View Full Version : CBS REPORTER TO WHITE HOUSE: ALITO 'SLOPPY SECONDS?'
Brock
10-31-2005, 12:22 PM
ROFL
CBS REPORTER TO WHITE HOUSE: ALITO 'SLOPPY SECONDS?'
Mon Oct 31 2005 11:26:56 ET
CBSNEWS Chief White House correspondent John Roberts described the President’s selection of Judge Samuel Alito as “sloppy seconds” during today’s press gaggle with White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan.
John Roberts: “So, Scott, you said that -- or the President said, repeatedly, that Harriet Miers was the best person for the job. So does that mean that Alito is sloppy seconds, or what?”
Scott McClellan: “Not at all, John.”
Sloppy seconds” is described in the United Kingdom’s A Dictionary of Slang as:
Noun: “A subsequent indulgence in an activity by a second person involving an exchange of bodily fluids. This may involve the sharing of drink, or more often it applies to a sexual nature. E.g. ‘I’m not having sloppy seconds, I want to shag her first.’”
Developing...
That's hilarious.
CBS is just swimming in journalistic credibility these days.
Reaper16
10-31-2005, 12:55 PM
My first impression of "Scalito" is that I want to punch him with a brick.
Reaper16
10-31-2005, 01:01 PM
"If a woman wants an abortion, she needs to first get permission from her husband." - Samuel Alito
:banghead: :sulk:
Brock
10-31-2005, 01:13 PM
"If a woman wants an abortion, she needs to first get permission from her husband." - Samuel Alito
:banghead: :sulk:
Not really interested in arguing with you, but what you are stating as a quote from Alito is completely false.
Amnorix
10-31-2005, 01:24 PM
That reporter should be reassigned. That's just completely classless.
go bowe
10-31-2005, 01:26 PM
"If a woman wants an abortion, she needs to first get permission from her husband." - Samuel Alito
:banghead: :sulk:somehow i doubt that is a true quote from judge alito...
perhaps you're referring to his dissent in a case in which he argued that requiring notification (not permission, not even close) to the spouse is permissible (with some exceptions)?
go bowe
10-31-2005, 01:27 PM
That reporter should be reassigned. That's just completely classless.that's being kind...
the Talking Can
10-31-2005, 01:29 PM
I'm more outraged about this than I am about the CIA leaks and indictments.
go bowe
10-31-2005, 01:50 PM
I'm more outraged about this than I am about the CIA leaks and indictments.outraged about what?
the fact that the reporter used the insulting phrase sloppy seconds?
or the nomination of judge alito.?
and if it's the reporter's question, how in the world could that be more significant than the cia leak?
Bootlegged
10-31-2005, 02:09 PM
That reporter should be reassigned. That's just completely classless.
and deranged.
unlurking
10-31-2005, 02:10 PM
perhaps you're referring to his dissent in a case in which he argued that requiring notification (not permission, not even close) to the spouse is permissible (with some exceptions)?
That's my understanding of his point of view as well, but IMO his point of view is bullshit and makes women second class citizens to the men they are married to.
mlyonsd
10-31-2005, 02:15 PM
That's my understanding of his point of view as well, but IMO his point of view is bullshit and makes women second class citizens to the men they are married to.
? Not notifying the father when the couple is married is treating him as a second class citizen as well.
That's my understanding of his point of view as well, but IMO his point of view is bullshit and makes women second class citizens to the men they are married to.
The kid belongs to the man too.......
Reaper16
10-31-2005, 02:24 PM
Not really interested in arguing with you, but what you are stating as a quote from Alito is completely false.
Of course it's not a real quote :); but in so many words...
Danush
10-31-2005, 02:33 PM
Of course it's not a real quote :); but in so many words...
"In so many words" gives a great deal of latitude to people with nefarious purpose. Would you grant the same to those who would like to characterize your opinions?
unlurking
10-31-2005, 02:38 PM
? Not notifying the father when the couple is married is treating him as a second class citizen as well.
So every time a married man gets treated for syphilis his wife should be notified?
Come on now, where does the right to privacy no longer become a right?
unlurking
10-31-2005, 02:39 PM
The kid belongs to the man too.......
Or the milkman, but that is no business of the United States government.
Edit:
Oh yeah, and when you refer to a child as "property", I believe you lose all credibility in claiming the "subject" is a life form with all rights under law.
Or the milkman, but that is no business of the United States government.
Edit:
Oh yeah, and when you refer to a child as "property", I believe you lose all credibility in claiming the "subject" is a life form with all rights under law.
Im a man. If the woman carrying my baby wants to kill it, I would think I should have the right to know.
You know babies are made from 1 sperm and 1 egg right? :shake:
Sully
10-31-2005, 03:44 PM
Im a man. If the woman carrying my baby wants to kill it, I would think I should have the right to know.
You know babies are made from 1 sperm and 1 egg right? :shake:
I would agree... but the question arises: What constitutes notification?
Does the husband have to sign a form? What if he refuses to sign a form? What if he's abusive? Is there some sort of court override so that in extreme circumstances a woman can be protected?
patteeu
10-31-2005, 04:06 PM
"If a woman wants an abortion, she needs to first get permission from her husband." - Samuel Alito
:banghead: :sulk:
"I molest small dogs." - Reaper16
patteeu
10-31-2005, 04:08 PM
outraged about what?
the fact that the reporter used the insulting phrase sloppy seconds?
or the nomination of judge alito.?
and if it's the reporter's question, how in the world could that be more significant than the cia leak?
User's guide to the cryptic posts of the Talking Can, page 13:
the Talking Can is fond of making outrageous statements in what he thinks of as the voice of the nutty right wingers, i.e. those who don't agree with his political views.
patteeu
10-31-2005, 04:12 PM
So every time a married man gets treated for syphilis his wife should be notified?
Come on now, where does the right to privacy no longer become a right?
I'm sure that if the legislature passed a law that said the wife should be notified in such circumstances that Alito would probably uphold it. You can't read anything into Alito's personal opinion from the husband-notification case, you can only read into his view of how the law should be applied. People who want judges who actually make law based on their own opinions of how things should be just don't get that simple fact.
Swanman
10-31-2005, 04:13 PM
I would agree... but the question arises: What constitutes notification?
Does the husband have to sign a form? What if he refuses to sign a form? What if he's abusive? Is there some sort of court override so that in extreme circumstances a woman can be protected?
One of the reasons for not requiring notification/consent is if there is abuse going on, the notificiation could further exacerbate the abuse.
Also, in some extreme cases, the husband could have raped the wife, causing the pregnancy. I know that case is way out there, but it can happen so it needs to be considered in the law.
patteeu
10-31-2005, 04:13 PM
I would agree... but the question arises: What constitutes notification?
Does the husband have to sign a form? What if he refuses to sign a form? What if he's abusive? Is there some sort of court override so that in extreme circumstances a woman can be protected?
Those are questions which the legislature must answer by way of the text of the statute.
Those are questions which the legislature must answer by way of the text of the statute.
Exactly. This is something that should not be open to legal interpretation. The legistlature needs to close things like this so we don't have judges determining policy.
Reaper16
10-31-2005, 05:07 PM
"I molest small dogs." - Reaper16
I probably didn't rule on any law covering the subject of undersized canine violation. :) :p
Reaper16
10-31-2005, 05:09 PM
"In so many words" gives a great deal of latitude to people with nefarious purpose. Would you grant the same to those who would like to characterize your opinions?
People have a right to exaggerate my opinions, yes. Its not like its never been done before.
unlurking
10-31-2005, 05:20 PM
I'm sure that if the legislature passed a law that said the wife should be notified in such circumstances that Alito would probably uphold it. You can't read anything into Alito's personal opinion from the husband-notification case, you can only read into his view of how the law should be applied. People who want judges who actually make law based on their own opinions of how things should be just don't get that simple fact.
As well, you can read into his views about what he may consider being "worthy" to overturn. I do not really worry about what he wants to implement, as you and others have pointed out, he can't. He can however, de-implent (making up words as I go).
I honestly don't know enough about the man to make an informed decision right now, but this was one of the talking points of a right leaning talk show I listen to. In terms of justices, outside of abortion, most of my concerns are usually right leaning. This is pretty much the only legal issue with the left I agree with.
patteeu
10-31-2005, 07:55 PM
As well, you can read into his views about what he may consider being "worthy" to overturn. I do not really worry about what he wants to implement, as you and others have pointed out, he can't. He can however, de-implent (making up words as I go).
I honestly don't know enough about the man to make an informed decision right now, but this was one of the talking points of a right leaning talk show I listen to. In terms of justices, outside of abortion, most of my concerns are usually right leaning. This is pretty much the only legal issue with the left I agree with.
I think that the additions of Roberts and Alito will not put the core result of Roe v. Wade in jeopardy but that it will lead to a judicial environment in which all kinds of democratically adopted restrictions on abortion are allowed. That's my best guess.
vBulletin® v3.8.0, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.