Posted on 07/02/2005 7:08:40 PM PDT by CHARLITE
Betcha' real money Denver Post wouldn't have let O'Connor be in charge of the cash register for even a half an hour.
Char :)
Geez...how...inconvenient for Cohen that Reinquist stayed alive over the last 20 years and prevented O'Connor from taking her "rightful" place in history.
(rollseyes)
Somebody said the other day "Sandra Day O'Connor would have made a great PTA president. But that's it."
LOL
"O'Connor actually is what most people think a judge ought to be."
Crap! Until yesterday, "most people" couldn't name her or anyone else on the SCOTUS!!
I think the court needs balance to Ruth Bader Ginsberg!
The bottom line: strict constructionists should be the only ones nominated to the position. I don't care what their political leanings are (clearly, that hasn't been much help anyway), they need to interpret law, and in particular, the intentions of the architects of that law, rather than try to make law.
Translation: "Oh God we're screwed! Conservative SCOTUS for 20 damn more years! Mommy!!"
LOL!
Pack the Court!!
Pack the Court!!!
Pack the Court!!!!!
what disgusting schmuck!
all of his tribe are liberally painted with "brilliant", o'connor when she's doing what he wants, the "courtly" souter,
but, president bushes' heroes thomas and scalia are called "clones".
Yet another Ode to Moderation.
Cohen preferred O'Connor and believed she was a "moderate" because she was the judicial equivalent of an "impulse shopper" -- one decision for the left in Aisle 3, another for the right in Aisle 5. And, occasionally, a decision selected from the end aisle gondola.
What kind of a game would baseball be if umpires called the game like O'Connor and the gang of activists called their judicial shots. What if some balls weren't balls? And not all strikes were strikes? What if some outs didn't count, but others counted double? What if umpires made their calls, not on the observable facts, but on their personal rooting preferences?
In baseball, at least, the umpires can't change the rules...
A comment from Colorado, the home of distinguished scholar Ward Churchill, and a comment that would do Professor Churchill proud.
So now David Souter is a centrist too?
One of the most sickening things about the Left and its dominance of the maintream media is how it constantly declares obvious liberals to be moderates.
The reason Souter is more despised by the Right than O'Connor is because O'Connor occasionally sees fit to offer a sane judgment, while Souter never does; at least on social/cultural issues.
But on those social and cultural issues, O'Connor is a liberal too, and just because she voted for Bush in the Bush v Gore doesn't change that.
Pres. Bush's picks ought to be as conservative as Clinton's were liberal. Billy Jeff certainly didn't choose moderates when he chose Ginsberg, an ACLU lawyer, and Breyer, a flaming eastern lib. Shame on the Pubbies for rolling over then, after the merciless smear job the Rats had done on Bork. It's way past pay-back time.
Sandra Day O'Connor as Chief Justice simply is not an option any more. Nobody gets extra downs in football, or extra strikes at the plate in baseball.
Justice O'Connor has retired. Give it a rest.
The jurisprudential concept that, by implication, has been "bolted to" by the likes of Rehnquist, Scalia, and Thomas is to make rulings according to The Constitution. If that turns out not to be "just" then the citizenry needs to elect legislators to write laws that are just. All conservatives understand this concept. No liberals do.
Sheesh, I don't believe the word "centrist" was even coined until around the time Clinton I.
;-) ;-) ;-/
Oh, yes! That one jumped off the page at me. If dim witted readers don't quite get how far to the left this Anderew Cohen is by the time they get to the "courtly Souter" line, then that ought to educate them about which ring of Saturn this guy lives on.
Char :)
Yes, last evening, the late news (Nightline?) made the point over and over again that SD O'C was a moral relativist and interpreted the Constitution as a living document. As if that was a compliment...
May the reader take this as advance references to Ann Coulter and Laura Ingraham?
;-)
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.