mattclearing
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 07:42 PM
Original message |
|
She will do whatever she is told out of loyalty and gratitude.
I see no reason to believe that she has the background or the constitution to be a strong or independent voice on this court.
She will be a Bush/Right Wing puppet, just like Thomas before her.
Discuss.
|
goclark
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 07:47 PM
Response to Original message |
1. The Brownie Twins = His and His? His and Hers? Whatever |
mattclearing
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. Not sure I get what you're saying. |
|
Edited on Mon Oct-03-05 07:51 PM by tasteblind
I'm saying that Thomas was someone who was nominated by a Bush because
A> He was black, and gave Bush non-racist points when he desperately needed them, and
B> He could be counted on to rule any way the Bushes wanted him to.
Miers was nominated because
A> She's a woman, and everyone said Bush needed a woman this time, and
B> She's loyal and proven as far as Bush is concerned. She will do what she is told.
|
FourStarDemocrat
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
5. I think the 1st post was refering to Michael Brown, as in another cronie. |
|
One thing we know for sure, Bush doesn't care about substance in any position. He likes his cronies, especially the ones that can protect him and line his pockets.
|
goclark
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 07:53 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
4. I say they are both underqualified for the position |
|
They are just like Brownie FEMA for Bush.
|
mattclearing
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
Selatius
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 07:50 PM
Response to Original message |
3. Kiss Roe V. Wade goodbye if the Senate confirms her |
Zynx
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
7. Old pro-Roe majority was 6-3. |
|
Edited on Mon Oct-03-05 08:00 PM by Zynx
Roberts replacing Rehnquist keeps it at 6-3 and possibly makes it 7-2(I'm not totally convinced he would overturn Roe) and even IF Miers is a pro-life zealot, the vote is 5-4. Last time I checked, 5-4 is a majority.
Kennedy, Breyer, Ginsburg, Stevens, and Souter are all pro-Roe.
|
charlie
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 08:19 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
9. Kennedy is not dependably pro-Roe |
|
He had to be lobbied hard to switch from Rehnquist's position in Planned Parenthood vs Casey. In recent years he's been signalling the return of his old discomfort with Roe.
Kennedy seems to have a history of sitting between positions with anguish as the two sides of the court tug at him, probably the most notable being the Florida fiasco. Breyer stills thinks if he had another 24 hours, he could've flipped Kennedy for Gore. Doesn't say much for Kennedy's convictions as a jurist.
|
Zynx
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 08:33 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
10. In an actual vote that would decide the fate of Roe, I doubt he would |
|
vote to overturn. He doesn't seem like the sort of guy who would want to go down in history as the creator of absolute political chaos on the state and local level.
|
Arkana
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 08:34 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
11. Exactly. People make such a stink about Roe, but they forget: |
|
the judge who tips the balance of the scale will live in infamy forever.
|
charlie
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 08:41 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
13. Thin thread to hang our hopes on |
|
In any calculus I wouldn't count on Kennedy's vote. Whichever side gang-presses him most effectively is the one that prevails. On Roe v Wade, that used to include O'Connor. No more.
|
Zynx
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 09:18 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
14. I rely on my fundamental belief the Republican establishment does not |
|
Edited on Mon Oct-03-05 09:19 PM by Zynx
want Roe overturned*. Besides, I am more than willing to bet Kennedy would not vote to overturn Roe in a serious vote. I think that vote is as reliable as Souter's in that regard.
*Ever notice that a majority of Republican appointed justices since Nixon have been pro-choice?
|
HappyMoonBat
(36 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 08:07 PM
Response to Original message |
mattclearing
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 11:38 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
15. Nice one. Welcome to DU. |
Piperay
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 08:36 PM
Response to Original message |
12. All this RW outrage is totally phoney |
|
she is nothing but one of them and I 'hope' the Democrats don't fall for it but I'm sure they will. :mad:
|
mattclearing
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Oct-03-05 11:38 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 19th 2024, 04:56 PM
Response to Original message |