Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

On cue, Turley is bashing the Sotomayor pick

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Uzybone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:37 AM
Original message
On cue, Turley is bashing the Sotomayor pick
Edited on Tue May-26-09 09:38 AM by Uzybone
stupid fucking idiot

Even Tweety looks stunned. Turley is saying she lacks the intellectual chops.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
CBR Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:38 AM
Response to Original message
1. He is SO ANNOYING. I am an academic and he is an idiot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jefferson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:40 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. Ditto.
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kahuna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:38 AM
Response to Original message
2. Unbelievable. He reeks.
:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
high density Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:40 AM
Response to Original message
3. Does this guy like anything?
This guy doesn't ever seem to have a positive take.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:02 AM
Response to Reply #3
27. Nope...and especially if it relates to Obama. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevenleser Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 01:18 PM
Response to Reply #27
114. You can expand that to, if it relates to any Democrat
I dont understand the defense he gets by some here. Someone who agrees with you on one issue can still be a right wing hack and that is exactly the situation here. Turley is only interested in torture because the issue causes a problem for a Democratic President.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 01:39 PM
Response to Reply #114
117. He "gets the defense here" exactly
Edited on Tue May-26-09 01:40 PM by Cha
because of his positions against President Obama.

Edit~ And, the corporatemedia has him "right on cue"(per the OP) for the same freakin' reason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:40 AM
Response to Original message
4. Can people now see what a jerk Turley is? I agree with him on torture but he is so smug
and so into himself. Sonia is down to earth, likable, and real.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tishaLA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:40 AM
Response to Original message
6. I like Turley, but he's a fucking turd about this
Tweety was right: you'd have a hard time saying someone with her credentials doesn't have the intellectual heft to be on the court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:40 AM
Response to Original message
7. Get ready for the Turley apologists in 3..2...
Edited on Tue May-26-09 09:41 AM by babylonsister
I agree, he's more than annoying.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #7
42. You're on mark...they've hit the thread already. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pirate Smile Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:41 AM
Response to Original message
8. Well, I've been thinking he is a jackass for quite a while so he just keeps reinforcing that
view.

I'm listening to his arrogance make his pronouncements right now. gag.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MADem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:41 AM
Response to Original message
9. Did he have his hand up, crying "Pick MEEE!!! Pick MEEEEE!!!" perhaps?
You know that's what he's thinking--that he's "better" and "more deserving."

Tweety should pull it together, say "HA!!!!!" Followed by "STFU!!!"

Perhaps the orchestra could play a few choruses of "Jealousy?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:41 AM
Response to Original message
10. he's parroting the right wingnut line: She's stupid.
she went from the projects to princeton, graduating summa and was an editor at the Yale Law Review. She's been on the bench for 19 years. and for what it's worth, Greenwald thinks it's a good pick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:43 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. She is a lot smarter then most of us. She went to Princeton without a silver spoon to help her.
She reminds me of our Michelle in that way, rising above her circumstances to become a possible Justice on the Supreme Court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chimpymustgo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:00 AM
Response to Reply #10
23. I like Turley and Greenwald. I think the Turley bashing is over the top. He's expressing his - and
some others' opinions - that her written opinions are not as rigorously intellectual -so far - as they might have hoped - especially to go up against Scalia and Roberts.

Must we all read from exactly the same script, all the time?

I think she's a great pick, but I also appreciate what Turley has to say. As our President has pointed out, it takes more than a pointy head to make a good - great - Supreme Court justice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #23
69. Her opinions lack the cold and bloodless quality of Scalia's, because
Edited on Tue May-26-09 10:52 AM by pnwmom
they are written by an actual human being. A person with *empathy*.

But she graduated from Princeton summa cum laude, with the Pyne prize, the highest award given to an undergraduate at Princeton. Intellectually, she can hold her own with anyone.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #23
99. maybe you should read one of her opinions before you decide which script you read from.
Edited on Tue May-26-09 12:21 PM by mkultra
Otherwise, you are just picking an oracle, and frankly, you did not choose wisely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 01:06 PM
Response to Reply #23
112. Your avatar is ironic
considering he is a "dim bulb" according to Turley...

Also, where is the evidence that Scalia's legal reasoning is so "brilliant"? This seems to be one of the biggest myths, propagated by conservatives (and sadly enough) liberals alike. Screw Scalia. He's basically a petty partisan thug and should have been kicked off the court long ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
global1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #10
43. Those Who Can - Do ---- Those Who Can't Are Talking Heads......nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #43
121. AKA MediaWhores. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thrill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:42 AM
Response to Original message
11. No one is smarter than him. Didn't you know?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asphalt.jungle Donating Member (792 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:49 AM
Response to Original message
13. Then cue his fans on DU joining in soon. He's a piece of work with a chip on his shoulder.
He tries too hard to show everyone how smart he is. He's gonna show those Ivy League lawyers like Obama and Sotemayor. Dude relax, Northwestern Law is an excellent school, not Harvard Law or Yale Law but excellent none the less. And GW Law is a very good law school to teach at, it may not be as highly regarded as UChicago where Obama taught Constitution Law but it is top 30. Lose that boulder off your shoulder and take pleasure in the fact that no one could possibly have the same grasp of Constitutional Law as you do Jonathan TURDLEY.


At this point he's just a media whore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uzybone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:50 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. lol.....great post
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #13
16. LOL
Nice. :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RoyGBiv Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #13
97. You know what's awesome ...

Today you can actually say that.

I said something similar to that several months ago, but at the time he was rambling off the "correct" things on a single issue, and so, of course, he was a golden boy champion of all that is good and holy about the law.

What's even more fun is I see someone in this thread who said I sounded like a right-winger for my criticism of Turley, but here that person is bashing Turley.

It's a fun world.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 01:47 PM
Response to Reply #13
120. And, we all know the "media" loves
their whores.."right on cue".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:53 AM
Response to Original message
15. He also dissed Thurgood Marshall as an overrated dim bulb which was a revealing follow-up statement.
Edited on Tue May-26-09 09:53 AM by ClarkUSA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. Revealing indeed nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
firedupdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #15
32. Oh really? Well, he can go screw himself. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #15
36. The man thinks he's God. He has a God complex. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polmaven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #15
63. NO!
OMG....Thurgood Marshall wasn't good enough for him? OMG!!! I knew he was an over-rated narcissist, but Thurgood Marshall???? Wow!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gkhouston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:19 PM
Response to Reply #63
127. Yeah. That one's gonna sink him, IMO. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:54 AM
Response to Original message
18. That stunned me, too.
I often agree with Turley's arguments, but there wasn't even an argument on this -- just a flat insult without any rationale. Inferior intellect? I don't believe that for a second.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #18
24. Why? I never agree with him b/c at this point he's biased. He's been biased.
If you pay attention to anything O does even when it is reveered by others...he will bash it. It's common place. You should sit and see if you can watch everything he's ever said. The man just doesn't like O and that's how he roles. Keep in mind what you see here and listen to him in the future. You'll notice his personality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #24
41. I consider each argument, rather than psychoanalyzing the guy
I often do agree with his analyses, but there didn't seem to be any analysis here -- just a flat judgment with nothing supporting it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #41
48. I've considered his arguments and have just come to see
his bias doesn't provide for a sound argument. He will find something to discredit those he may have a problem with. It's rather tiresome to watch. There's some give and take and there is none with this guy.

And then to basically state she's stupid and unqualified. Well he's not worth any grain of salt considering that he's basically psychoanalyzed Sotomayer as a failure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #48
122. And, that's why the "media"
insists on having only his opinion on at times just like this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
19. The man's intellectually honest. Hate his opinion but he's not lining his pockets ONLY
calling em' as he sees um.

She's qualified but NOT as brilliant as some, to me (not Turley) that's a plus. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #19
22. this woman went from the projects to graduating from Princeton
summa cum laude to serving as an editor on the Yale law review to the bench on the recommendation, largely, of Daniel Patrick Moynihan. She's said to be highly versed in the intricacies of the law. Sorry, I don't take Turley's word as sacrosant. Who is he or you to declare that she's "not as brilliant as some"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asphalt.jungle Donating Member (792 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #22
31. You have to understand that in the minds of people like him
their education background means nothing because the Obamas and Sotemayors are intellectually inferior minorities and all they did was take his place at Harvard or Yale and force him to settle for another great law school. It can't possibly be because they were more impressive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Uzybone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #19
26. He didn't just say she was not as brillant as some
he insinuated he she was not brilliant at all. Then he said Thurgood Marshall was a dim bulb.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #26
37. That's not the impression I received ... well, not quite that.
I'm a person (I believe) with slightly above average intelligence. I tested into a PhD level Experimental Design course as a graduate student and completed the course THIRD in my class of 15 students.

When I received my grade, I was miffed to have been awarded an A - (minus! :wtf:).

I scheduled an appointment with the professor where he informed me, POINT BLANK, "You have a talent for statistics and received THE HIGHEST A- in the class. That should make you happy? That's excellent for a master's level student." This program would not award a masters level graduate student a solid "A" because it did not meet their preconceived concept of our capabilities. We only served to fill out the class of esteemed PhD level candidates. :(

My point: Turley is A SNOB. I don't know what criteria he uses to judge brilliance, perhaps it was that one of her hairs were out of place.

Who knows?

The FACT that Turley says that she's NOT brilliant enough makes me LIKE HER MORE.

Some professors and intellectuals are so arrogant as to be unreachable ... can we say, lack empathy? :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EquallyExhausted Donating Member (58 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #26
62. well i'd love to be as intellectually unremarkable as sotomayor & thurgood marshall. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Born_A_Truman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 12:41 PM
Response to Reply #62
107. Agree!
And welcome to DU!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chimpymustgo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #19
29. Thank you for saying that (I noted something upthread). Turley calls 'em like he sees 'em.
"She's qualified but NOT as brilliant as some."

And she may well be a GREAT SCOTUS justice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #29
33. Your apologizing for this guy? Who is he to say whom is brilliant?! The man has a lot of nerve.
I'm not defending that jerk. There's telling it like it is or just straight bash. This guy has NEVER given O praise on anything he's done. NEVER. Sotomayer is actually a good pick and he's rather bashing her instead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:08 PM
Response to Reply #33
124. turley also said the poster's avatar was a "dim bulb"..
how does one defend that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sparkly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #29
35. I believe he said she was NOT qualified.
He said reading a few of her opinions, they don't rise to the level of a Supreme Court justice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:15 AM
Response to Reply #35
44. No, I missed that. He was upset because she was not Boffo Brilliant and Sparkling.
Yes, the folks in the faculty lounge will be much more receptive. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #29
64. Brilliance is measured only in sterile academia. Other areas of intelligence are not
so easily measured. As much as I admire Turley's academic intelligence, I believe that it takes MORE than abstraction and eloquence to make a SCOTUS who serves "the people" vice "the corporations" in the USA. Perhaps she has ... EMPATHY through life experiences? ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #19
71. She graduated with the top award in her class at Princeton, the Pyne prize.
Along with summa cum laude.

I think he's intellectually jealous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #19
72. No, he sounds like a racist and sexist to me nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #19
101. Is this the same guy that voted FOR impeachment of clinton?
The thing about intellect is that its less like a democracy and more like a horse race. The winner usually gets to the finish line alone. people that rank lower on the intellect scale are in no real position to rank those above them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #101
123. I read turley was FOR Impeachment of Clinton but
not sure "he voted".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #123
137. your right, mistated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HamdenRice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:58 AM
Response to Original message
20. Has he called for her impeachment yet? What's taking him so long? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 09:59 AM
Response to Original message
21. This guy hates all things about Obama. But the Turley pariahs will be after you.
He is a jerk and will NEVER agree with O's choices. I've come to terms with that. He's a jackass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #21
25. I am starting to think that he immensely dislikes Obama for whatever reason
At least Krugman praises Obama now and then, and when he disagrees with him it seems legitimate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:05 AM
Response to Reply #25
30. Yup. Turley on the other hand is just anti-Obama.
Edited on Tue May-26-09 10:10 AM by vaberella
I have been saying this from the beginning when I started my first anti-Turley thread. The guy is a jerk who really doesn't like the guy or any of his decisions. It could be a feeling of inadequacy due to the fact that O was the youngest head of the Harvard Law Review. Or maybe the guy just hates him period.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asphalt.jungle Donating Member (792 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #30
34. Obama graduated from Harvard Law, but he didn't teach there.
He taught at UChicago Law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:09 AM
Response to Reply #34
38. No I know. I meant to say he was head of the Harvard Law Review.
I'll correct it. I had stupid Turley as a professor in my head at the time I was writing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polmaven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #30
91. I think Turley
is anti ANYONE with even the hint of a (D) attached.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #91
110.  I think you're right. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #21
125. And, really, why does anyone actually
care what he thinks?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Clio the Leo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:03 AM
Response to Original message
28. Turley can suck it!
I may make that my new sig line. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:10 AM
Response to Original message
39. My conclusion is that he's a racist. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #39
40. I need more before I say that. He was anti-Clinton too and apparently Thurgood Marshall.
See post up the thread. I say he just thinks he's God.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:16 AM
Response to Reply #40
46. Hmmm...
all I can go on is that he's consistently "disappointed" in everything Obama does, including his pick of the first Latina for the SC. For him to say she's not as intellectually superior as Obama's other choices, which I haven't heard anyone else say (rather than pointing out any of her positive traits) tells me he may just be a racist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:21 AM
Response to Reply #46
50. No, I understand your point and I thought so as well.
Then I found about his past and I've just come to the conclusion he has a God complex and there was nothing else. Or he wanted the spot, or he wants to be Pres.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #50
55. So...
the bottom line may be he's jealous? That's possible. The way he takes things out of context to make Obama look bad (ala Rachel Maddow for a while now), makes him less credible than he SHOULD be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blogslut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:15 AM
Response to Original message
45. I only got to hear the good professor via audio today
Do tell, was his face a wee bit green?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MarjorieG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:17 AM
Response to Original message
47. Difficult to be all things to all people. Does he like Scalia, who is bright, writes well, but also
Edited on Tue May-26-09 10:19 AM by MarjorieG
politically corrupted and no purist? Turley has very strict approach ot the Constitution with more appeal to Conservatives, really, yet we like him because he also doesn't like Bush and, now, Obama.

Easier to be that kind of high-minded, simplistic, and never having to make tough choices.

sp.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
specialed Donating Member (276 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:21 AM
Response to Original message
49. Wood would have been the optimal choice....
Turley is dead on here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #49
52. Sustein would have been---he was my fave.
But then I like all the people on O' s list. So Sotomayer is a fine choice and I'm not disappointed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #52
54. That's twice I've seen you refer to Sustein.
Do you mean Cass Sunstein?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #54
58. My spelling was never in top form. ^_^ Thanks for the correction.
Oh and yeah, I meant him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:25 AM
Response to Reply #49
53. Sotomayor is the choice most opposed by the repukes
I don't know if Wood would have been a better choice. How did you decide that? Do you read a sampling of both women's written opinions? What in Wood's background makes her a better choice? Oh, and do you also agree with Turley about Marshall?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #49
73. Wouldn't that have smelled like cronyism?
Fellow Chicagoan and Lecturer at the University of Chicago School of Law. :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:22 AM
Response to Original message
51. "stupid fucking idiot" Yep, and a media hog as well...
One only has to read his submission to the House re the Clinton impeachment to KNOW who lacks the "intellectual chops" and it is NOT Judge Sotomayor. Turley will never be anything other than a libertarian/conservative talking head regardless of any judicial ambitions he might have and I hope that eats him alive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onenote Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:27 AM
Response to Original message
56. typical Turley--he is an attention whore. Always has been. Always will be.
The reason that Turley gets so much air time is that he can be counted on to say something controversial. Its a symbiotic relationship. The media wants someone to stir things up and Turley loves getting attention -- it helps him sell books (and he gets paid for some of his appearances).

He has no credibility. Zero. Nada.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #56
126. "Symbiotic" is an excellent descriptive word
for turley and the corporatemedia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polmaven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:27 AM
Response to Original message
57. Why is that?
Princeton and then Yale Law School......Takes a little intellect to get into either of those schools....What is it she lacks, Professor Turley? A penis? Is THAT the "chop she is missing? :mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #57
60. Obama had a penis and he's not too fond of him. Turley's got a God complex. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:30 AM
Response to Original message
59. Stephen Carter, Yale professor & author of "Jericho's Fall," just disagreed with Turley's assessment
Edited on Tue May-26-09 10:31 AM by jenmito
that she lacks intellectually brilliance or is as "intellectually persuasive" as some of the other potential picks. And he knows her. Thank you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #59
61. I hope someone is taping this. I need to see it. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #61
66. He was interviewed by phone. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CTyankee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #59
65. And Carter, by DU standards, certainly ain't no progressive on other things,
such as abortion and church-state separation. But he's no crazy,that's for sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #59
128. And, thank you for reporting that
from tvcableland, jenmito!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:50 AM
Response to Original message
67. Has anyone started boiling the tar yet??
:popcorn:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gkhouston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #67
130. We're going to heat it with our collective outrage. Film at 11. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dinger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:50 AM
Response to Original message
68. Neither Turley Nor Sotomayor Are "Stupid Fucking Idiots," And Neither
lacks "intellectual chops."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #68
70. It's INANE on the surface to accuse someone who graduated summa cum laude from Princeton as
NOT having adequate BRILLIANCE.

Turley is out of line, perhaps jealous? :thumbsdown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chimpymustgo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:13 AM
Response to Reply #70
79. That's not what he said. He said he's read 30 of her opinions, and they don't show the intellectual
Edited on Tue May-26-09 11:13 AM by chimpymustgo
rigor he - and some others - had hoped the would, as far as displaying an ability to shape the direction of the court. He said she might well come into her own, once she gets on the court - and she might be a great justice.

The Turley bashing is knee-jerk and predictable. Has Krugman weighed in, God forbid?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #79
81. Ahhh...an apologist. Understood.n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chimpymustgo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #81
86. Ahhh...a childish namecaller. Understood. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #79
84. What criteria? Turley rules? He's an intellectual snob - I've met many as a grad student. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #79
129. Oh, you mean like SOME around here Knee Jerk Bash
the president? Is that what you mean, chimpymustgo? Hmmmm.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jennicut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #68
74. No, Turley is merely a jerk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:03 AM
Response to Original message
75. Turley was just on MSNBC again. What he said -->
He says Sotomayor has a "lack of intellectual depth" and she won't be "the equal of Scalia". He continues and says "Thurgood Marshall's decisions did not have massive intellectual impact on the Court" but he "understands liberals' joy at her being a woman and an Hispanic." What patronizing arrogance. He might as well as said it's an affirmative action pick by President Obama.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:05 AM
Response to Reply #75
76. He also said this:
"Questions about empathy and temperament are less important than whether this person is going to have a profound impact-to help shape the court-and this nominee really doesn't have a history to suggest that."

Now we know where he stands.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #76
77. Yup. I stopped listening to his blowhard subjective crap long ago. This nails it.
Edited on Tue May-26-09 11:10 AM by ClarkUSA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #77
78. He just made it clear that he would never be on an Obama SC. He doesn't feel
empathy is important. What a snob.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #78
80. Not that they'd ever consider someone who's got such a lightweight legal background.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:21 AM
Response to Reply #80
82. Right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #82
83. He must be really fun at parties, though. Such a charmer. And humble.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #83
85. He's probably never been invited to a party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #85
88. !!!
:rofl:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #88
92. ...
:D :toast:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rvablue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 12:21 PM
Response to Reply #78
100. Wow! Did he really self-reference re: being picked for the SC????
That is very, very telling.

Turley thinks it should be him. Uh, Turley your ego and self-absorption are showing!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jenmito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #100
102. No. Sorry, I guess my wording wasn't right...
I meant that by his comment it's obvious he'd never make it as a SC justice under an Obama presidency.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #76
136. And, what of turley's "history" to suggest
he would become the mediawhore extraordinare? This is about him, too, since he's giving his opinions so much..we need to know just who is making these pronouncements.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:39 AM
Response to Reply #75
89. This guy is a real jerk...
Edited on Tue May-26-09 11:39 AM by redqueen
he just gets worse and worse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #89
90. Yup... Turley thinks Justice Scalia is da bomb!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HamdenRice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #75
118. Yeah, Marshall's legal strategizing over decades that led to Brown v. Board wasn't a big deal ...
compared to Turley's towering intellectual accomplishments.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uponit7771 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #75
133. Yeap, Turleys on my list now...very asshole-ish of him
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #75
134. Oh yeah, a snide little prick.
The mediawhores' mediawhore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
87. How does he keep up with his scholarly work when he's on 3 different cable shows every night?
wonder how his intellectual chops are...especially when you consider that half his blog complaint was about the politics of her appointment and provided no detail about what he felt was lacking in her opinions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
vaberella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #87
109. He considers himself God...that's how. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 12:01 PM
Response to Original message
93. I have to rethink all of his criticisms about "war crimes" now
I seriously have to rethink any opinion I've built with input from this arrogant prick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 12:02 PM
Response to Original message
94. Turley's probably right, but it's still a great pick
We've known that Sotomayor has not distinguished herself like other candidates.

However, she is Hispanic and female, which (IMO) is a great political move!

Great pick, Obama!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #94
95. "We've known that Sotomayor has not distinguished herself like other candidates." Really? How so?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 06:36 PM
Response to Reply #95
138. For instance, Pamela Karlan
Edited on Tue May-26-09 06:44 PM by LittleBlue
has authored the authoritative sources on constitutional law, and teaches at Stanford. Kagan and Sullivan were deans of Harvard and Stanford, respectively.

I'm not saying this is a bad thing, though. Some lawyers choose to go this route, while others choose private practice and the judiciary. Those candidates are more academically distinguished than Sotomayor, but that doesn't mean they are better jurists necessarily, or will perform better as a justice. David Souter definitely did not have the credentials that Sotomayor has, and he turned out to be an excellent justice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #138
144. so lets look
Karlan:
Yale University, where she earned a bachelor's degree in 1980 and a law degree and master of arts in 1984
Article & Book Reviews editor of the Yale Law Journal
worked as a law clerk
assistant counsel at the NAACP
professor of law at Virginia
on the faculty of Stanford Law School.
I don't see anything about her writing "the authoritative sources" on constitutional law, whatever that means.


Kagan:
summa cum laude at Princeton University in 1981, an M. Phil. from Worcester College, Oxford University, in 1983, and a J.D.
magna cum laude at Harvard Law
supervising editor of the Harvard Law Review.
was a law clerk
tenured professor of law at Chicago Law
served as President Bill Clinton's Associate White House Counsel and Deputy Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy and Deputy Director of the Domestic Policy Council.
first female dean of Harvard Law School in 2003


Sullivan:
Harvard Law School in 1981
law clerk
professor of law at Harvard Law
Dean of Stanford Law
author of a leading text in the field of Constitutional Law with the late Professor Gerald Gunther.
appellate litigator

Sotomayor:
summa cum laude at Princeton
Yale Law School
editor of the Yale Law Journal
Assistant District Attorney in New York County
private practice specialized in intellectual property litigation
became the youngest judge in the Southern District
first Hispanic federal judge anywhere in New York State
Court of Appeals Judge
honorary degrees from Lehman College, Princeton University, Brooklyn Law School, Pace University School of Law, Hofstra University, and Northeastern University
Other activities
lecturer-in-law at Columbia Law School
member of the Board of Trustees of Princeton University





So, she is more of a jurist and less of an academic. This does not lessen her qualifications in the least.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cali Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #94
96. how has she not distinguished herself?
many, many experts disagree with Mr. Turley.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #96
141. see above and below
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #94
98. Nice, damning with faint praise....
You have provided nothing to back up why "Turley is probably right" but you have made a very disingenuous attempt, imo, to say she is merely an 'affirmative action' pick.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #98
139. See above- that's not what I'm saying.
I am not calling a woman who was

1) Editor of the Princeton Law Review
2) Attaiend summa cum laude status

an affirmative action hire.

I am merely pointing out that she does MUCH to split the GOP from Hispanic voters, something that is very important.

She was my first choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spazito Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 07:01 PM
Response to Reply #139
142. Given Turley did NOT state "she does MUCH to split the GOP...
from Hispanic voters" but did state 'Judge Sotomayor lacks intellectual depth as did Supreme Court Justice Marshall', I am not sure why you made a point of saying "Turley is probably right" in your original post as opposed to stating straight out your point about splitting the GOP?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #94
105. I challenge your remark with no expectation that you will respond
because your full of shit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #105
140. see above
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SpartanDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 12:29 PM
Response to Original message
103. Just more reasons for to me ignore
this smug jackass and the comments about Thurgood Marshall are particularly disgusting
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mkultra Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 12:29 PM
Response to Original message
104. Turley called this obamas "highest risk option" nomination
If he truly believes this, he is is a dimwit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jillan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 12:38 PM
Response to Original message
106. RW radio is playing his clip from msnbc, as a reason not to confirm Sotomayor....
"And he is from MSNBC"

SHUT this guy up!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 12:48 PM
Response to Reply #106
108. Of course they are... just like the WSJ gleefully shared Maddow's comments.
They love our cirucular firing squad... even though Turley isn't a Dem, he's on MSNBC, which is close enough for their clueless and credulous audience.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jillan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #108
113. What were Maddow's comments? I'm afraid to ask.
I stopped watching her show when I realized that all she does is focus on the shiny objects of the day.

She does have great guests on, and I just figure I can catch those interviews here without having to sit thru the rest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #113
115. Didn't quote her...
but this appeared days after she showed a clip from a speech in 2007 and tried to claim that he'd done a 180 on tribunals... which IMO he did not.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124242595415225131.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jillan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 01:43 PM
Response to Reply #115
119. Interesting -
that was the show that was the deciding factor to turn her off for awhile.


Of course the rw is going to pick up our talking heads when they criticize Obama....we do the same thing to them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DireStrike Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 12:57 PM
Response to Original message
111. Wow, somebody is jealous and a sore loser.
Edited on Tue May-26-09 12:57 PM by DireStrike
Maybe you were next in line, Turley... not anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 01:35 PM
Response to Original message
116. Good..he proves the point
that he's a vulture, from a safe perch, taking pot shots with no gravitas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MasonJar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:35 PM
Response to Original message
131. I usually agree with Turley and I have not seen what he said, but apparently
despite growing up in a ghetto, Sotomayor graduated magna cum laude from Princeton and graduated from Yale Law School. That is an amazing accomplishment for one growing up in her circumstances, which definitely all too often preclude even college, much less Princeton University and Yale Law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SemiCharmedQuark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:36 PM
Response to Reply #131
132. Summa Cum Laude.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 02:47 PM
Response to Original message
135. Maybe this will be what opens the Left's eyes to what a one-note hack Turley is. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cali_Democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-26-09 07:04 PM
Response to Original message
143. Tuck Furley. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Jul 30th 2014, 04:58 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC