ABC radio news and NYT speculate - Bush has decided-Specter called to WH

ABC News | 07/18/05 | self

[Mad Mammoth]

I worry that if the Congress ever got the nads to limit the Court's jurisdiction under Article II of the constitution, the Court might just say "Sorry, denied under various penumbras and emanations of the BOR." Or under Scottish Law.

And that is when we will hope for a group of Patriots to step forward, sign a Second Declaration of Independence, declare the carcus of what was our First (and only) Constitutional Republic to be dead and abolished, and the Great Second American Revolution will begin in earnest.

Think Lexington. Think Concord.

Think Mel Gibson in "The Patriot" except next time those of us who side with Mel will be facing not redcoats, but sadly - our own bluecoats who will purport to represent the "legitimate" government of the United States.

By that time, should that time arrive, the right of We The People to dissolve our existing government may have been so effectively trampled that the outcome of that 2nd Revolution might be in doubt.

It will depend on whether or not those future Revolutionaries place their faith in Almighty God or not.

[CDB]

When you realize that Edith Jones could be on the Supreme Court in place of Souter, it almost makes one want to demand that W. nominate Judge Jones to atone for his father's visiting Souter upon us all.

Bush will announce his SCOTUS nominee this evening (9:00 pm--Eastern time). But I really hope his nominee is Edith Jones and NOT Edith Clement. Rush is talking about this now. "Buckling" won't happen with Edith Jones. IMO, "buckling" is more likely with Edith Clement, who might be a female Souter.

[CDB]

Bush I chose Souter over Edith Jones.

[Oliver Optic]

Bush I chose Souter over Edith Jones.

That fits into the scary historical coincidences category.

In fact it gives me the cold sweats.

[cake_crumb]

"He will nominate Spector"

He called Specktour because he's head of the Judicial committee, not becausse he's going to nominate the terminal, over-retirement-age nitwit.

[tobyhill]

Boxer has just admitted on FOX that the fact that there is a vacancy brings "extraordinary circumstances" and the Filibuster is fair game. I think she was saying no matter who the WH picks there will be a filibuster.

[CDB]

Sure does, doesn't it?

[mosquitobite]

I guess you are correct, we would have been far better off with John Kerry.

Ahh! the lesser of two evils argument...
Boy I sure feel better with NCLB/no veto power Bush in the office...
warm fuzzy feelings...all because he puts a R behind his name like Chafee does...

[cubram]

or "Christopher Walken."

At least there wouldn't be a shortage of cow bell!

[nonliberal]

Ashcroft? Ann Coulter?

[nonliberal]

How about Harry Anderson from "Night Court."

[Dont_Tread_On_Me_888]

Roger that.

The dreams of our Founding Fathers, and our future, will suffer accordingly.

[MikefromOhio]

redistributing wealth, and a bungled war just to name a few.

ahhh so many fallacies, so little time to correct the boys and girls.....

[MikefromOhio]

look at all of the rest of his judicial nominations....

virtually every one of them have been exemplary Conservative picks for the bench....

give it a chance. hell the announcement hasnt even been made yet and some on FR and in the MSM are having kittens about who it will be.

[nopardons]

BADERDASH!

[MikefromOhio]

And Hispanics vote fairly conservative, they're a key swing vote, in case you hadn't noticed.

Wait wait wait, aren't ALL hispanics ILLEGALS??!!??? joking joking :) But that is a fairly conservative and Catholic bloc the GOP would be missing if they gave up on them.

[RetiredArmy]

I stick by my prior post.

[MikefromOhio]

I didnt expect anything else. But I think we should give this President a chance on FR. Being closed-minded about something that DON'T know what the result is going to be yet is kinda, well narrow-minded don't you think?

[LincolnLover]

I don't know why media types (or folks here, for that matter) are putting so much weight on talk about the pick being "mainstream".

IMO, when President Bush said he'd pick a "mainstream" candidate, he means someone conservative. If you are a conservative, and you believe in an Originalist approach to interpreting the law, then picking a judicial conservative *is* mainstream.

I mean, if the law should be interpreted in accordance with the Constitution, then someone who agrees with that philosophy is, therefore, "mainstream" in relation to the intent of the Founders.

[Russ7]

How about Mark Levin....."The Great One"