Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

babylonsister

(171,065 posts)
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 09:54 PM Mar 2017

What did you think of Gorsuch?

Last edited Wed Mar 22, 2017, 07:48 AM - Edit history (1)

I watched him today. He's so very nice, too nice. After watching for awhile, I was repelled because he was being too comradely, too 'hail fellow well met'. Maybe because I wouldn't trust that in a normal person, I don't trust him.

Ugh.

90 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
What did you think of Gorsuch? (Original Post) babylonsister Mar 2017 OP
he believes in corporate personhood.. fuck him. JHan Mar 2017 #1
But generally not in human personhood Warpy Mar 2017 #55
Yes,.here are some others: JHan Mar 2017 #58
Those freaky cold eyes of zentrum Mar 2017 #66
He is as fake as a 3 dollar bill. fun n serious Mar 2017 #2
And there you have it... Raster Mar 2017 #29
Best assessment. strongermessage Mar 2017 #53
I don't trust him as a Supreme Court justice. As a person, he'd be a good neighbor. SharonAnn Mar 2017 #65
He's a thespian SummerSnow Mar 2017 #3
He's a maggot and answered no questions. Dems should NOT allow that hearing to go forward onecaliberal Mar 2017 #4
Bingo. dalton99a Mar 2017 #31
+1 mountain grammy Mar 2017 #34
On the news, they said he'd be comfirmed by April 7th yeoman6987 Mar 2017 #36
Dems don't really have a choice since they can't stop the confirmation :/ OliverQ Mar 2017 #52
+1 uponit7771 Mar 2017 #76
He said all the right things. Kath2 Mar 2017 #5
I find him about as sincere as a... dchill Mar 2017 #6
Hahahaha! Yes! nt babylonsister Mar 2017 #14
Not as nutritious, though. dchill Mar 2017 #23
He's not Garland and the pResident who nominated him is illegitimate. n/t rzemanfl Mar 2017 #7
There's that. That illegitimacy needs to babylonsister Mar 2017 #16
This Idoru Mar 2017 #81
Smarmy. Fake. Rehearsed. Insincere. Decidedly unbelievable as a "nice guy" type. Stinky The Clown Mar 2017 #8
Did not answer ANYTHING of substance uponit7771 Mar 2017 #9
Smarmy asshole. roamer65 Mar 2017 #10
"Smarmy" was the 1st adjective Nevernose Mar 2017 #13
He is a right wing hack with an aw-shucks grin. madaboutharry Mar 2017 #11
He seems so moderate, in an Altio kind of way. Chasstev365 Mar 2017 #12
Nominated by tRump. 'nuff said. old guy Mar 2017 #15
He reminds me of Bill Murray's character on SNL livetohike Mar 2017 #17
He is probably worse than Scalia .. ananda Mar 2017 #18
As I said in another thread, he gives me the same kind of willies that Squinch Mar 2017 #19
OMG! I have that exact feeling! About Dolan as well....you couldn't have described my impression Pachamama Mar 2017 #42
It's DEFINITELY there. I really hope the Democrats hold the line and keep him out. Squinch Mar 2017 #71
He had all the demeanor of a programmed android meow2u3 Mar 2017 #20
He learned a lot from his momma Phoenix61 Mar 2017 #21
He follows rules without exercising his soul in seeking justice. Ilsa Mar 2017 #22
And THAT has been proven. dchill Mar 2017 #38
The rule of law should be most important Amishman Mar 2017 #82
If you cunningly built & programmed a "conservative justice who might break from the pack"... VOX Mar 2017 #24
We would probably do worse. He likes Citizens United. Alice11111 Mar 2017 #25
They need to Filibuster, for the good of the party, and the nation. pat_k Mar 2017 #44
I'm all for fighting, but even if we won, we will get Alice11111 Mar 2017 #48
The only way that Democrats should EVER give in on an SC nominee is if the Republicans Squinch Mar 2017 #74
I wish, but not a chance. I like that the dems are making Alice11111 Mar 2017 #79
I know. But seriously, every Democrat who votes yes on this should have hell to pay. Squinch Mar 2017 #80
I would like a deal made Amishman Mar 2017 #83
Udsll put that deal forwstd. It wss rejected Alice11111 Mar 2017 #86
NO! Garland taking this spot, Gorsich taking the next and Ginsberg staying till she's Squinch Mar 2017 #90
It would be tough to find someone worse on some critical issues. pat_k Mar 2017 #88
Smarmy. gibraltar72 Mar 2017 #26
Fake Mr. Nice Guy! Yuck! n/t RKP5637 Mar 2017 #27
Phony, cowardly, untrustworthy underthematrix Mar 2017 #28
Yeah, he doesn't have horns and he's so well spoken dalton99a Mar 2017 #30
He's a corporate stooge who puts on a good act. n/t GoCubsGo Mar 2017 #32
He's a slick used car salesmen GP6971 Mar 2017 #33
Gorsuch isn't the issue, its McConnell. procon Mar 2017 #35
Mr "Religious Freedom equals fucking over the civil rights of Everyone Else" pat_k Mar 2017 #37
Didn't watch. Think the fix is in. elfin Mar 2017 #39
Flunked out of Drama and Theatre 101. cornball 24 Mar 2017 #40
disarming and slick hertopos Mar 2017 #41
Patronizing, condescending, evasive. madamesilverspurs Mar 2017 #43
Worse than Scalia... mark my words. Tatiana Mar 2017 #45
Apparatchik with a Cow Pie Western Chip on shoulder delisen Mar 2017 #46
Al Franken laid him bare the way a Korean chef skins and slits open a live eel before cooking it. pangaia Mar 2017 #47
Pompous DesertRat Mar 2017 #49
He's not good by any stretch Peachhead22 Mar 2017 #50
Ah yes, that is who it is! Sucha NastyWoman Mar 2017 #68
Not even. babylonsister Mar 2017 #78
I just mean physically Peachhead22 Mar 2017 #84
There's worse out there Loki Liesmith Mar 2017 #51
Wow! JimGinPA Mar 2017 #57
He's the best turd we squeeze out of this lot Loki Liesmith Mar 2017 #77
HE MUST NOT BE CONFIRMED! nikibatts Mar 2017 #54
DOLT 45 likes him MFM008 Mar 2017 #56
Very bad actor. littlemissmartypants Mar 2017 #59
He seems like another Clarence Thomas! Those assholes are not to be trusted! akbacchus_BC Mar 2017 #60
Ll truebluegreen Mar 2017 #61
A goodie goodie two shoes "deplorable" with a law degree, nevergiveup Mar 2017 #62
Slicker version of Alito. Blow-dried bad news. kairos12 Mar 2017 #63
Hated his "Aw shucks..." zentrum Mar 2017 #64
he is a fascist pig con man elmac Mar 2017 #67
never stop thinking about Gorsuch....he's dreamy.. Demonaut Mar 2017 #69
Smug groomed Trojan corporate wolf in folksy father knows best cloth BREMPRO Mar 2017 #70
Uber right Adolph Coors bircher, like his mum. Mc Mike Mar 2017 #72
Sexist asshole. nt msanthrope Mar 2017 #73
He's a weasel. Vinca Mar 2017 #75
He reminded me of someone trying to cheat on a personality profile test. MineralMan Mar 2017 #85
He is a sneak...he is Alitoesque...I hate that sob. Demsrule86 Mar 2017 #87
All veneer and total monster underneath. ananda Mar 2017 #89

Warpy

(111,256 posts)
55. But generally not in human personhood
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 11:32 PM
Mar 2017

He ruled that a truck driver didn't have the right to life, that his duty was to stay on the job and die in the process.

JHan

(10,173 posts)
58. Yes,.here are some others:
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 11:49 PM
Mar 2017

There's a trend:

1. An excavator operator died on the job after being electrocuted by an overhead power line at a surface mine site. The Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission investigated, finding a serious violation of safety regulations and imposed on the employer a $5,550 fine, which the employer appealed. While the majority of the court upheld the commission's findings against the employer, Gorsuch dissented, contending that this case was yet another example of administrative agencies wielding "remarkable powers" and "penalizing" the company even when no evidence existed. (Compass Environmental Inc. v. OSHRC, 10th Circuit, 2011)


2. In NLRB v. Community Health Services, the majority deferred to the expertise of the National Labor Relations Board, ruling that workers' interim earnings should be disregarded when calculating back pay awards where a hospital unlawfully reduced work hours. The NLRB reasoned that, on balance, workers who take on additional outside jobs should retain the benefit of their "extra effort," not "recalcitrant" employers. Gorsuch disagreed and dissented, observing that the NLRB's "statutory charge isn't to promote full employment....It's not some sort of reincarnation of the Works Progress Administration." (NLRB v. Community Health Services Inc., 10th Circuit, 2016)


3. In Strickland v. UPS, the court majority found that a woman driver fired by her company had sufficient evidence to challenge that firing based on sex discrimination. The trucker's evidence included co-workers who testified that she was treated differently than her male co-workers and that only she regularly had to attend individual meetings and counseling sessions on sales performance. Gorsuch, however, stridently dissented, finding such evidence "absent." (Strickland v. UPS, 10th Circuit, 2009)


6. In private practice, Gorsuch filed an amicus brief, again opposing class actions in securities litigation as burdensome on business, on behalf of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, an organization that represents the interests of Big Business and seeks to undermine worker protections. (Brief of Amicus Curiae for the United States Chamber of Commerce, Dura Pharm. Inc. v. Broudo, 2005). In a 2005 article discussing the Broudo case, Gorsuch attacked plaintiffs' lawyers who represented investors in securities class actions as seeking "free ride[s] to fast riches." ("No Loss, No Gain," Legal Times, Jan. 31, 2005)


7. In a 2005 opinion-editorial, Gorsuch condemned "American liberals" for an "overweening addiction" to constitutional litigation. While he concluded that liberals should "kick" that litigation addiction and try to "win elections rather than lawsuits," he directed criticism only at "the Left," not the Right and conservative legal advocacy groups. (Neil Gorsuch, "Liberals 'N' Lawsuits," National Review Online, Feb. 7, 2005)


the rest: 7 Things You Need to Know About Supreme Court Nominee Neil Gorsuch

He reminds me in some ways of Roberts.

zentrum

(9,865 posts)
66. Those freaky cold eyes of
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 12:47 AM
Mar 2017

...Roberts.

Just sent a copy of your post and link to Senator Franken. He probably already knows about these cases but just in case.

Thanks for posting.

 

yeoman6987

(14,449 posts)
36. On the news, they said he'd be comfirmed by April 7th
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 10:45 PM
Mar 2017

Even for regular times that seems very fast. Democratic senators need to stop this moving train now.

Kath2

(3,074 posts)
5. He said all the right things.
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 09:58 PM
Mar 2017

I don't trust him at all. At heart, I believe he is too corporation-friendly and an anti-choice extremist.

babylonsister

(171,065 posts)
16. There's that. That illegitimacy needs to
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 10:06 PM
Mar 2017

be addressed, and it is. Recent progress is breakneck for politics. Faith!

Nevernose

(13,081 posts)
13. "Smarmy" was the 1st adjective
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 10:03 PM
Mar 2017

I thought of. It's clear that he's not the smartest person in the room, or even the most knowledgeable, but it's also clear that he THINKS he is.

madaboutharry

(40,211 posts)
11. He is a right wing hack with an aw-shucks grin.
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 10:00 PM
Mar 2017

He is putting on a "I could play the dad in a remake of The Brady Bunch" act, but he is a card carrying member of The Federalist Society, loves corporations, and hides behind the word "originalist" which really means "I don't like it when rich white men" have to share power with other people.

Squinch

(50,949 posts)
19. As I said in another thread, he gives me the same kind of willies that
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 10:17 PM
Mar 2017

Cardinal Dolan from New York gives me. Every once in a while the green slimy thing peeps through the exaggeratedly ingratiating façade.

I think they both have dead bodies in their basements.

Pachamama

(16,887 posts)
42. OMG! I have that exact feeling! About Dolan as well....you couldn't have described my impression
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 10:55 PM
Mar 2017

... And sick negative feeling I get when I see that "smile".... That something dark is beneath/behind it hidden and nearly impossible to see....but it's there...

meow2u3

(24,764 posts)
20. He had all the demeanor of a programmed android
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 10:18 PM
Mar 2017

and the sincerity of Donald John Trump!

In other words, I wouldn't want to end up in his courtroom--I'd never get any justice, especially against a craporation!

Phoenix61

(17,003 posts)
21. He learned a lot from his momma
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 10:19 PM
Mar 2017

And that's not a good thing. Only caught Franken part today and got to see Gorsuch avoid giving any answer of substance.

Ilsa

(61,695 posts)
22. He follows rules without exercising his soul in seeking justice.
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 10:21 PM
Mar 2017

For him, the rule of law is more important than justice.

Amishman

(5,557 posts)
82. The rule of law should be most important
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 08:36 AM
Mar 2017

That is the point of laws. I absolutely want someone on the court who puts the law above all else.

My concern is that he would twist the law to fit his idea of justice. With all the non-answers I remain apprehensive.

(Even with the worries voiced in this thread I'm still very glad we're not facing Pryor)

VOX

(22,976 posts)
24. If you cunningly built & programmed a "conservative justice who might break from the pack"...
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 10:28 PM
Mar 2017

You'd get a Goresuch. It says the "right things," but what it actually does (and has done) is more of the same RW crap.

Alice11111

(5,730 posts)
25. We would probably do worse. He likes Citizens United.
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 10:32 PM
Mar 2017

Arithmetic...he is in, unless something egregious comes out. All the Dems did an excellent job of reveling some of his biases...for big business, not for little people, willing to leave someone without a remedy...like the freezing guy in the car, and he had other legal options, as Al F, even a non lawyer , pointed out. Favored Hobby Lobby case, putting a corporation's relifious interest over women's right to birth control covered by insurance.

He sounded like he would uphold Roe v Wade.

pat_k

(9,313 posts)
44. They need to Filibuster, for the good of the party, and the nation.
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 11:08 PM
Mar 2017

They need to stand together and show the nation that Democrats are capable of fighting as hard -- or harder -- for the principles they believe in as DT and his Congressional Cronies are for their insane notions. And that means having enough Democratic Senators commit, NOW, to vote No on Cloture to stop Gorsuch.

We know all we need to know. Not only is Gorsuch completely unacceptable, Republicans CANNOT be allowed to appoint ANYONE other than Garland to the seat that was President Obama's to fill.

Sure, Republicans may "go nuclear" to force him through, but they may find they have as much trouble pulling that off as they are having with repealing ACA. If Dems don't want to be complicit when Gorsuch puts the court back on track to destroying the protections Scalia and Co. didn't managed to destroy already, they need to do EVERYTHING in their power to stop any DT nominee (unless of course DT nominates Garland.)

It's pretty simple. Do Democratic Senators want ours to be the "roll over" party? Or do they want to be the Party of Principle, Strength, and Determination? If they want a Democratic majority in 2018, it BETTER be the latter!

Filibuster is not just the RIGHT thing to do, it is the WINNING thing to do.

http://www.thestranger.com/slog/2017/03/21/25032149/call-patty-murray-and-maria-cantwell-and-ask-them-filibuster-gorsuch

Alice11111

(5,730 posts)
48. I'm all for fighting, but even if we won, we will get
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 11:14 PM
Mar 2017

Someone worse. The odds are it's basic math.
If the Dems want to take him down the toilet, Ill be ok, but given we have the judgment of Al F, Feinstein, Amy K, if they decide to let this one go, I get it.

I'm pissed too about what they did to Obama! Fuck them all!

Squinch

(50,949 posts)
74. The only way that Democrats should EVER give in on an SC nominee is if the Republicans
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 07:18 AM
Mar 2017

agree to wait till the next seat comes up and then seat Garland AND their pick.

Otherwise we should say no to everyone.

Alice11111

(5,730 posts)
79. I wish, but not a chance. I like that the dems are making
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 08:09 AM
Mar 2017

Noise about dt not getting to pick because of the cloud on his legitimacy. Very doubtful it will work, but it calls attention to his legitimacy. We need to get that message out there. He is under investigation. Not just him, many in his camp and his administration are under investigation for colluding with a foreign power.

We don't have the votes to win. 3 short.

Amishman

(5,557 posts)
83. I would like a deal made
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 08:41 AM
Mar 2017

Gorsuch's confirmation in exchange for Ginsburg stepping down and Garland taking her seat.

As I voiced in another thread, the risk of getting a Pryor type on the court is just too high.

Squinch

(50,949 posts)
90. NO! Garland taking this spot, Gorsich taking the next and Ginsberg staying till she's
Thu Mar 23, 2017, 09:19 AM
Mar 2017

ready to go.

Losing Ginsberg and gaining Gorsich would put the court back to 5-4 against sanity.

pat_k

(9,313 posts)
88. It would be tough to find someone worse on some critical issues.
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 07:44 PM
Mar 2017

In some very important respects, Gorsuch is more extreme than Scalia.

For example, he subscribes to a "non-delegation doctrine" that even Scalia rejected. It's a doctrine that would cripple federal agencies that protect our financial system, consumers, the environment, voting rights, civil rights... on and on. DT is on a mission to "deconstruct" federal protections, but the damage he does is "repairable." Gorsuch could be instrumental in setting precedent that would strip agencies of the authority required to carry out their functions in a way that would live on until saner mind regain the majority on SCOTUS -- i.e., long past DT's tenure in office.

More in this report:
https://americanbridgepac.org/app/uploads/Gorsuch-SCOTUS-Report.pdf

underthematrix

(5,811 posts)
28. Phony, cowardly, untrustworthy
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 10:36 PM
Mar 2017

and likely to be easily intimidated by Trump

But I oppose his nomination because his nomination like the illegitimate President who made it is illegitimate

I want ALL Democrats to vote NO + 2 Republicans so Gorsuch can suffer the humiliation of having the VP come down and break the tie vote.

procon

(15,805 posts)
35. Gorsuch isn't the issue, its McConnell.
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 10:43 PM
Mar 2017

He started his court fiasco and the Senate Republicans vowed that if Hillary Clinton was elected, they would prevent anyone she nominates from being confirmed to fill the current court vacancy, or any future vacancy, until another Republican president was elected

Make them eat their words!

pat_k

(9,313 posts)
37. Mr "Religious Freedom equals fucking over the civil rights of Everyone Else"
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 10:47 PM
Mar 2017

He goes beyond Corporate personhood. If Corporation or other business entity "believes" in a religion that calls on it's followers to discriminate, they need to be allowed to discriminate, in the name of Religious Freedom. Of course, that is not how it is framed in his legalese, but that is effectively what some of this past decisions boil down to.

A decent article here:
http://www.thestranger.com/slog/2017/03/21/25032149/call-patty-murray-and-maria-cantwell-and-ask-them-filibuster-gorsuch

elfin

(6,262 posts)
39. Didn't watch. Think the fix is in.
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 10:49 PM
Mar 2017

Couldn't bear the expected downer of this hearing after yesterday, which lent a glimmer of hope.

He is a well-dressed slimeball IMO. He will be worse than Alito for decades to come. I am so sick about this.

Will check in on Franken part. I do love him more and more.

madamesilverspurs

(15,801 posts)
43. Patronizing, condescending, evasive.
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 11:08 PM
Mar 2017

Also a bit temperamental.

Without doubt, he is a gifted jurist. Problem is, he wasn't chosen to use those gifts against Trump's wishes.


.

Tatiana

(14,167 posts)
45. Worse than Scalia... mark my words.
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 11:10 PM
Mar 2017

I don't care what people think about Republicans going nuclear. On principle, this nomination should require 60 votes for confirmation and Democrats should vote against him.

delisen

(6,043 posts)
46. Apparatchik with a Cow Pie Western Chip on shoulder
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 11:12 PM
Mar 2017

protests his ethical standard too much.

When asked what he would have done if Trump asked him to overturn Roe vs Wade, he claimed he would have walked out the door. I find that hard to believe. ;

Also odd the he answered this hypothetical question.

He seems to live in a man's world.

pangaia

(24,324 posts)
47. Al Franken laid him bare the way a Korean chef skins and slits open a live eel before cooking it.
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 11:13 PM
Mar 2017

First the chef 'nails' the live head to a wooden board, Then zippppp.....open !

Guangzhoou chefs do the same thing.

DesertRat

(27,995 posts)
49. Pompous
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 11:18 PM
Mar 2017

He also sounded patronizing and condescending when answering Sen. Klobachar's questions. It rubbed me the wrong way.

Peachhead22

(1,078 posts)
50. He's not good by any stretch
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 11:24 PM
Mar 2017

Last edited Wed Mar 22, 2017, 09:22 AM - Edit history (1)

But if Dem Senators filibuster him, with an eye toward holding out till Trump's impeached. Pence's pick will be far worse.

BTW, did his appearance remind anyone else of Anthony Bordain?

Peachhead22

(1,078 posts)
84. I just mean physically
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 09:21 AM
Mar 2017

Strictly his facial features. Nothing to do with his personality or demeanor. I kept watching the hearings and thinking "Man, he looks like some celebrity. But I can't quite figure out who." Then eureka!

Loki Liesmith

(4,602 posts)
77. He's the best turd we squeeze out of this lot
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 07:37 AM
Mar 2017

I'd really like to work hard to regain the Senate and do to them what they did to Merrick Garland.

MFM008

(19,808 posts)
56. DOLT 45 likes him
Tue Mar 21, 2017, 11:42 PM
Mar 2017

that's all I need to know because not ONE person he has appointed is qualified to be in the position they are in.

nevergiveup

(4,760 posts)
62. A goodie goodie two shoes "deplorable" with a law degree,
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 12:23 AM
Mar 2017

nice suit and good hair. I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him.

zentrum

(9,865 posts)
64. Hated his "Aw shucks..."
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 12:40 AM
Mar 2017

.....folksy stories. His sincerity seemed rehearsed and over-scripted. He was acting his idea of a really nice trustable guy and it produced just the opposite effect in me.

Didn't fool Franken.

BREMPRO

(2,331 posts)
70. Smug groomed Trojan corporate wolf in folksy father knows best cloth
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 02:21 AM
Mar 2017

Smooth, i'm smarter than you attitude, arrogant, ideologically radical, opportunistic, evasive, fake manekin looks , claims of law is supreme hiding a deeper
Con-servative agenda. Can you tell I don't trust or like him??

MineralMan

(146,308 posts)
85. He reminded me of someone trying to cheat on a personality profile test.
Wed Mar 22, 2017, 09:43 AM
Mar 2017

He gave answers that were designed to meet what he thinks are the answers expected from a SCOTUS justice appointee seeking confirmation.

He appears to be a very bright and well-spoken fellow. I don't trust him one little bit, though. Like all Republicans, he speaks to deceive, not to inform.

Rotary President. Seriously. Do a Google Image search for Rotary President. You'll understand what I mean.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»What did you think of Gor...