taste is the same…

thank gawd.