Bush in no-win situation VERY SOON.

[eileen from OH]

Rehnquist is going to have to resign very soon, and Bush will have a Supreme Court judge to replace.

If he does NOT appoint a pro-life judge, there will be massive screaming from his base. The evangelicals just handed him the election - do you think they're NOT gonna be up in arms immediately and turn on him if he doesn't grab the first opportunity to overturn Roe V. Wade, the Holy Grail they've been waiting for for decades? And unlike the lapse of the gun assault weapons ban, he's not gonna get a free ride by letting Congress do it and act like he had nuthin' to do with it.

If he DOES appoint a pro-life judge, and Roe V. Wade is threatened, any moderate Republicans that supported him are gonna get a good slap in the face. Republican senators will be forced to finally put up or shut up. It wasn't just evangelicals that supported Bush, there were a ton of stoopid go-alongers that had always voted Republican and don't pay that much attention or were the he's-the-one-I-want-to-have-a-beer-with voters. This will be a big wake-up for them. Once the flurry of anti-abortion bills start popping up in individual states, and the discussion turns to what to do with those who participate in illegal abortions (murder trials for poor women and doctors?) we'll see a lot of buyer's remorse from the mindless Repub voters.

Either way, it's gonna happen and it's gonna happen soon and it is gonna be (as the Freepers say) HUGH.

eileen from OH

[July]

1. I've got an appetite for schadenfreude (sp.?) at the moment.

And this is HUGH, alright! (Good one!)

[progdonkey]

13. ...

I've seen this "HUGH" thing every now and then on the forums. Where does it come from? I'm assuming it's along the same lines as "moran," but what's the specific origin?


(By the way, you got the spelling for Shadenfreude right. :thumbsup:)

[July]

20. Sorry, I don't remember where it originated. nt

[uncle ray]

23. i think it's because freepers were raised on hukt on foniks

[msongs]

2. what bush is really gonna do it this:

he is having a second term. he can do about anything he wants and nobody can do anything about him politically. he has a republican house and senate. he can do about anything he wants and nobody can do anything about it.

he will do whatever he wants....and he will.

Msongs
Riverside CA

Dean-Obama 2008
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm

[hippiechick]

7. Bingo.

We are fucked.


:hippie:

[cubsfan forever]

3. Good point, but

Asshat may invade Syria as a distraction while he does just that(appoint wingnut) to the USSC. See link

Professor 2

http://www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/news_service/middle_east_full_story.asp?service_id=5487

[soupkitchen]

4. yeah, that's the silver lining. The reality of events is going to catch

up with the populace eventually.

[mazzarro]

5. I strongly doubt that he will be in trouble with any decision he makes

in this regard. The reThugs have mastered a way of giving themselves the room they need to maneuver around political obstacle in order to keep power. If they were not enraged about the obvious lies these administration and it reThuglican politicians told about all they have done since 2000, I don't see them being disillusioned/angry about this.

[athena]

6. The thing is,

the right-wing base will continue to believe that their beloved shrub can't overturn Roe v. Wade because of those all-powerful lib'ruls. (I'm predicting this based on what I've read in Whats the Matter with Kansas by Thomas Frank.)

Maybe there is a way to make the religious right-wing base understand that they're being used ... but I don't know what it is.

[Morning Dew]

26. you got that exactly right

it's the librul boogeyman.

If they never advance the social agenda because of the bad libruls, they always have an enemy to keep the base intact.

[happyslug]

8. And Rehnquist voted AGAINST Roe vs Wade

So Bush will have to appoint someone who will vote to overturn Roe Vs Wade, but the votes on the Court will still be 5-4 in favor of upholding Roe Vs Wade.

In my opinion what Bush will try to do is what happened when Scalia was appointed to the Court. Scalia was appointed to succeed Rehnquist as an associate Justice, while Rehnquist was named to succeed Burger as Chief Justice. The Democrats concentrated on Rehnquist and left Scalia in almost without opposition.

I suspect the same when Rehnquist resigns, either Scalia or O'Connor Will be appointed Chief Justice thus covering up whoever Bush appoints to succeed as associate Justice.

I suspect Scalia for the attacks on Scalia will be massive but most Democrats will eventually vote for him to be Chief Justice just because the change is relatively minor (like the Democrats Voted for Rehnquist when Scalia was Appointed).

Now O'Connor can also be named for naming O'Connor will give Bush the ability to appoint the First Female Chief Justice (Thus appear for equal rights) and force the Democrats to vote against a woman for Chief Justice.

[Danocrat]

9. Why do you think Ashcroft is resigning?

They've got big plans for that fundie

[GoddessOfGuinness]

32. Shit, I hope you're wrong.....

:scared:

[napi21]

10. What actually has to happen to bring Roe v Wade to the court?

I understand all the concern about Roe v Wade being overturned by a conservative court, but doesn't some case have to be accepted by SCOTUS for them to even discuss it? They don't just go through an agenda and say OK, lets make a decision on this one.

[Danocrat]

12. True

[jmowreader]

17. It wouldn't be very damn easy, for one thing

The Supreme Court rejects most of the cases brought before it. (On the first day of any Supreme Court session, you'll invariably see a flurry of "rejected without comment" rulings. This is them weeding through the million cases they've been presented to pick the couple dozen they actually want to sit through.)

How to get a law reviewed by the Supreme Court: First, go out and break the law you don't like. Make sure you do it in front of a cop, so you get brought into the legal system.

Next, lose your case but lose it in a way that leaves it open for judicial review.

Then lose at the state court of appeals, the state supreme court, and the federal court of appeals.

Applied to abortion: first they'd have to find an abortion law they didn't like that was breakable. It's fairly hard to break a law that lets you do something--if it's legal to turn right on red, not turning right on red isn't illegal. And last I checked, it's legal to get an abortion.

There have been a couple of abortion laws brought before the Supreme Court, and they generally fail on appeal. The Pennsylvania abortion law was overturned, not upheld, and it was supposed to be the one that killed Roe. Planned Parenthood v. Casey was supposed to be the one that killed Roe, and what it did was get rid of Roe's "trimester" framework and substitute the "viability" test--if it would live if you delivered it right now, you can prohibit elective abortion on it. But we still have most of Roe.

I only fear slightly for Roe.

[Mother Jones]

11. I agreed with this at first...

however, someone has pointed out that, when he WASN'T elected with the full support of the majority, he supported right-wing supreme court nominations. (and spoke out against "activist judges")

Now with majority support, he's gonna shove that down your throats. There are no concessions for him to make without worrying about a re-election. And btw, he had none even when he SHOULD have worried about one....

[beniciodeltoro]

14. bush will appoint an anti-abortion judge, that is the bottom line

the bickering will be forgotten long after that
judge continues to wreak havock on your lives

[RunningFromCongress]

15. When Reinquist steps down, nothing is changed

he's not a threat and niether is a pro-life replacement....

[The Chronicler]

16. LMAO @ 'hugh'

[BillZBubb]

18. Afraid not. More wishful thinking.

There will be no problems with any of the Repug base if he appoints an anti abortion judge. After all, Rehnquist is already anti-abortion so they can claim no change. Also, nearly every Repug went along with Clarence Thomas--even the so-called moderates.

They are moderate only when talking to their constituencies. When push comes to shove Repugs vote the party line with few exceptions.

Look for all Bush* appointments to be YOUNG, ULTRA RIGHT WING ideologues. They will have almost total Repug support. This will be no problem for them.

[Maiden England]

19. I'm not so sure that Roe is the number one worry

In view of how much this admin likes to control the flow of information in the country, I'd be more inclined to worry over the fate of 1st amendment rights, especially freedom of speech. I think we'll see a crack down by the 'moral majority' controlling what is aired on the networks first, the rest will follow in dribs and drabs. This is what we have to watch out for, the right to protest, voices like Air America, and our freedom on the net to find and distribute information.
That is what worries me most of all.

[Mother Jones]

21. Good point SL

I remember hearing Laura herself say she didn't believe R v W SHOULD be overturned.....remains to be seen if they pull a flip flop.

Agree with you on all the other scary things the boy king will do now...

[ballcap1776]

22. Ditto. If we ...

Can't talk about the revolution, then we can't mount an effort to reverse any dinking around they do with gay rights, women's rights, minority rights, anyone-who-isn't-white-male-and-wealthy rights...

[ollie3]

24. I'd like to agree but....

I don't think Bush is gonna worry about the moderate Republicans as much as his base. Also, he will talk to Jesus on the matter...remember?

I:t has been clear for years that Bush is going to appoint judges who are anti-abortion. This has not been a secret. If the moderate Republicans were gonna revolt, they would have already.

[teh636]

25. I don't think...

They will be overturning Roe v wade anytime soon. Mainly because it is such a hot button issue for most of the country. Not to mention the huge # of doctors they would be putting out of business overturning that decision. Now they could put a lot of restrictions on abortion, but they won't overturn it.

[Enraged_Ape]

27. I honestly think that's why Ashcroft is resigning

And he will blow right into the Supreme Court with no problems. It would be unpatriotic for anyone to fight it, with the mandate this President has. :puke:

[Pacifist Patriot]

28. Nope. Bush is beholden to no one at this point and

will appoint whomever the hell he wants to.

[bhikkhu]

30. Wouldn't get hopes up...

People are most apt to give up their freedoms in order to conform to social expectations. True or not, we have been force fed by the media since the election that "moral values" turned the tide of the election. Rewrite the "character of the majority", and the majority will redefine their own views to conform. Roe vs. Wade will go down with little protest, and those marginalized as a "strident minority" out of step with the new mainstream.

[javadu]

29. I Am Definitely In Favor of the Death Penalty

For women and doctors who do abortions. Obviously, this is the will of the people. I have opposed it in the past, but now it is time to get on board.

[CityDem]

31. No big deal

Replacing Rehnquist will not be a significant threat to our rights. He is very conservative and if he is replaced by a right wing nut, the balance of power in the SCOTUS will not change. The big fight will be over Sandy O or Stevens. If either of them resign or fall seriously ill, a conservative Scalia / Thomas like replacement will change the balance of power on affirmative action and maybe abortion. I think the dems in the senate will fight for all SCOTUS nominees, but will go to the mat when the change will affect the balance of power on the court.

[TexasSissy]

33. All the Repubs know this about *. They expect this. No big surprises

in his S. Ct. Justice selections. Even the moderates know what to expect. He is a born-again Methodist who is anti-abortion.

This is what most of them want. Except maybe SOME of the moderates, but a lot of them are too old to be faced w/this decision, so....

If he selects before Hatch leaves the post of head of the judiciary committee, this should go smoothly, actually. Next year, when Specter takes over, there might be more of a problem. But looks like Rehnquist is going to step down (I heard BEFORE the election that one of the things Bush said he was going to do post-election was name a new S.Ct. Justice, as if there had been some sort of agreement already).