Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Chief Justice William Rehnquist to retire

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
yankeefanatic3 Donating Member (256 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:08 PM
Original message
Chief Justice William Rehnquist to retire
DailyKOS has learned that it will happen between 10-11 am ET tomorrow. Apparently Bob Novak's sources say so too.

It looks like we'll be saying "Chief Justice Scalia?" soon enough.

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
The Velveteen Ocelot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:09 PM
Response to Original message
1. Or Chief Justice Thomas?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yankeefanatic3 Donating Member (256 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
14. I would hope not...He has said before though he wasn't interested n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mike_c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:10 PM
Response to Original message
2. OMFG will the bad news never end today...?
Oh shit....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kikosexy2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #2
13. Evil...
on the rise!!...Is God really pissed at the world or what?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renew Deal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:11 PM
Response to Original message
3. Have there ever been two openings at once?
Besides expanding the size of the court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dudley_DUright Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:41 PM
Response to Reply #3
19. Yes, last time was in 1971
The last time there were simultaneous vacancies at the court was 1971, when Justices Hugo Black and John Marshall Harlan retired in September, about a week apart. Rehnquist, then a Justice Department lawyer, urged the Nixon administration to move fast in replacing them. After Nixon's first two choices were harshly criticized, he named Lewis Powell and Rehnquist.

http://dsdsdemo2.ap.org/aponline/politics_stories/5_ds_...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithy Cherub Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:12 PM
Response to Original message
4. Hornets Nest...
Now each camp in the wingnut world can be assuaged...

Oh, THIS Summer is of intense political extremes... :popcorn:

Scalia the Shark's new chief justice robe should be a riot...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UCLA Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:12 PM
Response to Original message
5. Oh fuck. Here we go. Who next?? Kicked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #5
62. Sadly, the oldest, frailest one holding on is JP Stevens
Ford's sole appointee is arguably the most reliable liberal on the court. He's also in his 80s and only holding on because he loathes Bush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scottie72 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:13 PM
Response to Original message
6. I agree
That is another big OH SH*&^

Now there is going to be a apocalytical battle in DC for the justices. The best possible outcome would be to nominate a main line conservative (middle of the road like O'connor) and then he would be free to nominate a neo con. This wouldn't change the current balance of the court. If we get two neo cons the country will turn the clocks back this fall 50 years instead of an hour.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marmar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:16 PM
Response to Original message
7. Now he can appoint Gonzales to appease the slightly more moderate folks...
and a real right-wing extremists to pander to the, well, right wing extremists. These coordinated retirements are no accident, methinks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #7
17. I see no interest whatsoever in 'appeasement' from this cabal ...
.... unless it's appeasing the Chinese Communists. Of course that's just business, not political. (Leave the gun. Take the cannoli.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jaysunb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #17
37. Hey Clemenza !
I gotta little job for ya over here !! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kadie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:16 PM
Response to Original message
8. This should make it easy for bushie
Now he can appoint an ultra conservative and a moderate and make most of the people happy.

:eyes:


"Chief Justice Scalia?"

:scared: :scared: :scared: :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sonicx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:17 PM
Response to Original message
9. This sucks, but it's least it's a con...
whoever the replacment is can't be worse (or can it?)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sandpiper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:17 PM
Response to Original message
10. Replacing Rehnquist doesn't change the balance of the Court
Rehnquist was an anti-choice right wing partisan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old Vet Donating Member (618 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:31 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. My Guess, 2 Ultra Conservatives........
Bush will not try to appease anyone. His whole dream is about to come true, The Repugs have been gearing up for this fight for a long time, Every church you can name is taking extra collections to help overturn Roe. Remember political capitol?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:40 PM
Response to Reply #12
18. Agreed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ikojo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:55 PM
Response to Reply #12
28. The pugs are not only interested in overturning
Roe v Wade, they are interested in undoing the whole New Deal and that includes social security and many labor laws. Wow! I wish people could see how dangerous a conservative court is not only to the choice issue but to ALL working class people.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #12
63. Correction, two ultra conservatives between the ages of 45 and 50.
Ever since the religious right hijacked them in the 80s, Republican presidents like 'em young. Not a single Republican appointee has been over age 52.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aresef Donating Member (270 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 10:40 PM
Response to Reply #12
91. Not every church is full of Christofascists
Unitarianism, United Church of Christ, etc.

Anywho guys, THIS is our chance. We have to scream louder than ever before. Send letters to your senators. Paper letters. Any Democrat senator who votes for somebody like Alberto "Torture can be fun" Gonzales will be labeled a DINO.

And when the confirmation hearings begin, we should be more often hearing Bork used as a verb.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
brentspeak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:39 PM
Response to Reply #10
16. Yeah, but now we'll have
a much younger anti-choice right wing partisan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
longship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #10
55. True, but he's the chief
So CuckooBananas has a chance to reshape the court even more.

He appoints an even more conservative chief, e.g., Thomas.

Now he still has two new appointments both of which can be more conservative than Rehnquist.

I think Ted Olson will most certainly be one of them. Many think that Gonzales will be one.

Or, here's a positive thought (if you're a lunatic nazi). How about Ted Olson as chief? Then he can still appoint another lunatic.

Scary times!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadisonProgressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:27 PM
Response to Original message
11. What is happening to this world?
This has been a very bad day. :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doctor Pedantic Donating Member (210 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:35 PM
Response to Original message
15. Not a big deal
Look, Rehnquist is just going to be replaced by another right-winger. I do tend to agree that Bush will try to maintain the status quo by appointing what now passes for a moderate to replace O'Connor, thus not upsetting the balance of the Court. Even if he doesn't, the Court currently is 6-3 in favor of a basic right to abortion, so Roe really isn't in jeopardy -- yet.

Yes, some things will get worse, but it won't be time to panic until, say, Stevens retires or dies -- which I fear will happen before January 2009.

And let me also say that I believe a President has every right to nominate judges who share his or her fundamental views, and that the Senate should confirm judges based on their qualifications, and not their ideology. If Bush wants to appoint right-wingers, that's his prerogative. If in a few years Hillary wants to appoint left-wingers, that should be hers. As a lawyer, I care a lot more about the competence of the judges I'm in front of than about their ideologies. I know that mine is not a popular position on the left or the right, and I will probably get flamed, but I had to say it....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithy Cherub Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #15
24. Philosophy informs judicial desicion making:
Edited on Thu Jul-07-05 05:56 PM by Pithy Cherub
Some of the more spectacular SCOTUS decisions that determine the fate of the US for years because a president was given carte blanche. Could not disagree with your legal laissez faire aproach more!

No way is it a good judicial temperment to have let this happen:

Bush vs. Gore on edit
Plessy vs. Fergusson

btw, welcome to DU!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
smoogatz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:53 PM
Response to Reply #15
25. Of the remaining seven justices
Pro-choice:

Bader-Ginsburg
Stevens
Souter
Breyer

Anti-choice:

Scalia
Thomas
Kennedy (voted anti-choice in 1999's Stenberg v. Carhart)

So, two anti-choice Bush nominees could in fact result in a de facto overturning of Roe. Not to mention all the other damage a far right SCOTUS majority could do. So much for environmental protections, workers' rights, consumer protection and of course civil rights. It's a dark time in America, folks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ikojo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #25
38. Choice is NOT the only issue here!
The Republicans aim to undo the entire Roosevelt legacy and that includes a war on social security and other labor laws.

Where do each of the justices stand on support for the eight hour day?
Overtime pay for working more than 40 hours in a week?
Social security?
Worker's comp insurance?





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #38
58. Insufficient records on most subjects.
I don't think there's been a Supreme Court case challanging SS, overtime pay, or the 8 hour work day in the history of the current court. Still, worst case it would probably be at least 6/3 in favor of all of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cyclezealot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 08:35 PM
Response to Reply #58
119. Yes, we do
As posted later on this thread. This is just not about "Roe v Wade." As I said in a later reply. See "People for the American Way's "Courting Disaster" on their web site.
Property rights issues include the right for American's to not be able to challenge their serfdom in an ownership society.
People for the American Way analysis of Scalia's as of now Minority Decisions. He is a nut. You need find this out. Find out for yourself. Go to People for the American way and know.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DanCa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 07:29 PM
Response to Reply #38
77. And then theres the whole scientific spectrum
Everything from environmental sciencies to stem cell research is screwed. This doesnt suck it swallows.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheFarseer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #38
83. Thank you n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orleans Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 09:23 PM
Response to Reply #38
87. you're right--choice is not the ONLY issue here
but i would say it's one of the biggest issues.

they take away a womans right to choose, then they'll be taking away a womans right to vote.

it'll be stepford: "i was just gonna make you some coffee. i was just gonna make you some coffee."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:35 PM
Response to Reply #25
51. Stenberg v. Carhart was partial birth, not abortion in general.
It's not a surprise that one of the moderates might go against partial birth, as most people are in fact against it. And Kennedy has supported Roe in other decisions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 12:56 AM
Response to Reply #51
99. Actually, to be accurate a "Moderate" on the court...
voted against women's health, but hey, whatever you think. I do find it somewhat amusing that you assert that most people are against "Partial Birth Abortions" when they have to be performed, then again, most people are probably against having to have a triple bypass surgery sometime in their lives. Doesn't mean that either procedure should ever be put under the thumb of unnecessary government regulation, beyond basic sanitation and health issues. Just an FYI: since Roe, there have been NO "Partial Birth Abortions" that have not been done without a VALID medical reason(Endangered health of mother, fetus died, or saving life of mother). They are so rare, that they slipped under the radar of conservatives for years, and just NOW they are indignant that a NECESSARY medical procedure is so icky they have to ban it? I hate conservative logic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jaysunb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:07 PM
Response to Reply #15
35. no flames here, but I have a
Edited on Thu Jul-07-05 06:08 PM by jaysunb
wish list, that goes like this :

Fitzgerald rolls out indictments against Chaney, Rove & several others KNOWN to be involved in the leak.
He pulls a Ken Starr and goes further than his assigned scope because their crimes are directly related to the pre war WMD lies, which will set the stage for W's impeachment.

The court has only seven justices to decide the flurry of filings in the attempt to save the current mis-administration.

Ok Ok I'm waking up now..... :evilgrin:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boddhi Donating Member (92 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 08:12 PM
Response to Reply #35
84. i was having the same dream....
...is there such a thing as deja-dream?

but mine keeps going. W resigns, so we get Cheney. But he goes down for claiming Saddam's got nukes. So then it's DeLay - need I list the ways he would fall? So it'd be Frist - but they'd pull something on the whole "calling in the entire Congress to decide the fate of one person" so it keeps going - to CONDIE. So she was in on the whole yellow-cake deal - another one bites the dust. So we'd get John Snow...

ok, I'll stop, but maybe we could play a little game. Where would you like the dominoes to stop falling?

In order it'd be:

Snow - Tres
Rumsfeld - Def
Gonzales - Att'y Gen
Norton - Int
Johanns - Ag
Gutierrez - Comm
Chao - Labor
Leavitt -H&HS
Jackson - Housing & Urban Dev
Mineta - Transportation
Bodman - Energy
Spellings - Edumacation
Nicholson - Vets Affairs
Chosen by congress.....

except, at least according to the site:
http://members.1stconnect.com/anozira/SiteTops/resource...
there's no place for Chertoff at Homeland Security - anybody hear of a change in succession?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jaysunb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 09:58 PM
Response to Reply #84
88. none of that would matter, as we'd have
President Hassert. as in Dennis, the speaker of The House.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
More Than A Feeling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 01:21 AM
Response to Reply #88
102. After that, Alaskan Senator Ted Stevens
President Pro Tempore of the Senate. Which would actually be a huge improvement. Stevens has been around for so long he has to be more of an old-school Republican than the others. Someone we can deal with.

Sigh, it won't happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #15
78. "A President has every right..."
Except George W. Bush Jr. is not a president. It doesn't count if you steal the elections!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 07:45 PM
Response to Reply #78
80. Oops. Self-delete.
Edited on Thu Jul-07-05 07:47 PM by Hissyspit
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mamiesb2001 Donating Member (27 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:45 PM
Response to Original message
20. Days like this make it tough to be a Quaker. I'm tellin' ya....


BTW, disgust has finally gotten me to post instead of lurk. Hello -- it's been a pleasure to read all of you for the last year!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kadie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. Welcome to DU mamiesb2001!
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lfairban Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. Welcome Sister.
Glad to have you aboard! :grouphug: :hi: :party:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
I Have A Dream Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #20
29. Hi, mamiesb2001. Glad that you finally jumped into the...
DU pool! Welcome! :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mamiesb2001 Donating Member (27 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #20
39. And thanks for the greetings! It's good to be here -- surrounded
by others whose phones are also tapped by the government. (Just kidding. More or less.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #20
57. Welcome, mamiesb2001!
The Nerf balls don't really hurt much. :silly:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadisonProgressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #20
72. You go girl!
Welcome to DU, and keep speaking your mind! The more the merrier here at DU... :woohoo:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tight_rope Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #20
73. I must say....You truely have great patience!
I give in after 2 weeks. Happy to read your comments in the future. In your mind you probably think the world is going "MAD". And right your probably are. The only plans I make nowadays, is to hopefully wake up and continue breathing throughout the day. "That's It"!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadisonProgressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #73
74. Same here - lower the expectations!
Accentuate the positive - eliminate the negative!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
catzies Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:47 PM
Response to Original message
22. Was I wrong. My bet was that he'd die being Chief Justice.
My premise was that he loved it so much, he'd never leave until they carried him out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:48 PM
Response to Reply #22
61. You may be wrong by only a very short spell of time, however
His health is not good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
V Lee Donating Member (136 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:53 PM
Response to Original message
26. Can we get Bush to follow their lead and retire too?

I've been diagnosed as chronically optimistic.

>> Whats on Bills mind? Political commentary with attitude and more at http://www.BillsBrain.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
skids Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:53 PM
Response to Original message
27. Bush knew.
Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but I saw him gibbering on the news and he kept saying "I will nominate people" instead of "a person" which got me wondering whether he knew of another resignation, or whether he was slipping up and revealing a strategy to nominate an "extreme case" first and then withdraw it.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pithy Cherub Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 05:59 PM
Response to Reply #27
30. He's known for over a month!
SCOTUS gives public resignations and informs the WH privately in advance. Most do not heed that retiring justices in these modern times have tried to retire when their preferred party is in the WH.

Hang on Justice Stevens!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
losdiablosgato Donating Member (649 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #30
109. I heard opn the radio today Stevens may retire by the end of the year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UCLA Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #27
34. He totally slipped.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yupster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #27
48. You can't deduce anything about Bush
by his use or misuse of grammar.

There's no telling what Bush will say regardless of the conditions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressoid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:00 PM
Response to Original message
31. I need a fucking drink
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mamiesb2001 Donating Member (27 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:16 PM
Response to Reply #31
40. Yeah, me too. How big would it have to be to get us to 2006?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressoid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #40
45. I'm still having a big drink but...
I've since read the article. It comes from worldnetdaily via Bob Novak's musings. Proabably just b.s.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mamiesb2001 Donating Member (27 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:24 PM
Response to Reply #45
46. In that case, I'll only need to drink until .... well, 2006, but I don't
have to start right this second.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cyclezealot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 08:38 PM
Response to Reply #40
120. Won't help.
Neo Con judge activists will rule another 20 years. Have to be a hell of a drink. Remember, same judges who tried to destroy FDR's programs during most of his Administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TahitiNut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:37 PM
Response to Reply #31
53. What kind of drink is that?
K-Y and tonic? :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
boddhi Donating Member (92 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 08:18 PM
Response to Reply #31
85. excellent thought and...
... I hoist a mug to your name...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DanCa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:01 PM
Response to Original message
32.  It just keeps getting worse doesn't it
Wonder when the bottom will drop out
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
woodleydem Donating Member (170 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:02 PM
Response to Original message
33. I think we will be hearing "Chief Justice Gonzales" very soon.
This gives Bush the perfect scenario to nominate Gonzales as Chief, and I think he very much wants to have a "Gonzales Court" for a long time. (Alberto is only 49) He can nominate Gonzales as Chief, and then nominate some RW nut job and still claim to have balance on the Court. Plus, that would only mean two confirmation hearings, whereas if he puts Scalia as Chief, that would mean three confirmation hearings. I seriously doubt that. I really think Bush cares less about the actual legal ramifications of his appointments, but wants to leave his mark on the Court, which a Gonzales confirmation would do. And politically, the Republicans will reap rewards from the fastest growing minority group by nominating one of their own as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, which is a much more visible and glamorous position than AG.

That would be the smart thing for Bush to do, but alas, this is Bush we are talking about here, so intelligence is out the window.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
progressoid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:10 PM
Response to Original message
36. WAIT JUST ONE DAMN MINUTE
This comes from worldnetdaily via Bob Novak?

Maybe a grain or two of salt is needed here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:17 PM
Response to Reply #36
41. Or an entire shaker's worth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Endangered Specie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #36
113. Ill believe it when I see it actually happen...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Baconfoot Donating Member (653 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:19 PM
Response to Original message
42. #@*$#@ we knew it was coming but... #@*$#@ just to mark the occasion. NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robertpaulsen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:20 PM
Response to Original message
43. Now I know how I'll spend my weekend.
:beer: :beer: :beer: :beer: :beer: :beer: :beer: :beer: :beer: :beer:

Lots of sorrows to drown this week.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr.Green93 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:21 PM
Response to Original message
44. Our Senators will hold the line
Any appointments must be approved by us or else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Baconfoot Donating Member (653 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #44
49. Perhaps the sense of duty will kick in more strongly than it has of late.
Let us hope.
:patriot: :patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProudDad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #44
110. This is possible
1) If the Dems grow a spine and filibuster
all * nominations (they'll all be awful)
2) There's no Nuclear Option in the Senate
3) They block confirmations until Jan '09
4) A Dem gets elected in '08

I don't think this is possible.

Any ideas about what to do after the court goes right-wing?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cascadiance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:25 PM
Response to Original message
47. Call me nuts if you like...
... but I'm wondering if the timing of a lot of events lately:

1) retirement of O'Connor
2) retirement of Rehnquist
3) potential indictment of Rove
4) Bushies trying to quickly wrap up and distance themselves from MZM industries fiasco and those associated with it (Duke Cunningham and Katherine Harris)

are all connected somehow.

I wonder if they sense that there's a pending time of reckoning coming soon if and when they do haul off Rove before a grand jury or trial and things start getting ugly for Bush, Cheney and many others in the White House.

Perhaps, knowing that that time of being put under the microscope is coming soon, they feel that they have to take care of business of packing the court *NOW* and therefore put pressure on these two justices to leave *NOW* so that they can have their 5-4 majority and a chief justice that will do their bidding later.

I guess the question I'm getting to is...

Has anyone studied what the role of the Supreme Court would be with the process of impeachment?

Perhaps they feel that a "new" Supreme Court would be Bush's and Cheney's "insurance policy" from getting pushed out of office by impeachment, amongst other related things.

I know I'm probably being overly paranoid, but I've found with the way things have been going the last few years, one cannot afford *NOT* to be paranoid about things. It helps I think to know all of the possible scenarios that might come and be prepared for them or wind up getting squashed like we have been lately in trying to expose this criminal cabal of folks here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stand and Fight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:37 PM
Response to Reply #47
54. Only the Chief Justice of the US Plays Has a Role in Impeachment
Edited on Thu Jul-07-05 06:44 PM by Stand and Fight
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_Justice_of_the_Unite...

# Presides when the Senate tries impeachments of the President of the United States :yoiks:

* Two Chief Justices, Salmon P. Chase and William Rehnquist, have had the duty of presiding over Presidential impeachments and trials--Chase in 1868 over the proceedings of President Andrew Johnson and Rehnquist in 1999 over the proceeding against Bill Clinton.

# Presides over the impeachment trial of the Vice President if the Vice President is serving as Acting President (not a Constitutional responsibility but a rule of the Senate).


Hmmm.... Maybe Bush plans to appoint his own Chief Justice -- like Gonzales -- who will seek to sway things in his favor if it comes to impeachment? :shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
longship Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:33 PM
Response to Original message
50. Goodbye Rehnquist
Hello Thomas as Chief
and Gonzales and Olson as Associates.

This is not going to turn out good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donheld Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:36 PM
Response to Original message
52. We all knew this day was coming
We had suspected Sandra, and Rehnquist were on there way out. We may as well fight it out all at once and hope we have a prayer to come out of it with our country still intact. I just hope the Democrats are, as Schumer said, prepared for war and will stick to their guns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ordinaryaveragegirl Donating Member (853 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:39 PM
Response to Original message
56. Screwed...
Betcha the religious *wrong* ultra-conservative thugs will have their dirty little hands and wallets all over this. They've been salivating for years over the prospect of overturning Roe v. Wade, never mind that 2/3rds of the country would oppose it. But does * ever listen to what the people want? Hell, no...that's why his polls are in the dump. Enough said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FourStarDemocrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:46 PM
Response to Original message
59. Daily Kos and Bob Novak both mentioned as sources..funny!
If it's true, I'm glad that Daily Kos has a heads up on this. Other than that, the news sucks. Another Bu$h choice, oy... x(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:47 PM
Response to Original message
60. The timing could be to our advantage
Getting real balance on the Supreme Court just isn't going to happen until there's another Democratic president. But with two justices leaving simultaneously--ironically two who've been good friends since they knew each other in law school--the seeds are planted for a pretty decent compromise. There's a doable deal here in which the president could be persuaded to appoint one moderate-to-conservative sane person to O'Connor's seat to balance out the all but certain neaderthal who'll take Scalia's seat when he moves up to the presiding chair. Conservatives can console themselves with a two-for-one deal while liberals and moderates can maintain the court's original balance.

No one wants Bush appointing Scotus judges, of course, but at least him having two simultaneous conservative vacancies to fill puts progressives in a stronger tactical position for controlling the damage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mikelgb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:54 PM
Response to Original message
64. this means...
3 consecutive judicial appointments?!?

1 for O'Connor
Scalya or Thomas for Cheif
Their Replacement
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Stand and Fight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 07:05 PM
Response to Reply #64
68. Think about that again.... n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CityDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:55 PM
Response to Original message
65. Ramifications
If Rehnquist steps down, there will be little change in the ideology. Bush will appoint some conservative nominee to replace Rehnquist. If we are lucky, this nominee may be less conservative than Rehnquist because I doubt the senate would approve of any nominee who is more conservative than Rehnquist. Keep in mind, Ford appointed Stevens and Bush 41 appointed Souter.

If I were handicapping the replacements, I believe Bush will appoint either Garza, Jones, or Janice Rogers Brown to replace O'Connor. He will want another woman or a Hispanic for historic purposes. Brown would cause the biggest fight and surely result in a filibuster.

For Rehnquist, I believe we are looking at Luttig or Roberts -- both very conservative, white, male and around 50 years old.

I have been reading on other sites where insiders expect Ginsberg to step down sometime this year due to health reasons and this is where Alberto Gonzales comes in. He is considered more moderate, yet is far more conservative than Ginsberg. Ultimately, we are trading one conservative, one moderate (O'Connor) and one liberal for two conservatives and one conservative/moderate (Gonzales). If this is the case, we need to pray for Stevens to stay healthy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProudDad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #65
111. Fascist is the word for Gonzales
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vickers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 06:56 PM
Response to Original message
66. I hope he keeps wearing that fancy robe he designed on my dime
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
the_spectator Donating Member (932 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 01:01 AM
Response to Reply #66
100. No, now we will get an answer:
will the NEXT Chief Justice wear the fancy robe with the stripes?(which Rhenquist got from a Gilbert and Sullivan operetta) and make it a "Precedent"?

If it's Thomas or Scalia for CJ, I can see them wearing the juridicial stripes in solidarity.

And they are kind of cool. Come on, all the Justices have now is plain black robes, like some "graduate" of 8th grade or something; they don't get to wear wigs or anything! Let them have fun with their stripes!

:smoke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sojourner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 07:04 PM
Response to Original message
67. Oh, what a surprise!
:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sojourner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 07:06 PM
Response to Reply #67
69. self-delete
Edited on Thu Jul-07-05 07:09 PM by sojourner
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 07:13 PM
Response to Reply #67
71. Bush likes "Strict" Destructionists
Doubt he will appoint any moderates. I wish he would, but it's really not his style.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sojourner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 07:08 PM
Response to Original message
70. This is deliberate defensive move to keep BushCo from being removed from
office. In any move to impeach, not only does the House of Representatives have to bring the charges...but the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS acts as the "trial judge" presiding over the impeachment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amb123 Donating Member (764 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 07:24 PM
Response to Original message
75. I'm going out on a limb.
For Chief Justice - John Ashcroft
For Associate Justice - Alberto Gonzales

God help America!

:argh: :nuke: :patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cascadiance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #75
76. And who then for AG, Bolton?...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amb123 Donating Member (764 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #76
79. My guess is . . .
William Haynes, one of the four remaining Bush Judicial nominees not approved by the Senate. He was the Pentagon general counsel. I believe he helped devise the controversial detainee torture policies with Gonzales.

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 07:49 PM
Response to Original message
81. George Dubya Bush Jr. will possibly name THREE Supreme Court justices...
The choices will not be made by Bill Clinton, George Bush Sr., Al Gore, Wesley Clark, John McCain, or Paul Krugman.

They will be chosen by the most pathetic man to ever claim the office of U.S. President - a ridiculous offensive bumbling sociopath.

What stupid times for America.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElTexican Donating Member (53 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 10:31 PM
Response to Reply #81
89. George W. Bush should name Stevens as CJ
Actually, that would be a bad idea, but it would be a meaningless bone he could throw to his opposition.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
the_spectator Donating Member (932 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 01:06 AM
Response to Reply #89
101. That would actually be a smart idea for Bush (CJ Stevens)
Stevens is a liberal, mad old, but pretty healthy.
They could hope that the extra duties of being CJ could help speed his journey to the grave, and give them more chance of replacing him! :scared:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Abathar Donating Member (56 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #101
107. Actually it might be wise if he DID retire
It would almost guarantee he was replaced with a liberal judge if Shrub got 2 conservatives in ahead of him. George will be pushing his luck on 2, there is no way he will get three in a row without going to the left on one of them especially if he has to do them all in a row fast. If Stevens feels he can't make it till after the '08 election going right after (assuming Shrub gets his people through) may be the best bet in getting a like minded judge to replace him. If the Re pubs steal the white house again a new president will be back to square one on nominating judges, they will be given more slack because they won't be found guilty of the sins of the guy before them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DWolper Donating Member (238 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 10:38 PM
Response to Reply #81
90. No....Possibly FOUR
Edited on Thu Jul-07-05 10:51 PM by DWolper
John Paul Stevens may have no choice. He is not well. However....

Without naming names, it is my understanding that there is another Associate Justice who is less healthy than generally believed. Anybody else heard this? For people in high-stress jobs (like sitting members of the court) in their seventies and eighties who are not in the best of health, three and a half years left in this administration is a long time. Anything could happen.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hissyspit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 02:55 AM
Response to Reply #90
103. You're right, of course. Good f*cking god...
This is ridiculous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AnnieBW Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 07:49 PM
Response to Original message
82. Well, so much for that...
I was seriously thinking of escaping to England. But not after today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bribri16 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 09:21 PM
Response to Original message
86. Are they just sick that they handed GW the Presidency in 2000?
Look at what their actions have wrought.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deja Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 11:26 PM
Response to Reply #86
94. Nope. They're retiring so their buddy can put in more reich-wing lunatics
America is done. The offshoring, lack of investing in it, national debt, constant warring, reports that sales of game consoles will reach $8 BILLION by 2008.

America is done. :-(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SeanQuinn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 11:00 PM
Response to Original message
92. I thought Rehnquist was going to retire last time. Oh wait...
I'm not trusting Novak, Kos, or anyone yet on this matter until I read it on Google News or various sources instead of just an 'on-the-left, on-the-right' side of the thing or Rehqnuist or representive of Rehqnuist speaks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deja Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 11:24 PM
Response to Original message
93. Droppin' like flies...
Replaced with mosquitoes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pallas180 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-07-05 11:36 PM
Response to Original message
95. Looks like Scalia is a fanatic Opus dei. Flush the toilet . The country
is in it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bilgewaterbill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 12:23 AM
Response to Original message
96. Another rumor-Stevens to resign,too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goldmund Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 12:34 AM
Response to Reply #96
97. You should start a thread with that
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dissent1977 Donating Member (795 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 06:45 PM
Response to Reply #96
117. I think Stevens is smart enough not to do that yet
I am sure Stevens would like to retire, but I think he knows it would be a disaster if he did. I think he will hold out until at least after the 2006 elections, and he will possibly wait until after 2008. I don't think he wants Bush to pick his succesor, and I certainly don't think he wants Bush to pick his successor with the Senate made up like it is now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
funky_b0ss Donating Member (15 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 12:39 AM
Response to Original message
98. The irony....
I'm amazed at the cruel irony of a man selected by a SCOTUS decision being able to remake the court in his image.

It's almost like they planned it :sarcasm:

Seriously though...Is God on these guys' side or what? How else can you explain it? The list of stuff they get away with gets longer...the list of windfalls they get gets longer...there hasn't been any reckoning for their actions...even the monsters who kill Americans, Britons, Spaniards, and others play right into their hands politically. The laundry list keeps getting longer. It seems like, in the words of Bill Hicks (paraphrased): We are like pygmies shooting little darts of truth into the hide of the elephant, but doing no real damage.

At least I got an A on my Trig test today :dunce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BostonH Donating Member (5 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 01:07 PM
Response to Reply #98
104. Any news on if he did resign officially yet?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProudDad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #98
112. There is no god but...
If it turns out that there is a God, I don't think that he's evil. But the worst that you can say about him is that basically he's an underachiever.

http://www.quotableonline.com/WoodyAllen.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 01:38 PM
Response to Original message
105. Anyone heard anything?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BurgherHoldtheLies Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
106. Saying TODAY on W's return to Washington....
Robert Novak is reporting that William Rehnquist will retire at 4:50pm today when the President lands in Washington.

Now, consider the source...don't know how credible this info is but thought I'd post it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 02:54 PM
Response to Reply #106
108. who leaked it?
;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bushsuckslol Donating Member (1 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 04:43 PM
Response to Reply #108
114. Time to change the Constitution that these bastards have to retire after
10 years. I can't stand to think of these conservative monkeys on the court for 40+ years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 06:20 PM
Response to Original message
115. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
democracyindanger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 06:32 PM
Response to Original message
116. Where's the dKos link?
I just came from there, and there was no substantive discussion. And if you heard it from dKos, why not link to that instead of a right-wing site like worldnutdaily?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cyclezealot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jul-08-05 08:29 PM
Response to Original message
118. It is not just Roe V Wade.
It is a whole gamut of judicial activism to return this country to the pre-McKinley era when private property included all business transcations and the Pinkerton's security agency acted as a private military to keep us in a feudal state.
At the turn of the last century, such actions almost resulted in a revolution tamed by Theodore and Franklin Roosevelt. It will take American society 30 years to recover from the judical jack boot of Scalia.
Don't believe me. Go to "People for the American Way's" analysis of Scalia's minority decisions called "Courting Disaster" posted on their web site...Soon to be the majority.
Good luck American's in your serfdom...We sold our home last December , have started the visa process and will retire in the SOuth of France this coming Fall..Good luck . We will watch the reaction to serfdom from afar.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Oct 26th 2014, 03:02 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC