relax on Rhenquist

[montana500]

it's likely they won't find someone worse. This makes the Roberts hearings all the more important.

[Jane Eyre]

1. I now think that Bush will have a hard time getting his picks through

In a weird, macabre way, things have suddenly changed as far as Bushie's political capital goes. The emperor has no clothes, and Katrina certainly showed that to the world.

Now Bush faces the challenge of getting two Supreme Court picks confirmed more or less simultaneously. That changes the math as far as Roberts goes, because it becomes all too obvious that Bush can't get a free pass on "just this one judge". Two rightwing picks at one time is a whole lot to ask, especially from an increasingly unpopular president whose lack of judgement has just been on display for all the world to see. Plus, the MSM is on his case big time and isn't likely to let go now that Bush has essentially threatened the safety of their comrades who reported from New Orleans.

And one more thing...OK, two more things...we have the grand jury wrapping things up and we have the Abu Ghraib pictures which may very well come out during the hearings.

[joey93turbo]

10. MSM?

Who trusts the MSM?

[welshTerrier2]

2. yeah, they can find someone worse ...

just as an example, Rehnquist argued that political "free speech" should NOT be extended to corporations ...

i believe the case involved former Massachusetts Attorney General Francis X. Bellotti if you're trying to find the details ...

[PurityOfEssence]

3. Yeah, it's hard to find someone worse, but someone younger...

Rehnquist pretty much defines the limits of acceptability, even in a servile Senate like this, but that's not the issue; the issue is age: get someone--especially someone without a track record like that stealth-nazi Roberts--who's in his (yes, it'll be a male) late 40s and we're saddled with tight-assed primitiveness for the next 40 years.

[ProudDad]

4. Please don't be deluded

They've already found 3 worse, Roberts, Scalia and Thomas.

They're perfectly capable of finding someone even worse than that.

[cobaindrain]

5. Democrats have to be super strong and united through this

We can't let him push through 2 ultra conservatives, we have to find a way to get 2 moderates in there. net gain for us.

[gokar]

6. It wont help us to resist Bushit's SC nominees in the long run

because if we filibuster now, what do you think they will do
when we have a dem prez in WH? It also will look like we are
obstructionists and will end up losing votes in 2006.

The smarter strategy is to approve any nominee who is not
proven to be extreme right winger. Robert hearings will bring
that out and if he is not extreme, the smart thing to do is
vote him in. That makes it impossible for the repugs to filibuster
our nominees in the future.

[Douglas Carpenter]

9. I don't think so

your quote:
"That makes it impossible for the repugs to filibuster
our nominees in the future." ???????????????????

A sense of fair play is not what the Republicans are all about.

[CityDem]

7. Roberts for Chief Justice

I would not be surprised if Bush nominates Roberts for the Chief Justice position.

[Brundle_Fly]

8. Relax!!?

this is bush's chance to reinforce his fundie base and distract from his current woes....expect the worst.

[thinkingwoman]

11. LOL

Great take on the whole mess--he was undoubtedly one of the worst wasn't he?

Good riddance to him.

I don't like that Bush gets to nominate two supreme court members. I hate it. But people need to remember that so far he's replacing right siders with right siders. As long as the left siders (said with tongue in cheek given the conservative nature of the most "liberal" justices) stay alive and on the bench, Bush hasn't made any real mark. He's just maintaining the status quo.

[Totally Committed]

12. I disagree with my whole heart and soul...

Not find anyone worse? Are you serious? The nominee to fill this vacancy is going to be so RW, as to make Roberts look like a hippy!

Please read this statement from NOW:

http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=52619


Here's an excerpt:

"We've watched the Senate repeatedly 'go along to get along' with President Bush, and the results have been calamitous - from a costly war that was based on lies, to breaking the federal budget so that the rich could have their tax cuts.

"And in my home state of Louisiana right now, we see the fatal consequences of both of those disastrous decisions - the Army Corps of Engineers levee project budget was slashed, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) was stripped of its planning functions, the National Guard was shipped to Iraq, the divide expanded between rich and poor, and the people of Louisiana and Mississippi are paying price for this administration's absurd decisions and Congress' acquiescence.

"Have our senators learned anything yet? They've seen the damage that George Bush's policy of government-stripping has wrought in the executive branch (like putting an inexperienced crony in charge of FEMA and starting to privatize the agency) and now he has an unprecedented opportunity to mold the judicial branch for generations with a new Chief Justice and two new justices. Will they let him turn our highest court into another disaster for the American people? It's up to the legislative branch to find its backbone and 'just say no' to nominees who will further harm our country.

"With two lifetime appointments, George W. Bush could not only upset the delicate balance on this Supreme Court, but also extend his right-wing ideology and disregard for individual rights to the third branch of government - the judiciary - thus guaranteeing second-class status for girls and women in the U.S. for decades. Senators must demand full disclosure of all of the writings and opinions of every nominee, and must commit to filibuster any nominee who does not clearly support our rights."

This is BAD.

TC

[terrya]

13. Well, there's always Ken Starr.

If that isn't close to being as bad as Rehnquist, I don't know what is.