Posted on 09/28/2005 3:05:49 PM PDT by TitansAFC
SCOTUS: How to make Alberto Gonzales acceptable to the base. (Especially the Pro-Life base) Some random thoughts and more.......
As reported by NRO, et al:
"Speaking in Tallahassee yesterday, AG Alberto Gonzales sounded like someone seeking serious consideration as a Supreme Court nominee. He called Chief Justice Rehnquist a “hero” and suggested those who think he’d be significantly more moderate than other nominees are “ill-informed.”"
I would suggest that there are options open to the White House to make Gonzales acceptable, but they involve at least one bold move. If it is that important to nominate him, however, they should be compelled to make such a bold move - for old buddy Al, if for no other nominee.
Scenario One: Leaked document(s).
Arrange for a leaked document of Alberto Gonzales' where he openly criticizes Roe v. God and states something to the effect that it should be a "state's rights" issue. Other possible ideas along this line would be a memo where he states something to the effect that Thomas and Scalia have the right positions on the Roe issue, etc. You get what I mean - something that would "accidentally" reveal Al Gonzales to be more Pro-Life than we've ever had reason to believe before. More importantly, something that would let us know he'd overturn Roe v. God if given the chance.
Scenario Two: An outright public statement affirming that he would be a Pro-Lifer in the mold of outgoing Judge Rehnquist. Or something to that extent....
Either way, it involves taking a bold step. I know that the White House seems committed to campaigning on the promise of judges like Scalia and Thomas while being committed to actually making SCOTUS nominations as ambiguous as possible, but in the case of a very good and close friend, Al Gonzales, I would think they could afford one Supreme Court fight after promising a fight for the courts at every campaign stop in every city for three elections.
In other words, if you want Al, and you want the base "on board" and not in outright revolt, make it known - KNOWN - that Al Gonzales will be on our side on an important issue such as Roe v. God. Flush the stare decesis PC crap down the toilet for just one damn nominee and people like myself will go from fighting against Al Gonzales to a full-blown war to get him confirmed.
Just once be bold. If you want Al, be bold; stop fighting us (the base) if he's really on our side and take some behind-the-scenes (or hell, public scene) actions to prove to us that he IS on our side on these crucial issues. We'll face the Dems with you if you do that much.
But you're going to have to stop being afraid of the Roe v. God issue. You're going to have to, just once, nominate a candidate who's going to have to brave that storm before the Senate Inquisition if - IF - you want Al Gonzales on the Supreme Court for life.
So which is it, Mr. Gonzales? Constitutionally guaranteed right to abortion, stare decesis decision too old and controversial to overturn even if it's bad, or state's rights issue? A lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land may be at stake due to this question.
My sword is in the holster, Mr. President and Mr. Attorney General; give me (and social Conservatives like myself) a reason to go to war for Al Gonzales and I promise you that the payoff will be well worth a few weeks before the Senate Inquisition.
Really, how many times can they ask you about abortion, anyway? Plus, the tally is still 5-4 pro-Roe, so it's not like they can really fear it's overturning yet if - IF - you really are on our side on the issue, Mr. Gonzales.
Gonzalez needs to be moved into an office in the basement with his red stapler.
He's a gun grabber, and should never sit on any court, let alone SCOTUS.
Heh -- I'd be the Cowardly Lion...(Was he talkin' to the Wizard when he said, "put em up, put 'em up, put 'em up..."? OR no one? :-D)
President Bush's strategery has been misundrestimated again!
That's for sure. "W" could show up on the White House lawn, drunk and with a hooker and we'd understand. But if he puts a "Souter" of any color on the court, "Dub-Turd" may as well share an office with Clinton in Harlem, when his term ends, then dare go back to Texas.
LOL! Nah, you'd tell 'em what we've all been wishing somebody would say.
WE ARE NOT FOOLED. GONZALES IS STILL NOT ACCEPTABLE. Nice try, but how about putting a real conservative with substance and intellect on the Court. That person is Janice Rogers-Brown. If you took a poll of the VRWC, I would guarantee she would win by a landslide. We elected Bush. How about throwing us a bone once and a while. Clinton put in the most radical left wing justice (Ginsberg) in American history. How about cancelling out her vote? C'mon Mr President, you know it's the right call. Don't listen to Poppy and Barb say "She's so MEAN"...Just Do It!
I am glad you know that with such conviction. Since I do not know him, nor the President, I will be much relieved when I too know that for a fact.
Bush can make him acceptable by appointing Micahel Luttig
Agreed. Mr. Gonzalez is not acceptable to me on account of his statements on that issue.
You know what, if Bush showed the Cojones to nominate Luttig who is CLEARLY the most qualified for the court, I might be willing to put up with Gonzales for the next seat should there be an opening. Especially since he may serve for 5 or 10 years and then resign.
I think the optimum word is "might." Gonzales, I fear, would sooner or later (likely sooner) pull a Souter. But, until the last moment I'm hoping against hope Bush will see the light, ignore everyone (including Laura) and appoint Luttig. You're right...he is the best qualified by 12 furlongs.
However, I'm betting political correctness, multiculturalism and diversity will suspersed over merit brains, and values
If Gonzales replaces Stevens, Ginsberg, Breyer or Souter, most conservatives would probably accept it as the court would be moving to the right to some degree.
Gonzales the Gun-Grabber wouldn't be acceptable to me even if he suddenly became a Life Member of the NRA.
He is an acceptable SCOTUS appointee - to replace Stevens or Ginsburg.
His being a gun-grabber is a HUGE disqualification as far as I'm concerned.
Oh wait it is some other organization with the same goals different race.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.