Comments on: SC Lawmakers Could Reject Supreme Court Slate

By: Not Sayin', Just Sayin'

Not Sayin', Just Sayin' — Thu, 23 Apr 2009 13:12:34 +0000

My legacy is solid tarnish – why stop now? I really have clue how the JMSC voting process works. The judicial election process is truly the greatest mystery of the State House to me. Second greatest: Andre Bauer.

By: fitsnews

fitsnews — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 19:01:04 +0000

jkpolk- doubtful. Sic Willie is borderline retarded.

NSJS- you have the best handle in the history of FITS commenters. in fact, the phrase “not sayin, just sayin” has become part of Sic and Mrs. Sic’s daily interaction. but please, do not tarnish your legacy with such silly questions. everybody knows the way people vote has nothing to do with anything except in very rare occasions. probably three-quarters of mcconnell’s votes are nothing but show.

-FITS

By: Not Sayin', Just Sayin'

Not Sayin', Just Sayin' — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 18:54:59 +0000

Fitsy, for once I’m not trying to be an ass, but why would McConnell be critical of having Hearn rather than Williams on the slate when he voted for Hearn (who received a vote from each member) and at least ultimately didn’t vote for Williams (who in the final vote received no votes)? That part of this story doesn’t make sense.

By: jkpolk

jkpolk — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 17:49:32 +0000

I am definitely NOT suggesting that Judge Williams is paying anyone. I do, however, think you are smarter than me!

By: fitsnews

fitsnews — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 16:55:20 +0000

Reverse logic? You are talking over our heads, dude. We are really, really not that smart. And again, we could care less.

But hey, sure, go on and think that Williams is paying us THOUSANDS to pimp him. Whatever floats your boat works for us.

-FITS

By: jkpolk

jkpolk — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 16:51:45 +0000

You are entitled to your opinion, but people think you are on someone’s payroll because your logic is constructed in reverse. You say the GA cannot be trusted (your “point”) because they are rejecting conservative judges in favor of liberal ones. You base this on the declaration that one judge is conservative (Williams) and the other liberal (Hearn) when the undisputed facts suggest that, if anything, Hearn is slightly more pro-business (based on the ONLY case they have EVER disagreed on). In terms of criminal cases, four former US Attorneys (including Strom Jr.) favor her as being tough on crime. You keep repeating your claims while protesting that you don’t care at all about the race. It just doesn’t add up. Look, I think all three judges are solid. But if people think you have a rather urgent agenda here, that’s the reason.

By: fitsnews

fitsnews — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 14:53:22 +0000

Sheesh. We have never met the dude. Just like we never met the dude we supposedly “elected” last year. Seriously.

We give not a shitake mushroom about ANY OF IT.

In fact, the “reject the slate” ploy is reportedly being advanced as a method of ensuring Hearn’s election, as there is reportedly concern among Hearn backers that Few has the votes.

Again, the GA shouldn’t be involved in any of this (a.k.a. “our point.”).

Next time, you status quo inbreds might consider not reflexively accusing us of being on the payroll of EVERY single issue we write about.

Or don’t consider that … we could care less.

-FITS

By: Just Checking

Just Checking — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 14:45:42 +0000

Bruce needs to give it up and quit having you shill for him….and his wife needs to find a new boyfriend now that hers left the law school

By: Red Bank Bar

Red Bank Bar — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 13:56:55 +0000

As I’ve said repeatedly, folks is intellectually and morally bankrupt. Res ipsa loquitur.

By: Not Sayin', Just Sayin'

Not Sayin', Just Sayin' — Wed, 22 Apr 2009 13:52:22 +0000

And if McConnell isn’t happy with Hearn, why did he vote for her in JMSC?