Replies

" I believe Luttig is far more Conservative than McConnell."

Correct.........but I would personally LOVE to see Bush appoint Luttig to take O'Connor's place and then Janice Rogers Brown as Chief Justice.....within HOURS of receiving Mr. Justice Rehnquist's notice of retirement!

That's my idea of a double whammy......and it would indeed be "supreme" retribution for the Bork disaster!

I don't think that I will ever get over how pliant our Repubicans were in voting Ginsburg IN, while still (and forever) stinging from the Bork rejection.

IMO, our Republicans in both house of the Congress need to grow some TEETH.......quickly!

Thanks for your great comment!

Char :)

"believe Luttig is far more conservative than McConnell."

I'm not calling McConnell a liberal, which is obviously isn't. But I would trust him less than Luttig and some other people. The fact that he opposed the Clinton impeachment is a problem -- given that we're fighting what amounts to a civil war in this country, he should not have aided the enemy. If he honestly believed the impeachment violated the spirit of the Constitution, he should have kept his mouth shut.

Another problem with McConnell: Some of the liberal law profs endorsed him for the appellate appointment. Do they know something we don't? And what are we to make of the fact that he clerked with William Brennan, an outrageously liberal "justice"?

One thing McConnel would have, though, is the intellectual firepower to re-shape the court or at least to give it intellectual power. That is what I think he should look for: the "X" court. It needs to be a leading decision maker and a leading force for constitutionalism a counter just a stron gas the "Warren Court" and a worthy successor to the "Rehnquist court"- even if only in dissent.

You obviously know about these guys...what about some of teh bigs on the 7th circuit? What about...the Posner court? How old is he? I know he might be seen as a bit too libertarian...but he certainly would have done us right on the takings case.

If you counter that by putting on someone like Noonan on the 9th (?) and maybe McConnell (for an associate position), then, though none of them are Robert Bork, they will be good, solid justices and more constitutional than not...and they can back it up with intellect approaching Scalia.

I sure wish someone would ask MY opinion on this.....

What do you thinK?