an hour of Gorsuch embarrassing Feinstein and Leahy
But, the judge is well prepared and imminently qualified.
Could not in good faith, vote against the nomination, if I were a Senator, and had sworn an oath.
But, I am a high road kind of guy.
(no message)
(no message)
Smart and well qualified. Their more liberal views shouldn't disqualify them.
Now loads like a Thomas or Sotamayer, not so much.
But as far as this goes, Garland should have sailed through on being qualified (if you're agreeing to being qualified) if not for the GOP just not wanting Obama to fill the seat.
So, the dilemma of why the R's would see this as the D's being obstinate. As a matter of his opinions, I don't much like him and don't actually trust him as a judge - I think he just comes across with the mask of well thought and meaningful. There's something about him I do not trust - A lot like Thomas and Sotomayer.
They are both very smart, sound legal minds.
The R's took a big chance with Garland because if HRC won, she would have nominated someone far more to the left.
Sotamayer is a real jerk and not real smart. One of our lawyers use to practice in NYC and said she was universally disliked as a Second Circuit Judge both on temperament and brain wattage. Thomas goes without saying as a dolt.
Would anything have precluded Republicans rushing into hearings to confirm Garland had Clinton won?
I wouldn't have blamed the R's for denying her the seat.
He's obviously partisan. But most of them are. And when he got to the senate, he kept a low profile for years (unlike, say Cruz, who immediately acted if he was in charge, making enemies of basically everyone).
He's smart and funny, my two favorite qualities.
today.
Franken toasted him pretty good on that trucker case. Only time he looked not too sharp. Should have just acknowledged the dissent was a mistake and moved on.
(no message)
I also gained more respect for Franken as a questioner. He isn't bad.