January 17, 2009
Did anything truly notable (or worth discussing) happen during the Holder hearings?
I was on the road for the last two days and thus had no opportunity to watch or even follow indirectly the Senate hearings for AG-nominee Eric Holder. Based on press reports (collected here by How Appealing), it seems there was not much of great interest for sentencing fans beyond all the pedantic pardon talk. But I would be eager and grateful if readers would use the comments to spotlight if anything really notable or worth discussing came up during the hearings.
Some posts on the Holder pick for Attorney General:
- How much will guns and drugs come up during the Holder hearings?
- Real headaches or just hiccups on nominee Holder's path to AG?
- Any early federal sentencing thoughts on Eric Holder, the next U.S. Attorney General?
- Three late afternoon thoughts on the Holder pick: race, tough and tech
- President-Elect Obama officially names Eric Holder as his AG pick
- Interesting reflections on Obama appointees from drug policy reformers
January 17, 2009 at 01:05 PM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Did anything truly notable (or worth discussing) happen during the Holder hearings?:
What we learned is that Holder is a shameless liar. His protestations that Clinton's political concerns did not lead him to support the release of Puerto Rican terrorists is a bald lie. For a crowd that automatically assumed the worst about BushitlerHaliburton, this swallowing of Holder's lies is instructive. IOKIYAAD.
Posted by: federalist | Jan 18, 2009 10:54:21 AM
We learned that the Republicans still think people give a crap about what they have to say. One republican senator started babbling to Holder about abortion and how it's a "shame" that parents who learn their unborn fetus will be born with Downs Syndrome are terminated in 80% of cases, and that less (!) of these fetuses should be terminated because with expensive healthcare and nobody wanting to adopt children born with horrible genetic disorders requiring expensive, round-the-clock medical care, what we need is more, not less, children born with Downs Syndrome - their suffering reminds us of Christ.
Republicans have devolved to nothing more than a sick, twisted, insane religious cult, and now that they've had their chance to run the country - at which they failed miserably in every conceivable way - they need to shut up. Their opinions are worthless and if they have any decency, honor, or love of America, they will shut the fuck up and not talk for at least the next 8 years. They can go into their closets and pray to their imaginary fairies, so long as they're neither seen nor heard. Republicans are like pubic hairs - keep them out of sight and off the table.
To be clear, by "Republican" I am referring to the modern Republican party that supported Bush and McCain, not the GOP of ye olde days that supported honorable, reasonable, intelligent candidates like Barry Goldwater (who is to the left of Dennis Kucinich). I'm a Goldwater liberal, and proud of it. But the people who ruined this country's reputation and economy over the past 8 years have no right to speak. By their own "flag burning" logic, the First Amendment does not apply to them, because they don't value the freedoms this country offers ... and have tried to subvert and destroy those freedoms every chance they got. You don't get to subvert the Constitution and then claim First amendment protection to keep on talking. The First Amendment should not apply to "Bush" Republicans, and I fully support a Constitutional Amendment to make it a crime for them to speak. I think ideological estoppel should always be an exception to the exercise of Constitutional rights anyway, so it might not even require an amendment.
Posted by: BruceM | Jan 19, 2009 12:27:36 AM
"One republican senator started babbling to Holder about abortion and how it's a "shame" that parents who learn their unborn fetus will be born with Downs Syndrome are terminated in 80% of cases, and that less (!) of these fetuses should be terminated because with expensive healthcare and nobody wanting to adopt children born with horrible genetic disorders requiring expensive, round-the-clock medical care, what we need is more, not less, children born with Downs Syndrome - their suffering reminds us of Christ."
You know, BruceM, you POS, some people in here have family members with Down Syndrome.
Posted by: federalist | Jan 19, 2009 10:46:40 AM
I don't see how you conclude I am against people with Down Syndrome. They should be loved and treated as humanely as possible. But anyone who is pregnant and tests their fetus for any debilitating genetic disease, learns that their baby WILL HAVE that disease, and gives birth anyway is a horrible, cruel, selfish, evil, inhuman, sadistic asshole who deserves to be locked up for a crime against humanity.
What kind of person would intentionally condemn a life to perpetual, life-long suffering when it can be avoided ab initio? Only the most evil, cruel, sadistic person, that's who. They'd have to be extremely religious to even justify their actions. I wish I believed in hell, because there would be a special place there for parents who knowingly give birth to children with horrible genetic diseases when they learned about it pre-birth and had the chance to have an abortion. The lowest, darkest level of hell.
Posted by: BruceM | Jan 19, 2009 3:03:44 PM