Skip to main content

View Diary: Picking their judge (317 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I was very concerned a year ago (4.00)
    working on the Kerry campaign about preventing Bush nominees to the Supreme Court.  Now, I am concerned about minimizing the damage.  To be honest with y'all, we could have gotten worse than we have gotten.

    George W. Bush: The Disaster President

    by DCDemocrat on Mon Oct 03, 2005 at 04:57:40 PM PDT

    •  Bush's Lani Guinier moment (none)
      Except Bush pulled her (Janice Rogers Brown) before he even nominated her.
      •  By This Logic... (none)
        ...we should all be happy that Bush hasn't simply nuked the blue states.  Huzzah!  Thank you Democrats for preventing genocide.

        Given the depravity of some modern regimes, things could always be worse. However, the Democrats' "strategy" has been an endless series of surrenders and capitulations.  So long as they have over 40 Senators, they have some control over the situation. They refuse to exert that control.

        Positing imaginary worse situations, let alone arbitrarily congratulating the Democrats for keeping us out of them (while at the same time claiming that the Democrats are powerless) is more than "glass is half full" thinking. It is positively delusional.

        Do I get a pony with this best of all possible worlds?

        "This war is an ex-parrot." - The Editors

        by GreenSooner on Mon Oct 03, 2005 at 06:15:25 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  delusional (4.00)
          We LOST the election.  The opposing party now gets to pick the nominee and confirm said nominee.  For fuck's sake.  Come back to reality please.  Bush will not EVER nominate someone that is demonstrably moderate or liberal.  Why in god's name would he do that?  A Bush nominee is NEVER going to hit the mark on your political views.  Get over yourself, everyone, please.  This is why we tried hard to win Nov. 2nd.  We didn't.  We DID exert control, which is plain as fucking day to anyone who saw Reid today.  Remember?  He's the savvy, fighty one. Obviously some dealing happened here.  How is it that so many well informed people here have some kind of fantasy that the Democrats are going to threaten a filibuster and come out with a liberal nominee?  What. The. Hell.  We have half a chance that she'll flip once she gets to the seat, given the long history of "loyalist" appointees doing just that.  A conservative justice WILL be appointed.  Why does this even need to be explained to people?  She has a better chance to flip than someone who has spent an entire career as a conservative judge.  An ingrained client is WAY different than an ingrained philosophy.  Loyalty can fade with time and distance.  What's the worst that happens?  She's another Scalia or Thomas?  Guess what, that's what all the next nominees would be.  We could filibuster a couple times, dance that dance for awhile until the public gets sick, and Repbulicans go nuclear.  

          Arrogance and stupidity: it's a winning combination.

          by MatthewBrown on Mon Oct 03, 2005 at 09:13:03 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Lani Guinear <> Janice Rogers Brown (none)
        First, Guinear was nominated to be a mid-level member of the executive branch, not a lifetime appointee to the judiciary.

        Secondly, nothing Guinear supported or supports is anywhere near as radical as Brown's views.

        Third, even after being rejected once, Brown was renominated by Bush and now sits in a lifetime position on the federal district court.

        ...yet somehow we should see these situations as more or less equivalent, with the Democrats doing a little better that the Republicans did?

        And they call us Greens unrealistic!

        "This war is an ex-parrot." - The Editors

        by GreenSooner on Mon Oct 03, 2005 at 06:20:21 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Haha (none)
          I'm basically paralelling the actions of each President, with this one coming off as even weaker-kneed than Clinton. If you instead go for the perspective of the nominees, as you did, you'll find exactly those loosenesses in the trope.
          •  Bush Wanted Janice Rogers Brown (none)
            ...on the Federal Bench. He got her there. All this SCOTUS talk is pure speculation.

            Clinton wanted Guinear in the Justice Department, but backed down rather than fight for her, smearing her in the process.

            Where's the parallel?

            "This war is an ex-parrot." - The Editors

            by GreenSooner on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 12:56:20 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Okay, it's non Euclidean (none)
              One President caved in over a female jurist who represented his base. Another President caved in over a female jurist who represented his base. You see, you have two situations that run in roughly the same direction but never touch and...aw hell, forget it. I give.

              It's Lani Guinier btw, not, well, any of the ways you seem to have spelled it.

              •  I See No Evidence Dubya Caved (none)
                That's what this boils down to.  One of the many fantasies that Dems are spinning over this is that there were other nominees that Bush would have made had not Harry Brave and True stood up to him and got him to back down. There's no evidence whatsoever for this assertion. It's just wishful thinking.

                And I don't know why I keep misspelling Lani Guinier's name. I shouldn't. Thanks for the correction. She deserves a lot better.  But I'd rather have my name misspelled than be compared to Janice Rogers Brown, though by essentially calling her a nut as he tossed her to the wolves, Clinton more or less set the stage for your non-Euclidean "analysis."  

                "This war is an ex-parrot." - The Editors

                by GreenSooner on Tue Oct 04, 2005 at 05:06:48 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  My god (none)
                  You ought to stop now. You've written about 750 words (I'm not going to count) in reply to a very short, tossed-off post. Perhaps you ought to stop and think about what you're doing with your time. With that I'm off the thread--thanks for...whatever you did here. Chastise, I guess. 'Bye.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site