Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Re: Roberts. It's past time to draw a line in the sand.

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 » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Ready4Change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 07:24 PM
Original message
Re: Roberts. It's past time to draw a line in the sand.
Republicans long since crossed that line. The line that divides bi-partisan give and take from the minority filibuster. And when they crossed the line, Democrats blinked, and bargained.

Now you see the cost.

This is what happens when you cave in to a bully. The propoganda is seemless. He's being painted as the nice guy with the pastel 1950 style nuclear family. But he is anti-choice, he is anti-environment, he is pro-ultra rich and anti-common man. He must be opposed, and that means filibuster.

Or, you can just roll over and take it like you have so often during this administration.

Go out and buy yourself a nice, comfortable mattress. There's a long, long line at your door.

(PS, I'm a registered Republican, and admit my leaders have utterly failed. They have sold out to the neocons just to be "winners" and we are loosing our country as a result. Democrats, don't follow those footsteps.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
dave502d Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 07:28 PM
Response to Original message
1. Nice post Ready4Change,thank you.n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Benhurst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 07:29 PM
Response to Original message
2. ...
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
imenja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
3. who do you want instead?
of those that Bush might actually nominate? And what's the strategy to see that you get a better second nominee rather than a worse one?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ready4Change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. To be truthful, I'm not up on all the potentials.
I winced a bit at Gonzolas. Clement, from what I read of her, seemed an acceptable mix of good/bad.

The essential problem is, as you said who "Bush might actually nominate." By failing to filibuster, when blatantly challenged, Democrats have allowed the bar of "nominatable" to be raised, such that this nominee was nearly guaranteed to be an extremist dream.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
imenja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 07:58 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. this is a serious issue
and not to be opposed simply because we dislike Bush. If we don't have
a strategy that gets us a better court, you might be working for a right wing agenda rather than against it. I am not going to devote my energies to making sure Roe is overturned, which is what this may amount to. I suggest you read more about the nominees before you go to war. If the goal isn't a better court, there is something seriously wrong.

Bush is president. It is his constitutional right to nominate judges. I have not yet seen evidence that Roberts, as a jurist, is extremist. The BBC just called him a moderate conservative. Laurence Tribe thinks very highly of him, as do other prominent attorneys who know him.

Remember that Souter was attacked on similar grounds when he was nominated. The confirmation hearings will be important, but I'm afraid people are gearing up for a fight that may be counterproductive. Your goal must be a better court. Not simply to raise hell for Bush and the GOP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ready4Change Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 08:26 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. Ok (deep calming breath) what do we know of Roberts?
(I admit to being wound up. I'll try to regain rationality :) )

What I've heard of him:
1. He though Roe v. Wade was a bad ruling,
2. That he has made pro-business, anti-consumer rulings, and
3. That he has made anti-environment rulings.

I plead ignorance regarding the substance behind these statements.

What do we factually know of him?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
imenja Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. links and my take
most of what you list above are not rulings he made but positions he took as an advocate when employed by the Reagan and Bush administrations. He has never written a judicial opinion about Roe. He has argued abortion issues before the Supreme Court as directed by his client, the US govt. During the confirmation for the federal appeals court, he said Roe was the law of the land and would be upheld. But as an appellate judge his job is to uphold precedents, not overturn them. Seems to me the abortion issue is an unknown. Arguments that he wants to overturn Roe assume his views are identical to his clients. Seems to me it's not wise to assume that. He may think Roe should be overturned, he may not. We need to find out his views on the constitutional basis for the Roe ruling during the confirmation hearings. I do know many of the possible Bush choices have been far more clear in their opposition to Roe and Civil Rights more generally.

There is a difference between believing something personally and one's view on the law. I personally believe abortion is murder but am strongly pro-choice. Someone can be a devout Christian or Muslim and still recognize a constitutional separation between Church and State.
Roberts reputation is that he revers the law and comes to opinions based on the law rather than imposing his own ideological views. Of course, how one sees the law is dependent on your own experiences. No one lives in a vacuum.

Here is an analysis of Roberts voting pattern on the DC Circuit court that I found through the Washington Post home page. I'm not familiar with the group so I don't know their ideological slant. A couple of weeks ago the WP had a very thorough discussion of various potential nominees. I posted that on DU then.

http://www.sctnomination.com/blog/archives/2005/07/robe...

This links to the Post's SCOTUS coverage. Lots of other websites have analyses of the potential nominees.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/linkset/20...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 08:03 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. I agree with you on this part
Guaranteed to be an extremist dream. That's all we got out of that-if we can't prove the nominee is an Nazi or clinically insane-then forget it-we must rubberstamp.

I'm disgusted with the Democratic appeasers and I NEVER would vote Republican, so I find this ironic saying it to you, a registered Republican.

Oh..and I like your signature....bitter I get..but I think I'm afraid at this point of the ones that think "it's all gonna be okay..this is the best we can do..we can do worse."
They scare the shit out of me. Slippery slope that leads to this day and all the days ahead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lefty48197 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 07:32 PM
Response to Original message
4. Line in the sand indeed!
We cannot accept a justice that is more conservative than the justice they are placing. Not on one single issue. Fight to the death. If the Democrats fight like we want them to, this could be a huge issue in 2006.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robliberal Donating Member (2 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-20-05 07:33 PM
Response to Original message
5. Sadly may be right
The sad reality is that nothing that has come out so far will stop him from winning Senate approval.
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 Fri Jul 25th 2014, 11:38 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) 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