Q: What do you call a dozen lawyers buried up to their necks in cement?

A: Not enough cement

It is down-right frightening to think of Obama and a democrat controlled congress promoting judges to the SCOTUS.

This emphasizes the importance people of getting out there and working for a McCain/Palin win! Volunteer, volunteer, volunteer.

Biden blows softball question, brags about becoming more ideological
Biden managed to hit every hot button in this answer to alienate
centrists, independents, and undecideds. Not only does he talk about
ideological litmus tests for confirming……

later after saying,

I was of the view … that the only thing that mattered was whether or not a nominee … suggested by the president had a judicial temperament, had not committed a crime of moral turpitude, and had been a good student. …but (i) realize(d) that the ideology of that judge makes a big difference. That’s why I led the fight against Judge Bork.

…he has the unchecked cynisism to say…

That’s the fundamental change Barack Obama and I will be bring to this party, not questioning other people’s motives.

lodge on October 3, 2008 at 12:02 PM>>>

But not until it is first made known to everybody in this nation that it was Obama’s lawyer work as a community organizer with ACORN that started this subprime mess – forcing banks to give loans on the basis of race rather than on the basis of financial risks that would then be guaranteed by tax dollars through FM/FM.

We can make jokes about community organizers and lawyers, but in real life they can be as funny as a heart attack.

It is also lawyers who made sure that infanticide of abortion survivors of any age will NEVER be prosecuted in IL (unless BAIPA was passed). See the Herbst-O’Malley Agreement where the State of IL agreed not to enforce the born-alive parts of their abortion law in return for lawyers not filing any more lawsuits about it.

Ed, just curious. How many “centrists, independents, and undecideds” do you think come visit here at HA? Or, other like blogs? How many of those same folks do you think even picked up on his answer to make a difference in the vote?

1GooDDaDDy on October 3, 2008 at 11:54 AM

A good reason to make a commercial out of this answer, along with an explanation of why it is so wrong.

I love lawyer jokes. : )

Anna on October 3, 2008 at 11:48 AM

What’s the difference between a catfish and a lawyer?
One’s a muck eating bottom dweller. The other is a fish.

What do you call 10,000 lawyers on the bottom of the ocean?
A good start.

Doug on October 3, 2008 at 11:53 AM

That would be amazing, but it will never happen.

I believe the French had something close to this in their last election. It was the two leading candidates sitting at a small table debating the issues. The opposition candidate was a woman that had continuously pushed the meme of Sarkozy having a dangerous temper. During the debate, he stayed calm and kept calling her on misstated facts, mispeaks and outright lies. She got very upset and lost her temper. In the postmortem, a lot of French analysts said that’s when Sarkozy cemented his win. [FYI, this is an old memory and was from articles in US newspapers, so I fully acknowledge that I probably only have part of the story.]

US candidates would never go for that. They prefer to haggle over all the debate details and stick to the smallest number of debates possible (for the most part). The debates are orchestrated by both sides to limit the amount of damage they can do to themselves. It will be a long time before we ever see an open format ‘kitchen table’ type debate in the U.S.

freeus on October 3, 2008 at 12:03 PM

Well said.

To be “borked” is no honor, his attack on Bork led to a whole new way of deciding appointments…that is you attack them personally; professional abilities, performance, intellect, judgment, all out the window because of Biden and his ilk on Bork. He ushered in the attitude that to get rid of someone, the easiest way is to attack him personally for things completely unrelated to the job.
They tried it with Clarence Thomas and it failed, they are trying it with Palin and it will fail, they did it to Hillary this time and it worked, this is nothing to brag about, it was the beginning of the huge split between Dems and Republicans…he took it to the gutter, and made everything personal.

right2bright on October 3, 2008 at 11:49 AM

Exactly. Palin should take this answer on the campaign trail, detailing how Biden’s opposition to Bork for purely idealogical reasons (and not on qualifications) by attacking them personally helped define the term “To Bork” someone.

She should point out how the DEMs and the MSM are doing the exact same thing to her, then look straight into the camera and say “America… I will not be borked.”

CC

That said, I was appalled by Biden’s answer to this question – perhaps more shocked than appalled. Yes I do believe there is something to be said about a jurist’s ideology – for me, the thought of Obama appointing Supreme Court justices and skewing the court to the left makes me nervous. There is some merit in ascertaining whether a potential jurist is a strict constructionist or whether he/she believes that the Constitution is a living and breathing document which should be continually reinterpreted to fit current times. But an ideology-based litmus test???? No thank you (that also goes for appointing a conservative jurist based strongly on his/her position on abortion).

a. Jersey got first pick!!!

/all-time fave lawyer joke …

Tommy_G on October 3, 2008 at 12:09 PM

Other than the fact that energy independence, gun control etc weren’ talked about at all, not really.

Maybe it was my perception, but Biden seemed to get the last word in a lot more often than Palin did.

Jaibones on October 3, 2008 at 12:01 PM

Badger40 above said it much better than I.

I give up trying to comment and dance with the kids at the same time.

Biden is just another empty suit.