Did anyone just see ABC World News Tonight about the Surpeme Court?

[Massacure]

They claim indicators are pointing at Judge Gonzalez to be appionted to the supreme court of Reinquest leaves. Then they said that Gonzalez would anger the conservative base because he isn't conservative enough on abortion and gay marriage. However, they say anyone more conservative would put up a fight in the Senate.

Anyways, what are you opinions?

[PretzelWarrior]

1. yeah. let's get a guy in who approved all the Texas executions

under Bush and who views Geneva Conventions as "quaint". Oh, and it's not torture if you've somehow convinced yourself it doesn't hurt the prisoner.

Yeah, we need someone fucking moderate like him.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. if he's pro Roe and pro Lawrence I'll Take Him (nt)

[The Backlash Cometh]

12. The media is setting you up.

Let the Bar Association tell you what his record is like. The media hasn't gotten anything right in over 25 years.

[LTRS]

3. Oh don't believe that for a minute

Why do we (the country) always fall for these head fakes? Gonzalez is not going to vote in favor of equality or a woman's right to choose. Not in a million yrs. They are simply putting that out there to get the meme going, so they can slide him through. Shit, the public is so dumb there is no question they will fall for it. (Sigh)

[pretzel4gore]

17. the public is SUPPOSED TO BE DUMB!

Indeed, that's one of the arguments the ancients had about the efficacy of democracy, with most thinkers (aristotle, plato etc) saying simply the herd is too stupid and gullible to play any role in determining public affairs, and a wise aristocracy is necessary, with land ownership being the yardstick for judging membership in the 'wise'....Of course, generation after generation revisited the argument, and at some point it became known that a well informed public, therough a FREE PRESS, could in fact elect itself dynamic ruthless leaders who would defend the defenseless ie the poor, the foolish, the crazy the children etc while watching out for the majority OFTEN IN DEFIANCE OF POPULAR SENTIMENTS! THe election of Geeb (which is affectionate nickname of the bush clan for george jr, a variance on John Ellis Bush, or Jeb) has proven that democracy cannot work, and that aristotle, plato and karl marx were right.... a dictatorship of the working people majority must be established (fuk the aristocracy, they aint so smart, and eat too much)

[bain_sidhe]

4. NOW they tell us!

They couldn't, maybe, have mentioned the Supreme Court and the right-wing reactionaries bu**sh** intents to appoint to it, oh, maybe once or twice BEFORE the election?

:eyes:

[cornermouse]

5. Dobson said Gonzalez was not conservative

enough. If I remember correctly, he wants someone like Espinosa.

[tom_paine]

14. That is a LIE. Gonzales is an Imperial retainer, loyal and ruthless

He will do as he is told.

He will be Chief Justice Fat Tony Scalia's THIRD VOTE.

FreeAmerica is simply no more.

A memory, residing in the ash-heap of history.

[PDittie]

16. Do you mean Miguel Estrada? n/t

[cornermouse]

22. I was only halfway listening to him

Someone Bush has nominated previously and didn't get it.

[Eric J in MN]

6. Gonzalez called the Geneva Convention "quaint" nt

nt

[slappypan]

7. They will settle for another O'Connor

Someone who always votes to expand corporate power, but leaves socal issues alone so the fetus people will wail and gnash their teeth and keep turning out to vote GOP.

[tigereye]

9. at some points O "Connor was the only one

standing between Roe V Wade and the alternative.

[jefferson_dem]

8. Well, check out what this conservative blog has to say about Alberto - -

A useful cue is always to assess who opposes and who supports the potential nominee. We will never be happy with ANY justice Chimp offers, but seems we could do far worse than Gonzalez. See this quote from a hard right conservative blog -

"Well, I certainly hope you're right about what President Bush intended, but speaking as a judicial conservative, I don't hold out much hope that Roe is going anywhere. There are only three justices that are currently willing to overrule Roe: Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas. Rehnquist will retire in a second Bush term, so that's a wash if we're lucky (if we're unlucky, Alberto Gonzalez gets the nod, and we're down to two). Bush would have to place three ultra conservatives on the Court, and I just do not see that happening given the current composition of the Senate."

Here's another one, from another blog

"Bush could get at least one Supreme Court pick. In all likelihood, that choice would be Alberto Gonzalez. For one thing, Gonzalez is a Hispanic, and Bush is salivating over the opportunity to be the president who puts the first such person on the nation's highest bench. However, conservatives who believe Bush is going to straighten out the court on the life issue should know that Gonzalez is anything but pro-life. He is the man who wrote the Texas Supreme Court decision allowing a minor girl to have an abortion without her parents' permission. He even went so far as to help sink fellow justice Priscilla Owen's opportunity to be confirmed by the Senate to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of appeals by ridiculing her position requiring parental notification for underage girls seeking abortion as "an unconscionable act of judicial activism." This was all the excuse Democrats needed to reject her. In other words, a Bush court will do nothing to overturn Roe v. Wade."


<REFUSE TO LINK TO THE CESSPOOLS>

[spotbird]

10. Nonsense. It is the conservitives who are floating this crap.

In the la la land of political gamesmanship they are pretending that Gonzalez is a "comprimise" candidate.

[leftchick]

11. exactly....

This is the same fellow who okayed ignoring Geneva conventions. OMG... we are actually talking about supreme court nominees like * is a legit president. Please someone wake me from this nightmare... :(

[spotbird]

26. I wish I could wake you.

I just want out.

[snippy]

13. Opposing Gonzalez might not be the right battle for democrats to fight.

Gonzalez is not any where near as bad as many people Bush could nominate and if Gonzalez is nominated to replace Rehnquist the balance of the Court would not change since a conservative would be replaced by a conservative. By allowing Gonzalez to be confirmed the democrats would steal some of the Reich Wing liars' ammunition when Bush tries to appoint a real Reich Winger. The democrats could point to the Gonzalez confirmation to counter the Reich Wing lies that democrats are trying to block all of Bush's conservative appointments.

The possibility that Reich Wing conservative groups might oppose a Gonzalez nomination may mean that Bush will never nominate him. But if Bush refuses to obey the Reich Wing and does nominate Gonzalez, the democrats should keep out of the way if the Reich Wing and the moderates and the Bush administration start eating their own. The Reich Wing is likely to get so ugly that it could hurt the GOP.

[DarthDem]

18. 100%

Exactly right.

[PretzelWarrior]

19. hmmm....this discussion is depressing. let me tell you something

there is a strategy game called "DOMINATE" which is supposed to represent some natural population/competition model. You are trying to beat someone else or the computer at winning territory. The best case I've seen when playing this game is to be agressive and also to set traps with the ultimate goal of surrounding your opponenet and cutting them off from escape.

I just feel this is an area and a time where we need to be aggressive but do it in a way where you allow the opposition to push forward and take the bait you lay down for him.

How does that affect this choice? Well, I believe you may be right about ULTIMATELY letting him in. But they should definitely make it a living hell for him. They should grill him out the wazzoo to get him on record about all of his previous papers and statements that are questionable.

Unfortunately, he's spent his time as a lawyer--not a judge so there aren't a lot of public writings and opinions to go on. scary stuff folks.

[snippy]

21. I completely agree about grilling him about his previous writings and

statements. Especially concerning the Geneva Conventions. Ideally, a majority of the American public would come to dislike him as a result of the confirmation hearings.

But I worry much more about who replaces Stephens or O'Connor or Ginsberg than I do about who replaces Rehnquist. I think the democrats need an overall strategy for two or three Supreme Court nominations rather than individual strategies for each nomination. Part of that strategy needs to be to focus on nominations that change the balance of the Court. Especially since it seems likely that Bush will make such nominations. I would feel much differently if the democrats had a majority in the Senate.

[Thomas Jefferson]

24. Line in the sand - no new appointments to S CT by Bush

He's not president and you don't know his hidden agenda. Just say no.

[snippy]

25. LOL. n/t

[PDittie]

15. He's in like flint n/t

[Democat]

20. The Republicans have decided the far right is moderate in today's America

Extremely far right is right, far right is moderate, middle is liberal, and anything left of the middle is extremist left.

That's what the media tells America every day.

[Thomas Jefferson]

23. Hey. I want my Bill of Rights back. It's more important than anything

Say no to this guy.