Reinquist is certain to go soon as well (cancer is not going to allow him a choice) and we'll have two more conservative judges on the bench for lifetime appointments.
We're sooooo fucked.
Your opinions?
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, if Bush's nominee is even somewhat moderate, it's possible the Democrats will let them through to avoid having things blow up. However, in the far more likely event that the nominee is a total nutter, I suspect Harry Reid has the requisite balls to call for a filibuster. If that happens, the Republicans will pull out the nuclear option again. Then it becomes a question of convincing the compromisers that the nominee constitutes an "extraordinary circumstance". Chances are, that won't happen, though, and you can wave goodbye to the last reins on Republican power.
I believe, though, that there was some plan, should the nuclear button get pushed, for the Democrats to somehow flood the Senate with their own agenda, but I don't recall the details of how it would help at all.
But, with any luck (and a fair dose of intelligence on the part of the American people... no, better rely on luck...), things will be very different on 3. Jan. 2007.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
A lot of people (people, of course, referring to those media pundits who did an oh-so-wonderful job of predicting the verdict in the Michael Jackson case, so take ample grains of salt) seem to think that Bush is going to avoid the huge battles and pick someone relatively moderate like Alberto Gonzales. What they're basing this one is anyone's guess, aside from Gonzales having a legal background and is a friend of Bush. What makes them think Bush is going to do anything to avoid a judicial battle is anyone's guess. One article I read said Janice Rogers Brown is a possible nominee, which is interesting in that she only got her current judicial posting this month. The local media has also been trumpeting Senator John Cornyn possibly being nominated, and thus clearing the path for someone new to take up the mantle of "least popular US Senator". In short: no one knows what Bush's plan is except Karl Rove.
O'Connor retiring is a cause for concern, but a replacement with a conservative justice would just balance the conservative and liberal wings (now standing at 3 to 4) with only one swing vote. We'll see a lot more 5-4 decisions and probably a lot swaying of the swing vote. Rehnquist retiring or dying won't make much of an impact on the court unless Bush appoints a moderate to replace him.
-------------------- The philosopher's stone. Those who possess it are no longer bound by the laws of equivalent exchange in alchemy. They gain without sacrifice and create without equal exchange. We searched for it, and we found it.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
My horrific prediction: Bush nominates a total nutter- someone that pleases the holy-rollers, anti-abortionists and Rush Limbaugh crowd of SUV driving yokels. Someone high-profile. Hitler's brain in a jar prahaps.
The Democrats scream "Fillibuster! Oh shit, we have to stop this monster now!"
The Republicans announce they are using "the nuclear option".
Democrats, fearing they'll lose they only remianing (though obviously ineffectual) weapon, send Liberman or some other press-hungey fool to negoitate a "bi-partisan solution".
Seeming genuinely disappointed, Bush nominates a candidate with little official record for the Democrats to to publicly object to without their seeming uncooperatiive and "partisan".
HItler's brain will just have to serve honorably as ambassaor to Israel or something.
The democrats fold, and allow this new nominee into the court where he will be just as conservative as the high-profile nutter.
Mabye we can put Reinquist on life-support: then the holy-rollers will keep him alive at least long enough for a new administration to gain office. ....of course, judging from the shambles of Democrat leadership, and overall voter stupidity, we may have Hitler's Brain as the next President.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
"Democrats, fearing they'll lose they only remianing (though obviously ineffectual) weapon, send Liberman or some other press-hungey fool to negoitate a 'bi-partisan solution'."
That already happened.
"Seeming genuinely disappointed, Bush nominates a candidate with little official record for the Democrats to to publicly object to without their seeming uncooperatiive and 'partisan'."
I think what Jason's trying to say is that Bush will try to push a "stealth conservative". He'll originally nominate someone very conservative that will ignite the fillibuster debate again. Bush'll either pull the candidate or the candidate will be rejected. Then Bush will nominate another person who doesn't many of his opinions on the public record (either from a short judicial career or who just kept his or her mouth shut about politics) and who happens to be just as conservative as the first candidate. Since this person doesn't have much of a background, the Democrats can't start off right away bashing the candidate for conservative views; the candidate can probably get away with fudging his true opinion on a lot of things to secure the votes of enough senators to get voted to the Supreme Court. Once on the high court, his true colors will be revealed.
It seems possibly, but not probable (in my opinion). This is a Supreme Court nominee, and I doubt that many senators on either side would want to vote for someone who doesn't have an extensive record of service and experience in the judiciary or legal fields.
-------------------- The philosopher's stone. Those who possess it are no longer bound by the laws of equivalent exchange in alchemy. They gain without sacrifice and create without equal exchange. We searched for it, and we found it.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
I think what Jason's trying to say is, that Bush's Bunch is going to try to see how far they can push, threaten the "nuclear option" for the first nomination, when really they're going to try to force the Democrats into "compromising" on their second candidate, who's the person that they want to get in office all along. It's like asking for double what you really want, in order to make half look like something that's fair to both parties.
Of course, that's an incredibly stupid way to strategize, but then, the Neo-Conservatives are an incredibly stupid bunch, too.
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
You're both correct. I think the Bush bunch will try the "bait and switch" thing- offering up a unacceptable first choice among the possible nominations for everyone to balk at, while intending to settle an someone less objectionable but still very conservative.
Who know though? Mabye the Republicans will nominate someone not too nuts as a PR concession to "bipartisanship" and head off the circus the media is already starting.
I doubt it though.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
Thanks to all the gods who ever have or ever will exist for that ray of hope.
Maaaan, we do not need a justice that wants to "re-define the definition of torture to apply to the current times".
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
That's the reason free speech in the EU is a conditional right, a very conditional one at that, we don't get wackos trying to redefine torture...
-------------------- Garbled, confusing and quite frankly duller than an inflight magazine produced by Air Belgium.
Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
posted
It's not a matter of free speech, Marauth. It's a matter of an advisor to the President (namely, Gonzales in his role as chief general counsel for the White House) telling the President in a memo that the Geneva Convention is outdated and specific things that might once have been deemed torture really aren't in this day and age.
Jason: I'd rather put up with Gonzales on the Supreme Court (who does seem to be moderate in some of his views) than the likes of Ted Olsen, Edith Jones, and some of the other litmus-test passed, Religious Right approved, socially conservative justices that are probably being compiled into a list.
-------------------- The philosopher's stone. Those who possess it are no longer bound by the laws of equivalent exchange in alchemy. They gain without sacrifice and create without equal exchange. We searched for it, and we found it.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Y'Know, today is my birthday, so I should get to choose who is the next Supreme Court Justice. Hmmmm..... Jonny Cochrane. He's dead, but we could just ad lib some snappy catchphrases from a hidden speaker in his embalmed throat and make do.
No, I dont think that's wrong.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
-------------------- “Those people who think they know everything are a great annoyance to those of us who do.” — Isaac Asimov Star Trek Minutiae | Memory Alpha
Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
No sweat. I wont even charge royalties (Nim's got me paying through the nose).
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
