A Simple Questionnaire

Question #2 is just plain redundant.

This is the one that Harriet Miers had returned to her marked “incomplete”, isn’t it?

Thanks, Jay. I thought they just pulled resumes off Monster.com. Besides, isn’t answering all q.’s a breeze? “I can’t answer that since it may affect an upcoming case…” or similar seems to cover nearly all q.’s. Jay, I’ll bet you and teammates have a tougher time with the expense report accountants than Kagan will with the Senate.

“What did you believe before we asked you what you believed after we were sure we knew what you believed and don’t believe anything you say now because it can’t be our belief”.

centfan: I believe you are correct.

Unfortunate that is cost $54.00 to get a copy and decide for myself about Kagan.
.
Is it available FREE anywhere?

Doesn’t 11B suggest that all federally employed judges are in violation of this requirement, since DADT is discriminatory?

Too bad the press did not send one of these to Obama during the campaign instead of just taking the guided tour

I filled out job applications twice that long.

In reality, this would get into one’s personal life if you get into what people in your life are involved with. That is, if she has a boyfriend who is involved in a court case in some way, then we will find out that she is not a lesbian. (That was yesterday’s post).

In reality, I don’t see any problem with the confirmation process.

“Too bad the press did not send one of these to Obama during the campaign instead of just taking the guided tour.”
.
If the press sent a form to Obama during the campaign, nuts like you would know that he is a Protestant Christian, half African (not Arabian at all) Hawaiian born man. Then you’d just accuse him of lying since when facts and right wingers conflict, the facts get thrown out the window.

Question 2 is hardly redundant: “State the position for which you have been nominated.” That could be Justice or (and I hope soon) Chief Justice.

Give it up Patrick. Your delusion that sexual orientation has to do with marital status is not scientifically or realistically accurate.
Love you Patrick but please find another issue.

“Your delusion that sexual orientation has to do with marital status is not scientifically or realistically accurate.”
.
First, I do believe that gays fall in love exactly the same way heterosexuals do. Hence, there is a serious influence by one’s spouse or gay lover.
.
Second, it would appear as if you are saying (and I have no reason to believe this is true, but am not an expert on the topic) that if somebody walked into a gay bar they would be as likely to find as many married people as they would in the general population?
.
All I can think is, I would guess that I would loath being married to a woman if I weren’t sexually attracted to women.
.
As somebody who does not know much about gay people, if you can link a study saying that gays are as likely to get into marriage (not including gay marriage) as heterosexual people are, I will accept it.
.
If not, then I should not be a target as an unmarried man for being called “Patsy” (an effeminate name) by twothirdsrocks than the married men.

Patrick it is your assumption that gay people don’t marry. That is why I think if you want to ask Kagan about her attachments and sexual orientation you must ask every Supreme Court candidate. The closet can be mighty deep. Therefore, my belief is ask nobody that question. It is irrelevant.