GAH

[mazzie]

CNN is reporting that Sandra Day O'Connor is retiring.

Impending doom, anyone?

ETA:William Kristol predicted this last week. He adds:

(2) President Bush will appoint Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to replace O'Connor. Bush certainly wants to put Gonzales on the Supreme Court. Presidents usually find a way to do what they want to do.

Comments

[cochise15.livejournal.com]

Commence shit storm.

[mazzie.livejournal.com]

i wonder if it's possible to make a recess appointment to the Supreme Court.
and i really fucking hope not.
my nightmare: Ashcroft.

[cochise15.livejournal.com]

Worst case scenario: Bush decides to nominate an arch conservative, and the Democrats move to filibuster, Frist gets his nuclear option, the Democrats shut down the government.

Reagan, almsot as conservative as Bush, nominated O'Connor and she's actually done what a judge should do: walk the thin line of the law between two opposing ideologies. It destroyed what Reagan was hoping for.

Then the Supreme Court start handing down crazy decisions, then Civil War. Well, maybe not that, but a severly pissed off half of a nation.

[mazzie.livejournal.com]

I actually read a really good article in the Atlantic a couple months ago about how nominees to the Supreme Court rarely (if ever) follow the ideaology of the president who appoints them or the Senate that confirms them. I'll have to try to dig it up. It basically says we go through all this hyperbolic hysteria and really it amounts to no big deal.
We'll see.

[cochise15.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that's kind of what happened with Rehnquist, who I suspect is waiting it out until after Bush leaves. I read an article in the Post where he said when he first moved into his neighborhood someone warned him about one his neighbors because he was a democrat and Rehnquist said he's never been more offended.

It's just that Bush is so much more a divisive figure and he is SOOOO partisan. Like crazy praise jebus partisan.

[jccohen.livejournal.com]

I actually read a really good article in the Atlantic a couple months ago about how nominees to the Supreme Court rarely (if ever) follow the ideaology of the president who appoints them or the Senate that confirms them.

I've read similar articles.

[jccohen.livejournal.com]

You can recess appoint for any position, I think.

[socratic.livejournal.com]

Get your abortions NOW girls. Get like 4-5, stock up on them.

Also remember when corporations didn't have the right to kill their workers for disobeying orders? Good times.

however...

[chicago-anon.livejournal.com]

...killing your own workers makes the "dead peasant" insurance policies you took out on them pay off so well though.

[verymelm.livejournal.com]

Um, I thought he was one of the few in the Bush administration that wasn't against abortion..?

[socratic.livejournal.com]

He? There's absolutely no guarantee that Gonzalez will be the one tapped, and I wrote that before she added that piece anyway.

So poop on you.

[mazzie.livejournal.com]

NO POOPING ON MY FRIENDS!
*WHAP*

[blueinva.livejournal.com]

I think Gonzales would be a good pick. The radical right *hates* him (even more so after he took the drapes off the statuary at) the DoJ that Ashcroft put up so we wouldn't have to see naked boobies.
He's a conservative, but is decidely not anti-choice and of all the names floated the closest to Potter Stewart and O'Connor.

One thing that has interested me is the hysteria from outside the Beltway and the relative calm of those here who know how government works and realise that there's lots of business that won't get done if another Bork gets nominated.

Nice to see the ladies in pink outside PP on 16th Street today too!