Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Specter Says Bush Should Bypass Gonzales for Supreme Court Post

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
stevedeshazer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 03:23 PM
Original message
Specter Says Bush Should Bypass Gonzales for Supreme Court Post
Sept. 11 (Bloomberg) -- President George W. Bush should bypass U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales for the second opening on the U.S. Supreme Court because his nomination likely would spark a contentious confirmation fight, Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter said.

``I believe it's a little too soon for Attorney General Gonzales to move up,'' Specter, a Pennsylvania Republican, said on NBC's ``Meet the Press'' program. ``He's an able fellow, but we just went through a tough confirmation hearing, and my sense is that the national interest would be best served if he stayed in that job right now.''

<snip>

Specter said Bush should consider a woman to replace O'Connor, the court's first female justice. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is the other woman on the court.

``I think it would be helpful if he can find a woman who he thinks is the right person for the job,'' Specter said. ``I think that we ought to have more women on the court. Two is a bare minimum. We really ought to have more.''

link: http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aOCjPn7aVbpo&refer=us

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Someone's gonna be paying Sen. Specter a visit, and soon....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
SpiralHawk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
1. "The national interest would best be served if..."
Edited on Sun Sep-11-05 03:28 PM by SpiralHawk
Allow me to finish that thought for you, Senator:

"...all cronies of BushCo, including George Jr., took truth serum and went on live TV to TESTIFY before the nations..."

Testify brothers...

Testify sisters...

It will soothe your souls.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iamjoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 03:27 PM
Response to Original message
2. Nah, It Will Be Janice Rogers Brown
and Dubya will get accolades for appointing the first African American woman to SCOTUS, after his father appointed an African American man. How can people claim Republicans are racist? Have Democrats appointed African Americans to SCOTUS?

Of course, the problem is, that while Janice Rodgers Brown is female and is African American, everything she stands for is anethema to most women and African Americans. Dubya has a special skill for assembling a cabinet and picking appointees who are very ethnically diverse, but idealogically narrow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevedeshazer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 03:29 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Good observation
A JRB appointment would be every bit as cynical as Poppy's appointment of Clarence Thomas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Benhurst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. "Have Democrats appointed African Americans to SCOTUS?"
Yes, Thurgood Marshall, who was nominated by John F. Kennedy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iamjoy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 05:33 PM
Response to Reply #4
11. Yeah, That Was Over Forty Years Ago
I guess I should have clarified it to mean when was the last time or what has been done recently

Don't get me wrong, I think you can appoint a few token people to some high profile positions, but if your policies have a negative impact on the daily lives of minorities, are you really a friend to them? But, you know how the spin machine works in this country.

Despite the fact that Al Sharpton would describe Ms. Brown as "my color, but not my kind" any Democrat voting against her would have to answer to the African American community, and could likely lose support with them. I think it is why a lot of Democrats from states with large Hispanic populations confirmed Gonzalez. They weren't giving in to Dubya, per se, but they knew the majority of the Hispanic community would never forgive them for voting against him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goclark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #11
19. You would not have to answer to me for Janice "Brown Nose" Brown

She is another Condi.

Black people would see right through it.

Besides, others would wrongly think that there were two African Americans on the court but really there would be ZERO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bornskeptic Donating Member (951 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 06:21 PM
Response to Reply #4
14. Actually, Marshall wasappointed by LBJ in 1967. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Benhurst Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 10:43 PM
Response to Reply #14
23. Thanks, bornskeptic. You're right. One of the disadvantages of having
lived through a period is not bothering to check a specific date you think you remember.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tiggeroshii Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
5. I hear there's a lot of very conservative women on his short list..
I wouldn't be surprised if he goes for one. Would probably bring public support up as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zynx Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #5
17. Clement would be an obvious choice.
Clement lives in Louisiana and thus Bush could pander this way and she is not controversial enough to cause him political difficulty except perhaps with his conservative base.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FightingIrish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 03:38 PM
Response to Original message
6. Since Bush has already nominated the judge who will
preside over his own impeachment trial, why not add his former personal counsel to the court.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tiggeroshii Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Could the Supreme court in any way stop impeachment
trials?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doris32r Donating Member (60 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. I was thinking that too.
That maybe Bush wants Roberts to be chief because he thinks that will help him. He probably will nominate a very right wing woman for justice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zenlitened Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
8. I think he should nominate Al Gore, I really do. It would be...
... and incredible act of healing for this country.

Of course, what I think Bush "should" do and what I expect he "will" do... :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pushycat Donating Member (401 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 03:57 PM
Response to Original message
9. Bypass Gonzales for sure
A little too soon is right. How about never.
We need someone chosen on the basis of qualifications, experience, wisdom, and a work product that demonstrates a clear support for the US Constitution, not those stupid 'shared values' memes. The SC is not some kind of coven, its the supreme judicial body of our country.

Our future civil liberties are in peril with this guy - he's a bushbot on automatic pilot beholden to Bush dynasty. Wouldn't ever let a bushman get caught even if it meant taking a political hit. Ha - he better if he wants to keep his kneecaps intact. He's way too compromised. Hope Spectre can keep him OUT.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catfight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 05:44 PM
Response to Original message
12. Why another white conservative male as chief injustice? Why not
appoint a black woman? Have someone that represents real america, not another white power hungry conservative male. We've had enough, this is the 21st century, time to make 21st century decisions.

NO to roberts..YES to a black female as chief justice. I can't accept there isn't a qualified black female to serve this country. Come America, demand a balanced court that represents the direction of America. Oust Bush before he screws up the court with his white male cronies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Akoto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 05:51 PM
Response to Original message
13. Female nominee, eh? Here's a scary thought for you ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muriel_volestrangler Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. Wouldn't that be one of the signs of the Apocalypse? (n/t)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kdmorris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 06:23 PM
Response to Original message
15. Considering how much they fought to get them judgeships
I am expecting that they will nominate Priscilla Owen or Janice Rogers-Brown. Considering how much he just showed his racism/classism, I expect it will be Rogers-Brown, just to make it impossible to vote against her.

Then again, I thought he would nominate one of them in the first place, so I was surprised when he nominated Roberts to O'Connor's spot in the first place.

Man, I'm just going to be sick. This was just the nightmare I was expecting on Nov. 3rd when I realized that it was all over.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pushycat Donating Member (401 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. Priscilla Owens, JRB or Roberts - all losers.
Both these women and Roberts are bought and weird. Of ALL THE GOOD candidates available, why do we have to even look at these candidates FACES, they're not SC caliber!!! They are bushbots. They have been compromised in favor of the Bush dynasty. REJECT THEM and get someone competant to represent the great laws of our great country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kdmorris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 09:24 PM
Response to Reply #18
21. I'm with you
Priscilla Owen and JRB should have been rejected to begin with, back when they were up for their judgeships. But I don't choose the SC nominees. Bush does. And he will chose those people who helped him politically and financially. That was what everyone was screaming from the rooftops last year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aresef Donating Member (270 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 07:35 PM
Response to Original message
20. B-but Gonzales fits perfectly with the Adminstration's view...
"Torture is good for the soul."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevedeshazer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-11-05 10:00 PM
Response to Original message
22. Interesting that no one here noticed what I think is the main point
Arlen Specter has wandered off the *Bushco reservation again.

Doesn't anyone remember when Bush jerked Specter's chain before?

-Patriot Act

-Pro-choice

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 02:33 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC