Learn Me Something

I am politically retarded. That being said, will someone tell me why the people don’t vote for Supreme Court nominees?

14 Comments

  1. because technically, it shouldn’t matter. these are to be non-political people (as set up in the constitution)who judge only through the filter of the constitution and what it states. they are not to be people who do favors for one party or the next. they have to be one thing objective through the eyes of the constitution. what is happening with judge roberts is a dog show. it doesn’t matter that he may be republican or democrat, it doesn’t matter that he is jewish or christian or muslim, what matters is how well he wears the “constitutional glasses” when he goes to work.

    Reply

  2. was that a rhetorical question? you did mean us citizens? or did i get that wrong?

    Reply

  3. You got it right. Actually wanted to know. Thanks. I’m listening to the hearing and it’s painful. Really painful.

    Reply

  4. People do vote for them—by way of our elected Senators. The public can’t directly vote for everything, after all. That’s why we have representatives who voice our concerns and opinions. Of course, once you leave the local-most level, a lot of that direct parallel to the concerns of the public often gives way to personal views and other pressures.

    Reply

  5. he’s got the law on his side and the experience of “argument” he’ll do fine. it’s the politicians that really look dumb. and we elect them, which totally blows my mind sometimes when i hear them speak. i get embarrassed for them(politicians that is)

    Reply

  6. Our country is also set up on the idea that the President is the only person who is a representative of the people / elected by them as a whole.

    The legislative branch is all filled with state representatives, to weigh in their interests.

    I could be wrong remembering this, but I think that thee judicial was supposed to be designed as a compromise between the people and the state (hence appointments that are confirmed).

    Then you get that whole 3 way checks and balances thing.

    Reply

  7. greg, this hearing broadcast is totally painful. You’re so right. I was thinking.. these are the folks we appointed to speak for us? Oh dear god. It’s no wonder…

    Reply

  8. this is why politics (as a practice) scares me. i have more education than probably 95% of them and they have the nerve to stand up on their soap box and preach to me about things that are physically or scientifically not true. the problem is people believe their bullshit more often than not. global warming is a huge politicized farce, sure it exists, but nobody knows why, yet the politician want to educate me that they have the heads up???? yeah right! anymore i put politicians in the same braket as used car salesmen.

    Reply

  9. i was under this crazy assumption that we knew why global warming exists – pollution and rapid industrialization/overdevelopment of ecosystems that place certain natural tendencies in check

    Reply

  10. As I’m listening to this, I can’t help but feel that the senators are more interested in talking about what they believe and getting their beliefs heard rather than ask Roberts questions and or find out about him. I mean, at times. Is anyone else getting this feeling?

    Reply

  11. Take a look at Daily Kos (one of the top liberal blogs) and there’s lots of discussion about the Roberts confirmation.

    The bottom line here is that important decisions, especially Roe vs. Wade, stand in the balance. For some reason, be it “decorum” or what have you, no one will come out and ask Roberts point blank what he thinks. Instead, the senators on the committee pontificate about their personal beliefs.

    When Clinton was president, the Republicans on the committee wanted to know how Clinton’s appointees (like Ginsberg) viewed certain issues. The Democrats wanted to squelch that debate. Now that the other political party’s in power, it’s the Democrats that want to know what Roberts thinks and the Republicans who want to squelch the debate.

    Of course, the Bush administration has gone farther than Clinton’s did, in denying the committee access to a bunch of Roberts’ writing, saying it’s none of their business. If I were on that committee, I’d say, you don’t provide me with that information, I won’t vote for your nominee.

    Reply

  12. What has become shamefully true (for me) as I have listened to this, is that Roberts has been very articulate and intelligent when answering questions while some of the senators come off like buffoons. Not everyone, but some of them.
    And regarding the Roe Vs. Wade thing, the guy who just spoke really did hop around the question, didn’t he? That was a bit odd.
    PS. Why doesn’t that site work for me? I get a blank page.

    Reply

  13. doesn’t work for me either

    Reply

  14. They’ve been getting hammered lately. Probably have to try again later. (I have nothing to do with the site.)

    Reply

Leave a Reply