Democrats are blowing the Supreme Court nomination

[jackbourassa]

Leave it up to those Washington Democrats. I understand that we probably don't have the votes to stop him. But we could at least put up a fight. I mean come on!

This has more to do with the second court opening. If we put up a fight on Roberts (even if we lose) and show some muscle - it will give Bush pause about the second nominee. If we let Roberts go unchallenged, then Bush will think the Democrats don't have the will to fight him if he appoints another Scalia to replace O'Connor.

Is there any wonder we lose with these Washington Democrats in chanrge?

[Erika]

1. The democrats are seriously considering Roberts

as they should. What's your problem?

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

2. We're going to lose on Roberts. He's basically a lock.

Roberts is about as conservative as Rehnquist was, so we don't really lose much. I guess they're really warming up for the O'Connor replacement. That nomination tips the balance.

[LittleClarkie]

4. And I reckon the Dems are saving their wad for that fight as well

Both my Senators are on this committee. Not sure about Kohl, but Feingold is a good man. And, indeed, the Roberts nomination does nothing to change the makeup of the Court. The replacement for Centrist O'Connor will do that.

[Tesha]

22. Considering how many fights they've saved it from, it must be one hell...

> And I reckon the Dems are saving their wad for that fight as well

Considering how many fights they've saved their wad from, it must be
one hell of a wad by now.

After all, they didn't waste any of their wad defending Gore and the
CBC in 2000/2001.

They didn't waste any of their wad blocking Bush's appeals court
judges.

They didn't waste any of their wad investigating the complete and
total failure of the Bush administration to block 9/11.

They didn't waste any of their wad investigating the complete and
total failure of the Bush administration to catch Osama.

They didn't waste any of their wad stopping the Iraq invasion or
investigating the total lack of justification revealed ex post facto.

They didn't waste any of their wad campaigning in 2004 like it
really mattered.

They didn't waste any of their wad blocking John Ashcroft, or Alberto
Gonzalez, or Patriot Act I or II, or investigating Gitmo, torture,
or extraordinary rendition.

They didn't waste any of their wad blocking Chertoff or Drownie.

In fact, they never seem to waste any of their wad on anything!

'Must be one hell of a wad by now.

Tesha

[pushycat]

33. You forgot Enron... fantastic eom

[aquart]

7. Their always telling us jam tomorrow. Never jam today.

I want to see them fight NOW. Not tomorrow.

[genius]

11. If we lose on Roberst, we might as well give up and pack up.

It means we can't win on anything and even our Democratic Senators should not be entitled to any salary.

[Pushed To The Left]

12. The O'Connor replacement will be a WAR

She was a swing vote, so putting a conservative ideologue in her place would be much more damaging.

[Tesha]

23. Don't bet on it. (NT)

[Totally Committed]

16. I will be taking careful note of the Vote...

Who voted HOW.

A lot of Dems tried to sound tough for the cameras, but which button they push is what's gonna count with me.

TC

[OzarkDem]

32. There's much to be gained in fighting

and calling attention to the corrupt and inept people Bush is nominating for SCOTUS.

Leading with a wedge issue (Roe V Wade) is also incredibly stupid in raising voters awareness about the ideological fools Bush is putting on the court.

Its really, really time to start running some good Dems against these people in the primary.

[oc2002]

37. AmeriKa deserves its little Fasict court.

Dems should not be overly agitated by this. It not like we won the election you know. the fascist are consolidating the courts now that they have consolidated the government.

[KT2000]

3. They are falling into a trap

they are going so easy on Roberts. If the next nominee is an Afican-American woman, they have set the stage for being called racist if they are saving their fire for the second nominee.

[napi21]

5. Bernie Ward suggested an interesting question to ask Roberts.

He suggested this:

Judge Roberts, you say you are a conservative Catholic. Conservative Catholics believe that abortion is murder. Then you said your faith would not influence how you would cast a vote on an abortion case. Now, do you want this job so bad that you're willing to go to hell for it? Or are you lying?


Bernie also explained that it's the same Church that wanted to forbid Kerry from participating in the sacraments, NOT because he believed in having an abortion, but that he believed a woman had a right to chose!

He also said there isn't any member of this judicial panel who has the nerve to ask that question!

[Stinky The Clown]

6. And he's right

Indeed, there's not a Senator in all of DC who has the nerve to ask that.

[napi21]

8. Let me ask you a question though.

If there were a Dem willing to ask that question, would you want him/her to ask?

I ask because, by asking that question, we would be dooming ANY Catholic Dem future candidate for President!

[Stinky The Clown]

13. I'm not sure that's true

It simply lays bare the notion of religion's impact on politics. While the case may be about a Catholic, it applies to all religions. The bigger danger, if we follow the implication you suggest, is that we would 'doom' any future candidate who claims membership in any religion.

And I don't see how that could happen.

The question is, indeed, legitimate.

[bunkerbuster1]

25. face facts. Any Catholic Dem future candidate IS doomed.

Pope Ratzi has seen to that.

[genius]

9. They should ask whether the Constiution gives a woman the right

to determine what happens with her body. If he defers that, the response should be that thbis isn't something that should be decided. It should be a fundamental understanding of the rights of a free woman.

[genius]

10. We should make a big deal about the fact that his wife is part of a group

that advocates murdering doctors.

[onenote]

14. Link?

onenote

[genius]

27. We're talking aoubt Operation Rescue, Terry White's group

There have been prosecutions. Roberts was asked a little about his wife's work with operation rescue but the kind of work the organization does wasn't discussed in yesterday's hearings. Google it.

[onenote]

29. tried google, came up empty

I think John Roberts is a terrible choice for the SUpreme Court, but before I start using his wife's membership in a particular organization as an argument, I need some evidence that she is in fact a member or even a supporter. She belongs to a group called Feminists For Life, but I haven't found anything indicating she has ever belonged to Operation Rescue or that Feminists For Life supports Operation for Life.

I am strongly pro-choice, but if we start down the road of attacking Roberts' wife (and by implication, anyone who opposes a woman's right to choose) as supporting the murder of doctors, we are going to alienate folks that might otherwise be sympathetic and basically fuck ourselves.

That said, if there is a link out there that I've missed, I'd be interested in seeing it.

onenote

[onenote]

30. delete -dupe post

[Totally Committed]

15. "Democrats are blowing the Supreme Court nomination...

... Is there any wonder we lose with these Washington Democrats in chanrge?"

We are seriously misserved by about *80% of our electeds. They have no spines, so serving their corporate masters for the money to keep them viable is all they think about. We no longer matter.

TC

* my estimation, not a scientific estimate, and I was being KIND...

[Snivi Yllom]

17. Joe Biden:" 'You're the best I've ever seen before the committee'..."

no comment necessary where this is going

[Imagevision]

26. Joe Biden was made in Hollywood - total plastic putz...!

[TheCowsCameHome]

18. Give them Roberts. He's in anyway. Then savage them on the next appointee

Roberts is a trade for Rehnquist. One for one.
The next nominee is the one that really counts.

[calico1]

19. I agree. n/t

[realFedUp]

20. This guy is worse than any conservative on the court to date

I'm wondering what will get the Dems to take
any action at all...what's it take? Hindsight?

Saving dissent for another day and nominee
will be tragic.

[TheCowsCameHome]

24. Even worse than Scalia or Thomas? Somehow that's hard to imagine

[realFedUp]

34. You don't have to imagine it...his writings confirm it.

Hard to imagine New Orleans under water too eh?

[genius]

28. Roberts helped Bush steal the 2000 election & indicates he'll do it again

He refused to answer questions as to whether he would overrule the votes and indicated that a Bush v. Gore case was likely in the future.

[katinmn]

36. Now where did I hear that before?

[win_in_06]

21. It feels like a Judicial Juggernaut that we can't stop.

Who will the next nominee be and will we be able to Bork him/her?

Our children's future depends on it. Whomever it it we have to dig, dig and dig some more. Then we have to play hardball. No more Mr/Mrs nice guy during the hearings, if it gets that far.

[Blackwater]

31. Roberts is too slick

and he comes off as being a really nice guy.

That makes the job hard.

[katinmn]

35. I must have received 100 emails, snail mail appeals and

even a few phone calls from progressives wanting to stop the Roberts nomination. In addition there are ads and petitions galore.

The people are working this but...

They're not listening to us!!

Do they ever?