SCOTUS; All quiet on the Liberal front...

[amicus]

President Bush pulled another magic rabbit from the ten gallon hat by his nomination of a woman to replace the retiring O'connor.

Choosing a woman, who has never been a judge before and thus, no 'paper trail' has completely confuzzled the left wing whiners who were prepared to confront any nomination the President made.

This new nominee will be confirmed in short order and give the Supreme Court a Conservative, strict constructionist nature for the first time in decades.

Finally we can begin to roll back the socialist programs of the last half century. Goodbye Roe v Wade, so long affirmative action, bye bye forced integration, faretheewell quota systems for minorities and women and Title 9 legislation.

I wish I could forsee an abolishment of social security, medicare, foodstamps and all the other programs that have created a poverty class in America. I wish I could foresee the courage to find that taxation to provide public education is unconstitutional. I wish I could foresee that the 'Income Tax' would once again be ruled, 'unconstitutional'.

I wish I could foresee a time when all state and federal lands were made available to the private market place, when mining and oil exploration and energy creation became a function of a free market.

But alas...I only dream....


amicus...

 

[elsol]

President Bush pulled another magic rabbit from the ten gallon hat by his nomination of a woman to replace the retiring O'connor.

Choosing a woman, who has never been a judge before and thus, no 'paper trail' has completely confuzzled the left wing whiners who were prepared to confront any nomination the President made.

This new nominee will be confirmed in short order and give the Supreme Court a Conservative, strict constructionist nature for the first time in decades.

Finally we can begin to roll back the socialist programs of the last half century. Goodbye Roe v Wade, so long affirmative action, bye bye forced integration, faretheewell quota systems for minorities and women and Title 9 legislation.

I wish I could forsee an abolishment of social security, medicare, foodstamps and all the other programs that have created a poverty class in America. I wish I could foresee the courage to find that taxation to provide public education is unconstitutional. I wish I could foresee that the 'Income Tax' would once again be ruled, 'unconstitutional'.

I wish I could foresee a time when all state and federal lands were made available to the private market place, when mining and oil exploration and energy creation became a function of a free market.

But alas...I only dream....


amicus...

And you've got to go church EVERY Sunday, or you get whipped in the town square.

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[JamesSD]

Miers is grossly underqualified. It's a pro-crony pick. There were so many better options available to him, but he chose his personal friend. We expect nothing less of the Great Divider.

The only good news is she may be a bit of a moderate. She's unmarried. While on the Dallas City Council she voted in favor of a 7% increase in property taxes.

She also submitted a report to the ABA which included recomendations:

Supports the enactment of laws and public policy which provide that sexual orientation shall not be a bar to adoption when the adoption is determined to be in the best interest of the child. ...

Recommends the development and establishment of an International Criminal Court.

Be afraid conservatives, you might be looking at Souter, Part 2.

 

[amicus]

JamesSD...welcome....a Souter, part two, would be a disappointment for conservatives for sure...and within the realm of possibility.

Presidents, from Roosevelt and even before have made appointments to SCOTUS that did not pan out as expected. There is always that possibility here, but for the sake of individual freedom, I truly wish it does not happen.

We shall see...

I do predict either the retirement or death of another Supreme Court Justice within the year and I think the next appointee will be a strict constructionist with a paper trail and a big fight, filibuster and all.

amicus...

 

[amicus]

Elsol, not that it matters, but has no one told you I am an atheist?

amicus...

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Thomas is no more a strict constitituionalist than Ginsberg. In fact, the only person I have ever heard hailed as a strict constitutionalist is Scalia in his younger days.

O'Connor was a minimalist, shoosing to go with narrow decisions on a case by case basis, rather than applying sweeping precedent.

A strict constituinalist would be considered the enemy by both left and right, which Is why I think Scalia has moved right over the years. He would for example, infuriate the right by upholding the Roe V. Wade decision, based not on left or right politics, but on the strict interpretation of the constitution. All powers not specifically enumerate to the federal government are reserve powers of the states. All of the issues in roe, are essential reserve powers of the states,there isn't a single federal enumerated power that applies. The left would hate him, because much of the civil rights issues of now & yesteryear, come from a broad interpretation of the 14h amendment. An interpretation a strct reading does not impart.

As to a conservatve flavor, I hate to break this to you, but at present, you have replaced a minimalist with a conservative and an old school conservative with a neo-con. None of the liberals nor the wishy washy moderate liberals have been replaced, so you haven't changed the balance, except in instances where O'connor's minimalist applications caused her to vote with the liberals (like Roe).

Of all your examples, the only one that may indded come to pass is the overturning of Roe v. Wade. In that case only, you may have managed a majority. If their voting records are any indication, the other five would still block most of the things you are a hoping for.

Misogyny is the only one of your cherished values that is likely to get a boost. that of course assumes no other justice chooses or is forced to depart while Dubya is still in the white house.

 

[amicus]

Colleen Thomas...dear Colly...forgive me..I be soused, thouroughly such and should not reply, but if I do not, I will not...thus...I must...

"...Misogyny is the only one of your cherished values that is likely to get a boost. that of course assumes no other justice chooses or is forced to depart while Dubya is still in the white house..,.."

It seems to me, after reading your posts, many of them, that you are between a rock and a hard place, to use a cliche''

Your main issue with me is abortion. So I gather.

The secondary issue is sexual orientation.

Abortion, to me, is not an issue. Foregoing the religious aspect, when a boy and a girl, or a man and a woman, make a baby, it is a 'life', a human life and by not just the Constitution of the United States, but by the accumulation of knowlegde throughout out the ages, must be protected.

It is not even a debatable issue with me; a human life is created at conception.

If we, Americans, the US of A, respect, 'life' we must respect, 'life' at the earliest possible inception, or we do not respect human life at all.

I know you do not like this line of thought, but it is much like an algebraic equasion, logic, and..there is no escape. If we accept that 'Life' is an innate, inalienalble right, to all humans, then we must, I repeat, must, acknowledge that human life begins at the moment of conception.

And I know, full well, with personal things I will not tell you, the trauma of the question to abort or not.

damn....Misogynist...as you think of me...I am not...although it may answer questions you have...you are as aware, as much as I am, as to the genetic, physicological, biological differences between the male and female of the species.

I envision a marvelous, although complex, symbiotic relationship between opposites. I see and comprehend the conflict and aspertion between the genders and sense it to be natures solution to nurturing the offspring, as procreation in the natural intent.

Thus, you see, anything outside heterosexuality, must, by logic, be viewed as an aberration, an anomaly that can be understood and accepted, but not made a rule of law, or common behaviour.

sorry...it got late....and I got fuzzy.....fuzzy wuzzzy

 

[mack_the_knife]

Give the dems a few days to dig up obscure facts, they'll be ready to thrash and burn by Thursday. I'm sure she's a racist, homophobic, pro-lifer, religious zealot, or will be by Saturday. I imagine they're donning their rectal spelunking gear even as we speak. Right now, the catchphrase is cronyism, which is rewarding someone who helped you by putting them somewhere they have no right to be. Looks like that FEMA twit was a crony. Seems this woman is amazingly accomplished and qualified for the job (being a judge is NOT a qualification). Unless she accidentally dropped an 'N' bomb somewhere, or something equally damning, she's in, they'll just have to get over it.

 

[TheEarl]

I wish I could forsee an abolishment of social security, medicare, foodstamps and all the other programs that have created a poverty class in America. I wish I could foresee the courage to find that taxation to provide public education is unconstitutional. I wish I could foresee that the 'Income Tax' would once again be ruled, 'unconstitutional'.

I wish I could foresee a time when all state and federal lands were made available to the private market place, when mining and oil exploration and energy creation became a function of a free market.

But alas...I only dream....


amicus...

Amicus: I'm always amazed/amused at how fervently you preach the credo of the free market, considering you don't understand the basic economic laws of supply, demand and externalities.

The Earl

 

[Guest]

Give the dems a few days to dig up obscure facts, they'll be ready to thrash and burn by Thursday. I'm sure she's a racist, homophobic, pro-lifer, religious zealot, or will be by Saturday. I imagine they're donning their rectal spelunking gear even as we speak. Right now, the catchphrase is cronyism, which is rewarding someone who helped you by putting them somewhere they have no right to be. Looks like that FEMA twit was a crony. Seems this woman is amazingly accomplished and qualified for the job (being a judge is NOT a qualification). Unless she accidentally dropped an 'N' bomb somewhere, or something equally damning, she's in, they'll just have to get over it.

Now, now, now.

I am annoyed to the nth degree by the "us" and "them" aura that has begun to cloud everything in the AH these days.

Of course in the United States the political piranhas on both sides are searching and circling - that's what governing has become in this country. A bitchin' free-for-all, an attempt to trash as many people as possible (as long as they are on the other side) and don't stop even if your facts are inconclusive, even if they are iffy, even if they are later proven to be complete fabrications.

Don't do this here, please.


(And I'm biting my lip at what my normal reply would be to a post such as yours. Biting hard.)


Oh, and don't listen to ami. He's not an ally, he just loves to start shit.

 

[elsol]

Elsol, not that it matters, but has no one told you I am an atheist?

amicus...

You're in bed with Fundamental Christians, Ami.

I hate to break it to you, but I have more in common with them than you do.

You're lifestyle is just as anti-thetical to them (to be read as us) as one guy sucking another guy's cock.

You're just useful... for now.

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[LadyJeanne]

Give the dems a few days to dig up obscure facts, they'll be ready to thrash and burn by Thursday. I'm sure she's a racist, homophobic, pro-lifer, religious zealot, or will be by Saturday. I imagine they're donning their rectal spelunking gear even as we speak. Right now, the catchphrase is cronyism, which is rewarding someone who helped you by putting them somewhere they have no right to be. Looks like that FEMA twit was a crony. Seems this woman is amazingly accomplished and qualified for the job (being a judge is NOT a qualification). Unless she accidentally dropped an 'N' bomb somewhere, or something equally damning, she's in, they'll just have to get over it.

Oh, gimme a break! Qualified? She is one of our best and brightest legal minds? In constitutional law?

Silk purse, sow's ear, promoting your agenda, blah blah blah...

 

[Colleen Thomas]

Colleen Thomas...dear Colly...forgive me..I be soused, thouroughly such and should not reply, but if I do not, I will not...thus...I must...

"...Misogyny is the only one of your cherished values that is likely to get a boost. that of course assumes no other justice chooses or is forced to depart while Dubya is still in the white house..,.."

It seems to me, after reading your posts, many of them, that you are between a rock and a hard place, to use a cliche''

Your main issue with me is abortion. So I gather.

The secondary issue is sexual orientation.

Abortion, to me, is not an issue. Foregoing the religious aspect, when a boy and a girl, or a man and a woman, make a baby, it is a 'life', a human life and by not just the Constitution of the United States, but by the accumulation of knowlegde throughout out the ages, must be protected.

It is not even a debatable issue with me; a human life is created at conception.

If we, Americans, the US of A, respect, 'life' we must respect, 'life' at the earliest possible inception, or we do not respect human life at all.

I know you do not like this line of thought, but it is much like an algebraic equasion, logic, and..there is no escape. If we accept that 'Life' is an innate, inalienalble right, to all humans, then we must, I repeat, must, acknowledge that human life begins at the moment of conception.

And I know, full well, with personal things I will not tell you, the trauma of the question to abort or not.

damn....Misogynist...as you think of me...I am not...although it may answer questions you have...you are as aware, as much as I am, as to the genetic, physicological, biological differences between the male and female of the species.

I envision a marvelous, although complex, symbiotic relationship between opposites. I see and comprehend the conflict and aspertion between the genders and sense it to be natures solution to nurturing the offspring, as procreation in the natural intent.

Thus, you see, anything outside heterosexuality, must, by logic, be viewed as an aberration, an anomaly that can be understood and accepted, but not made a rule of law, or common behaviour.

sorry...it got late....and I got fuzzy.....fuzzy wuzzzy

Actually, the only issue I had with your post was linking an ultra conservative view to a strict interpretation of the constitution. My apologies if I got preachy.

A strict interpretation is neither liberal nor Conservative, it would piss off both sides, royally. A strict interpretation would gut a huge number of liberal advances, by adhereing to the policy of states rights being upheld in any case where no federal enumerated power is in question. Similarly, a strict interpretation would put the kibosh on many rightest doctrines particularly separation of Church and state issues and personal choice things like abortion, orientation, viewing pornography, etc.

Both sides may claim they want a strict interpretation, but neither dside does. What they want is strict enforcement of THEIR interpretation, which is a horse of a different color, with apologies to shang

 

[lil_elvis]

What would Hamilton say?

Just a snipet from an op/ed piece I read ealier today, which quoted Alexander Hamilton's writings in the Federalist papers (#76) regarding senate confirmation of justices. I'm skipping the editorial and just posting the Hamilton quote as food for thought. (Italics are my addition):

"To what purpose then require the co-operation of the Senate? I answer, that the necessity of their concurrence would have a powerful, though, in general, a silent operation. It would be an excellent check upon the spirit of favoritism in the President, and would tend greatly to prevent the appointment of unfit characters from Sate prejudice, from family connection, from personal attachment, or from a view to popularity…He would be both ashamed and afraid to bring forward, for the most distinguished or lucrative stations, candidates who had no other merit than that of coming from the same to which he particularly belonged, or of being in some way personally allied to him, or of possessing the necessary insignificance and pliancy to render the obsequious instruments of his pleasure."

This would seem to preclude Harriet Myers from the bench.

 

[elsol]

*burp* -- From NY.Times.

Of the 109 people who have been on the Supreme Court, 41 had no previous judicial experience, according to the "Guide to the U.S. Supreme Court," published by Congressional Quarterly.

Many of those have been among the most influential justices - John Marshall, Earl Warren, Louis D. Brandeis, Robert H. Jackson, Felix Frankfurter and William H. Rehnquist, to name a few.

I knew there was something about making a big deal of her lack of 'experience' that was off.

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[Guest]

Just a snipet from an op/ed piece I read ealier today, which quoted Alexander Hamilton's writings in the Federalist papers (#76) regarding senate confirmation of justices. I'm skipping the editorial and just posting the Hamilton quote as food for thought. (Italics are my addition):

"To what purpose then require the co-operation of the Senate? I answer, that the necessity of their concurrence would have a powerful, though, in general, a silent operation. It would be an excellent check upon the spirit of favoritism in the President, and would tend greatly to prevent the appointment of unfit characters from Sate prejudice, from family connection, from personal attachment, or from a view to popularity…He would be both ashamed and afraid to bring forward, for the most distinguished or lucrative stations, candidates who had no other merit than that of coming from the same to which he particularly belonged, or of being in some way personally allied to him, or of possessing the necessary insignificance and pliancy to render the obsequious instruments of his pleasure."

This would seem to preclude Harriet Myers from the bench.

Yes. I am in full agreement.

(and I'm biting my lip again - though I have more to add.)

 

[lil_elvis]

Yes. I am in full agreement.

(and I'm biting my lip again - though I have more to add.)

You're so cute when you bite your lip.

I wasn't able to formulate what bothered me (the most) about Myers, but I think Hamilton hit the nail on the head.

 

[Guest]

You're so cute when you bite your lip.

I wasn't able to formulate what bothered me (the most) about Myers, but I think Hamilton hit the nail on the head.

 

[elsol]

People...people.

It's not like he nominated Jeb Bush... it's his frackin' lawyer.

Just say it!

I hate Bush!
I'll hate anyone he nominates too!

I promise it will make you feel better... no really, it will watch.

I hate Bush!
I'll hate anyone he nomiates too!

See I'm smiling already, and I don't even mean it... (that much).

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[elsol]

Jesus... even Democrats like her.

Can you imagine the howls from Amicus if the first abortion case that comes up Miers vote pro-Roe?

Two reasons to smile today.

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[Alex756]

Yah know, he did pull a rabbit out of his hat.

The only move that could have surprised us soo much we never saw it coming.

He took up Harry Reid's suggestion.

Isn't that what we want? both sides listening to each other?

Course there aren't even really sides, there is a little blue, a little red, and a big ole mass of purple.

~Alex

 

[elsol]

Yah know, he did pull a rabbit out of his hat.

The only move that could have surprised us soo much we never saw it coming.

He took up Harry Reid's suggestion.

Isn't that what we want? both sides listening to each other?

Course there aren't even really sides, there is a little blue, a little red, and a big ole mass of purple.

~Alex

It's not actually a rabbit... it's a time-delay grenade.

He's basically saying -- 'Let's play hot-potato..."

Oh... my god, third reason to smile today.

Republicans grilling their own candidate for answers to those tough questions.

Such a nice day!

Sincerely,
ElSol

 

[Guest]

People...people.

It's not like he nominated Jeb Bush... it's his frackin' lawyer.

Just say it!

I hate Bush!
I'll hate anyone he nominates too!

I promise it will make you feel better... no really, it will watch.

I hate Bush!
I'll hate anyone he nomiates too!

See I'm smiling already, and I don't even mean it... (that much).

Sincerely,
ElSol

It's the crony thing. There is no paper trail. We don't know much about her except that she was his lawyer and represented him on some property issue.


Shhhh. http://bestsmileys.com/peeping/5.gif

 

[Alex756]

It's not actually a rabbit... it's a time-delay grenade.

He's basically saying -- 'Let's play hot-potato..."

Oh... my god, third reason to smile today.

Republicans grilling their own candidate for answers to those tough questions.

Such a nice day!

Sincerely,
ElSol

You need to find video of the cardigan incident on Fox News, that will SOO make your day. really right woman really pissed screaming about how Bush might as well be carter, and then being blind sided by some older guy making a cardigan joke and showing how little she knew what she was talking about.

Its perfect! he pissed of the far far right and no one knows what to do. I can't wait for the vote, she'll pass unless something wacko turns up, AND have No votes from both sides.

It'll be like the wedding in The Bird cage with the far sides of both parties being like 'I can't believe we are here for the same thing'

~Alex

 

[elsol]

It's the crony thing. There is no paper trail. We don't know much about her except that she was his lawyer and represented him on some property issue.


Shhhh. http://bestsmileys.com/peeping/5.gif

Well... to be honest.

I think at this point I would prefer a personal crony than a political one.

Seriously, the candidates have been 'reasonable' considering what the most vocal part of his party really wanted.

Okay... I don't know anything about Miers, but no one does.

Maybe she gave him a blowjob at one point and he's trying to keep her quiet.

Sincerely,
ElSol