E-Mail 'Sen. Joe Biden whines because nominees won't take issue positions' To A Friend

Email a copy of 'Sen. Joe Biden whines because nominees won't take issue positions' to a friend

Loading ...

39 Responses to "Sen. Joe Biden whines because nominees won’t take issue positions"

PCD says:

January 12, 2006 at 11:42 am

I wish Biden would go to a public forum where I could call him a partisan hypocrite. Why didn’t Biden ask Ginsburg substantive questions on abortion, Property rights, Presidential power? Because Biden is a partisan hypocrite.

Anynoe notice that no one is bringing up Kelo?
Baklava says:

January 12, 2006 at 12:43 pm

ST wrote, “Thoughts?”

I “feel” that Biden doesn’t care what the nominee has to say. What gives me this feeling/thought?:
1) During the q and a Biden would rather speak and give a speech than have a give and take conversation and he doesn’t listen to “Alioto’s” answer anyway.
2) Biden would as he just stated rather just debate about the nominee than have a q and A session so that “Alioto” can’t speak or have a voice.

Funny thing is that the “confirmation hearings” or q and a BEFORE the confirmation hearings is what weeded out Harriet Miers. So Biden, doesn’t remember/learn from history very well. He’s very “emotion/feeling” driven and doesn’t think.
Conservative Outpost says:

January 12, 2006 at 1:02 pm

Joe Biden actually has a good idea

Yes, even a blind squirrel finds a nut every now and then. In this case, the squirrel in question is Joe Biden, and the nut is the idea that judiciary committee hearings on Supreme Court justices have outlived their “usefulness”…
Kenwg says:

January 12, 2006 at 1:07 pm

I like having the hearings. They get a lot more airplay than floor debate ever would – so we get to watch Alito squirm and dodge about embarrassing things like how proud he was in 1986 of his membership in “Concerned Alumni of Princeton” (promoting racist and sexist bigotry) but couldn’t remember being a member by 1990, then remember that he joined because of ROTC (???) – yeah, that’s it, had to join because of ROTC…

And how he swore under oath to recuse himself from cases involving Vanguard then didn’t do so. And approved warrant less strip searches of 10 year-olds. And how in cases involving individual rights vs corporate or government intrusion he has voted against rights 84% of the time. And so on.

We probably wouldn’t get to see any of this good stuff if we didn’t have hearings.

Ken G
ArizonaTeach says:

January 12, 2006 at 1:10 pm

Kelo’s been brought up, but that might have been after you posted today…although now that I think about it I’m pretty sure it was brought up on the first day of questioning, also. Alito’s response has been “there’s more than money tied up in houses” or something like that.

As far as what Biden has to say, it’s not the process as written that’s broken — it’s the fact that there are cameras in the room. Get those out of there and problem solved.
ArizonaTeach says:

January 12, 2006 at 1:15 pm

My God, Ken, what are you WATCHING? CAP was racist and sexist? Did you know that the editor of the Prospect at that time (the publication of CAP) was Laura Graham? And the prior editor was a woman from India? Yeah, totally racist and sexist. To say nothing that he’s not squirming at all. Of course the NYT already researched all of those papers in November and found no cause at all.

Strip search of a ten year old girl? Do you even know what the argument for or against that is, or are you throwing out talking points?

Vanguard was examined by the ABA and no wrongdoing was found. He was cleared across the board. But what, you know more?

Disgusting. You should be ashamed.
PCD says:

January 12, 2006 at 1:16 pm

Ken, if that is what you call squirming, then Reid and Dorgan are going into convulsions over being investigated for their Abramoff connections.

All the hysterics are coming from the Democrats Edited. –ST
Baklava says:

January 12, 2006 at 1:23 pm

Kenwg wrote, “so we get to watch Alito squirm

Partisanship galore. Do you remember Ginsberg’s insistence as an answer for many questions Ken?

Other parts of your quotes make you sound like a McCarthy/witchhunt type person. Do you see that at all or is my point totally invalid? I’m willing to see it if you explain Ginsberg’s memberships and Ted Kennedy’s memberships in things away but their jobs weren’t stripped from them and they were questioned with condescension for their memberships… I just don’t get it.

Have you ever been a member of or consorted with the Republican party? That’s a yes or no question! Answer the question! … geez

Ken wrote, And approved warrant less strip searches of 10 year-olds.

The more I read from you the more I see your sources of info are off base. It may explain your views. Your whole last paragraph is characterization that could only be written if reading left sources only and agreeing with left sources only.
Baklava says:

January 12, 2006 at 1:24 pm

Sorry, I missed the greater than sign the first time I posted it.
Baklava says:

January 12, 2006 at 1:26 pm

AT wrote, “Disgusting. You should be ashamed.

I agree. There is a SMALL percentage of people writing about these cases in these terms and characterizations. This is loony stuff people (if you are a newbie to politics).
fine dry wit says:

January 12, 2006 at 1:41 pm

Hi Sister-Biden probably cribbed that idea from someone else.;)
I think an up or down vote would be fine, and the “hearings”–they aren’t called ‘listenings’ for a reason–are nearly over, so let’s go ahead and swear Alito in.
Justice O’Connor wanted to step down for health reasons, and should be applauded for hanging in there until a replacement joins the Court.
If not for Chief Justice Rehnquist passing away, she would have been able to retire months ago.

Totally unrelated, Sister, but I wish your Panthers well in Chicago. I don’t have a team I follow, so I can cheer for everybody.
Baklava says:

January 12, 2006 at 1:50 pm

I think your points Ken are so unpursuasive as to be pointless due to the lack of perspective that you bring to the table. This is on top of the fact that you should be ashamed. It is not up to US to site you better more informed writeups on his decisions. It is up to you to use logic, common sense and perspective in the sources of information you are reading.

This contains the accusation that you had about the 10 year old girlNotice you stated the issue incorrectly.

This one also sets your LIE straight

This one debunks Ken’s lie about Vanguard

Got new sources yet Ken? Wasted your last 10 years reading junk? I know how you feel. I felt the same way before 1991 when I was a liberal. USE YOUR NOGGIN! It’ll come to ya.
PCD says:

January 12, 2006 at 1:57 pm

I’ll root against Chicago just because they are Chicago.
benning says:

January 12, 2006 at 2:20 pm

As long as the nominees can stand the garbage tossed at them, I say keep the hearings!

What better platform from which to display the Democratic Party? How better to show America what these idiots are, and what they think?

Nobody pays attention to Democrats speaking in Congress, but they watch hearings!
Bob says:

January 12, 2006 at 3:38 pm

Not only should the nominees go striagt to the senate for vote, but I would like to revisit another piece of senatorial history. At one time the senators were appointed by the governor of the state they represented. That way, the states, which we are really a collection of and not some big national government with sub catagories, had more sway over what the federal government did. If the governor didn’t like what you did, he recalled you. This also makes people think a little more when voting for statewide offices because of the impact in Washington.

It would really be best if we knew where we came from to know where we are going.
steve says:

January 12, 2006 at 4:01 pm

I agreee with Biden and they should serve 20 years not until they die or retire. Alito is a liar and not a man of his word. Vanguard. A real Italian wouldn’t last 10 minutes in the neighborhood, with a character like that. Peace
ArizonaTeach says:

January 12, 2006 at 4:08 pm

My God…Steve’s a racist now, too? 8-|
justaskin' says:

January 12, 2006 at 4:56 pm

Steve added a little too much sugar in the Kool-Aid…:d

Funny how this bumbling bunch of bafoons from the Left who’s moral compass spins faster than one of my old Archies records, have the audacity to pontificate and try to smear a man who has more intelligence, morality, and honor in his little finger than Biden(The Palgerist), Kennedy(The Swimmer), Leahy(Senator Apple Tree) and all the rest combined.

MUST SEE TV….:x
El Conquistadore says:

January 12, 2006 at 8:16 pm

Biden is just so STOOOPID. I mean, he is a dork! what an IDIOT! And his mom is STUPID and his kids are STUPID because his sperm is STUPID and he’s STUPID!

Biden’s mom is so fat, she stepped on a dollar an made change!

Biden’s mom is so funky, she used Secret and it told on her!

Whew! OK, now I’m gonna go read the first ST post. Wonder what it says…?

:-“
PCD says:

January 13, 2006 at 9:00 am

Biden and the Democrats are just angry that Alito didn’t provide them with a smear that worked. They can not accept the fact that Alito is well qualified and that being a strict Constructionist juror isn’t a disqualification to the Supreme Court.
steve says:

January 13, 2006 at 9:53 am

Alito is a liar. He swore that he would recuse himself from any case involving Vanguard. He did not keep his oath. Breaking his oath cost the American people tens of thousands of dollars. Alito is not fit for office. Peace
PCD says:

January 13, 2006 at 10:10 am

steve, what are you talking about? This was examined in infinite detail and there is nothing wrong here.
Dana says:

January 13, 2006 at 11:00 am

Actually, I agree with Senator Biden on this one. He said that the hearings were pointless, and (for once) he told the truth.

The Democrats hoped that the hearings would produce the Big Mistake, the point that they could use to vote against Mr Alito without appearing to be total partisan hacks (not that they really care, nor that they in any way succeeded). Now they’ll have to go to the floor to vote, and even though Mr Alito performed very well, a lot of Democrats will vote against him on general (un)principle. They could have done that without the hearings.
sanity says:

January 13, 2006 at 12:17 pm

What I see in these hearings:

Not alot of questions and majority of the time spent is not used to ask question but for Senators to grandstand and make long-winded statements. If they are interested and finding out about the background of a candidtae and what type of judge they will be on the bench, they should ask proper questions (and at least know the Law they talk about).

If these senators were interested in what type of judge Alito would be on the Supreme Court, they would have stuck around and not left when other judges and clerks that have worked for or with Alito through out the years came to testify. At which time some of the Democrats left, not bothering to even stay and listen to what is being said about Alito, which goes to show you that they are not interested in knowing about Alito, just in smearing.

The political divide is to great, no matter who it is, the Democrats will always treat a Repulican Nominee this way, and now that they keep doing this, Republicans may end up doing the same thing to Democrat Nominees in the future.

This sets a bad precedent for the future and it will only continue to get worse.
steve says:

January 13, 2006 at 3:26 pm

So nobody here cares that Alito is Not an honest and honorable man as long as he’s a Republican? Peace
Baklava says:

January 13, 2006 at 3:33 pm

I’m happy and I do care that Alito is honest and according to most people who worked with him a dilligent worker.

Charges due to politics are just that – charges. I wonder how much time those who have made the charges on this page have actually spent with Alito? 0 seconds?
Baklava says:

January 13, 2006 at 3:34 pm

That was funny.
PCD says:

January 13, 2006 at 3:54 pm

steve, you have not proven that Alito is anything. All you’ve proven is that your rantings are nothing but static to be ignored.
sanity says:

January 13, 2006 at 4:01 pm

Alito was investigated, drawn through the mud, and investigated some more.

You can bet every democrat senator looked for anything to nail Alito with; they probably even dug through his trash. Well, they had an intern probably do it, wouldn’t expect them to get thier hands dirty now would we.

ABA thoroughly investigated him and has given him a very qualified ranking.

Your allegations of lying and dishonesty is baseless.

Believe me, if there was anything at all to “get” Alito with, the Democrats would be all over it, but you know what? There was nothing there.

Bloiviate all you wish, but there is nothing there, and Alito will be confirmed.
Baklava says:

January 13, 2006 at 4:18 pm

By Susan Sullivan

Excerpt:
my fellow liberals… Yes she’s a liberal

I was one of Judge Alito’s law clerks from 1990-1991, the year the Casey decision was decided. I consider myself a social progressive. I am a card-carrying member of the ACLU and a liberal pro-choice advocate who supports abortion rights… Good set up !

I favor gun control, support gay marriage and oppose the death penalty. I also don’t have a problem if you want to take “God” out of the Pledge of Allegiance…. Got a live one here.

what scares me is the way my fellow liberal Democrats are behaving in response to the nomination. I’m appalled and embarrassed by the fear mongering, the personal attacks and what I see as an irresponsible and misleading distortion of his real judicial record as well as his character OK then. We covered irresponsible, fear mongering, personal attacks, misleading distortions. Seems my points have been spot on.

I believe we need to tread carefully, temper our partisan distrust and think carefully before reflexively voicing outrage. Otherwise, we may actually undermine our own best “liberal” interests as well as the interests of everyone else. Well said.
Baklava says:

January 13, 2006 at 4:22 pm

Betsy from Betsy’s page wrote:
I only saw a bit of the testimony from the panel of Circuit Court judges who have worked with Judge Alito and who came forward to praise his integrity and abilities. It truly was impressive to have these judges of different backgrounds, including a Clinton appointee and one appointed by LBJ. We should all be so lucky to have colleagues who think so highly of our abilities and character that they would travel to publicly speak up in our favor. It really was an amazing tribute to Samuel Alito. Perhaps, hearing those encomiums from his co-workers almost made up for having to sit through all the garbage said about him. It must truly have been a gratifying moment for him.

And of course, the Democratic senators all showed their respect and deference for these distinguished judges by skipping out on the hearings.
Only Senators Feinstein and Durbin are here for this testimony. Schumer did not even make the cameo that Kennedy made. A pity that Kennedy and Schumer had no interest in even pretending to respect the testimony based on factual, personal knowledge that these witnesses had to offer. They prefer wild innuendo and baseless character assassination.
They all mouth these platitudes about their respect for the law and the courts and then they just walk out on circuit court judges who have traveled to Washington to talk to them.

They really are despicable.
steve says:

January 13, 2006 at 7:51 pm

Alito swore an oath to the Senate that he would recuse himself from any case involving Vanguard. He broke that oath. He is therefore a liar. Because he is a liar he can’t be trusted. Thus, moral turpitude. Peace
sanity says:

January 13, 2006 at 10:51 pm

And Steve will still be looking and looking for the Man/Woman with no Sin.

ABA investigated this and found no wrong doing in the case handled by him, and foudn that he and they both felt this was just a mistake.

Is this all you have got?

Even the Democrats realized this was nothing, and they actually TRIED and failed.

If this is really all you have, then you to are going to fail in this.
steve says:

January 14, 2006 at 11:47 am

This guy has many more sins than being a liar. But, because he’s a liar he will not get my support. If you all want to get along and go along with greedy, corrupt, liars that’s on your head. Peace
Lorica says:

January 14, 2006 at 1:36 pm

You mean like your Buddy Clinton Steve?? Talk about corrupt and greedy. How about Justice Souter who would allow your home to be sold, for fair market value, to the highest bidder if the city you lived it wanted to get rid of you and your neighbors?? Or Justice Ginsberg who has no problem with violence against the unborn. There is plenty of sin to go around, and your selective support of them, and then telling us about how bad we are is getting a tad annoying. I am glad that it was Jesus who paid the price, not me. Keep up the delusion. Peace – Lorica
sanity says:

January 15, 2006 at 9:32 pm

Steve,
You keep saying it but you offer no proof, zilch, none.

He was investigated by the ABA and by the Democrats.

Are you saying the Democrats are so stupid they overlooked and couldn’t find all the things you seem to be privy to?

Because as I said, it would be a sure bet if the Democrats had found anything on Alito they would be all over it like bees to honey. It didn’t happen, so again, you are wrong….unless you care to provide some proof that goes against all the other judges that testified for Alito, the ABA’s high recommendation and all the investigations of the Democrats that came up with Zilch, Zippo, Nada…….
ryan says:

January 17, 2006 at 11:20 pm

Well said – they tried, tried again, tried again, but none of the baseless charges stuck.
PCD says:

January 18, 2006 at 8:36 am

steve, stop lying about Alito. You discredit yourself and more by continuing to do so.
Louise says:

January 19, 2006 at 11:43 am

I have 3 words for Senator Joe Biden: Ruth Bader Ginsgurg. Judge Alito answered more questions than any nominee in decades. He is to be commended!

Comments are closed.