You Want Perspective? I've Got Your Perspective

[Zomby Woof]

William Rehnquist was nominated by Richard Nixon when Vietnam was still going on. Those of you pushing 40 weren't even in grade school, or were just starting. Watergate was just the name of a hotel in D.C, and nothing else.

John Paul Stevens, nominated by Ford, when Swine Flu Vaccines were the rage and television brought you those "Bicentennial Minutes". Whip Inflation Now! "Jimmy who?" wasn't even a question... yet.

Many of our young DUers, in high school or college now, were born or starting grade school when Scalia came onto the High Court, courtesy of narcoleptic pinhead Ronald Reagan.

Sandra Day O'Connor, whose inevitable retirement started us down this sordid path, was also chosen by Reagan. In 1981, just a mere 193 years after the Constitution was ratified, a woman finally made it to the Supreme Court. Granted, a conservative, and appointed by Reagan, but this barrier was way past overdue to be broken.

So here are, smack in the middle of the tumultous first decade of the 21st century, and the potential successor for O'Connor has been anointed by the Unchosen One.

If confirmed by the Senate, John Roberts has the potential to sit on the bench and interpret OUR Constitution when your present-day toddlers are preparing your grandchildren for their high school graduations.

A Supreme Court justice isn't like a diamond - it's not forever, but in matters of our Republic's health, it's pretty damn close.

I don't think the sky is falling, I don't need to be told to calm down, and I am sure as the shit that dribbles from Scotty McClellan's chin every morning that it is not possible to belabor the point that we must work our collective asses off to voice our opposition to this one John Roberts. We will fight the confirmation, and if we are successful, we will have a momentum Joe Lieberman cannot even summon out of his ass after a bean-dip bender; and if we lose, we just have a new set of battles, in which we will tenaciously fight until Joe Biden is left drooling on the foot of the Capitol steps in a fetal position, mumbling "the president is an honorable man, even if we disagree...". Until his last fart disperses him into oblivion, of course.

Simultaneously, we will keep at it with that goddamned pasty shit Rove and the Plame Affair. We are large, we contain multitudes. We all have the same number of hours in a day to use however we see fit.

I see fit to fight Roberts, win or lose. It's time well spent, give or take the next 35 years or more of judicial gas he could yet poot from the hole in the back of his robe...

It's disgraceful to roll over, folks. The Lieberman/Biden look was never fashionable.

[flamingyouth]

1. Thank you.

:thumbsup::hug:

Just, thanks.

[Zomby Woof]

8. You're welcome

:-) What wouldn't I do for a fellow Quincy junkie?

[RagAss]

2. Bravo.....Bravo...

[_testify_]

3. excellent perspective

but do we HAVE to fight the same ole way? Do we have to scream and kick? Can't we plot, devise, misdirect, employ ruses, subterfuge and all around sneakiness?

[Zomby Woof]

4. I don't see why not

I am all for creative and new ideas, because sometimes the old ones fail us. That's what makes progressives, um, progressive. A little confrontation is a language they surely understand, no? Ruses and subterfuge, I say go for it!

[beam me up scottie]

5. Thanks.

Too many have forgotten or never knew how hard we fought to get those rights.
How much blood was shed.
It is an insult to all those who came before.

[_testify_]

13. I've been reading your posts all day

and I can see that you are a passionate person, but with all due respect, it sounds like you'd rather fight DUers who don't agree than the current regime that is a bona-fide threat to all of us. I'm not trying to flame, or insult - you strike me as the sort of person that would go it alone (and that is truly admirable) - so why do you care if others don't get it?

[beam me up scottie]

17. I don't want to fight du'ers but I sure the hell won't shut up

because I'm told to.

I only care about the people who will fight for the rights of all of us, no matter how futile it may seem.

I don't care about those that would sacrifice the rights of some of us to win.

This is not the first time we have been told to give up for "the good of the party".

If I remember correctly, last time around we were told to give up the fight for gay rights.

I don't abandon my friends, brothers and sisters, because we might lose the fight.

Do you ?

[_testify_]

18. No, I'm not going to duck n cover either

But we need to spend more time fighting and less time looking around to see who's not with us!

I don't think we should give up for the good of the 'party' - the things we fight for exist whether or not there even IS a party.

I just think we need to choose HOW we fight, not whether or not we fight at all.

[beam me up scottie]

20. I wasn't "looking" for who's not with us.

They slapped me across the face with their "it's a distraction", "it's not worth fighting for" and "let's fight the next one" all damn night and day.

Add to that the infinite number of posts calling us hysterical and paranoid and years of being told that our rights will never be threatened, and you've got one pissed off ex-Marine.

So, I DO know when to pick my battles, thank you very much.
I know it's time to fight when I'm being told to shut up and roll over.

And I have an endless supply of angst and the energy to keep fighting, it's not like this is anything new and I'm going to get tired.

[_testify_]

23. well I look forward to kicking some ass with you!

The clock is running on these pigfuckers!

[beam me up scottie]

26. It's on !

I swear I meet more cool people by pissing them off... :evilgrin:

[Generator]

6. We contain multitudes

And a little poetry never hurt either.

Win or lose..what honorable words..when you are the miniority and defeat may be certain what you have is your honor. Some won't surrender it just for another possible crumb.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

7. Huzzah! Huzzah! Kill the fatted calf!

Da Woof rediscovers politics!

Welcome back to the fray, my brother. Welcome back. We have kept one of the mattresses open just for you.

[Zomby Woof]

9. Ah good!

Just make sure it isn't the one matcom stained. x(

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

14. Don't worry.

We acid-dipped and sand blasted it after he was done. We then stored it in a thick coat of Cosmolene. ;-)

[knowbody0]

10. AWESOME,

[Walt Starr]

11. The only way to fight it, get the gang of fourteen on your side.

The gang of fourteen decides who will and who will not be confirmed.

McCain already put a shot across the bow of the filibuster, so it ain't happening because if itdoes, the filibuster gets nuked.

That's the political reality. We've got lemons. Make lemonade. Ask the tough questions and use this against the moderate New England Republicans because they will have to answer for it. Rhetorical posturing is all we have left at this point.

If we picked up two seats in the Senate, we might be able to filibuster, but it's doubtful we could survive the nuke option.

If we picked up four seats in the Senate, filibusters would be all the rage.

Pick up five seats in the Senate and all nominees would come from Moderates-R-Us

The only way to get anybody even remotely approaching liberal is to pick up seven seats in the Senate AND win the White House.

Political reality is a bitch.

[TahitiNut]

41. Well, that's actually not true.

Ignoring the technical possibility of attracting some moderate (honest) Republican support ....

The Dems stated retaliation if the Pugs abused their authority and illicitly wipe out the filibuster for nominations is to halt all Senate business unless critical and CLEARLY unanimous or nearly so. The tactic is to deprive any motion of 'unanimous consent' ... an "efficiency" practice where the Rules of the Senate are bypassed in the interests of expediency. Requests to "revise and extend," forgo the Clerk reading of a bill, and a plethora of other instances where the Rules are evaded would then be subjected to roll call votes (and the coincidental quorum) and the requisite majority or supermajority result.

Why not just monkey-wrench 'em?

If there's absolutely no accommodation for Democratic Senators (who, by the way, represent the majority of the American People!) in a one-party-rule Senate, what the hell is there to lose? More seats? So fucking what? If we have no voice as it is, what the hell is the use of playing nicey-nicey?

[Democat]

12. It's better to fight and lose than to give up right away

Democrats need to learn that the American people want their leaders to fight for them.

If you are afraid of being called an "obstructionist" then the Republicans have already won.

[Fenris]

15. Very well thought out and put.

:applause:

[Crowdance]

16. WORD!

You said it! This is it. Let's not choose disgrace.

[Hubert Flottz]

19. Don't give the bastid any coffee!

I haven't heard what my two senators think, but I'll bet Mr. Byrd feels about the way we do! No pain no gain! If that guy was in on helping shrub steal the election in 2000, he's a fascist enabler and deserves nothing but scorn from real democrats.

A glorified freeptard is all the guy is, if he's crooked enough to be hooked up with the likes of Ali Shrubby and the 40 thieves in and around the White House! One of Rove's Rogues!

[jonnyblitz]

21. yup.

yet ANOTHER great post from you today. :thumbsup:

[Carni]

22. Last night my initial reaction was to let his appointment ride

But now today I am thinking F that--*strategy* so far has gained nothing in the way of lucid government.

I know this guy is dirty just based on his role in the 2000 recounts.

I say oppose the hell out of this moron--good post btw

[Bouncy Ball]

24. He's 50.

So possibly 35 years. Possibly more.

I will be in my early 70s. But here's another thing---the decisions the SC hands down in the years he (and a possible Rhenquist replacement?) are on the court--those decisions will possibly go on even longer than THAT.

That is why I told wishy-washy voters "two words: Supreme Court."

[Zorbuddha]

25. Motivational speeches suck

What's next, torches and pitchforks?

[Jim Sagle]

30. If necessary.

[beam me up scottie]

32. .

:evilgrin:

[Zorbuddha]

35. I love a good mob on a moonless night.

TO THE LUMBERYARD!

[bonito]

33. Would flowers and hugs be the other side of that coin?

And to own one the other comes with it. what do you propose?

[Zorbuddha]

36. Love

drugs.

[TahitiNut]

40. ... and lock and load.

(as we usta say in the nam)

[Zorbuddha]

42. At ease, soldier.

You've earned it.

[TahitiNut]

51. I would aspire to be courageous and conscientious enough ...

... to emulate Thich Quang Duc. No other act of conscience has ever come close to having the same impact on me. We are a morally-impovershed people without many thousands who'd mirror his choice. (As one, I could only resort to "lock and load.")

[Zorbuddha]

57. Seriously, and sadly so.

Even in my own morally impoverished state, I recall the impact it had on me. It resonated within me the depth of some and the shallowness I felt immersed in.

I don't know if his choice is a model for action, but it is surely an unsurpassed iconic lesson for those with the substance to learn by it.



I was to see that sight again, but once was enough. Flames were coming from a human being; his body was slowly withering and shriveling up, his head blackening and charring. In the air was the smell of burning human flesh; human beings burn surprisingly quickly. Behind me I could hear the sobbing of the Vietnamese who were now gathering. I was too shocked to cry, too confused to take notes or ask questions, too bewildered to even think.... As he burned he never moved a muscle, never uttered a sound, his outward composure in sharp contrast to the wailing people around him.

[proud patriot]

27. Woof Woof

Right on :thumbsup:

[Eloriel]

28. You are outdoing yourself tonight. NOMINATED. n/t

[Straight Shooter]

29. How can we trust a decision by bush, when his closest advisor is a traitor

Clearly bush is a poor judge of character. His most trusted confidante and advisor is a traitor to the country. We must all examine Roberts very carefully.

I, for one, am extremely dismayed at the man's youth. 50? What the bleep does he know?

The more I read about Roberts, the more convinced I am that people need to be educated about how disingenuous and devious bush is by choosing him.

[ClayZ]

31. Bravo ZombyWoof

Standing Ovation! Thank you! You are spot on!


:applause:

[stevedeshazer]

34. What the hell...

...have they been putting in your zomby coffee, anyway?

Well said.

[rosesaylavee]

37. Ways will appear

for us to get to the truth in all this. There is another post from **ithinkmyliverhurts** tonight - he/she has a journalist friend in DC who has uncovered the following on Roberts:

1) Roberts' role in election 2000 and his donations are interesting.
2) His wife's role in anti-choice feminist fund raising/do-gooding is interesting (but the editorial harnesses have been put on).
3) Reporters are chomping at the bit to get back to Rove.

I feel the tide turning for these bushies.

[AuntiBush]

38. My Fellow Ex-Marine...............

I salute you! You breathe hope.

[Zomby Woof]

39. Thank you, but

I am not a former Marine or veteran of any kind. I salute YOU if you are! :patriot:

[AuntiBush]

45. Here Ya Go.

Late husband. Died way too young in brutal accident. He was a Viet Nam vet. The minute he hit homeland he grabbed signs and headed for DC. Adamantly against the atrocities he had to deal with, while over there.

He vowed to always be a peacemaker, and stood his ground well, regardless. Fair, he knew timing and you my friend sound exactly like what he would be doing right now. You would make him sooo proud.

Yes, signed-up decades ago. Army. Family had a tizzy.

And for that... I thank you ZombyWoof.

Note: Though I read you were an ex-marine. Sorry abt that. Been a tough day.

Still :patriot: to you for your staunch bravery. Someone has to say it and you did so very well.

[beam me up scottie]

46. I'm an ex-Marine.

And I would have been honored to know your husband.
BTW, you're pretty awesome too.
:thumbsup:

[understandinglife]

43. Superb post. Here is a link to my initial thoughts on the matter, for ...

... whatever little they may be worth:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=4149627&mesg_id=4150035

Roberts is a dangerous dude.

Multi-tasking is an entry level qualification for those who want to preserve and expand our democracy! I've never understood those who thought our Constitution was a cocoon of complacency instead of a living system that we need to nurture and protect, at all times. We've got to stop Roberts, and get a bunch of neoconsters indicted, and get Bu$h OUT.

http://www.peacecandy.com/gwbush/remindus
REMIND US

Peace.

www.missionnotaccomplished.us - How ever long it takes, the day must come when tens of millions of caring individuals peacefully but persistently defy the dictator, deny the corporatists their cash flow, and halt the evil being done in Iraq and in all the other places the Bu$h neoconster regime is destroying civilization and the environment in the name of "America."

[Zomby Woof]

44. Thanks for the link!

And for reading my little screed. :-)

[Desertrose]

47. Well said, ZW, well said!

we need to get our collective asses united and moving.

Well said!

:loveya::hug:
DR

[Zomby Woof]

52. Thanks D-ma!

Although I see it as just my usual crass vulgarity. :7

:loveya: :hi:

[wryter2000]

48. Biden...

While we're talking perspective here. (Yes, I'm an old fart.) Let's not forget Biden's work as Chairman of the Judiciary Committe that kept Bork off the court. I came to admire Biden tremendously then. At the time, he was attempting a run at the White House and involved in some silly shit that was being thrown at him about plagiarism when he was in college. But he managed the hearings like a champ. I will never, as long as I live, forget Barbara Jordan's testimony.

It's hurt my heart to see him sink so low. I hope he finds some cojones this time (as I told him in a pen and ink, 37 cent stamp letter). I'm not holding my breath, though. :cry:

[BonnieJW]

49. Please keep in mind what is at stake

I am 56 and there are some who do not realize what Roe v Wade means to American women. When I was in high school, if a girl got pregnant, her life was over. She was not allowed to stay in school while pregnant. Scenario 1: Her parents would send her away to a "school" for wayward girls to wait for the birth of her baby, who was taken from her immediately after the birth to put up for adoption. She could never find out what happened to the baby. Scenario 2: She married the 16-year-old pimple faced kid who knocked her up, she had her baby and lived the rest of her life in poverty either with or without the baby's father. Scenario 3: She had a back alley illegal abortion performed by anyone who could fog a mirror and wanted to make $500. She bled to death at the scene or died in agony from complications a few days later.

When you think of the Supremes or anyone anywhere overturning this law, please keep the face of a terrified, desparate 16-year old girl in your thoughts. Even if it's considered a "bad law," it's the only one we have and we must cherrish it.

[CAcyclist]

50. My LTTE

Anyone who wants to -feel free to copy. I got my last letter about Rove published in a couple papers so this one probably won't be published, since it follows so closely on the heels of the last one. The Miami Herald article is posted on Common Dreams.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0721-07.htm

Dear Editor,

We who value the environment, the right to have your vote counted, individual rights over corporate rights and the right to privacy would be wise to oppose the nomination of John Roberts. I urge the Democrats to filibuster in this case. It is not enough that his thin record shows moderation, but as the probable swing vote, we do not have the luxury of hoping that this will be his true face.

As evidence of concern over his partisanship, I refer readers to the Miami Herald , who said 7/21/05:

TALLAHASSEE -- U.S. Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts provided legal advice to Gov. Jeb Bush in the weeks following the November 2000 election as part of the effort to make sure the governor's brother won the disputed presidential vote.

Roberts, at the time a private attorney in Washington, D.C., came to Tallahassee to advise the state's Republican administration as it was trying to prevent a Democratic end-run that the GOP feared might give the election to Al Gore, sources told The Herald.

[kcass1954]

53. Those of us old enough to remember when Rehnquist was nominated

also remember Watergate and the pre-Roe v. Wade era. While I may not have personally known anyone who died as the result of a back-alley abortion, I know anecdotally of several. I also have a friend who was able to have a legal abortion only because her family could afford to send her to another state.

I had an abortion in Florida in the late 70's. The clinic where I went was extremely caring and understanding. This was not necessarily an experience that I would care to repeat, but I'm glad that I had the option to choose. I was 23 and unmarried, and not in the position, either financially or emotionally, to be a parent. I sometimes wonder about the 27-year-old I might now have, but I'm confident that at that point in time, I made the correct decision.

My child-rearing days are nearly at an end. But I'm not a member of the "I got mine, you're on your own" club. I'm concerned for the futures of my nieces, my son's girlfriend, and the thousands of other young women who I don't personally know but who may find themselves with an unwanted pregnancy at some point in their lives.

There appear to be many valid reasons to oppose Roberts' nomination, and no doubt more will be revealed in the coming weeks. But his prior position on Roe, and the fact that he may sit on the court for 30+ years, do not bode well for our daughters' futures.

We need to fight this nomination with everything we've got. If not now, when?

[Ysolde]

58. Very poignant post.

Thank you. I took a dear friend in college to her abortion. It was available and private at the time. I fear what she'd have to go through now, instead of over 20 years ago! I don't remember the world before Roe, but my aunt does and her story about a distraught 1st grader still haunts me. His older sister died from a botched abortion given by his grandmother.

We have to fight and never stop. In memory of that poor girl and many others as well as all that are still coming of age.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

54. IN A NUT SHELL!....thank you

[VOX]

55. Oh yeah! Woof is in da house!

And your surgically precise deployment of scatological terminology is nonpareil. :)

Translation: You cuss good! :yourock:

ZW, THANKS for injecting a dose of cool sanity into this hot summer bake-off! :thumbsup:

[hunter]

56. If we can't swat Roberts down in the Senate, we can just swat him down.

Let's light a fire under his feet, force him to withdraw. And we should certainly fight dirty if we have that opportunity -- we should be looking for any skeleton's we can find in this guy's closets.

Roberts is dangerous, not only for Constitutional issues such as Roe v. Wade, but because it is his clear fealty to the Bush Administration to cover up their various election frauds, their corrupt influence within the energy industry, and their continuing destruction of the natural environment.

The Bush Administration maintains its political power by its parasitic relationship to the energy industry. This Administration's greatest fear is that they will lose this status. This is the reason for their war in Iraq, their lack of support for energy conservation and "alternative" energy programs, and their gutting of U.S. environmental regulations. They cannot imagine a world where they do not have some controlling stake in the energy infrastructure of the United States.

We saw this very clearly during the artificially created "California Energy Crisis." Energy companies such as Enron, Dynergy, etc., stole billions of dollars from the people of California, and just when it seeme likely these criminal institutions would be prosecuted, the Executive branch of our state government was simply replaced. Gray Davis was out, Arnold Schwarzenegger was in.

I am so ready to fight. Hide your testicles you right wing fancy boys. The dogs are loose.

[noiretextatique]

59. another excellent post, ZW

the 'realists' have already capitulated...again. just like in 2000..."but...but...but "what could they do?"
it's deja vu all over again :cry:
i may as well vote for the party i'm registered with, since i keep "throwing my vote away" anyway by voting D for do-nothing.

[yorgatron]

60. "narcoleptic pinhead Ronald Reagan"

:rofl: :kick:

[Democracy White]

61. I am just wondering...

maybe we should push to have the Justices serve only four year terms or so instead of lifetime terms. That way the "people" (us) would have more of a say on who sits on the bench.

Dee

[radio4progressives]

62. I agree Completely and Whole Heartily/Soon I will be 55 years old n/t

[blue morality]

63. i understand the passion but some of us will not be fighting this...

just because we think it is politically a bad idea to fight this, just because we think it is wrong to fight this (he isn't Scalia and, hello, WE LOST THE ELECTION so it isn't our choice), doesn't mean we are going to roll over.

Using Roberts as one more issue we can take back the Senate next year and possibly the entire government in '08. That is far more important that raising bloody murder against a nomination we can't stop anyway.

All I am saying is think it out. Passion is great, but some times you have to use your head. There is a time to fight and there is a time to be wise and wait.

[Wizard777]

64. They have the lowest of all removal bars.

They simply have to misbehave. Bad Justice! You're outta here!