Posted on 07/12/2005 7:48:24 AM PDT by watsonfellow
Test Screening
The Hill’s Geoff Earle reports Senator Sam Brownback will hold a personal meeting with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Brownback, who sits on the Judiciary Committee, was asked if he believes Gonzales would make a good SCOTUS nominee. “I need to talk with him about his view of the Constitution to tell. That’s what I hope to do this week,” Brownback said.
My initial response is that if Brownback is “interviewing” Gonzales as a possible nominee, this must mean the White House is serious about the possibility of nominating him. Brownback is one of the strongest conservative voices in the Senate and a likely 2008 candidate. Getting his stamp of approval for a Gonzales nomination would go a long way toward making that pick a reality.
If President Bush is indeed planning to nominate Mr. Gonzales he needs to think again. Right now his support from gun owners is somewhat soft. If he were to nominate Gonzales, who has a record of antipathy toward the Second Amendment, this could alienate gun owners to the point of no return.
I have only to refer to the presidential campaign of 1992, when Bush 41 was not on good terms with the NRA. His adviser at the time, the usually astute (and now late) Lee Atwater, is reputed to have advised the elder Bush not to actively seek the endorsement of gun owners. He evidently felt that gun owners would blindly vote Republican no matter what. He reportedly said, "Where else are they going to go?" That was the signal for Billy Jeff to break out the hunting clothes and the shotgun for photo ops to try to fool the voters into thinking he was pro-gun. Enough gun owners either voted for Billy Jeff, voted for Ross Perot, or sat on their hands, with the result that we got eight years of Slick Willie and Shrillery.
The Republicans would be well-advised to be more vocal in their support of the rights of law-abiding gun owners and the Second Amendment. Nominating Gonzales for the highest court in the land is NOT the way to reassure gun owners.
http://members.aol.com/abtrbng/505scl1.htm
There was no clear indication that he said that if he had two more votes he would overturn Roe Vs. Wade. Please let me know if I missed it.
Regarding your question on how the US Supreme Court can stop more baby killings laws, I would like to pint out that despite that President Bush signed ban on late term abortion law some local state courts declared the law unconstitutional. Hence a conservative US Supreme Court will overturn these activist liberal judges and declare the ban late term abortion as the “constitutional” law of the land.
serious question. assuming that W turns RINO on us and appoints gonzalez, who can we support in 08 to make sure that the bench gets filled with true conservative judges, and no more Souters?
after all, Stevens and Ginsburg will have to die at some point, depsite their deal with the devil.
if Bush gives in to the liberals now, we need to make sure this doesn't happen again. What about Orrin Hatch? Or can we pull Ashcroft into the race?
im very worried that Bush is too much like his father, and think that's definitely the case with Jeb. No more RINOS!
Are you a Bush hater? Let me be more specific. Are you a troll, a Buchananite, or a third party voter? In other words are you a bitter loser?
Casey upheld Roe, Thomas and Scalia voted against Casey hence they do not uphold Roe.
Liberal law professors like Lawrence Tribe know Roe is a bad joke in place of law. If Tribe can get it why can't nonliberals.
But this is a good discussion after all if Roe is untouchable that is something a lot of pro-lifers need to know before the next election.....
Scalia has made it very clear on several occassions that he would overturn Roe.
Good points.
Also, I would point out that there is enough case law established at this point to effectively end abortion without explicitly overturning Roe, which is a position somoene like Rehnquist (but not Gonzalez) would support. For example, if a state passed a law (or better, a state constitutional amendment) saying that a fetus after the 2nd trimester was a person, I don't think (i could be wrong) that Roe would be able to prevent that. certainly, truly conservative justices wouldn't say that ROe prevented that.
You'll have to change your screen name, too.
>>>>Not necessarily, but the President is free to chose whoever he seems fit, period.
The president has a moral obligation and a duty to fulfill the oath of office, and he has made a promise to appoint a particular type of judge. Picking a less qualified personal friend who is not that type of judge breaks that promise and breaks the oath of office. I don't think Bush will do it, but if he does I'd be another in the camp of those who won't support republicans. I believe Bush will do what he said he will do, but if he doesn't, how can I trust that the next R will do what he promises me?
>>>>>I repeat guys, even if you get 9 Scalia on the court Roe Vs Wade will never be abolished, it is just an impossiblity, period.
You don't have a sense of history. Plenty of bad laws have been struck down.
patent
Are we as pro-lifer convinced that we can overturn Roe Vs. Wade if we get on the US supreme court five justices who are anti-abortion? If this is the case then many of us will be disappointed forever. The way I see it is that some type of abortion, mainly first trimester (Roe Vs. Wade), has a powerful stronghold in our judicial system and culture, and it is accepted and tolerated by the majority of Americans contrary to our wishes. I do not see we will ever get five judges to vote on over turning the trimester abortion i.e. Roe Vs Wade because they will be fighting a cultural, social, and political majority of the American people.
>>>>Plenty of bad laws have been struck down.
To edit, I meant that plenty of bad cases have been reversed by later courts.
With respect, there are Republicans who don't fit into either of your two categories. I am a Constitutional conservative. If Gonzalez is the nominee, I will also be deeply disappointed in GWB (for the first time in his presidency, I might add).
That makes maybe ten thousand of you. Bush weighs that against the several million new Hispanic votes the Republican Party is likely to if he puts Gonzales on the Court, and what decision do you think he makes?
Brownback is just talking to him in case.
I highly doubt Gonzales will be the pick.
Of course, I would be pissed if he is, but I don't think it is going to happen.
You are reading way too much into this and using it for your anti-Bush agenda.
I'm sure this conversation took place even though I wasn't there:
Bush The Elder: Don't make the mistakes that I made:
Bush The Younger: And they were?
Bush the Elder: I raised taxes. I didn't finish off Saddam when I had the chance and I put Souter on the Supreme Court.
We know that Bush the Younger has taken care of daddy's wishes on 2 out of 3. If he nominates Gonzales knowing that the Dems love him (relatively speaking) he would have to be a complete dunce not to realize that he was falling into the same trap as his father. I'm certain that he doesn't think he is. I'm less certain that he right. Maybe Bush really is the dunce that the Dems have said he is all along.
This is "where are they going to go" politics.
Fools.
conservatives are not liberal patsies.
Gonzales does not support the INDIVIDUAL in 2nd amendment rights and a whole host of other individual rights.
Furthermore, it seems that justice Scalia is not against states that will allow abortion laws. If this is the case then the whole fight against abortion is dead in the water since a good number of states have very liberal supreme courts that allow abortion laws.
The way I see it is very pragmatic and it is the best we can get as pro-lifers. We need a SCOTUS conservative enough to overturn all the abortion laws on a federal level that are more than Roe Vs. Wade. I explained in my post # 52 why I see the impossibility of overturning Roe Vs. Wade.
A pacifist is one who feeds his children to the crocodile, in the hopes the crocodile will eat him last. Sound familiar?
We act like a bunch of children putting our hope in a man who appears to hold no allegiance to our cause, at least if this pick goes forward, maybe some here will finally get it.
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.