Breaking CNN - Roberts confirmed.

[Fridays Child]

No link yet. Will post when available.

[RubyDuby in GA]

1. If you'll allow me:

fuck fuck fuck fuck fuckity fuck

[Shakespeare]

15. Thanks. Just what I was going to say. n/t

[Zorra]

98. You beat me to it.

Serious, very evil fascists are now in control of the Supreme court.

[Darth_Kitten]

2. Scary

:scared:

[saigon68]

63. Wait til the Crazy Mother-Fucker really does something

[ourbluenation]

3. Most dems voted no but Fiengold - yes???? eom

[TheVirginian]

5. 22 no votes, 23 yes votes from Dems

Including Jeffords as part of the Dem. Caucus (who voted yes).

[Darth_Kitten]

8. that's pathetic.....

:(

[CrazyForKucinich]

57. Now you know why people vote for Nader-like candidates.

Let's stop the Nader bashing.

[Mountainman]

73. Maybe when ole Ralf deserves it he will no longer get bashed.

You know, if Gore were president Roberts would not have been nominated.

[nvliberal]

87. I hold Nader in almost as much contempt

as I do the Republicans.

Those who voted for him are as much the problem as people who voted for Bush.

[depakid]

93. Sheesh- you really don't get it

The Dems sell us out over and over and over. This is just one more instance.

That's exactly why Nader ran in 2000- because so many of them consistently side with Republicans on legislation and on nominees (like Thomas, for example).

Name one thing that the Dems have denied the far right since Bush was installed. One thing.

Nadar was right- as it stands right now- on the record- there's not a dime's worth of difference between the parties.

[Dark]

97. Privitization of Social Security. n/t

[Sparkman]

24. If you're count accurate, what a vivid repudiat'n to the idea of Dem=lib!!

[Sparkman]

28. Calif. Boxer=NO Calif. Feinstein=NO ( personal calls to their offices)

[shanti]

79. wonderful!

and just what i EXPECTED from my reps.

[Terran]

51. I'm surprised that many voted No.

The opposition seemed to be virtually non-existent, except for Harken.

[Darth_Kitten]

6. Where do we find the breakdown of the vote?

:shrug:

[Mass]

7. It will be posted on senate.gov a little later.

[TheVirginian]

14. Take the list that someone posted earlier....

of who AP had voting yes and voting no for the Dems. Add all the Republicans to the yes column, as well as Rockafeller (D-WV), and add Akaka (D-Hawaii) to the no column.

[LionInWinter]

9. Here you go ...

http://www.c-span.org/congress/roberts_senate.asp

[Darth_Kitten]

21. There is no honour anymore...

Hey, why bother voting democratic anymore if these people won't uphold your interests? :shrug:

Looks like a lot of rich white guys supporting a lot of....rich white guys. Wow, like that's never happened before. :sarcasm:

[kath]

43. Looking more and more like it's way past time to form a new party -

The Progressive Party or somesuch name. A party that stands for what the Dems *used* to stand for, and that will be a real OPPOSITION party.

[Darth_Kitten]

46. The two party system is over...

probably has been for quite a while. :(

[nvliberal]

86. Yeah, let's abolish the Democratic Party

and make sure there's nothing but a one-party government.

Like it or not, the Democratic Party is the only party we who are not rich or corporate executives have.

Going third party solves nothing.

[Darth_Kitten]

95. oh, that's not what I said...

:eyes:

[muriel_volestrangler]

26. for Firefox users: the Democratic votes may not line up

so if you just find a senator, and look across, you may find the incorrect vote for them (you can tell by looking at the bottom of the list to see if the names and Y/N column match). It looks OK using IE on the same machine for me.

[DELUSIONAL]

76. Thanks -- Firefox flipped the votes of my two senators.

Evidently one Washington Senator after being re-elected is showing her true colors as a Republican.

Interestingly the other senator is up for election and she is trying to act like a democrat.

Reid is a useless piece of crap -- he can talk a good game but in reality he isn't a democrat.

Amazing that he is still fooling so many people.

Had he shown TRUE leadership he would have stopped Roberts -- just like the GOP managed to do when THEY were the minority.

Reid is NOT a democrat.

There are a whole lot of democrats who are wannbe Republicans.

[ewagner]

He said he would

vote "Yes" last week.....

I understand Kohl was voting "yes" also...

Wisconsin Senators 0-2

[MADem]

4. To quote Gomer Pyle, Surprize, surPRIZE....

Ugh, the only thing that could save this is if he turns out to be the chimp's Souter...but I won't hold my breath.

[Coventina]

10. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.....

*sigh*

[cal04]

11. John Roberts confirmed by Senate as 17th Chief Justice of the United State

http://www.cnn.com/

:grr:

[Laura PourMeADrink]

12. List of Great Dems who Voted NO

Biden
Schumer
Sarbanes
Clinto
Inouye
Dayton
Durbin
Harkin
Kennedy
Feinstein
Kerry
Stabenow
Akaka
Cantwell
Boxer
Corzine
Obama
Reed -RI
Lautenberg
Mikulski
Reid - Nev
Bayh

[lancdem]

17. Who's Clinto?

Just kidding! :hi:

[uppityperson]

22. Cantwell voted no? Good for her, starting to wake up.

Where's Murray (WA)?

[Rainscents]

49. Murray has become shill for Republican! She lost all of my respect!

[LisaM]

78. I know, I am LIVID

I don't understand her vote at all (Murray's.)

[WindRavenX]

68. good for Clinton and Kerry

I knew I could count on them.

[Renew Deal]

77. The who's who list of presidential contenders.

That's all that is.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

84. I'm sending e-mails to Sarbanes and Mikulski right now

to thank them for being real Democrats.

[TheDonkey]

92. BAYH voted NO! he's running in '08 no questions asked

wow that was a shock, really. Bayh!?!

[Fridays Child]

13. Nays - 22.

78 in favor

[Seedersandleechers]

19. You never know

I can only hope that since he is in a permeate position maybe he'll do the right thing

[Tesha]

67. I think you can be sure he'll do the Reich, err, Right thing! (NT)

[CBGLuthier]

16. Woudln't it be funny if Stevens refused to swear him in.

It wouldn't matter of course, one of the pigs on the court would do it, but technically it is the member with the most seniority and that would be Stevens.

If I were him, I would do it on principle. What could Rogers do, fire him?

[UpInArms]

18. link: Senate confirms Roberts as chief justice in 78 to 22 vote

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/newsfinder/pulseone.asp?dateid=38624.4884409606-844376562&siteID=mktw&scid=0&doctype=806&

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- The U.S. Senate easily confirmed Judge John Roberts as the nation's 17th chief justice Thursday. The vote was 78 to 22. The 50-year-old Roberts will likely lead the Supreme Court for decades to come and preside over several business-related cases when its next session opens Oct. 3. Cases involving Illinois Tool Works (ITW) , Texaco (CVX) and Volvo Trucks North America (F) are all on the docket. President Bush must now turn his attention to appointing a successor to retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.

[alcibiades_mystery]

20. This was a fait accompli from the git go

If anything, Roberts is probably more moderate than Rhenquist.

The real fight comes for the O'Conner seat, and our position is strengthened considerably by letting Roberts through. You can see this from the ridiculous spin, in which the media is clutching for the straw that Dems are overly partisan because only 78 total senators approved Roberts, while 96 approved Ginsburg. On the next one, we filibuster until Bush puts up someone appropriate. And whenever someone whines "obstructionists!," we say "We approved Roberts, despite his lack of qualifications."

[Sparkman]

23. Criminalization of the poor & disconnected, the exoneration of the rich...

this is about class struggle. If your a rich Democrat, you have to doubly renew your efforts to run your lives ethically, support the people's causes for justice and legal standing and protection from the police and criminal systems that prey on the poor to validate the institutional complex.
The military is fed by those abused by the courts for drugs or petty crimes that are not exonerated, but are elevated to felony, just to allow a "judge" offer the military option. And don't be fooled, the Repubs DO NOT attend church to live the moral life, but to remain connected and liason with political associates. It's blatant in south africa, and blatant here in our early history. Kill the original peoples in the afternoon, go to church in the morning. In the words of Charles W. Morgan (Pacifica)....we must persevere.

[ForABlueAmerica]

25. The best thing we can do is...

ensure that he swears in a Democrat on January 20, 2009.

[Sparkman]

44. WELCOME ForABlueA ! my post offers doom, yours is the HOPE!! good on ya

[Psephos]

47. Heh - great post n/t

[Fridays Child]

27. Link

http://www.nynewsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-uscort0930,0,3835907.story

[msmcghee]

29. Many here think the Dems are hopeless . .

. . pink tutus as Bart would put it. I'm not so sure.

If we were going to the mat on every issue, blocking congress and yelling and screaming about the bad bullies and the unfairness of it all - then I don't think we'd be seeing the repukes self-destructing as they are. I don't think we'd see the huge swing toward Dems in the polls and the huge losses for the pukes.

We are (usually) the party of the grownups. We are showing that vividly by letting each Dem sort out their own positions on these issues. No matter how they voted on Roberts, each one has issued a sensible statement about their decision. That's the message that America is hearing as evidenced in the polls. While the repukes are playing right into the frame that they so stupidly set for themselves. It's political jujitsu.

The question is - should we demand the brief emotional satisfaction of seeing Dems go down in flames for our principles in a political environment where right now they don't have the numbers to win?

Or, do we want to take this government back and do some good for America?

[Sparkman]

45. This is an insider forum, not the DLC, right? So we can rant here today?

Then we can rally as the DIVERSE party. The ONLY diverse party.
NO other party hosts conservatives and liberals, warriors and pacifists, rich old-time money and impoverished immigrants.

Party Politics is about tolerance here, about lockstep talk point hypnosis over there.

So can we forgive any who are outraged at the opinions within the party...we have to.

[msmcghee]

54. Ranting is good . .

. . as long as we know that's what we're doing. I think a reminder of that is sometimes useful here at DU.

Catch me on another day, another outrage, and I'll be starting the rant thread myself.


:toast:

[Dr Fate]

58. How would DEMs "go Down in flames" for voting against Roberts?

And how does a vote for Roberts "do some good for America?"

[truthpusher]

30. Roberts confirmed as 17th chief justice of Supreme Court (23 Dems vote y)

http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-uscort0930,0,5644445.story

Roberts confirmed as 17th chief justice of Supreme Court

THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

September 29, 2005, 11:39 AM EDT

WASHINGTON -- John Roberts is taking his place as the next chief justice of the Supreme Court, with a commanding majority of the Senate backing him to lead the court through turbulent social issues that will affect generations to come.

Roberts was to be confirmed Thursday by at least 77 senators, or more than three-fourths of the 100-member chamber, as President Bush's selection to replace the late William H. Rehnquist.

"With the confirmation of John Roberts, the Supreme Court will embark upon a new era in its history, the Roberts era," said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., whose 55 GOP members plan to unanimously vote for the conservative judge. "And for many years to come, long after many of us have left public service, the Roberts court will be deliberating on some of the most difficult and fundamental questions of U.S. law."

(snip)

complete story: http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/nation/ny-uscort0930,0,5644445.story

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

31. who voted no?

I want to thank them.

[Mass]

34. Here is the list

Biden
Schumer
Sarbanes
Clinton
Inouye
Dayton
Durbin
Harkin
Kennedy
Feinstein
Kerry
Stabenow
Akaka
Cantwell
Boxer
Corzine
Obama
Reed -RI
Lautenberg
Mikulski
Reid - Nev
Bayh

[leveymg]

37. Self-delete

[Carni]

59. I am frankly shocked that this many voted no

I think that sends a statement to the rational segment of the public at least (even though we still get stuck with that friggin loon Roberts)

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

90. Thanks

I'm so mad at Blanche Lincoln-earlier this week she said she'd vote no. Wish I still lived in IL, where I could be PROUD of the votes of my Senators.

[TheVirginian]

32. 78 votes. n/t

[realFedUp]

33. it was actually 78, but who waits for the actual news anymore....

gads.

[marmar]

35. It's party time!

:party: :sarcasm:

[defiant1]

36. Hoo-fucking-ray....

:puke:

[ismnotwasm]

38. How utterly disgusting

We knew it was coming of course. I work nights, and am about to go to bed. I'll probably have nightmares about this on general principles.

[tridim]

39. "Yer doin' a heckuva job Mr. Robert-o"

[rodeodance]

40. Breaking News from ABCNEWS.com:

Breaking News from ABCNEWS.com:

JOHN ROBERTS HAS BEEN CONFIRMED AS 17TH CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE UNITED STATES


http://abcnews.go.com?CMP=EMC-1396

[rodeodance]

41. jr to annouce O'conner appointment tomorrow--fema off the radar time.

[ForABlueAmerica]

42. The Tally

Akaka (D-HI) N
Alexander (R-TN) Y
Allard (R-CO) Y
Allen (R-VA) Y
Baucus (D-MT) Y
Bayh (D-IN) N
Bennett (R-UT) Y
Biden (D-DE) N
Bingaman (D-NM) Y
Bond (R-MO) Y
Boxer (D-CA) N
Brownback (R-KS) Y
Bunning (R-KY) Y
Burns (R-MT) Y
Burr (R-NC) Y
Byrd (D-WV) Y
Cantwell (D-WA) N
Carper (D-DE) Y
Chafee (R-RI) Y
Chambliss (R-GA) Y
Clinton (D-NY) N
Coburn (R-OK) Y
Cochran (R-MS) Y
Coleman (R-MN) Y
Collins (R-ME) Y
Conrad (D-ND) Y
Cornyn (R-TX) Y
Corzine (D-NJ) N
Craig (R-ID) Y
Crapo (R-ID) Y
Dayton (D-MN) N
DeMint (R-SC) Y
DeWine (R-OH) Y
Dodd (D-CT) Y
Dole (R-NC) Y
Domenici (R-NM) Y
Dorgan (D-ND) Y
Durbin (D-IL) N
Ensign (R-NV) Y
Enzi (R-WY) Y
Feingold (D-WI) Y
Feinstein (D-CA) N
Frist (R-TN) Y
Graham (R-SC) Y
Grassley (R-IA) Y
Gregg (R-NH) Y
Hagel (R-NE) Y
Harkin (D-IA) N
Hatch (R-UT) Y
Hutchison (R-TX) Y
Inhofe (R-OK) Y
Inouye (D-HI) N
Isakson (R-GA) Y
Jeffords (I-VT) Y
Johnson (D-SD) Y
Kennedy (D-MA) N
Kerry (D-MA) N
Kohl (D-WI) Y
Kyl (R-AZ) Y
Landrieu (D-LA) Y
Lautenberg (D-NJ) N
Leahy (D-VT) Y
Levin (D-MI) y
Lieberman (D-CT) Y
Lincoln (D-AR) Y
Lott (R-MS) Y
Lugar (R-IN) Y
Martinez (R-FL) Y
McCain (R-AZ) Y
McConnell (R-KY) Y
Mikulski (D-MD) N
Murkowski (R-AK) Y
Murray (D-WA) Y
Nelson (D-FL) Y
Nelson (D-NE) Y
Obama (D-IL) N
Pryor (D-AR) Y
Reed (D-RI) N
Reid (D-NV) N
Roberts (R-KS) Y
Rockefeller (D-WV) Y
Salazar (D-CO) Y
Santorum (R-PA) Y
Sarbanes (D-MD) N
Schumer (D-NY) N
Sessions (R-AL) Y
Shelby (R-AL) Y
Smith (R-OR) Y
Snowe (R-ME) Y
Specter (R-PA) Y
Stabenow (D-MI) N
Stevens (R-AK) Y
Sununu (R-NH) Y
Talent (R-MO) Y
Thomas (R-WY) Y
Thune (R-SD) Y
Vitter (R-LA) Y
Voinovich (R-OH) Y
Warner (R-VA) Y
Wyden (D-OR) Y

[northzax]

48. and the court enters a cyclical period

of decline in prominence. it will take some time, if ever, for Roberts to get his sea legs, to build coalitions among the justices, with another newbie coming on board, I don't look for much from the court for the next two terms. he's going to have his hands full, that's for sure.

[Czolgosz]

50. Democrat hall of shame (voted for Roberts’s confirmation):

Baucus (MT)
Bingaman (NM)
Byrd (WV)
Carper (DE)
Conrad (ND)
Dodd (CT)
Dorgan (ND)
Feingold (WI)
Johnson (SD)
Kohl (WI)
Landrieu (LA)
Leahy (VT)
Levin (MI)
Lieberman (CT)
Lincoln (AR)
Murray (WA)
Nelson, Ben (NE)
Nelson, Bill (FL)
Pryor (AR)
Rockefeller (WV)
Salazar (CO)
Wyden (OR)

[dad]

61. If only Senate Democrats voted

The score would be 22-22

[Czolgosz]

65. I expected better of Byrd, Dodd, Feingold, Leahy, Murray, and Rockefeller.

[Megahurtz]

81. I would probably never trust a name like Rockefeller,

:sarcasm: (but not really)

[TrogL]

52. I think Repugs will come to believe this was Dubya's greatest mistake

[Czolgosz]

55. The Enron-Halliburton Corporatists will look back at this as their finest

hour. Maybe, just maybe, Roberts will disappoint the Christian Fundamentalists-Dominionists (his judicial record isn't well developed enough to say for sure although everything outside of his judicial record suggests that they will be well pleased with Roberts), but Roberts's judicial record is sufficiently clear to conclude that consumers and individual citizens have lost out to amoral inhuman corporations.

[Carni]

62. I think after bushit's fix is in on the supreme court he'll be impeached

Probably wishful thinking on my part... but this whole thing from the get go has been about the neocons taking over the courts (IMO anyway)

Once bush accomplishes stacking the courts full of these right ringers he is not needed anymore and I think he's become enough of a liability that his reich may cut him loose.

Not that it will matter because we'll still be screwed.

[hunter]

69. What, like Roberts is some kind of ugly duckling?

I will be very surprised if Roberts suddenly blossoms into some sort of Social Justice Catholic, or even a Social Libertarian.

I am cynical about his "pro bono" gay rights work in Colorado. I believe he didn't want the public spectacle of gay workers getting fired from their jobs and evicted from their homes hanging over the elections of his utterly corrupt Republican cronies.

Maybe we can pray that the Holy Spirit in the form of a vicious Pit Bull will grab Roberts by his naked ass and drag him out of his dirty little closet into the Light, but I wouldn't take any bets it's going to happen.

Or maybe you are even more cynical than I am, TrogL... maybe you think Roberts is going to crash and burn in some horrible scandal that will destroy the Republican Party forever. That would be good too.

[4_Legs_Good]

53. This is the part where we hope and pray

that this guy isn't what we feared.

It's possible we'll get lucky.

:crossesfingers:

david

[Straight Shooter]

56. Well, is "Fat Tony" Scalia doing the happy dance now?

The bush cabal just stole the plum right out of his hands and turned it over to someone who did less to install bush in 2000 than Scalia did. Not only that, Roberts is soooooo unqualified, except by political connections.

What a joke the SC has become. We might as well be living in a third world.

[alarimer]

60. Why didn't all Dems vote against him?

He was going to be confirmed anyway but why not a show of solidarity and make it a very narrow victory for Roberts??

I don't understand at all.

[RatRacer]

64. Saving their ammo

I think they looked at this as a replacement for Rehnquist in essence. No change to the balance of the court. The next one will be viewed as the pivotal nomination, replacing O'Connor. They can let this one slide, then fight like crazy over this one because they've "shown" they can be open minded and "non-partisan."

[hogwyld]

66. No Cajones

What they "should" have done is filibuster this nazi until someone more moderate was nominated. I mean, we stood up to Bork, why not Roberts? With 78 votes, the pukes will assume it's some sort of frickin' mandate!

[Catchawave]

71. Picking their battles ?

Something like that ? :banghead:

Though duly noted those dems doing the goose step for this administration, are on my un-support list. Solidarity would have been a good thing in this President Limpdick's appointments.

[earth mom]

72. I heard Wydens' reason was to get rethug votes for dem issues

in the future. Ha! Fat chance and a piss poor reason if you ask me. :puke:

Oh! I am SO sick of the "politics" of politics! :grr:

[Peace Patriot]

70. The one thing that we can console ourselves with is that there was...

...absolutely nothing we, the people, could do about it. We have no say about anything that goes on in our name in Washington DC. Our job must be to restore the power of our vote. Without it, we are helpless. There is no reason for the President or Congress to listen to us.

Our votes currently are meaningless, due to Bushite corporations--Diebold and ES&S--having gained control over the vote tabulation, during the 2001-2004 period, with SECRET, PROPRIETARY programming code in the new electronic voting systems. This SECRET, PROPRIETARY programming code--code so secret that not even our secretaries of state are permitted to review it--rendered the 2004 election invalid (and also several of the 2002 Congressional elections). These elections were completely non-transparent and unverifiable. They should not even be dignified with the word "election." No one among the public, and no one in government, can establish, by recount or audit, that those who were supposedly elected by means of SECRET, PROPRIETARY programming code were legitimately chosen by the voters.

And compounding the utter violation of democratic principles in "trade secret," proprietary vote tabulation software is the complete lack of any kind of "paper trail" in one third of the country in 2004, added to the existing wholly inadequate auditing and recount procedures even where a "paper trail" of some kind exists.

The so-called "official results" of this SECRET, PROPRIETARY vote tabulation that occurred in 2004 is the ONLY evidence that George Bush holds office legitimately. All other evidence points strongly to a Bush loss in 2004, including--but by no means limited to--the independent national and state exit polls, which Kerry won handily, and whose results were ALTERED, by the TV networks on election night, to "fit" the "official results" of Diebold's and ES&S's secret formulae (Bush won).

In addition to this lack of legitimacy, the Bush regime has engaged in egregious violations of national and international law--including laws against torture and unjust war--massive looting of the federal treasury, and corruption on a scale that we have not seen (and that far exceeds) the Harding administration, harbinger of the Great Depression.

George Bush--or, rather, George Bush's handlers--appointing the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, in addition to a second justice replacing O'Connor, and the Bush Cartel's numerous other federal court appointments--are the most wrongful, illegitimate, disgusting and disastrous acts that we have seen during this junta, aside from the wrongful, illegitimate, disgusting, and disastrous invasion of Iraq and slaughter of tens of thousands of people.

These Bush Cartel court appointments will hamper or completely prevent the essential reforms that will soon be desperately needed to save our country from massive starvation, homelessness and unemployment, and will also hamper or prevent any efforts to restore our democracy and our civil rights, including our right to vote.

Clearly the banning of unverifiable electronic voting will be one of those efforts to restore democracy--and it will be facing a Supreme Court that will most certainly rule in favor of secret, corporate-controlled vote tabulation. This will retard the fight for transparent elections possibly for decades.

Another needed reform is stripping corporations of personhood--a bizarre fascist doctrine that is responsible for much of our current enslavement to our Corporate Rulers and war profiteers.

The list of potential catastrophic impacts of these Bush Cartel court appointments is very long--both as to preventing vital future reform, and as to undoing a half a century of progress in economic justice, civil rights and environmental regulation.

Our situation will be very similar to that faced by Franklin Delano Roosevelt in the early 1930s. With a third of our country unemployed, massive breadlines, people starving and homeless, complete economic collapse, and worldwide Depression, the Robber Baron-era appointments to the Supreme Court struck down reform after reform, proposed by FDR and passed by Congress, including the National Industrial Recovery Act, and many progressive labor laws, and was poised to declare even the Social Security Act as "unconstitutional."

The matter was resolved when FDR took the extraordinary measure of threatening to "pack" the Supreme Court (add to the number of justices, so that new, younger, more liberal appointments could be made--a power that Congress DOES HAVE, by the way), which prompted one of the "moderate" justices to switch sides on New Deal programs (and both Social Security and the National Labor Relations Acts were saved!).

The U.S. had been inflicted with some of the worst presidents we've ever seen, during the Robber Baron era--people who pushed "laissez faire" policies (no regulation of the "free market") much akin to the global corporate predation and "free piracy" we see today. These corrupt (McKinley, Harding), oblivious (Coolidge), stupid (Coolidge) or ineffective (Hoover) leaders permitted the country to be RUINED by the super-rich--who were idiotically holding "Beggars' Balls" in the Waldorf-Astoria on the eve of the Great Depression. Hoover (who was not without good instincts, but was sadly ineffective) in 1928 campaigned on the slogan, "A chicken in every pot, a car in every garage"! He, too, blindly believed in the "free market," AND in VOLUNTEERISM as the answer to massive poverty. (Where have we heard that before?)

(Coolidge: "We do not need more intellectual power, we need more moral power. We do not need more knowledge, we need more character. We do not need more government, we need more culture. We do not need more law, we need more religion." --while the immoral glitterati danced the night away at the Waldorf-Astoria dressed up as BEGGARS!)

Well, we're right back where we were THEN, in many ways. And the scariest part of it all is that even FDR's reforms--involving massive government employment programs--while they were saving peoples' lives and giving people hope, were slow in generating economic recovery (not helped by the obstructions of the pro-rich, pro-big business Supreme Court), and only WW II (a huge retooling of industry, and huge government subsidies of industry) prevented a final collapse of the U.S. and all western economies.

Our economy has been on a war footing ever since, with continued huge taxpayer subsidization of the military industries, and, now, with the Bush Cartel, vast subsidies of every kind for all U.S.-based global corporate predators, and zero accountability in the military (or any) sector. (At least FDR and the New Dealers rode herd on industry and punished war profiteering.)

Another scary fact is that an FDR--someone genuinely devoted to serving the majority of people, especially the poor and downtrodden--could not be elected today. They counted votes by hand in those days, and although there was plenty of election fraud and vote stealing committed by both sides, they pretty much canceled each other out, and--critically important--it could not occur on the scale that it now occurs with non-transparent electronic voting, at the speed of light, unseeable by the human eye--one hacker, a couple of minutes, switching thousands of votes, and leaving no trace.

Now we have ONE PARTY--or rather, the far rightwing of one party--in total control of vote tabulation. We shouldn't be surprised at the result.

If we want our democracy back--and if we are to have any hope of combating the fascist rulings of a Bush Cartel-appointed Supreme Court and federal judiciary which we are going to be facing for decades to come--we MUST recover our right to vote, however we can.

The BIPARTISAN corruption of our election system, wrought by the $4 billion electronic voting boondoggle (provided by Bush's "pod people" in Congress), is a formidable obstacle to election reform. It is at least half the story of why the Democrats have gone along with this INSANE takeover of our elections by Bushite corporations. (I think the other part of the story is war profiteering corruption by pro-war Democrats.)

Our best chance at reform is at the state/local level, where the power over election systems still resides, and where ordinary people still have some influence.

My advice: Throw Diebold and ES&S election theft machines into 'Boston Harbor' NOW!

----------

An excellent account of the FDR and the Supreme Court:
http://www.crf-usa.org/bria/bria10_4.html

A quick rundown on "the Constitution in Exile"--Herbert Hoover's Constitution (pre-FDR Constitution) that fascists have been trying to re-install, beginning in the Reagan era, through judicial appointments:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2004/0409.sunstein.html

[Kralizec]

74. How dissapointing.... n/t

[Politicub]

75. How depressing

It's like having Damien from the Omen as chief justice.

[skipos]

80. Can someone post this poll for me please?

I am interested to know how the DU would feel about this poll.

***
If you only had the choice between Rehnquist or Roberts, who would you rather have as Cheif Justice?
***

I haven't donated yet, so I can't do polls. Can someone post this poll for me? I'll donate soon. Thanks.

[RSchewe]

82. Anyone who is surprised about this needs their head examined.

This was inevitable since Bush got elected.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

83. Every "Dem" who voted for him

should have their sorry, spineless ass voted out in the next election.

[hogwyld]

85. I Agree

Get rid of those turncoats, and elect more progressive people. I am sick and tired of these "repug lite" people not listening to us! Do not compromise with the enemy.

[sando]

89. What the F happened to Feingold?

The one gd senator to vote against the Patriot Act and he votes Yes? WTF is that about? Color me :banghead:

[ECH1969]

88. I knew they would fold

[sofa king]

91. More important: who's the next nominee?

Until recently, I thought it was highly implausible that Alberto Gonzales would be nominated for such a high place, but since then I've changed my mind.

Now I KNOW it's going to be Gonzales.

Yeah, yeah. Gonzales doesn't thump the Bible hard enough. Yeah, the trogs have to be placated with a foaming at the mouth conservative. Yeah, it won't sit well with women if one of the oh, three barely-qualified arch-conservative female judges isn't chosen.

But Gonzales is going to get the nod. Why?

Because he's a pain in the ass.

You see, Gonzales seems to have truth issues: he seems to have an affinity for it, and as Attorney General he is working entirely too hard to bring it about.

Whereas John Ashcroft slapped "state secrets" gags, delayed and compartmentalized investigations, fought FOIA requests and otherwise did everything in his power to keep Jack Abramoff's money laundering operation away from terrorist investigators and the public eye, Mr. Gonzales has allowed the case to go forward. Even worse, Mr. Gonzales is cooperating with state and local authorities to allow further revelations about Abramoff's operations to come to light.

And what's going to come to light if Mr. Gonzales is not stopped? I think we are going to learn that Jack Abramoff was laundering al Qaeda's money straight into the one place where nobody would dare to look: the coffers of the Republican Party.

That of course cannot be allowed to happen. So Mr. Gonzales is going to be promoted out of the oversight of the Abramoff investigation. He's going to be made an offer he can't refuse: a seat on the highest court of the land.

Whether his efforts were motivated by an honest love for his country, or if it was a the clever excercise of the leverage he holds over the Bush Administration, we may never know. Either way, Mr. Gonzales has successfully navigated his way through the most criminal Rresidency in the history of our nation, straight to the pinnacle of his profession.

Just you watch.

[depakid]

94. Doesn't matter- the Dems will punt on that one, too

They already allowed Mr. Torture and forget the Geneva Convention to become attorney general.

The current crop of Dems aren't going to fight anything- and are going to end up losing badly in 2006- even though the Republicans are imploding.

Wyt? Because no one wants to vote for cowards who won't stand up for anything that they supposedly believe in. Even I don't want to vote for many of them- and I sure as hell won't give either my current Senator (Wyden) or Congressman (Wu) and of my time or money.

[paineinthearse]

96. Pardon me, but I laughed at the subject line

Breaking on CNN :rofl:

Why wait for the corporate media to spin a story? Get it from the source, watch Senate proceedings on CSPAN.