Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Edith Clement Nomination: All things considered, is it good or bad?

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 » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 02:25 PM
Original message
Poll question: Edith Clement Nomination: All things considered, is it good or bad?
Edited on Tue Jul-19-05 02:32 PM by Vash the Stampede
Remember when voting, folks, there is absolutely no chance we're going to get a liberal on the bench with Bush in office.

With THAT in mind, comparing her to other potential and realistic nominees, is Clement possibly being nominated a good thing or a bad thing?

On edit, if it's bad, which of the potential and realistic SCOTUS nominees WOULD you like to see happen?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
WCGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 02:26 PM
Response to Original message
1. Stealth candidate....
Has not had to rule on any controversial issues in her court....

She is a member of all the major right wing think tanks and prominate in the Federalists.

In the mold of Scalia and Thomas
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSparkle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. But she claims Roe is "settled law" which isn't bad
I'm just afraid this mess is going to take focus off Rovegate -- if she's even slightly acceptable, we ought to just say "no problem" and keep pummeling Chimpy on KKKarl. (Get him in a weakened position before he has to nominate Rehnquist's replacement.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dobegrrrl Donating Member (190 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. Settled law
My understanding is that she ruled that way only because she had no choice - the Court of Appeals cannot over turn the SC. She may take a different view and probably will if (WHEN) confirmed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSparkle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 02:53 PM
Response to Reply #8
10. Yeah, and I've done some checking into the Federalist Society
and if she's part of that pod ("and I choose my word carefully"), then that's NOT a good thing....Made me consider deleting my post. I'm now inclined to think she's a stealth nominee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WCGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 03:33 PM
Response to Reply #4
11. Let the Special Prosecutor do his job....
That will happen regardless of what goes on in the SC....

BEside, you are right. It really makes no difference since this president doesn;t give a shit what anyone inside or outside of his party thinks...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
genius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 02:27 PM
Response to Original message
2. She's a Federalist. That's really bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Goldmund Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 02:28 PM
Response to Original message
3. I'm not getting your "Yes"/"No" options
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Nicholas D Wolfwood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. Sorry for the typo...
corrected.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quiet.american Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 02:38 PM
Response to Original message
6. Sounds like it could be really, really bad
I don't know much about Federalism, except that they're heavily referred to in David Brock's "Blinded by the Right," and my recollection of those involved with the Federalist movement is that they seem to be, er... insane.

A quick Google search brought this up:

Federalism is about the architecture of our federal and state-based system of government. The term describes a fluid balance between the power of states and the power of the national government. At issue is whether the national government will be able to address matters vitally important to our entire country. If the Court has its way, the country could return to a pre-civil rights movement, pre-New Deal, even a pre-Civil War vision of "states' rights" jurisprudence, rendering the national government impotent to act in many areas of domestic concern.


Much more detail here:
http://www.legalmomentum.org/issues/fed/index.shtml

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
malaise Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Worry more about Luttig
that looks like the plan. Conservative media have been trying to paint him as 'balanced'
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2005/06/chief-justice-luttig.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Connie_Corleone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 02:49 PM
Response to Original message
9. Clement is only a rumor right now.
I'll wait until 9:00 pm to give my opinion. Bush might pick someone else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
senseandsensibility Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. You mean he might
read someone else's name picked for him from the teleprompter? :) I find it hard to believe the chimp could pick his nose, let alone a nominee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
underpants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jul-19-05 04:02 PM
Response to Original message
13. Apparently NOT Clement
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 Fri Dec 27th 2024, 08:04 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) 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