Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

We conservatives have a historical opportunity to place several of the finest jurors America has ever produced, onto the Supreme Court. Why would we consent to this Democrat idea of "going outside the judiciary" (nominating a Senator!) for new justices?
1 posted on 07/12/2005 4:57:25 PM PDT by CHARLITE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-26 next last
To: CHARLITE

what about Ted Olson? i'd be happy with him and i believe he's a lawyer in private practice right now.


2 posted on 07/12/2005 4:58:41 PM PDT by avital2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CHARLITE

I don't believe the prez will "consent" to anything the D's have to say.


3 posted on 07/12/2005 5:00:33 PM PDT by anniegetyourgun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CHARLITE

Why are these people in GB's house? Can't he feed them at Dennys or something?


4 posted on 07/12/2005 5:00:44 PM PDT by CindyDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CHARLITE

I can't even see the sun any more with all of the Dems'/MSM's trial balloons. The best part: W is going to pick whoever he d*mn well wants to. Hehehehe....


5 posted on 07/12/2005 5:00:45 PM PDT by eureka! (It will not be safe to vote Democrat for a long, long, time...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CHARLITE

Yes, Bush needs to be careful, Specter is definitely a master baiter.


6 posted on 07/12/2005 5:00:50 PM PDT by NathanBookman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CHARLITE

Congressman Billybob would be a good choice.


7 posted on 07/12/2005 5:04:41 PM PDT by Tax-chick (No! I don't want a socialist muffin in a boat!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CHARLITE

There are plenty of fine potential nominees in academia and in private practice.

But this is all noise by the Democrats. Remember that one of their "knocks" against "Borked" DC Circuit nominee Miguel Estrada was that he didn't have judicial experience yet? (Never mind that he had stellar law school-, judicial clerkship-, Justice Dept., and private-practice experience.)

If the pool of SCOTUS nominees most feared by these Dems were instead academics and other non-judges, we'd be hearing them repeat now what they said in Borking Estrada: Oh, we need someone with solid on-the-bench experience, yes yes, harrrumph! instead of this disingenuous, Oh we need someone outside the legal monastery, hm yes harrumph!


9 posted on 07/12/2005 5:10:42 PM PDT by pogo101
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CHARLITE

Well, if we must...Robert Bork, Mark Levin, Laura Ingraham, Ann Coulter...


10 posted on 07/12/2005 5:12:08 PM PDT by pookie18 (Clinton Happens...as does Dr. Demento Dean, Bela Pelosi & Benedick Durbin!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CHARLITE

I would not be upset if he picked Fred Thompson.


11 posted on 07/12/2005 5:13:56 PM PDT by mware ("God is dead" -- Nietzsche........ "Nope, you are"-- GOD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CHARLITE

Why? Ann Coulter or David Limbaugh would be just fine.


15 posted on 07/12/2005 5:23:48 PM PDT by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of news)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CHARLITE

If they do go outside the judiciary, I think I should get nominated.


18 posted on 07/12/2005 5:33:05 PM PDT by Duke Nukum (To thine own self be true...or relatively true. --Guy Caballero)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CHARLITE

I don't have any problem with him selecting someone outside the judiciary. How about Mark Levin or Ann Coulter?


19 posted on 07/12/2005 5:38:05 PM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CHARLITE

I'd rather have a non-lawyer who's commitment to upholding the Consitution has not been corrupted by law school and the legal profession.


21 posted on 07/12/2005 5:53:49 PM PDT by Paleo Conservative (Hey! Hey! Ho! Ho! Andrew Heyward's got to go!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CHARLITE

I'd love to see a straight-thinking, conservative engineer be appointed.


24 posted on 07/12/2005 6:18:11 PM PDT by MortMan (Mostly Harmless)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CHARLITE

Steve Largent!!!

Oklahoma - Steve Largent - 97 Lifetime Rating


25 posted on 07/12/2005 6:21:04 PM PDT by RightFighter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CHARLITE
Bush will make a fine selection. Conservatives have not yet opposed a single candidate he has named for any judicial position.

There has been a very rare whimper, but he's not disappointed us yet.

26 posted on 07/12/2005 6:23:00 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CHARLITE
The U.S. Constitution does not require a Supreme Court justice to be an attorney or a judge.

It was this type of thinking that put Earl Warren on the court and lead to the start of the judicial tyranny that is still tearing the Republic apart. (Warren was a lawyer and prosecutor, but had never served as a judge.)

27 posted on 07/12/2005 6:25:30 PM PDT by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CHARLITE
Why would we consent to this Democrat idea of "going outside the judiciary" (nominating a Senator!) for new justices?

Because, this is nothing more and nothingless than good cop/bad cop. We're all getting screwed...but to us, it feels better when the pubs do it.

As long as the economy stays the same or grows moderately, we all feel something is really happening, while all the time, our rights are being eroded by those in power, be it pub or dem.

We drilling in anwar yet?

Smoke and mirrors.

FMCDH(BITS)

28 posted on 07/12/2005 6:30:58 PM PDT by nothingnew (I fear for my Republic due to marxist influence in our government. Open eyes/see)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CHARLITE
A consensus candidate is anyone acceptable to Democrats. "

I can't believe that sentence made it past the editors

32 posted on 07/12/2005 6:51:23 PM PDT by Mr. K
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: CHARLITE
I hope President Bush doesn't take this bait

Considering the fact that he doesn't have the brains of a big mouthed bass, it's hard to tell what bait he'll take!

38 posted on 07/12/2005 7:16:46 PM PDT by iconoclast (Conservative, not partisan..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-26 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson