Fox News reporting that Sandra Day O'Connor retiring!

Fox News | 7/1/05 | SueRae

[Txsleuth]

The people that remark was aimed at, aren't listening, they are already huddling with Ralph Neas to figure out how to stop any nominee President Bush puts forth....

I am praying that he DOESN'T nominate Alberto Gonazalez, though...and I am afraid if he does, he will have a fight from both sides of the aisle...

I want this to be FUN for us...a nomination that WE like, but that will send the dems more over the edge than they are!!!

I like Janice Rogers Brown, or of course, Mark Levin, lol!

[zzen01]

What is wrong? Too Hot! GET OUT OF THE KITCHEN IF YOU CANNOT HANDLE IT!

[Hellkicker]

Im Aboard we need to hold pres feet to fire on this one.

[theDentist]

"New tone". I'd forgotten that old chestnut.

[johnb838]

I agree right to life trumps all -- abortion, euthanazia of disabled and end-of-life; lebensunswertes leben. We have to go on the offensive. Too many lives are being lost.

[zzen01]

Nebraska

[cajungirl]

You are right. I learned a lesson then. I voted for Bush 41 but saw others abandoning ship.

I am to the right of Attila the Hun in military matters, but in social matters, I rely on society rather than a court to change things. And I guess I am a fiscal conservative who believes in some of the welfare state.

So I am dancing with the pubs.

[AliVeritas]

Too moderate

[xzins]

President Bush is speaking shortly. Maybe he'll bring up Kelo when he says that we must find a trusted replacement for O'Connor.

[pollyannaish]

I agree with that. But there are some who will NEVER be happy because NOBODY is conservative/constitutionalist/originalist for them. In other words, a perpetual state of dissatisfaction.

If President Bush appoints a stinker, then I will complain. Until then, I think it is only fair to give the President a chance to put his nominee forward. Everything else is just premature carping and vague threats.

[Howlin]

BTW, if you haven't guessed, I fall the in the Conservative Republican mold that understands you don't always get everything you want but you keep on trying and never fold up your tent and go home.

Amen!

And some fall into the "As for everything and end up with nothing (except, of course, an issue!).

[cajungirl]

We disagree on that.

[AliVeritas]

Sarcasm off

[SittinYonder]

And I guess I am a fiscal conservative who believes in some of the welfare state.

Yikes!

[mosquitobite]

A conservative wants a strict constructionist on the Court to rule not make up things to suit their ideology. A Conservative is the broken glass Republican who will always vote. We have to beg the social conservatives to get on board so often because some candidate is not 100% of what they want -- remember the "purist" or "true" conservative that gets tossed around -- that is from the social conservatives IMHO. That's my interpretation of the difference between a conservative and a social conservative. I'm not a social conservative, I'm a diehard conservative. I want a true originalist on the bench. Thankfully I think, is the fact that someone who IS a true originalist will also have the same positions as the ONE thing social conservatives want (overturning RvW). No where in the Constitution is abortion a right. If the libs want abortion, they need to get a law passed through Congress. Then the SC can uphold it ;) But I will NOT go for someone who is a moderate. I will leave the party for that!

[GVnana]

Same difference.

[johnb838]

MAke the majority bigger. Attack the RINOs. Replace the republicans who won't do the job with somebody who will. The rats didn't take over this country overnight. The muzzies didn't get where they are overnight. They have patience. They take setback after setback and keep coming at you. Don't give up ground. Now we're going after a filibuster proof majority in the Senate. After that we'll go for a RINO proof major

[Howlin]

I agree! I like your two suggestions.

But I'm not going to support somebody that is TOO extreme.

[traviskicks]

And I guess I am a fiscal conservative who believes in some of the welfare state.
---

Take a look at these charts and graphs and it might change your tune:
http://www.neoperspectives.com/summary.htm

[jackbenimble]

Gonzales is a mystery as well as Miguel Estrada. Just like Souter was a mystery

I know a little about this because my little sister was working in the Bush '41 Whitehouse as Administrative Assistant to Boyden Gray who was President Bush's Personal Legal Council. One of Boyden's responsibilities was to develop the vetting criteria that was used to choose Supreme Court nominees and there was a big push to avoid another Bork. The vetting criteria deliberately was designed to choose somebody whose judicial writings revealed little about their judicial temperament. It was assumed Souter was a constructionist because he was a Republican.

Souter was a mystery because the Administration wanted a mystery. Please, lets not repeat that mistake!