Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/12/19/brownback.judge.ap/index.html" target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITI CS/12/19/brownback.judge.ap/index.html</a> Sen. Brownback, considering a presidential run, has blocked a judge's nomination because she attended a lesbian wedding. Apparently the only way to appease Brownback is to denounce gays.
Originally Posted By melekalikimaka <<Brownback, a Kansas Republican, said he wants Michigan state judge Janet Neff to testify about her role in the 2002 Massachusetts ceremony, her legal views on same-sex unions and her ability to be impartial if called upon to rule on such cases.>> I love that he's questioning her ability to be impartial. LOL
Originally Posted By gadzuux The road to success in GOP politics is paved with gays and lesbians - they must be denigrated and scapegoated at every opportunity. And republicans seem only too happy to comply.
Originally Posted By melekalikimaka <<Earlier this month, Brownback, a prominent opponent of gay marriage who is exploring a presidential run in 2008, said he would lift the hold he put on Neff's nomination if the judge agreed to withdraw from ruling on any court case involving the legality of same sex unions.>> Interesting idea. Maybe we should cloister judges away from the world lest they ever have to judge cases where they might have any experiences. Can't preside over a case where a police officer testifies...she once got a speeding ticket.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <I love that he's questioning her ability to be impartial. LOL> Ironical, ain't it?
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder He wants her to say how she'd rule om certain cass, which ethically she shouldn't say. Roberts didn't, Alioto didn't, and I'm not quite sure why Brownback thinks Neff should. Nothing has been said about her officiating there, she merely attended, if I've got this right. So really, what we have, is someone who Brownback thinks shouldn't go to a gay wedding. Brownback might as well declare himself a homophobe and be done with it.
Originally Posted By TALL Disney Guy Hey, if the "Girls" are okay with lesbians, they must be fine. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92zMAWvIF1A" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =92zMAWvIF1A</a>
Originally Posted By JohnS1 I understand all of your comments, but don't you all agree that we vote for senators and congressmen on a different basis than judges? I vote for congressmen and sneators based on what i perceiver as their likelihood to represrent my viewpoint when voting on legislative matters. I vote on judges whom I think will be impartial and not represent any particluar view.
Originally Posted By TALL Disney Guy <I vote for congressmen and "sneators" based on what i "perceiver" as their likelihood to "represrent" my viewpoint when voting on legislative matters. I vote on judges whom I think will be impartial and not represent any "particluar" view.> Eeeeeeasy on the egg not, John. It ain't Christmas yet. ;-)
Originally Posted By TALL Disney Guy LOL! Dang you, you tricky keen-eyed JohnS1 you...I nearly corrected myself, then thought "Naaah, 9 times out of 10 no one spots the typo unless you point it out in your next post" [Tiggrl exempt]. See, I'm just not used to typing out the awful words "egg noG" that it's hard for me to get it right sometimes. <---Dean's Custardâ„¢ guy all the way
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "I vote on judges whom I think will be impartial and not represent any particluar view." Correct, but what about Neff attending a gay committment ceremony prompts this tantrum from Brownback? Moreover, this episode means she's automatically going to vote one way or another? Brownback's actions here are completely irrational and irresponsible.
Originally Posted By JohnS1 If I were a judge, I wouldn't go to weddings, barmitzvahs, commitment ceremonies or even supermarket openings. Once you are a judge, you are viewed as being on a plane above the average mortal. You should never be seen anywhere in public; nowhere except in your robes and on the bench.
Originally Posted By TALL Disney Guy <If I were a judge, I wouldn't go to weddings, barmitzvahs, commitment ceremonies or even supermarket openings.> Not even a Brisk, eh?
Originally Posted By melekalikimaka <<You should never be seen anywhere in public; nowhere except in your robes and on the bench.>> LOL, yes, like I said, cloister them away. They shall have no friends, no family, no personal life whatsoever. They should probably eat protein powder instead of real foods too because you never know how they might judge a case against the food industry or vegetarians. They shouldn't be consumers in any way, might be swayed by the power of cotton over polyester. Obviously we just need to forget about using humans at all. We need robots to be judges. It's the only way to be sure...unless they get a virus or their batteries die. Oh dear...
Originally Posted By JohnS1 :We need robots to be judges. It's the only way to be sure...unless they get a virus or their batteries die. Oh dear..." I can see it now..."Sorry Dave, I'm afraid you're guilty."
Originally Posted By ecdc >>Correct, but what about Neff attending a gay committment ceremony prompts this tantrum from Brownback?<< The fact that no one who is running for President has yet to pander to the extreme right? Mitt Romney tried a little bit with his lame attempt to have Massachusetts voters determine the legality of gay marriage, but he's also trying to appeal to moderates as well. Brownback must be thinking there's really no one out there to represent the Insano 700 Club voter...
Originally Posted By TALL Disney Guy "Brisque", whatever...I Googled "circumsision" with "brisque" and "brisk" and "brisqu" and "brisk" looked "more right" in the searches. Dang Internet, it'll let just anybody put stuff on the online now! ;-)
