"Democrats have turned the Supreme Court nominations into a savage political affair."

[Atman]

Of course, Joey Scab said this, just moments ago. He pointed to the Clarence Thomas hearings, and how "disgraceful" they were. And to Robert Bork. And not once did Joe bother to question WHY either of these men were questioned. Joe, here is something to consider: sometime there is a REASON people such as "Zero-Experience" Thomas and Crazy Bob Bork draw deeper scrutiny -- because in one way or another, they are just enough outside of what the proverbial 'most people' would consider normal/desirable, and they are being considered for a lifetime appointment to what is arguably one of the most prestigious jobs in the land.

Some appointees, by virtue of their lack of a résumé or, ironically, maybe a little bit too much information, as with Robert Bork, deserve a little bit of checkin' out. Thomas was proclaimed by The Nominator-in-Chief as being the most qualified person in America. Is there really one person, regardless of political persuasion, who believes that? Clarence Thomas?! His CV at the time of his nomination, a mere 18 months behind the bench, was shorter than the Supreme's lunch time take-out order.

And Robert Bork? Sure, maybe he's brilliant. But that's not the point. Many of us know people whom we consider to be "brilliant." But often, they're bat-shit crazy, too. I don't think Bork was bat-shit, but he had a crazy beard and wore bow ties and he looked bat-shit crazy. Then he opened his mouth, and bats flew out, and it caused a lot of us to want to know what else was inside that cave. Bork's arrogance got him trouble -- plus the beard and bow-tie thing (CONTENT ALERT: HIGH LEVELS OF SARCASM DETECTED). IOW, politics.

There were legitimate issues with both Clarence Thomas' and Robert Bork's nominations. They deserved some scrutiny, and I know many DUers still harbor resentment against certain Dems who didn't block Thomas. To claim that it is THE DEMOCRATS who invented the whole idea of fighting Judicial appointees on ideological grounds is laughable if it weren't so sad. Sad, because Joe Scarborough, a suspected criminal himself, is given a daily forum through which to peddle his personal views as news, and goes unchallenged as he spouts the most ridiculous, baseless claims.

I wish he'd run for office. I think it'd force him off the air.

.

[underpants]

1. Tina Brown "Are you saying the Republicans don't have an effective attack machine?"

Joe had no response to that one

I am not a huge fan of Tina Brown's but that was funny

[rampart]

2. right to privacy

bork searched the entire constitution and did not, anywhere, find a right to privacy.

the "federalist society" still believes this but knows better than to say it in front of a committe.

[floridablue]

3. Joe wisely turned down a bid for the Senate in 2010

I bet it didn't take much to make that decision.

[kentuck]

4. I love it when the Repubs make this argument...

There is always the deceit in Republican nominees. They hide information and intent. They nominate crazy folks, far out of the mainstream, and expect them to be treated like the "Democratic" nominee the last time around. No doubt, there is a lot of politics to go around, but if the Republicans did not so obviously use the Supreme Court for political purposes, it might be a little more civilized?

[tanyev]

5. Joey's conveniently forgotten that it was the religious right who tanked Harriet Miers.

[Ganja Ninja]

6. Republican's have turned Christmas into a savage political affair.

God how these people love to project.