quote:

Originally posted by Vlad One word... Filibuster.

both parties agreed earlier in the year to use it for extreme cases, and if the democrats do it again the repblicans will try to get rid of it agian.

___________________
In the beginning there was Jack. And Jack had a groove. And from this groove came the groove of all grooves. And while one day viciously throwing down on his box Jack boldly declared "Let there be house!" And house music was born. I am the creator and this is my house and in my house there is only house music. But I am not so selfish because once you enter my house it then becomes our house and our house music and you see no one man owns house because house music is a universal language spoke and understood by all. You see, house is a feeling that no one can understand really unless you're deep into the vibe of house. House is an uncontrollable desire to jack your body and as I told you before this is our house and our house music. In every house you understand, there is a keeper and in this house the keeper is Jack.

one of my friends didn't like the idea of Roberts being the Chief Justice...


only because he did not have a solid conservative record


http://republicansenate.blogspot.co...pportunity.html

quote:

John Roberts is a good nominee for Chief Justice and should be confirmed. Having said that, the President missed a golden opportunity to define a new direction for the Supreme Court. If the President had nominated Janice Rogers Brown, he could have made a statement that the government has far exceeded its constitutional authority and that the era of big government is, in fact, over. He would also have clearly rejected Sandra Day O'Connor's jurisprudential gymnastics and seated another Justice whose record shows a clear understanding of the fact that the Constitution says what it says, not what Gallup's latest poll says it says. Politically, the nomination of Janice Rogers Brown would have been the play of the decade. Anybody could see the irony of Ted Kennedy complaining about the civil rights record of the fist ever black woman to be nominated for Chief Justice of the United States. Senators Nelson, Stabenow, Landrieu, and others would have been forced to either back a solid conservative or institute a glass ceiling on black women in America. The confirmation of Janice Rogers Brown would have made clear once and for all that judicial philosophy is not justification for filibustering judicial nominees. The hipocracy of the Democrat Party, no matter what it did, would have been bared for all to see. As I said, Roberts is a solid nominee and deserves to be confirmed. This assessment is not a criticism of John Roberts, whom I had endorsed for confirmation to replace Sandra Day O'Connor. I expect that Judge Roberts will serve well for decades to come. The documents released from his service in the administration of President Reagan suggest that he is a solid consrvative and point to a Scalia without the attitude approach. (I like the attitude.) I will be posting regularly throughout the rest of the process in support of the good Judge..

___________________

quote:

[11:58] Bas //: fuck he's hot

Last edited by verndogs on Sep-06-2005 at 03:34

LOL, he probably will nominate her.

___________________
/SARCASM.

quote:

Originally posted by Coup Vlad wins. Flawless victory.

past republican presidents have been wrong about their choices being totally conservative. i can't match names of presidents with their picks but i know eisenhower's pick went to the left, and reagan's pick of anthony kennedy has been somewhat disappointing for staunch conservatives. all i can say is they're fair. but why push roberts through as chief justice? i haven't been paying too much attn to what's been going on lately...

quote:

Originally posted by trunks1022 past republican presidents have been wrong about their choices being totally conservative. i can't match names of presidents with their picks but i know eisenhower's pick went to the left, and reagan's pick of anthony kennedy has been somewhat disappointing for staunch conservatives. all i can say is they're fair. but why push roberts through as chief justice? i haven't been paying too much attn to what's been going on lately...

I think it's because the Republicans are seeing the opporunities that could be associated with Rehnquist's. As of now, they have not indicated who they want to nominate to replace O'Connor, which means, that the Democrats have to be very careful about what happens during Rehnquist's proceedings. If they're too standoffish and too willing to filibuster, then the Republicans will start to threaten to change the filibuster rules again. If they do, they'll be able to nominate whoever they want for the associate, because they'll only need 51 people to make it go to a vote and they have 55 seats in the Senate. I think the associate justice nominee is going to be more conservative than Roberts.

What's even more scary is what happens when Stevens goes. In the Rehnquist court, he has leaned liberally quite a few times (though some of his earlier opinions were conservative). Overall, he's been one of the moderates (which in my opinion is the more desirable construct of the court). And the Republicans complain of judicial activism now, just wait until they get to handpick half of the court and see how activist it becomes.

Rehnquist, while conservative when nominated, became much more moderate as he got older.

___________________
www.myspace.com/joepapeo