Comments on: CNN’s No Bias, No Bull is a lot of Bull! http://mindyourowndamnbusinesspolitics.com/wordpress/2009/05/26/cnn%e2%80%99s-no-bias-no-bull-is-a-lot-of-bull/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=cnn%25e2%2580%2599s-no-bias-no-bull-is-a-lot-of-bull Wed, 16 Mar 2011 17:23:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Brett http://mindyourowndamnbusinesspolitics.com/wordpress/2009/05/26/cnn%e2%80%99s-no-bias-no-bull-is-a-lot-of-bull/comment-page-1/#comment-261 Brett Thu, 28 May 2009 19:34:08 +0000 http://mindyourowndamnbusinesspolitics.com/wordpress/?p=573#comment-261 Farrell: I can't tell if you are serious or facetious here. So...there are different standards for hearings for Sotomayor than there are for Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas, John Roberts, et al? (include any other nominations). Much of this circus started with the Bork confirmation hearings, by the Democrats. As has been stated elsewhere, there truly needs to be separation of powers between the branches of government; no reason to let any president do whatever the hell he pleases. Let the senators do their jobs also, and hopefully they'll ask appropriate questions of this "giant". And come on now, the government will waste money and time? A time honored tradition going back since before I was born. Farrell: I can’t tell if you are serious or facetious here.

So…there are different standards for hearings for Sotomayor than there are for Robert Bork, Clarence Thomas, John Roberts, et al? (include any other nominations).

Much of this circus started with the Bork confirmation hearings, by the Democrats. As has been stated elsewhere, there truly needs to be separation of powers between the branches of government; no reason to let any president do whatever the hell he pleases. Let the senators do their jobs also, and hopefully they’ll ask appropriate questions of this “giant”.

And come on now, the government will waste money and time? A time honored tradition going back since before I was born.

]]> By: Farrell Sacramento, CA http://mindyourowndamnbusinesspolitics.com/wordpress/2009/05/26/cnn%e2%80%99s-no-bias-no-bull-is-a-lot-of-bull/comment-page-1/#comment-256 Farrell Sacramento, CA Wed, 27 May 2009 21:38:31 +0000 http://mindyourowndamnbusinesspolitics.com/wordpress/?p=573#comment-256 It's Roland Martin not Roland Smith you idiot! Just the first of much of what you got wrong..... And john boy; as has been stated many times this week; if all you can come up with are these two minuscule statements by this giant of the judicial world over a 30 year career it will be a waste of time and taxpayer dollars to have hearings at all. Say hello to our new justice Sotomayor! It’s Roland Martin not Roland Smith you idiot! Just the first of much of what you got wrong…..

And john boy; as has been stated many times this week; if all you can come up with are these two minuscule statements by this giant of the judicial world over a 30 year career it will be a waste of time and taxpayer dollars to have hearings at all. Say hello to our new justice Sotomayor!

]]> By: john http://mindyourowndamnbusinesspolitics.com/wordpress/2009/05/26/cnn%e2%80%99s-no-bias-no-bull-is-a-lot-of-bull/comment-page-1/#comment-254 john Wed, 27 May 2009 17:32:09 +0000 http://mindyourowndamnbusinesspolitics.com/wordpress/?p=573#comment-254 Ok. It's CNN. Because they call the show unbiased, you think it might possibly be unbiased? Come on, it's CNN! Thats all they do. Biased reporting is their thing. If they would have been unbiased, they would play what she has actually said, and acknowlege that she infact said it, but would then allow debate on what interpretations could come from that. But, then it's really difficult to defuse "I think that a hispanic can bring better decisions to the court than a white person.", not to mention " The appeals court is where we make laws. Oh, I shouldn't have said that, should I? " She pretty much summed up herself there. Hard to debate facts. So, you have to laugh it off, as an avoidance technique. Worked for Obama. Ok. It’s CNN. Because they call the show unbiased, you think it
might possibly be unbiased? Come on, it’s CNN! Thats all they do. Biased reporting is their thing. If they would have been unbiased,
they would play what she has actually said, and acknowlege that she infact said it, but would then allow debate on what interpretations could come from that. But, then it’s really difficult to defuse “I think that a hispanic can bring better decisions to the court than a white person.”, not to mention ” The appeals court is where we make laws. Oh, I shouldn’t have said that, should I? ” She pretty much summed up herself there. Hard to debate facts. So, you have to laugh it off, as an avoidance technique. Worked for Obama.

]]>