ButterflyBlood
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 12:06 PM
Original message |
Bill Clinton for SCOTUS. What do you think? |
|
I heard some wingnut awhile back talk about how if Kerry wins he will definately appoint "Slick Willy" to the Supreme Court where he can destroy our nation for years to come. I say, let the Freepers have it! I'd enjoy watching their little heads explode.
|
LTR
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 12:08 PM
Response to Original message |
|
...Clinton was disbarred due to the whole RW witch hunt thing. What didn't they do to try to destroy this good man?
I do hope Kerry appoints the most liberal people possible to the SCOTUS. And pull a Reagan and appoint younger justices. I'd like that.
|
ButterflyBlood
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
|
having him on the Court would be the ultimate payback.
|
NewJeffCT
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 12:10 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
4. would a 40-45 year old liberal survive confirmation? |
|
All the Repubs would need is 40 votes to filibuster him or her.
I'd love to see it, but I think we're going to have to 'settle' for Ruth Bader Ginsburg type quiet nominees.
|
leyton
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 01:15 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
21. I think a Supreme Court seat is too high-profile. |
|
As long as Kerry nominates lots of young liberal justices - plenty for conservatives to pick from - the Republicans in the Senate only hurt their own image by filibustering such a high-profile position.
|
Bandit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 12:13 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
7. You don't need a law degree to be a Supreme court Justice. |
|
Anyone can be appointed, even Bill Clinton.
|
Cheswick2.0
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
9. Clinton has a law degree |
|
He is only disbarred for five years. However I can't see the righties allowing it to happen.
|
charlie
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
11. There are no requisite qualifications |
|
for Supreme Court Justices. You just have to make it through the Senate gauntlet.
|
tsstranger
(582 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 12:09 PM
Response to Original message |
3. Clinton on the SCOTUS??? |
|
There would be mass suicides on the Conservative Republican side.
|
David Dunham
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 12:11 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Clinton is disbarred, so he's out. Let's try Hillary. |
JI7
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
16. one doesn't have to even be a lawyer to be on the supreme court |
|
to be on the supreme court one does not even have to be a lawyer. although most if notall of them are. so clinton can be there. but i don't want to because there are too many limitsput on them and i want clinton to be out in thepublic saying what he wants and meeting with people.
|
Momgonepostal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 12:12 PM
Response to Original message |
6. have we ever appointed anyone who... |
charlie
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
DieboldMustDie
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
17. Oliver Wendell Holmes |
|
http://www.lucidcafe.com/lucidcafe/library/96mar/holmes.html"Young man, the secret of my success is that at an early age I discovered that I was not God."
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.
|
Cheswick2.0
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 12:19 PM
Original message |
Hubert Flottz
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 12:19 PM
Response to Original message |
10. A HELL of a great Idea! |
|
We have some great lawyers in the democratic party!
|
Wapsie B
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 12:23 PM
Response to Original message |
12. Put Hillary on the SCOTUS. |
|
Make the righties blow a gasket big time.
|
stinkeefresh
(563 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 12:24 PM
Response to Original message |
13. Nah, SCOTUS is supposed to be a quiet position- |
|
And I want Bill to keep talking. It's also a re-active postition (you respond to cases that are presented) As AG or something else in the cabinet he could be pro-active.
Honestly, I think what he should really be is a peace broker, ala George Mitchell in Ireland. Fairly autonomous, using his charisma and heart. The Middle East could use his prgamatism.
|
Atman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 12:37 PM
Response to Original message |
14. It would be lunacy, even had he not been disbarred |
|
How would "the left" feel if Bush nominated the most despised, devisive righty he could find? Granted, it would be tough to even narrow it down to a short list, but still, he could try. Trent Lott, maybe. Or Tom Delay. We'd howl, and rightly so.
To even think that Bill Clinton should even be considered is silly. It makes "us" sound so much like *oooohhh....shuddderrr* them!
|
TreasonousBastard
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 12:38 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Court nominations are controversial enough without the explosion trying to get Clinton on would cause. Besides, in criminal justice cases, I'm not all that impressed with Clinton's record as prosecutor, governor, or President. And, he may be a bit too pro-business.
Some asshole was just trying to whip up Kerry hatred from lingering Clinton hatred.
|
eeyore
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 01:00 PM
Response to Original message |
18. I think that wingnut is dreaming |
|
There is no way in hell that anyone in their right mind would try that one. Pure and simple scare tactics.
eeyore
|
rinsd
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 01:02 PM
Response to Original message |
19. Wasn't Clinton also forbidden from arguing in front of SCOTUS? |
|
I know he was disbarred for five years but I seem to remember he was also permanantly banned from arguing in front of the SCOTUS. I found this: http://www.cnn.com/2001/LAW/10/01/scotus.clinton/Was this resolved?
|
Demeter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 01:14 PM
Response to Original message |
20. I Think Hillary Has the Judicial Temperament |
|
Her husband would be better suited for more people-oriented work.
|
Bandit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 01:18 PM
Response to Original message |
22. Edwards would make a much better Justice ~ He's young and able |
|
He would make it through the Senate.
|
swinney
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Jun-10-04 01:35 PM
Response to Original message |
23. Only with overwhelming D Congress |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Thu Apr 18th 2024, 06:27 AM
Response to Original message |