Bush set to mollify religious conservatives today

[D. Scarlatti]

President To Name Nominee For Court

Bush spent the weekend at Camp David huddled with Miers, who remains his White House counsel and is therefore in charge of the judicial selection process, along with Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr., who originally advocated Miers as the choice to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. As the three talked, White House officials contacted prominent conservatives to test the reaction to various candidates.

One group consulted was the Concerned Women for America, whose decision to oppose Miers last Wednesday became one of the final blows to help kill the nomination. Janet M. LaRue, the group's chief counsel, said it received a call from the White House on Saturday and liked what it heard.

According to most reports Bush is likely to nominate one of two middle-aged white males: Samuel A. Alito, Jr. or J. Michael Luttig. Both were appointed to the Courts of Appeal by Bush's father in the early 90s and have been sitting on the 3rd and 4th Circuits respectively.

Both have solid conservative credentials and Luttig even clerked for then-D.C. Circuit Judge Scalia. Alito served for several years in the Reagan Justice Department under Federalist Society icons Ed Meese and Charles Fried.

A third potential nominee, should Bush decide to respect Sandra Day O'Connor's publicly expressed wish to be replaced by a female, is Alice M. Batchelder, another Reagan/Poppy Bush protege currently on the 6th Circuit.

I had no idea anyone took Gary Bauer seriously anymore, but Bush appears to be poised for a Senate battle if any of the foregoing are submitted.

[Dingfod]

Hello neighbor. Good to see you. The word of the day is filibuster. Can you say filibuster? I knew that you could.

[D. Scarlatti]

Samuel A. Alito it is.

Bush is expected to announce the nomination at 8 a.m. Washington time.

In the early 1990s, Alito was the lone dissenter in Planned Parenthood v. Casey, a case in which the 3rd Circuit struck down a Pennsylvania law that included a provision requiring women seeking abortions to notify their spouses.

"The Pennsylvania legislature could have rationally believed that some married women are initially inclined to obtain an abortion without their husbands' knowledge because of perceived problems - such as economic constraints, future plans or the husbands' previously expressed opposition - that may be obviated by discussion prior to the abortion," Alito wrote.

The case ended up at the Supreme Court where the justices, in a 6-3 decision struck down the spousal notification provision of the law. The late Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist cited Alito's reasoning in his own dissent.

"Scalito," they call him.

[TomJoe]

Another Catholic. Our plan of world domination has been set in motion.

[livius drusus]

They warned us before Kennedy was elected, but did we listen? Noooo.

+ =

[Clutch Munny]

Originally Posted by livius drusus

+ =

I see from the smiley code that it's a papal bull. At first I thought it was just a sacred cow.

[alphamale]

According to most reports Bush is likely to nominate one of two middle-aged white males:

Middle-aged? White? So what? But anyway the 50-year party for libs is over - having captured the presidency and congress, conservatives are prepared to roll over the last lib redoubt - the supreme court legislature.

[D. Scarlatti]

Originally Posted by alphamale

[C]onservatives are prepared to roll over the last lib redoubt - the supreme court legislature.

Considering Republicans have made 10 of the last 12 nominations, your confidence, like most of your other addlepated "political" commentary, appears misplaced.

[wei yau]

Originally Posted by alphamale

But anyway the 50-year party for libs is over - having captured the presidency and congress, conservatives are prepared to roll over the last lib redoubt - the supreme court legislature.

You're crowing about victory now? Aren't you either premature or terribly late? Alito hasn't been confirmed yet, so you might be counting your chickens before they hatch. On the other hand, you might have been better off crowing once O'Connor announced her retirement or Rheinquist died. At that point, you knew this administration would nominate a conservative judge.

[godfry n. glad]

Originally Posted by Clutch Munny

I see from the smiley code that it's a papal bull. At first I thought it was just a sacred cow.

Nah... This is the holy cow, and probably what attracted ManM to this forum. Looks like an Orthodox icon, eh?

[Dingfod]

Used to?

[alphamale]

Ha Ha! The feeble attempts at humor - the losers trying to console themselves!

[Dingfod]

Keep crying in your cornflakes there, alfalfamail, your guy is going down in history as, to coin a Miers phrase, the worst President ever.

[alphamale]

Originally Posted by Warren

Keep crying in your cornflakes there, alfalfamail, your guy is going down in history as, to coin a Miers phrase, the worst President ever.

I don't give a fart, and probably neither does he, because such rankings are made by liberal left profs, who wouldn't have their jobs if affirmative action applied to them. Roberts is 50, and Alito 55. Since they all seem to stay till they're around 80 nowadays, that means Bush has gotten 55 man-years of conservatives on the court. Also, isn't Breyer or one of those far left wingers around 80? Bush may even get to nominate a THIRD justice! The days of liberals getting their political ideas enacted by the court/legislature are gone! Now, dems will have to make their party name not a misnomer and get support from the people for their policies.

[Trojan]

Originally Posted by alphamale

I don't give a fart, and probably neither does he, because such rankings are made by liberal left profs, who wouldn't have their jobs if affirmative action applied to them. Roberts is 50, and Alito 55. Since they all seem to stay till they're around 80 nowadays, that means Bush has gotten 55 man-years of conservatives on the court. Also, isn't Breyer or one of those far left wingers around 80? Bush may even get to nominate a THIRD justice! The days of liberals getting their political ideas enacted by the court/legislature are gone! Now, dems will have to make their party name not a misnomer and get support from the people for their policies.

Shouldn't you be giving a soldier a handjob somewhere Alph?? I thought conthervatives HATE judicial activism! Dislike the unelected robed judges! Your mother should have considered abortion. ABORT THE COURTS TOO!

[alphamale]

Originally Posted by Trojan

Shouldn't you be giving a soldier a handjob somewhere Alph?? I thought conthervatives HATE judicial activism! Dislike the unelected robed judges! Your mother should have considered abortion. ABORT THE COURTS TOO!

If ever our paths cross, I'll break every bone in your body.

[Trojan]

Originally Posted by alphamale

If ever our paths cross, I'll break every bone in your body.

EEEeeeeeeeK!!! Like an ABORTION!!!???? If your MOTHER were aborted such violence wouldn't be suffered here Alph!

[beyelzu]

Originally Posted by alphamale

If ever our paths cross, I'll break every bone in your body.

i love internet death threats, they fucking rock

just to up the ante a little,

i will be glad to tell you my exact location and go halveses on any travel costs if you want to come break every bone in my fiscally conservative and socially liberal body*



*this combination is the exact opposite of so called conservatives btw and the reason i hate bush.

[D. Scarlatti]

Originally Posted by alphamale

Bush may even get to nominate a THIRD justice!

This is his third nomination, Einstein.

[beyelzu]

Originally Posted by D. Scarlatti

This is his third nomination, Einstein.

[Waluigi]

Isn't it technically his fourth? His first three being Roberts for Associate Justice, Roberts for Chief Justice, and Meirs for Associate Justice.

You know, not to be pedantic or anything...

[D. Scarlatti]

Originally Posted by Waluigi

Isn't it technically his fourth?

Well, see, you're one of those drooling liberal tyrants that reads things into the Constitution that simply aren't there. What Article II says on the subject is only that "[the President] shall nominate ... Judges of the supreme Court[.]"

Where Congress gets off enacting this "Chief Justice" business is anyone's guess, since its regulatory powers are confined to tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court and its power over the Court itself is limited to tinkering with its appellate jurisdiction.

So John Roberts, according to "strict constructionism," is merely an unconstitutional potentate.

[Waluigi]

Originally Posted by D. Scarlatti

Well, see, you're one of those drooling liberal tyrants that reads things into the Constitution that simply aren't there. What Article II says on the subject is only that "[the President] shall nominate ... Judges of the supreme Court[.]"

Where Congress gets off enacting this "Chief Justice" business is anyone's guess, since its regulatory powers are confined to tribunals inferior to the Supreme Court and its power over the Court itself is limited to tinkering with its appellate jurisdiction.

So John Roberts, according to "strict constructionism," is merely an unconstitutional potentate.

Yeah? And you're ugly!

[D. Scarlatti]

Originally Posted by Waluigi

Yeah? And you're ugly!

What I really meant to say is you're right, but it's fun to play the strict constructionist on occasion to demonstrate what a silly doctrine it can be. What's funner is to play the strict construction/original intent game so we can get back to public hangings.

[alphamale]

Originally Posted by D. Scarlatti

What I really meant to say is you're right, but it's fun to play the strict constructionist on occasion to demonstrate what a silly doctrine it can be. What's funner is to play the strict construction/original intent game so we can get back to public hangings.

You think the rule of democratically-established law (not by judges) is a big joke?