Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Strong Anti-Roe Nominees Off Table??? (I hope it's not True)
The Supreme Court Nomination Blog ^ | 13 June 2005 | Tom Goldstein

Posted on 09/17/2005 9:43:37 AM PDT by HapaxLegamenon

Roe's Influence on the Choice of the Nominee Candidates > Jones | 06:14 PM | Tom Goldstein | Comments

Second, and directly relevant to the President's ongoing process of selecting a nominee to replace Justice O'Connor, the article attributes to "[s]ources close to the White House" the fact that Edith Jones "is no longer under serious consideration." The reason "in part" is "concerns that her strongly voiced views against abortion would alienate Collins, Snowe, and other Republican moderates."

(Excerpt) Read more at sctnomination.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; US: Maine
KEYWORDS: 109th; collins; edithjones; jones; judicialnominees; rinos; scotus; snowe; supremecourt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-92 next last
To: thoughtomator
"Unfortunately we do not control the Senate." As much I want to say it is not so, IT IS. We need to recognize that the '06 midterms are as important to us as they are to the Dems; we need at least 5 more seats to have a foil-proof majority. The problems is that some of the GOP seats are in play already, and some of the incumbents are the very ones who stand opposed to us right now. Conservatives should be brokering ads on regular basis that state the outrageous positions taken by LIBERAL JUDGES to help show WHY we need to keep a conservative Republican majority.
21 posted on 09/17/2005 10:44:56 AM PDT by Amalie (FREEDOM had NEVER been another word for nothing left to lose...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: HapaxLegamenon

Amazing how the Majority of 55 lets the Minority of 44 run all over them.

Who cares what Schumer and Teddy think about any nominee??


22 posted on 09/17/2005 10:48:34 AM PDT by Sometimes A River ("The leaves have broken on Lake Ponktran" - WKAT 1360 AM Miami Newsreader)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: HapaxLegamenon

Of course it's true. The Bush administration is in the process of losing its conservative base. The Republican party had better look out.


23 posted on 09/17/2005 10:51:09 AM PDT by kjo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HapaxLegamenon

He should go outside judicial circles this time and pick a surprise like a Ted Olsen or Orrin Hatch.


24 posted on 09/17/2005 10:57:12 AM PDT by ez (What went wrong...Blanco kept the Red Cross out while Nagin kept the refugees in.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HapaxLegamenon

Is Kay Bailey Hutchison pro-life? She'd be a great choice...


25 posted on 09/17/2005 10:57:50 AM PDT by ez (What went wrong...Blanco kept the Red Cross out while Nagin kept the refugees in.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Acts 2:38
Amazing how the Majority of 55 lets the Minority of 44 run all over them.

The point made elsewhere on this thread is correct. It is not a minority of 44. On abortion issues it is the 44 rats plus 5-7 RINO's. So the bad guys still have a majority in the Senate on most cultural issues.

26 posted on 09/17/2005 11:06:37 AM PDT by ModelBreaker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: HapaxLegamenon

One thing is certain: You won't get any nominees that are ADVERTISED as strong anti-Roe nominees.

And you shouldn't get any nominees who are advertised as strong pro-Roe nominees, either. Any justice who has already "made up his mind" is not qualified to serve.


27 posted on 09/17/2005 11:14:21 AM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ez
Kay Bailey Hutchison

Not "purely" pro-life but fairly strong, it looks like.

28 posted on 09/17/2005 11:21:52 AM PDT by workerbee (A person's a person no matter how small)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: HapaxLegamenon
"[s]ources close to the White House" = pro abortion protestors on sidewalk outside the White House. That's close.
29 posted on 09/17/2005 11:24:54 AM PDT by savedbygrace ("No Monday morning quarterback has ever led a team to victory" GW Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Peach

Peach, there are two issues right now that are important to me as a conservative:

1) President Bush fulfilling his PROMISE to appoint a strict constructionist

2) The administration closing the borders for national security

If we don't know for certain the nominee is a strict conservative, then we can't know whether President Bush has kept his promise. A stealth nominee = a broken promise until proven otherwise. It doesn't swing the other way.

You "moderates" either don't understand, or don't care, about these two vital issues.

I am far from alone is deciding that if these two issues are not being serviced, then it gives me less than sufficient reason to vote Republican next time. I and many others are willing to accept the consequences of voting conscience rather than party, regardless of how many names you call me, or how much you malign my character or political intelligence.


30 posted on 09/17/2005 11:35:24 AM PDT by savedbygrace ("No Monday morning quarterback has ever led a team to victory" GW Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ez
Is Kay Bailey Hutchison pro-life?

No, No, No, No! She is Pro-Abort!

31 posted on 09/17/2005 11:42:33 AM PDT by HapaxLegamenon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: HapaxLegamenon
Bush "applauded" SCOTUS for upholding affirmative action racial preferences. No way he appoints a justice as conservative as Rehnquist.
32 posted on 09/17/2005 11:45:04 AM PDT by dagnabbit (Vincente Fox's opening line at the Mexico-USA summit meeting: "Bring out the Gimp!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tall_Texan

This "no litmus test" thing is a joke. Truth be told, when judges get to decide this sorts of issues then there WILL BE a litmus test. There's no way around it. That's one reason it's so wrong to allow them to rule over us in this way.


33 posted on 09/17/2005 11:49:57 AM PDT by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Be a good samaritan, save an unborn child.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: HapaxLegamenon
Bush and the GOP better start worrying about alienating their base.

We're going to now be asked to have to stealth maybes to replace a seat held by an originalist? The result is the court moving to the left and a broken campaign promise by the Bush.

The Republican party must be held accountable at the ballot box if it refuses to appoint orignalist judges to the court.

34 posted on 09/17/2005 11:50:24 AM PDT by Ol' Sparky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky

I agree. Rove should know better. The short list should by Brown, Jones, Luttig, & Garza.


35 posted on 09/17/2005 12:21:04 PM PDT by HapaxLegamenon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: HapaxLegamenon

Why post this article now?

Its dated July 14th when I went to the link.

Its been a political eternity since then.

President Bush has made his choices clear that he will not abandon his base, with appointing Roberts. Since Roberts was originally selected to replace O'Connor, as when this article was written. This is way off, and has no current relevance.


36 posted on 09/17/2005 1:16:42 PM PDT by GopherGOPer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Unam Sanctam

Everyone is ignoring the date. The "moderate" pick has already been awarded to Roberts. So the next one should be even more conservative.

This article is old. Its been a political eternity since then.


37 posted on 09/17/2005 1:18:46 PM PDT by GopherGOPer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: savedbygrace

OMG. You sound hysterical.

#1. I'm not a moderate.

#2. Please show me where I maligned your character.

#3. Please show me where I called you names.

I'll wait.


38 posted on 09/17/2005 1:24:02 PM PDT by Peach (South Carolina is praying for our Gulf coast citizens.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: GopherGOPer
I know this is old, but i just found it today. If anyone has a newly list with inside sources than I welcome their input.
39 posted on 09/17/2005 1:35:04 PM PDT by HapaxLegamenon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: sittnick

The date was July and I believe that the source was some law firm's newly created SCOTUS nominee website. Sheer speculation signifying nothing but the law firm's probable view that it is bored with all that haggling over a mere 45 million little corpses and wished that attention be paid to nuances of anti-trust law, commerce clause stuff and the other REALLY important issues.


40 posted on 09/17/2005 1:36:33 PM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-92 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson