tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8038715.post113712447291558453..comments2023-09-24T07:47:43.839-04:00Comments on StarSpangledHaggis: Preach it, Joe Biden!Ehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17587216740731401718noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8038715.post-1137300521196305522006-01-14T23:48:00.000-05:002006-01-14T23:48:00.000-05:00Nonsense!Let's be honest and say that the hearings...Nonsense!<BR/><BR/>Let's be honest and say that the hearings are a dog-and-pony show of people being annoyingly aggressive in their questioning of people being annoyingly evasive.<BR/><BR/>I mean, come ON, would you forget that you ever belonged to an anti-woman, anti-gay, anti-disabled people, anti-anythingnotwhiteandmaleandPrinceton group?!! That is just not to be believed. As one of the Senators said something like, "I'll take you at your word on that, and I hope if any of us were to appear before you and say we forgot we knew Jack Abramoff, you will also take us at our word."Ehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17587216740731401718noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8038715.post-1137167670923668692006-01-13T10:54:00.000-05:002006-01-13T10:54:00.000-05:00Biden's right, given the depths to which the heari...Biden's right, given the depths to which the hearings have descended. But perhaps if Senators like Biden (who seems to feel an obligation not to deprive the American public of the pleasure of listening to his voice) actually spent more time asking relevant questions instead of delivering 23 minute polemics, there'd at least be the possibility of the hearings serving a useful purpose.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8038715.post-1137167416581490012006-01-13T10:50:00.000-05:002006-01-13T10:50:00.000-05:00Anony, when you say,Personally I like the fact tha...Anony, when you say,<BR/><I>Personally I like the fact that you need to convince 60% of the senate to vote for a person to get them a lifetime appointment to a position.</I><BR/>I agree with you. Unfortunately there's some ambiguity on the right of filibustering on SCOTUS nominations. I look forward to a time when this issue can be duked-out (or - better, <I>nuked-out</I>) sometime in the near future. Unfortunately, Go-Slo Joe and his friends didn't unearth enough dirt on BorkAlito. Maybe nextime.....Vigilantehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07640246609540057997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8038715.post-1137167045213369112006-01-13T10:44:00.000-05:002006-01-13T10:44:00.000-05:00I don't believe it, E.!What a great & rare find: Y...I don't believe it, E.!<BR/><BR/>What a great & rare find: You actually discovered an original thought expressed by Joe Biden!<BR/><BR/>The Haggis is truly Star-Spangled! <BR/><BR/>Great job!Vigilantehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07640246609540057997noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8038715.post-1137163044280125122006-01-13T09:37:00.000-05:002006-01-13T09:37:00.000-05:00If you went straight to the up and down vote would...If you went straight to the up and down vote wouldn't that get rid of the filibuster abillity as well. Personally I like the fact that you need to convince 60% of the senate to vote for a person to get them a lifetime appointment to a position. Maybe they should just change the rules in the first place and then go straight for the vote. Would make things much more interesting, although maybe a bit too hard in some cases.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com