Republicans refuse to think

[veritas]

For good reason, Bork was probably the most despicable choice ever nominated. He would have done tremendous damage given his track record of ridiculous inflexibility and explicit partisanship.

The decision on who gets to the court is supposed to be based on qualifications, not whether you like their politics. Bork was kept off for one reason only, the libs didn't like his positions. He was eminently qualified and should have been confirmed with ease.

[DaggerJohn]

For good reason, Bork was probably the most despicable choice ever nominated. He would have done tremendous damage given his track record of ridiculous inflexibility and explicit partisanship.

You think that Ruth Bader Ginsburg is any less partisan and ideologically-driven? She's easily the most predictable vote on the Court. The way the Dems trashed Bork was "criminal". I wonder if any ever apologized?

[ms maggie]

The decision on who gets to the court is supposed to be based on qualifications, not whether you like their politics. Bork was kept off for one reason only, the libs didn't like his positions. He was eminently qualified and should have been confirmed with ease.

His firing of Cox made him less than eminently qualified, a real character blot. But he should have been confirmed.

[bullmikey]

...like Democrats.

Is what you mean, right?

[ms maggie]

...like Democrats.

Is what you mean, right?

Tell you what. Let them filibuster Rice and continue to legislate against reproductive rights and for English as the national language. Won't have to worry much longer about what the GOP thinks.

[Monte]

You can't get disability with no work history

It's getting easier all the time, just like the qualification for extended unemployment and welfare benefits. Obama can't risk having his base become more independent.

[Calamari]

Maybe this is why:

Studies Reveal that Conservatism is Promoted When People Rely on ‘Low-Effort’ Thinking

Good news for conservatives as a compilation of four recent social psychology studies demonstrate that rather than necessarily being pathological, political conservatism is promoted when people rely on low-effort thinking.

In the four studies conducted by Scott Eidelman, Christian S. Crandall, Jeffrey A. Goodman, and John C. Blanchar published by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc, they concluded, “(P)olitical conservatism is promoted when people rely on low-effort thinking. When effortful, deliberate responding is disrupted or disengaged, thought processes become quick and efficient; these conditions promote conservative ideology… low-effort thought might promote political conservatism because its concepts are easier to process, and processing fluency increases attitude endorsement.”
...

It would be easy to be snarky about studies like this, but in truth these studies are a general step up regarding the possible psychological/cognitive reasons for conservative thought. Prevailing thought based on many previous studies was that there is a psychological pathology inherent conservative thinking. But in these studies we are offered a more practical way to approach the divide, if rather tedious. We might try starting off our next “discussion” with a conservative with something along the lines of “Yes, that makes sense initially but it doesn’t account for x, y and z.”

[MithrilKnight]

I know I'm joining this thread late, but - did you know that some Republicans, possibly as many as 70%, believe woman's bodies can reject the sperm of a rapist? They think the vagina has the ability to do this.

[LMoore24]

I know I'm joining this thread late, but - did you know that some Republicans, possibly as many as 70%, believe woman's bodies can reject the sperm of a rapist? They think the vagina has the ability to do this.

Did you know that some leftists, possibly as many as 99.99999%, believe it's just fine to shamelessly lie in order to advance their ideological agenda?

[dogstarman]

The decision on who gets to the court is supposed to be based on qualifications, not whether you like their politics. Bork was kept off for one reason only, the libs didn't like his positions. He was eminently qualified and should have been confirmed with ease.

His previous rulings provided a glimpse of what this man could be like in the supreme court. It was not really about politics other than the fact that Bork himself brought politics into his judgements.

In particular, he wrote a judicial opinion in favor of "American Cyanamid" in a case where this company _required_ women candidates for a particular position to be sterilized simply so that the company could avoid the possibility of future legal actions as a result of birth defects caused by exposure to toxic chemicals. _THAT_ is despicable and callous by any reasonable interpretation and it is an example of why this man faced fierce oppostion to his nomination.

[dogstarman]

You think that Ruth Bader Ginsburg is any less partisan and ideologically-driven? She's easily the most predictable vote on the Court. The way the Dems trashed Bork was "criminal". I wonder if any ever apologized?

No apology necessary. He deserved it, FULLY.

No apology was necessary for Harriet Meirs either, as she as just a joke of candidate nominated by Dubya so the conservatives could have an easy sycophant in the supreme court.

[demopublican]

What could be worse than the two headed monster that we have running this system?
Both sides fight to get the most partisan and biased person through to the SCOTUS.

[Grindelwald]

Did you know that some leftists, possibly as many as 99.99999%, believe it's just fine to shamelessly lie in order to advance their ideological agenda?

ROTFLMFAO you just desribed the right wing to a tee. Hypocrite.

[LMoore24]

Hypocrite.

Personal attack.

ROTFLMFAO you just desribed the ring wing .

Ring wing? Is that a new product from GovernmentHostess?

If you read the post i was replying to, you'd see that my response was a parody.


OH, sorry, here ya go:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parody

[Grindelwald]

Backtrack much?