Chief Justice William Rehnquist to retire

[yankeefanatic3]

DailyKOS has learned that it will happen between 10-11 am ET tomorrow. Apparently Bob Novak's sources say so too.

It looks like we'll be saying "Chief Justice Scalia?" soon enough.

http://worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=45166

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. Or Chief Justice Thomas?

[yankeefanatic3]

14. I would hope not...He has said before though he wasn't interested n/t

[mike_c]

2. OMFG will the bad news never end today...?

Oh shit....

[Kikosexy2]

13. Evil...

on the rise!!...Is God really pissed at the world or what?

[Renew Deal]

3. Have there ever been two openings at once?

Besides expanding the size of the court.

[Dudley_DUright]

19. Yes, last time was in 1971

The last time there were simultaneous vacancies at the court was 1971, when Justices Hugo Black and John Marshall Harlan retired in September, about a week apart. Rehnquist, then a Justice Department lawyer, urged the Nixon administration to move fast in replacing them. After Nixon's first two choices were harshly criticized, he named Lewis Powell and Rehnquist.

http://dsdsdemo2.ap.org/aponline/politics_stories/5_ds_852046.html

[Pithy Cherub]

4. Hornets Nest...

Now each camp in the wingnut world can be assuaged...

Oh, THIS Summer is of intense political extremes...:popcorn:

Scalia the Shark's new chief justice robe should be a riot...

[UCLA Dem]

5. Oh fuck. Here we go. Who next?? Kicked.

[Bucky]

62. Sadly, the oldest, frailest one holding on is JP Stevens

Ford's sole appointee is arguably the most reliable liberal on the court. He's also in his 80s and only holding on because he loathes Bush.

[Scottie72]

6. I agree

That is another big OH SH*&^

Now there is going to be a apocalytical battle in DC for the justices. The best possible outcome would be to nominate a main line conservative (middle of the road like O'connor) and then he would be free to nominate a neo con. This wouldn't change the current balance of the court. If we get two neo cons the country will turn the clocks back this fall 50 years instead of an hour.

[marmar]

7. Now he can appoint Gonzales to appease the slightly more moderate folks...

and a real right-wing extremists to pander to the, well, right wing extremists. These coordinated retirements are no accident, methinks.

[TahitiNut]

17. I see no interest whatsoever in 'appeasement' from this cabal ...

.... unless it's appeasing the Chinese Communists. Of course that's just business, not political. (Leave the gun. Take the cannoli.)

[jaysunb]

37. Hey Clemenza !

I gotta little job for ya over here !! :hi:

[Kadie]

8. This should make it easy for bushie

Now he can appoint an ultra conservative and a moderate and make most of the people happy.

:eyes:


"Chief Justice Scalia?"

:scared::scared::scared::scared:

[sonicx]

9. This sucks, but it's least it's a con...

whoever the replacment is can't be worse (or can it?)

[Sandpiper]

10. Replacing Rehnquist doesn't change the balance of the Court

Rehnquist was an anti-choice right wing partisan.

[Old Vet]

12. My Guess, 2 Ultra Conservatives........

Bush will not try to appease anyone. His whole dream is about to come true, The Repugs have been gearing up for this fight for a long time, Every church you can name is taking extra collections to help overturn Roe. Remember political capitol?

[TahitiNut]

18. Agreed.

[ikojo]

28. The pugs are not only interested in overturning

Roe v Wade, they are interested in undoing the whole New Deal and that includes social security and many labor laws. Wow! I wish people could see how dangerous a conservative court is not only to the choice issue but to ALL working class people.

[Bucky]

63. Correction, two ultra conservatives between the ages of 45 and 50.

Ever since the religious right hijacked them in the 80s, Republican presidents like 'em young. Not a single Republican appointee has been over age 52.

[aresef]

91. Not every church is full of Christofascists

Unitarianism, United Church of Christ, etc.

Anywho guys, THIS is our chance. We have to scream louder than ever before. Send letters to your senators. Paper letters. Any Democrat senator who votes for somebody like Alberto "Torture can be fun" Gonzales will be labeled a DINO.

And when the confirmation hearings begin, we should be more often hearing Bork used as a verb.

[brentspeak]

16. Yeah, but now we'll have

a much younger anti-choice right wing partisan.

[longship]

55. True, but he's the chief

So CuckooBananas has a chance to reshape the court even more.

He appoints an even more conservative chief, e.g., Thomas.

Now he still has two new appointments both of which can be more conservative than Rehnquist.

I think Ted Olson will most certainly be one of them. Many think that Gonzales will be one.

Or, here's a positive thought (if you're a lunatic nazi). How about Ted Olson as chief? Then he can still appoint another lunatic.

Scary times!!

[MadisonProgressive]

11. What is happening to this world?

This has been a very bad day. :scared:

[Doctor Pedantic]

15. Not a big deal

Look, Rehnquist is just going to be replaced by another right-winger. I do tend to agree that Bush will try to maintain the status quo by appointing what now passes for a moderate to replace O'Connor, thus not upsetting the balance of the Court. Even if he doesn't, the Court currently is 6-3 in favor of a basic right to abortion, so Roe really isn't in jeopardy -- yet.

Yes, some things will get worse, but it won't be time to panic until, say, Stevens retires or dies -- which I fear will happen before January 2009.

And let me also say that I believe a President has every right to nominate judges who share his or her fundamental views, and that the Senate should confirm judges based on their qualifications, and not their ideology. If Bush wants to appoint right-wingers, that's his prerogative. If in a few years Hillary wants to appoint left-wingers, that should be hers. As a lawyer, I care a lot more about the competence of the judges I'm in front of than about their ideologies. I know that mine is not a popular position on the left or the right, and I will probably get flamed, but I had to say it....

[Pithy Cherub]

24. Philosophy informs judicial desicion making:

Some of the more spectacular SCOTUS decisions that determine the fate of the US for years because a president was given carte blanche. Could not disagree with your legal laissez faire aproach more!

No way is it a good judicial temperment to have let this happen:

Bush vs. Gore on edit
Plessy vs. Fergusson

btw, welcome to DU!

[smoogatz]

25. Of the remaining seven justices

Pro-choice:

Bader-Ginsburg
Stevens
Souter
Breyer

Anti-choice:

Scalia
Thomas
Kennedy (voted anti-choice in 1999's Stenberg v. Carhart)

So, two anti-choice Bush nominees could in fact result in a de facto overturning of Roe. Not to mention all the other damage a far right SCOTUS majority could do. So much for environmental protections, workers' rights, consumer protection and of course civil rights. It's a dark time in America, folks.

[ikojo]

38. Choice is NOT the only issue here!

The Republicans aim to undo the entire Roosevelt legacy and that includes a war on social security and other labor laws.

Where do each of the justices stand on support for the eight hour day?
Overtime pay for working more than 40 hours in a week?
Social security?
Worker's comp insurance?

[TheWraith]

58. Insufficient records on most subjects.

I don't think there's been a Supreme Court case challanging SS, overtime pay, or the 8 hour work day in the history of the current court. Still, worst case it would probably be at least 6/3 in favor of all of them.

[cyclezealot]

119. Yes, we do

As posted later on this thread. This is just not about "Roe v Wade." As I said in a later reply. See "People for the American Way's "Courting Disaster" on their web site.
Property rights issues include the right for American's to not be able to challenge their serfdom in an ownership society.
People for the American Way analysis of Scalia's as of now Minority Decisions. He is a nut. You need find this out. Find out for yourself. Go to People for the American way and know.

[DanCa]

77. And then theres the whole scientific spectrum

Everything from environmental sciencies to stem cell research is screwed. This doesnt suck it swallows.

[TheFarseer]

83. Thank you n/t

[orleans]

87. you're right--choice is not the ONLY issue here

but i would say it's one of the biggest issues.

they take away a womans right to choose, then they'll be taking away a womans right to vote.

it'll be stepford: "i was just gonna make you some coffee. i was just gonna make you some coffee."

[TheWraith]

51. Stenberg v. Carhart was partial birth, not abortion in general.

It's not a surprise that one of the moderates might go against partial birth, as most people are in fact against it. And Kennedy has supported Roe in other decisions.

[Solon]

99. Actually, to be accurate a "Moderate" on the court...

voted against women's health, but hey, whatever you think. I do find it somewhat amusing that you assert that most people are against "Partial Birth Abortions" when they have to be performed, then again, most people are probably against having to have a triple bypass surgery sometime in their lives. Doesn't mean that either procedure should ever be put under the thumb of unnecessary government regulation, beyond basic sanitation and health issues. Just an FYI: since Roe, there have been NO "Partial Birth Abortions" that have not been done without a VALID medical reason(Endangered health of mother, fetus died, or saving life of mother). They are so rare, that they slipped under the radar of conservatives for years, and just NOW they are indignant that a NECESSARY medical procedure is so icky they have to ban it? I hate conservative logic.

[jaysunb]

35. no flames here, but I have a

wish list, that goes like this :

Fitzgerald rolls out indictments against Chaney, Rove & several others KNOWN to be involved in the leak.
He pulls a Ken Starr and goes further than his assigned scope because their crimes are directly related to the pre war WMD lies, which will set the stage for W's impeachment.

The court has only seven justices to decide the flurry of filings in the attempt to save the current mis-administration.

Ok Ok I'm waking up now.....:evilgrin:

[boddhi]

84. i was having the same dream....

...is there such a thing as deja-dream?

but mine keeps going. W resigns, so we get Cheney. But he goes down for claiming Saddam's got nukes. So then it's DeLay - need I list the ways he would fall? So it'd be Frist - but they'd pull something on the whole "calling in the entire Congress to decide the fate of one person" so it keeps going - to CONDIE. So she was in on the whole yellow-cake deal - another one bites the dust. So we'd get John Snow...

ok, I'll stop, but maybe we could play a little game. Where would you like the dominoes to stop falling?

In order it'd be:

Snow - Tres
Rumsfeld - Def
Gonzales - Att'y Gen
Norton - Int
Johanns - Ag
Gutierrez - Comm
Chao - Labor
Leavitt -H&HS
Jackson - Housing & Urban Dev
Mineta - Transportation
Bodman - Energy
Spellings - Edumacation
Nicholson - Vets Affairs
Chosen by congress.....

except, at least according to the site:
http://members.1stconnect.com/anozira/SiteTops/resources/succession.htm
there's no place for Chertoff at Homeland Security - anybody hear of a change in succession?

[jaysunb]

88. none of that would matter, as we'd have

President Hassert. as in Dennis, the speaker of The House.

[More Than A Feeling]

102. After that, Alaskan Senator Ted Stevens

President Pro Tempore of the Senate. Which would actually be a huge improvement. Stevens has been around for so long he has to be more of an old-school Republican than the others. Someone we can deal with.

Sigh, it won't happen.

[Hissyspit]

78. "A President has every right..."

Except George W. Bush Jr. is not a president. It doesn't count if you steal the elections!

[Hissyspit]

80. Oops. Self-delete.

[mamiesb2001]

20. Days like this make it tough to be a Quaker. I'm tellin' ya....

BTW, disgust has finally gotten me to post instead of lurk. Hello -- it's been a pleasure to read all of you for the last year!

[Kadie]

21. Welcome to DU mamiesb2001!

:hi:

[lfairban]

23. Welcome Sister.

Glad to have you aboard! :grouphug: :hi::party:

[I Have A Dream]

29. Hi, mamiesb2001. Glad that you finally jumped into the...

DU pool! Welcome! :hi:

[mamiesb2001]

39. And thanks for the greetings! It's good to be here -- surrounded

by others whose phones are also tapped by the government. (Just kidding. More or less.)

[TahitiNut]

57. Welcome, mamiesb2001!

The Nerf balls don't really hurt much. :silly:

[MadisonProgressive]

72. You go girl!

Welcome to DU, and keep speaking your mind! The more the merrier here at DU...:woohoo:

[Tight_rope]

73. I must say....You truely have great patience!

I give in after 2 weeks. Happy to read your comments in the future. In your mind you probably think the world is going "MAD". And right your probably are. The only plans I make nowadays, is to hopefully wake up and continue breathing throughout the day. "That's It"!

[MadisonProgressive]

74. Same here - lower the expectations!

Accentuate the positive - eliminate the negative!

[catzies]

22. Was I wrong. My bet was that he'd die being Chief Justice.

My premise was that he loved it so much, he'd never leave until they carried him out.

[Bucky]

61. You may be wrong by only a very short spell of time, however

His health is not good.

[V Lee]

26. Can we get Bush to follow their lead and retire too?

I've been diagnosed as chronically optimistic.

>> What’s on Bill’s mind? Political commentary with attitude and more at http://www.BillsBrain.com

[skids]

27. Bush knew.

Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but I saw him gibbering on the news and he kept saying "I will nominate people" instead of "a person" which got me wondering whether he knew of another resignation, or whether he was slipping up and revealing a strategy to nominate an "extreme case" first and then withdraw it.

[Pithy Cherub]

30. He's known for over a month!

SCOTUS gives public resignations and informs the WH privately in advance. Most do not heed that retiring justices in these modern times have tried to retire when their preferred party is in the WH.

Hang on Justice Stevens!

[losdiablosgato]

109. I heard opn the radio today Stevens may retire by the end of the year.

[UCLA Dem]

34. He totally slipped.

[Yupster]

48. You can't deduce anything about Bush

by his use or misuse of grammar.

There's no telling what Bush will say regardless of the conditions.

[progressoid]

31. I need a fucking drink

[mamiesb2001]

40. Yeah, me too. How big would it have to be to get us to 2006?

[progressoid]

45. I'm still having a big drink but...

I've since read the article. It comes from worldnetdaily via Bob Novak's musings. Proabably just b.s.

[mamiesb2001]

46. In that case, I'll only need to drink until .... well, 2006, but I don't

have to start right this second.

[cyclezealot]

120. Won't help.

Neo Con judge activists will rule another 20 years. Have to be a hell of a drink. Remember, same judges who tried to destroy FDR's programs during most of his Administration.

[TahitiNut]

53. What kind of drink is that?

K-Y and tonic? :evilgrin:

[boddhi]

85. excellent thought and...

... I hoist a mug to your name...

[DanCa]

32. It just keeps getting worse doesn't it

Wonder when the bottom will drop out

[woodleydem]

33. I think we will be hearing "Chief Justice Gonzales" very soon.

This gives Bush the perfect scenario to nominate Gonzales as Chief, and I think he very much wants to have a "Gonzales Court" for a long time. (Alberto is only 49) He can nominate Gonzales as Chief, and then nominate some RW nut job and still claim to have balance on the Court. Plus, that would only mean two confirmation hearings, whereas if he puts Scalia as Chief, that would mean three confirmation hearings. I seriously doubt that. I really think Bush cares less about the actual legal ramifications of his appointments, but wants to leave his mark on the Court, which a Gonzales confirmation would do. And politically, the Republicans will reap rewards from the fastest growing minority group by nominating one of their own as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, which is a much more visible and glamorous position than AG.

That would be the smart thing for Bush to do, but alas, this is Bush we are talking about here, so intelligence is out the window.

[progressoid]

36. WAIT JUST ONE DAMN MINUTE

This comes from worldnetdaily via Bob Novak?

Maybe a grain or two of salt is needed here.

[MissB]

41. Or an entire shaker's worth.

[Endangered Specie]

113. Ill believe it when I see it actually happen...

[Baconfoot]

42. #@*$#@ we knew it was coming but... #@*$#@ just to mark the occasion. NT

[robertpaulsen]

43. Now I know how I'll spend my weekend.

:beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer::beer:

Lots of sorrows to drown this week.

[Mr.Green93]

44. Our Senators will hold the line

Any appointments must be approved by us or else.

[Baconfoot]

49. Perhaps the sense of duty will kick in more strongly than it has of late.

Let us hope.
:patriot: :patriot:

[ProudDad]

110. This is possible

1) If the Dems grow a spine and filibuster
all * nominations (they'll all be awful)
2) There's no Nuclear Option in the Senate
3) They block confirmations until Jan '09
4) A Dem gets elected in '08

I don't think this is possible.

Any ideas about what to do after the court goes right-wing?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x1914346

[cascadiance]

47. Call me nuts if you like...

... but I'm wondering if the timing of a lot of events lately:

1) retirement of O'Connor
2) retirement of Rehnquist
3) potential indictment of Rove
4) Bushies trying to quickly wrap up and distance themselves from MZM industries fiasco and those associated with it (Duke Cunningham and Katherine Harris)

are all connected somehow.

I wonder if they sense that there's a pending time of reckoning coming soon if and when they do haul off Rove before a grand jury or trial and things start getting ugly for Bush, Cheney and many others in the White House.

Perhaps, knowing that that time of being put under the microscope is coming soon, they feel that they have to take care of business of packing the court *NOW* and therefore put pressure on these two justices to leave *NOW* so that they can have their 5-4 majority and a chief justice that will do their bidding later.

I guess the question I'm getting to is...

Has anyone studied what the role of the Supreme Court would be with the process of impeachment?

Perhaps they feel that a "new" Supreme Court would be Bush's and Cheney's "insurance policy" from getting pushed out of office by impeachment, amongst other related things.

I know I'm probably being overly paranoid, but I've found with the way things have been going the last few years, one cannot afford *NOT* to be paranoid about things. It helps I think to know all of the possible scenarios that might come and be prepared for them or wind up getting squashed like we have been lately in trying to expose this criminal cabal of folks here.

[Stand and Fight]

54. Only the Chief Justice of the US Plays Has a Role in Impeachment

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chief_Justice_of_the_United_States

# Presides when the Senate tries impeachments of the President of the United States :yoiks:

* Two Chief Justices, Salmon P. Chase and William Rehnquist, have had the duty of presiding over Presidential impeachments and trials--Chase in 1868 over the proceedings of President Andrew Johnson and Rehnquist in 1999 over the proceeding against Bill Clinton.

# Presides over the impeachment trial of the Vice President if the Vice President is serving as Acting President (not a Constitutional responsibility but a rule of the Senate).


Hmmm.... Maybe Bush plans to appoint his own Chief Justice -- like Gonzales -- who will seek to sway things in his favor if it comes to impeachment? :shrug:

[longship]

50. Goodbye Rehnquist

Hello Thomas as Chief
and Gonzales and Olson as Associates.

This is not going to turn out good.

[donheld]

52. We all knew this day was coming

We had suspected Sandra, and Rehnquist were on there way out. We may as well fight it out all at once and hope we have a prayer to come out of it with our country still intact. I just hope the Democrats are, as Schumer said, prepared for war and will stick to their guns.

[ordinaryaveragegirl]

56. Screwed...

Betcha the religious *wrong* ultra-conservative thugs will have their dirty little hands and wallets all over this. They've been salivating for years over the prospect of overturning Roe v. Wade, never mind that 2/3rds of the country would oppose it. But does * ever listen to what the people want? Hell, no...that's why his polls are in the dump. Enough said.

[FourStarDemocrat]

59. Daily Kos and Bob Novak both mentioned as sources..funny!

If it's true, I'm glad that Daily Kos has a heads up on this. Other than that, the news sucks. Another Bu$h choice, oy... x(

[Bucky]

60. The timing could be to our advantage

Getting real balance on the Supreme Court just isn't going to happen until there's another Democratic president. But with two justices leaving simultaneously--ironically two who've been good friends since they knew each other in law school--the seeds are planted for a pretty decent compromise. There's a doable deal here in which the president could be persuaded to appoint one moderate-to-conservative sane person to O'Connor's seat to balance out the all but certain neaderthal who'll take Scalia's seat when he moves up to the presiding chair. Conservatives can console themselves with a two-for-one deal while liberals and moderates can maintain the court's original balance.

No one wants Bush appointing Scotus judges, of course, but at least him having two simultaneous conservative vacancies to fill puts progressives in a stronger tactical position for controlling the damage.

[mikelgb]

64. this means...

3 consecutive judicial appointments?!?

1 for O'Connor
Scalya or Thomas for Cheif
Their Replacement

[Stand and Fight]

68. Think about that again.... n/t

[CityDem]

65. Ramifications

If Rehnquist steps down, there will be little change in the ideology. Bush will appoint some conservative nominee to replace Rehnquist. If we are lucky, this nominee may be less conservative than Rehnquist because I doubt the senate would approve of any nominee who is more conservative than Rehnquist. Keep in mind, Ford appointed Stevens and Bush 41 appointed Souter.

If I were handicapping the replacements, I believe Bush will appoint either Garza, Jones, or Janice Rogers Brown to replace O'Connor. He will want another woman or a Hispanic for historic purposes. Brown would cause the biggest fight and surely result in a filibuster.

For Rehnquist, I believe we are looking at Luttig or Roberts -- both very conservative, white, male and around 50 years old.

I have been reading on other sites where insiders expect Ginsberg to step down sometime this year due to health reasons and this is where Alberto Gonzales comes in. He is considered more moderate, yet is far more conservative than Ginsberg. Ultimately, we are trading one conservative, one moderate (O'Connor) and one liberal for two conservatives and one conservative/moderate (Gonzales). If this is the case, we need to pray for Stevens to stay healthy.

[ProudDad]

111. Fascist is the word for Gonzales

[Vickers]

66. I hope he keeps wearing that fancy robe he designed on my dime

:eyes:

[the_spectator]

100. No, now we will get an answer:

will the NEXT Chief Justice wear the fancy robe with the stripes?(which Rhenquist got from a Gilbert and Sullivan operetta) and make it a "Precedent"?

If it's Thomas or Scalia for CJ, I can see them wearing the juridicial stripes in solidarity.

And they are kind of cool. Come on, all the Justices have now is plain black robes, like some "graduate" of 8th grade or something; they don't get to wear wigs or anything! Let them have fun with their stripes!

:smoke:

[sojourner]

67. Oh, what a surprise!

:sarcasm:

[sojourner]

69. self-delete

[CreekDog]

71. Bush likes "Strict" Destructionists

Doubt he will appoint any moderates. I wish he would, but it's really not his style.

[sojourner]

70. This is deliberate defensive move to keep BushCo from being removed from

office. In any move to impeach, not only does the House of Representatives have to bring the charges...but the Chief Justice of the SCOTUS acts as the "trial judge" presiding over the impeachment.

[amb123]

75. I'm going out on a limb.

For Chief Justice - John Ashcroft
For Associate Justice - Alberto Gonzales

God help America!

:argh: :nuke: :patriot:

[cascadiance]

76. And who then for AG, Bolton?...

[amb123]

79. My guess is . . .

William Haynes, one of the four remaining Bush Judicial nominees not approved by the Senate. He was the Pentagon general counsel. I believe he helped devise the controversial detainee torture policies with Gonzales.

:shrug:

[Hissyspit]

81. George Dubya Bush Jr. will possibly name THREE Supreme Court justices...

The choices will not be made by Bill Clinton, George Bush Sr., Al Gore, Wesley Clark, John McCain, or Paul Krugman.

They will be chosen by the most pathetic man to ever claim the office of U.S. President - a ridiculous offensive bumbling sociopath.

What stupid times for America.

[ElTexican]

89. George W. Bush should name Stevens as CJ

Actually, that would be a bad idea, but it would be a meaningless bone he could throw to his opposition.

[the_spectator]

101. That would actually be a smart idea for Bush (CJ Stevens)

Stevens is a liberal, mad old, but pretty healthy.
They could hope that the extra duties of being CJ could help speed his journey to the grave, and give them more chance of replacing him! :scared:

[Abathar]

107. Actually it might be wise if he DID retire

It would almost guarantee he was replaced with a liberal judge if Shrub got 2 conservatives in ahead of him. George will be pushing his luck on 2, there is no way he will get three in a row without going to the left on one of them especially if he has to do them all in a row fast. If Stevens feels he can't make it till after the '08 election going right after (assuming Shrub gets his people through) may be the best bet in getting a like minded judge to replace him. If the Re pubs steal the white house again a new president will be back to square one on nominating judges, they will be given more slack because they won't be found guilty of the sins of the guy before them.

[DWolper]

90. No....Possibly FOUR

John Paul Stevens may have no choice. He is not well. However....

Without naming names, it is my understanding that there is another Associate Justice who is less healthy than generally believed. Anybody else heard this? For people in high-stress jobs (like sitting members of the court) in their seventies and eighties who are not in the best of health, three and a half years left in this administration is a long time. Anything could happen.

[Hissyspit]

103. You're right, of course. Good f*cking god...

This is ridiculous.

[AnnieBW]

82. Well, so much for that...

I was seriously thinking of escaping to England. But not after today.

[bribri16]

86. Are they just sick that they handed GW the Presidency in 2000?

Look at what their actions have wrought.

[Deja Q]

94. Nope. They're retiring so their buddy can put in more reich-wing lunatics

America is done. The offshoring, lack of investing in it, national debt, constant warring, reports that sales of game consoles will reach $8 BILLION by 2008.

America is done. :-(

[SeanQuinn]

92. I thought Rehnquist was going to retire last time. Oh wait...

I'm not trusting Novak, Kos, or anyone yet on this matter until I read it on Google News or various sources instead of just an 'on-the-left, on-the-right' side of the thing or Rehqnuist or representive of Rehqnuist speaks.

[Deja Q]

93. Droppin' like flies...

Replaced with mosquitoes.

[Pallas180]

95. Looks like Scalia is a fanatic Opus dei. Flush the toilet . The country

is in it.

[bilgewaterbill]

96. Another rumor-Stevens to resign,too.

http://corner.nationalreview.com/05_07_03_corner-archive.asp
See-For Peter's Sake

[Goldmund]

97. You should start a thread with that

:)

[dissent1977]

117. I think Stevens is smart enough not to do that yet

I am sure Stevens would like to retire, but I think he knows it would be a disaster if he did. I think he will hold out until at least after the 2006 elections, and he will possibly wait until after 2008. I don't think he wants Bush to pick his succesor, and I certainly don't think he wants Bush to pick his successor with the Senate made up like it is now.

[funky_b0ss]

98. The irony....

I'm amazed at the cruel irony of a man selected by a SCOTUS decision being able to remake the court in his image.

It's almost like they planned it :sarcasm:

Seriously though...Is God on these guys' side or what? How else can you explain it? The list of stuff they get away with gets longer...the list of windfalls they get gets longer...there hasn't been any reckoning for their actions...even the monsters who kill Americans, Britons, Spaniards, and others play right into their hands politically. The laundry list keeps getting longer. It seems like, in the words of Bill Hicks (paraphrased): We are like pygmies shooting little darts of truth into the hide of the elephant, but doing no real damage.

At least I got an A on my Trig test today :dunce:

[BostonH]

104. Any news on if he did resign officially yet?

[ProudDad]

112. There is no god but...

If it turns out that there is a God, I don't think that he's evil. But the worst that you can say about him is that basically he's an underachiever.

http://www.quotableonline.com/WoodyAllen.html

[mmonk]

105. Anyone heard anything?

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

106. Saying TODAY on W's return to Washington....

Robert Novak is reporting that William Rehnquist will retire at 4:50pm today when the President lands in Washington.

Now, consider the source...don't know how credible this info is but thought I'd post it.

[mmonk]

108. who leaked it?

;)

[bushsuckslol]

114. Time to change the Constitution that these bastards have to retire after

10 years. I can't stand to think of these conservative monkeys on the court for 40+ years.

[Name removed]

115. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[democracyindanger]

116. Where's the dKos link?

I just came from there, and there was no substantive discussion. And if you heard it from dKos, why not link to that instead of a right-wing site like worldnutdaily?

[cyclezealot]

118. It is not just Roe V Wade.

It is a whole gamut of judicial activism to return this country to the pre-McKinley era when private property included all business transcations and the Pinkerton's security agency acted as a private military to keep us in a feudal state.
At the turn of the last century, such actions almost resulted in a revolution tamed by Theodore and Franklin Roosevelt. It will take American society 30 years to recover from the judical jack boot of Scalia.
Don't believe me. Go to "People for the American Way's" analysis of Scalia's minority decisions called "Courting Disaster" posted on their web site...Soon to be the majority.
Good luck American's in your serfdom...We sold our home last December , have started the visa process and will retire in the SOuth of France this coming Fall..Good luck . We will watch the reaction to serfdom from afar.