in english centre forward but he wasn t six foot two, he wasn t strapping a physically imposing, what was interesting about this man was the way he revolutionised what it meant to be an english striker. it was about positioning. it wasn t about discussing the high ball in the middle of the box and then heading it in. he was an agile, skilful player. heading it in. he was an agile, skilful player- skilful player. yes, and also, remember skilful player. yes, and also, remember he skilful player. yes, and also, remember he often - skilful player. yes, and also, remember he often played . skilful player. yes, and also, i remember he often played with skilful player. yes, and also, - remember he often played with a centre forward. certainly in chelsea in his earlier days. he did in tottenham. the spurs fan will certainly remember. jimmy was the goal poacher and he played alongside the main striker but if you saw some ofjimmy s goals, he could go past three, four orfive ofjimmy s goals,
accomplish it? this is one idea. candidates have a lot of ideas, they don t all agree but it s good to have a debate and some republicans supported changing the number in the past and it has changed several times in our history so let s talk about it. shannon: article iii does not provide a number but if congress can set it, it wasn t six but eventually they decided it would not work and the founding fathers i don t think ever thought the court would be leaned upon as often as it is on these issues with an even number but it changed 7 times over the years but not in 150 years. kristin i want to read something from the headline on this. only one way to fix the supreme court. neil gorsuch s appointment justifies this packing idea. shifting from potential 5-were liberal majority to 5-4 conservative majority to republicans still two vote so 11 justices would merely rebalance what was taken. this is another effort by
scott. with about 6 democrats earlier in the week. were you one of them? caller: well, it wasn t six and i wasn t one of them. but, talks continue between the democrats an senate republicans and they are tenuous at best, and, there is not much detail on the nature of the bill but at least we are talking. bill: is at least one of those democratic senators willing to come back now as a result of the meeting? caller: absolutely not. you know, earlier in the interview, one of the fitzgeralds said, people need to come back and if this becomes a precedent or a piece of legislation this is not any piece of legislation. this is an extraordinarily significant, really a landmark bill, in wisconsin, because it eliminates workers rights and, if it were any piece of legislation we would be voting and everybody knows that. bill: he s saying the public pressure is against you, it is mounting. and that gets you to crack and come back. caller: that is his opinion