Kennedy, O'Connor, Scalia and Thomas...the sad, sad repercussions of your decisions...

[ourbluenation]

3000+ Americans would still be living their lives if you had not gone beyond the bounds of your jobs and appointed that man. Pure and simple. Just think about that for a second. You too Katherine Harris. And Rehnquist...hopefully you've met your maker and been horrified by the look you got back. What hell hath the six of you wrought.

Mothers and Fathers wouldn't be agonizing over the heartache of losing their children, spouses wouldn't be miserably lonely facing the reality of going it alone, the old ones, the grandparents wouldn't be in pain at a point in their lives where things should have been golden, and thousands of children would still have their parents with them to guide them through their precious lives.

You backed the wrong pony you worthless and corrupt excuses for human beings. Mr.Gore from Tennessee would not have let this happened.

Screw you all and the horses you rode in on. Screw you all to hell.

Sorry, but sometimes when you think about what a Gore Presidency would have been like compared to this frightening man and his cabal, it's hard not to get really, really angry.

Forgive me for bringing this up all these years later friends, but sometimes I think it needs repeating.

[merh]

1. well said

K&R

[ourbluenation]

2. and let that be a reminder to all to please, please not sit out on election day. SCOTUS appointments

are so important.

[...of J.Temperance]

7. One of the MOST important reasons why a Democratic President needs electing in 2008

Justice John Paul Stevens and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg....sometime in the next four years, these two Justices will vacate their positions.

The next President will choose their replacements, if it's a Republican President, he'll choose two Right-Winger's, that will give the GOP a solid majority on the Supreme Court, and with that ALL sorts of things will be under jeopardy....including a woman's right to choose and very possibly Roe v Wade itself.

In November 2008, it's of paramount importance to elect a Democratic President, and also to help solidify Democratic control in both the House and the Senate.

People should REMEMBER, that whichever two Justices the NEXT President chooses, to replace Justice Stevens and Justice Bader Ginsberg, those two new Justices will be LIFETIME appointments, and that COULD mean that they'll be sitting on the bench for the next 30 YEARS or 40 YEARS.

Their decisions and rulings are going to affect not only THIS generation, but the NEXT generation as well.

So don't sit the next election out, and DON'T waste the vote by voting THIRD PARTY, the Third Party candidate will NEVER be elected President, but the Third Party candidate COULD get just enough votes to hand the election to the Republican candidate.

DON'T mess up the NEXT generations lives....vote for WHOEVER the Democratic Presidential nominee is.


On Edit: Dammit spelling error

[Supersedeas]

15. spot on

[...of J.Temperance]

19. Yep n/t

.

[HughBeaumont]

17. Tell that to the PARTY, not the voter.

Get behind a candidate that will UNITE, not divide.

[...of J.Temperance]

18. No, tell that to those who say they'll NEVER vote for Hillary Clinton

Because IF Hillary Clinton becomes our nominee, the choice is, they vote for HER....OR the Republican's nominee wins the election.

And IF THAT happens, then get ready for Roe v Wade being overturned.

[HughBeaumont]

23. OMG, STOP with the "It's the same as votin' for a Republican" scare tactic!!

It's a BIT much.

This is the WEAKEST GOP field since the one that sent grouchy Bob Dole to the race in 1996. The only name recognition candidate they have, and this is just BARELY, is "Mr. 9/11", and he's so unbelieveably flawed, not even a maelstorm of MSM praise will save him in the eyes of the voters. They really see him as a no-accomplishment-having, twice-divorced charlatan.

The others . . . well sheesh, you got an actor, a "progressive" Republican (who's a flat-taxer, pro-lifer and passes out flyers that have pics of him and Reagan. Yeah, THAT'S going to get me to vote for you), a generic panderer, a xenophobe, a once-great war hero-turned-Bewsh-sycophant, a religious-right whack-a-doo . . . I mean, PLEASE.

There's no "Bewsh" to run away with this thing or to inspire theft among the Corporations. The Pukes KNOW they're screwed.

If the Dem candidate no matter WHO they are cannot beat the Repuke by at least 30-40 electoral votes, then maybe the problem isn't with the voter. Maybe the problem lies with the fact that we refuse to nominate a Dem that inspires enough voters to elect them.

Whether I leave my vote blank should "The Inevitable" get the nomination is not going to matter one iota.

I cannot understand the continuing quest of the party to go against the interests of the people versus the corporations by selecting a baggage-laden woman who's hand-in-hand with Rupert Murdoch, Big Insurance and Big Pharma, is pro-free-trade, talks out of both sides of her mouth in regards to job-offshoring, has left "all options on the table" regarding Iran and isn't sorry she believed the Failure Fuhrer and his cooked evidence in 2003 that has cost nearly 4000 AMERICAN LIVES!!! I imagine others can point out many more things which make her a questionable selection for the DEMOCRATIC nominee.

If you and the rest of the Democratic party think selecting Madam Windsock as our nominee ISN'T perpetuating the system of right-wing corporatists loading both parties with lapdogs and creating a climate of regression for the American middle class and working poor, then I have no hope for the party anymore. I really don't.

Once again, WORK for a candidate that will UNITE us. Do you really wonder why no "loyalty oath" posts are directed towards Obama, Kucinch or Edwards? Simple solution. Edwards, Obama, Gore or Kucinich. I don't do loyalty oaths or surrender. Madam Windsock will be nothing but Business as Usual and she will not turn ONE RED STATE.

America does NOT need "Business as Usual". It needs CHANGE.

"It'll still be better than a Republican!" I say, aside from the Supreme Court, it will be nearly as bad for working people. When is someone going to stand for the LABOR of this country? WHEN?

[...of J.Temperance]

24. You don't know what you're talking about, because....

As I've repeatedly stated at DU, John Edwards IS my candidate, he was my candidate in 2004 and he's my candidate in 2008.

My ENTIRE post upthread, was SUPPOSED to illustrate, that in the event that Hillary becomes our Presidential nominee....then IF that happens, ALL of the people who despise Hillary, and judging by your comments, I'd say that you despise the woman as well....well IF Hillary becomes our nominee, the Hillary Is Evil and Eats Newborn Babies For Breakfast crowd, will have a VERY simple choice:

You can either vote for our nominee Hillary Clinton, or, if you don't vote or if you vote Third Party....then you definately run the risk of allowing the Republican nominee to become the 44th occupant of the White House.

Surely you CANNOT say that there's NO difference between Hillary Clinton and Rudy Guiliani/Fred Thompson or Mitt Romney?

The Supreme Court choices to replace Justice Stevens and Justice Bader Ginsberg are LONG-TERM, they are on the bench for a LIFETIME, if those replacements are in their mid-40's or early 50's, then that means that those two replacements will be on the Supreme Court for 30 or 40 years.

I think in the long-term not in the short-term....the Labor Unions stand up for Labor....who's going to stand up and be able to STOP Roe v Wade being overturned?

What's more important here, nobody wants to return to a Draconian era where abortion was totally illegal and women and girls were left to the mercy of backstreet butchers and where due to botched abortions, women and girls were left to bleed to death in filthy hotel rooms.

[Olney Blue]

9. Exactly.

[still_one]

3. you left out Rehnquist /nt

[ourbluenation]

4. because he's dead. n/t

[still_one]

5. Actually Rehnquist was mentioned within the body, I spoke too soon

nevertheless thanks for the clarification

[ourbluenation]

6. no worries.

:)

[book_worm]

8. I doubt they lose a minute of sleep due to their decision.

[Raster]

10. Oh I think Sandra Day O'Connor is haunted ever day by Selection 2000.

Her legacy won't be that of the first woman to sit on the SCOTUS, but as a member of the blatantly partisan felonious five that hijacked democracy and shivved Lady Liberty in the ribs. May she never again have a decent nights sleep.

As a side note, she has become somewhat of an armchair activist for independent judiciary. To that all I can say is "how's Selection 2000 working out for ya? Yes-sir-ee, gotta love that reich-wing independent judiciary!"

[BrklynLiberal]

11. I cannot imagine that Scalia and Thomas give a rat's ass.

O'Connor has voiced some regret, but too little, too late.

[ourbluenation]

12. Nor would they think twice about doing it again, especially since Roberts was on team boosh in 2000

[Virginia Dare]

21. Precisely why he was "put" there...n/t

[Virginia Dare]

20. The only thing Thomas appears to give any thought to..

is himself. The man is a true narcissist.

[Time for change]

13. It's worse than that

There was no legal basis whatsoever for their decision. They twisted the Constitution into unrecognizability in order to render that decision. Their decision was not supposed to be a vote for president -- they had all already voted. They were supposed to be rendering a legal decision on the legality of the Florida Supreme Court's decision to have votes recounted by hand that couldn't be accurately counted by machine.

All 5 of them should be tried for treason and spend the rest of their lives in prison.

[SergeyDovlatov]

14. OMG. Have you read America: Citizens guide to democracy inaction?

They have a wonderful game there. Restore dignity to supreme court justices.
If you haven't flip thru the book in a book store.
It is a great game, but I won't tell you what it is not to spoil the fun!

[ourbluenation]

22. thank you sergy - I will check it out. n/t

[HughBeaumont]

16. ESPECIALLY O'Connor.

I mean, when I read about her utterly spiteful reasoning behind her decision (which I guess she won't talk publicly about) of not being able to retire under a Dem president, it makes me even more disgusted. She was hardly the partisan idiots that Scalia, Kennedy, Rehnquist and Thomas were and she didn't HAVE to do what she did, with so many lives at stake.

There's an exhibit of her at the National Portrait Gallery. I refuse to look at it. She'll always be Mrs 5-4. Thanks Sandy. Hope you have some Brillo for all that blood on your hands.

Incidentally, and maybe I'm not up on my political science as much as some people, but why is there any modicum of left or right in a Supreme Court Judge? I mean, doesn't that kind of contradict the purpose of the position, if were talking in terms of preserving the branch's integrity?