|
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend Bookmark this thread |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
NJmaverick (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 08:54 AM Original message |
What is too old for the next Supreme Court Judge? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MattBaggins (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 08:57 AM Response to Original message |
1. Never trust anyone over the age of 30 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hlthe2b (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 09:11 AM Response to Reply #1 |
9. I never found that amusing when I was 18... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Kaleva (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 08:57 AM Response to Original message |
2. Thos who've already died of old age ought not be considered. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
joeybee12 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 08:58 AM Response to Reply #2 |
4. I don't know, that person would still be better than Alito, Scalia, Roberts and Thomas |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Deep13 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 08:58 AM Response to Original message |
3. 60 nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wapsie B (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 09:01 AM Response to Reply #3 |
5. My thoughts exactly. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MicaelS (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 09:51 AM Response to Reply #5 |
16. I agree 60 is it, no older. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TexasObserver (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 09:08 AM Response to Original message |
6. 55 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NJmaverick (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 09:18 AM Response to Reply #6 |
11. I am leaning toward that age as the cut off |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TexasObserver (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 09:24 AM Response to Reply #11 |
13. And if they pick a healthy one in their 40s, we could get 25-40 years. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NJmaverick (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 09:36 AM Response to Reply #13 |
14. 40s and liberal would be perfect |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Gidney N Cloyd (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 09:10 AM Response to Original message |
7. Mid-50's. This isn't a job for late bloomers. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
panader0 (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 09:11 AM Response to Original message |
8. Good health should be a consideration |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Captain Hilts (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 09:12 AM Response to Original message |
10. Hillary Clinton, sorry to say. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NNN0LHI (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 09:43 AM Response to Reply #10 |
15. You think thats who it might be? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Captain Hilts (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 10:21 AM Response to Reply #15 |
17. No. I think she won't get it because she's too old. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JerseygirlCT (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 09:19 AM Response to Original message |
12. Might be related to how old the pick is! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kentuck (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 10:27 AM Response to Original message |
18. I don't think age should be the primary factor... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NJmaverick (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 10:35 AM Response to Reply #18 |
20. I think age should be a flag issue, in other words too old should not be considered |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WeDidIt (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 10:29 AM Response to Original message |
19. 45 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
w4rma (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 11:00 AM Response to Reply #19 |
22. Agreed: 45 (nt) |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 10:43 AM Response to Original message |
21. since 1900, there have been 13 SCOTUS appointments over 60 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
WI_DEM (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 11:01 AM Response to Original message |
23. 94 |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Obamanaut (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 11:14 AM Response to Original message |
24. Pick any age and there is no guarantee that the selectee, however young or |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
NJmaverick (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 01:13 PM Response to Reply #24 |
27. Isn't it true that the older one is the more likely the odds of them being affected by one of these |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Obamanaut (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 01:48 PM Response to Reply #27 |
28. Isn't it also true that one can be afflicted with most anything at |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
kentuck (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 11:21 AM Response to Original message |
25. Should there be a minimum age? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onenote (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 11:24 AM Response to Reply #25 |
26. no. William O. Douglas was 40. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
AngryAmish (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore | Mon Apr-12-10 01:49 PM Response to Original message |
29. Anyone of the 60s generation should be excluded |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) | Mon Dec 09th 2024, 10:55 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) |
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