Posted on 09/21/2005 4:54:29 PM PDT by goldstategop
Perhaps President Bush has inadvertently nominated a true conservative to the court with this Roberts fellow. I remain skeptical based on the following facts:
Anita Hill has not stepped forward to accuse Roberts of sexual harassment.
The Democrats did not accuse Roberts of having a secret life as a racist.
We have no idea what kind of videos he rents.
Also, I'm still steamed that Bush has now dashed my dreams of an all-black Supreme Court composed of eight more Clarence Thomases. Incidentally, eight more Clarence Thomases is the only form of human cloning I would ever support.
As liberal Hendrik Hertzberg wrote in the New Yorker, Roberts was a scared choice. After Hurricane Katrina, Bush was even more scared. So when he had to pick a chief justice, he renominated the Rorschach blot.
For Christians, it's "What Would Jesus Do?" For Republicans, it's "What Would Reagan Do?" Bush doesn't have to be Reagan; he just has to consult his WWRD bracelet. If Bush had followed the WWRD guidelines, he would have nominated Antonin Scalia for the chief justiceship.
As proof, I refer you to the evidence. When Reagan had an opening for chief justice, he nominated Associate Justice William Rehnquist. While liberals were preoccupied staging die-ins against Rehnquist and accusing him of chasing black people away from the polls with a stick – something they did not accuse Roberts of – Reagan slipped Scalia onto the court.
That's what Reaganesque presidents with a five-vote margin in the Senate typically do. Apart from toppling the Soviet Empire, Scalia remains Reagan's greatest triumph.
Scalia deserved the chief justiceship. He's the best man for the job. He has suffered lo these many years with Justices Souter, Kennedy and O'Connor. He believes in a sedentary judiciary. He's for judicial passivism. Scalia also would have been the first cigar-smoking, hot-blooded Italian chief justice, which I note the diversity crowd never mentions.
But most important, if Bush had nominated Scalia, liberals would have responded with their usual understated screams of genocide, and Bush could have nominated absolutely anyone to fill Justice O'Connor's seat. He also could have cut taxes, invaded Syria, and bombed North Korea and Cuba just for laughs. He could even have done something totally nuts, like enforce the immigration laws.
Even if Roberts turns out to be another Rehnquist (too much to hope for another Scalia!), we don't know that, Bush doesn't know that, and Bush has blown a golden opportunity to make Chuck Schumer the public face of the Democratic Party. A few weeks of Schumer as their spokesman, and normal Democrats would be clamoring for Howard Dean to get back on the stick. Teddy Kennedy would start showing up at hearings actually holding a double scotch.
Inasmuch as Bush must still choose a replacement for O'Connor, it's important to remember the "Sandra Day O'Connor bylaw" to the WWRD guidelines: Never appoint anyone like Sandra Day O'Connor to any court at any level.
Reagan had made a campaign promise to appoint a woman to the Supreme Court. He didn't say anything about appointing a ninny. But back in 1981, it was slim pickings for experienced female judges. O'Connor was a terrible mistake and will forever mar Reagan's record, but at least he did it only once.
Bush has already fulfilled all his campaign promises to liberals – and then some! He said he'd be a "compassionate conservative," which liberals interpreted to mean that he would bend to their will, enact massive spending programs, and be nice to liberals. When Bush won the election, that sealed the deal. It meant the Democrats won.
Consequently, Bush has enacted massive new spending programs, obstinately refused to deal with illegal immigration, opposed all conservative Republicans in their primary races, and invited Teddy Kennedy over for movie night. He's even sent his own father to socialize with aging porn star Bill Clinton.
(Sidebar on the aging porn star: Idiot Republicans fraternizing with the Clintons has not harmed the decadent buffoon's reputation abroad. A Chinese condom manufacturer recently named one of its condoms the "Clinton," a fitting tribute to the man who had Monica Lewinsky perform oral sex on him in the Oval Office on Easter Sunday. Their advertising slogans are: "Always wear a 'Clinton' when you're getting a 'Lewinsky'!"; "I still believe in a place called the G-spot"; "Extra-thin skinned!"; "For when you really, really want to feel her pain." Note to Bush: This isn't Walter Mondale. How about sending Pops on the road with Joey Buttafuoco?)
According to my WWRD wristwatch, it's time for Bush to invade Grenada, bomb Libya, fire the air traffic controllers, and joke about launching a first strike against the Soviet Union. In lieu of that, how about nominating a conservative to O'Connor's seat on the court? It would be a bold gesture.
Note that your (and Ann's) point of "cozying up to the Clintons" has not been addressed, but when it does get reluctantly addressed on other threads, we are treated to the laughable sycophantic talking point that the Bushes "have class". Yeah, surely, Shirley!
The American Pope!
Funny thing is, they all say the same things as you do.
And I never implied nor stated that you were a DU troll, so you can put your defenses down.
You're most likely one of the fellows who will be praising President Bush in 20 years, and conveniently forget that you were bashing him while he was President.
Of course, by then, we will have historic proof of how conservative he was, and how he moved the country to the right, and you won't be able to deny it.
Ann wouldn't be any go whatsoever as a Justice; even in an appellate court!
Now, Mark Levin...that's a whole other story! :-)
I know...............and they will be RIGHT (a pleasant change from their present opinions).
EXACTLY!!! Could not have put it better myself.
Keep talking. You're sinking fast.
I've heard Reagan's excuses for Lebanon. The fact is, he allowed terrorists to beat him back by killing 241 Marines. That act emboldened Hamas, and, eventually, bin Laden by demonstrating that we will, if the casualty count is high enough, retreat.
The point of this thread is that Reagan was so far superior to George W. Bush in his actions and in his boldness. I don't see it.
Reagan didn't hold a candle to Bush in what he actually did.
Seems he thinks anyone who isn't in total agreement with him is a troll.
Much of the blame extremists place on him is more appropriately aimed at the Congress.
Don't confuse the two.
"Do you like Reagan's choice of O'Conner??????"
Not much but, as I said earlier, I'd take her over Bush and Rudman's pick of Souter any day.
Oh, can you be more specific as to what you mean by this phrase: "Don't let history get inthe way of your stinkin' ideology, Cautor?"
For starters, can you explain what you mean--in a grammatical sense--by the term: stinkin' BTW, do you always run around with your panties in such a wad?
And I don't think you probably are either.......for whatever that's worth.
What a pant-load. Unless you're a lot older than I suspect, you were still filling your diapers when we "DU trolls" were laying the groundwork for today's conservatives. You have no clue what we braved for the cause. Because I support Bush does not mean I have to be an uncritical sycophant.
President Bush will in the end have nominated more conservatives to the Court than Reagan, but somehow, you ignore O'Connor because it doesn't suit your template that Reagan was a god and Bush is a loser. (that's what I meant by 'stinkin' ideology.......the facts never interfere with it).
That's a bold face lie. Read your history. Reagan was a champion of pro-life issues throughout his Presidency.
When it came to the abortion issue, PresReagan's pro-life bonafides were rock solid and Christian conservatives were his biggest supporters. The President wrote an outstanding essay on abortion called "Abortion and the Conscience of a Nation". On top of that, Reagan was the first President to address the pro-life/right to life forces who gathered to protest each year in WashDC on the annivesary of Roe V Wade.
Short list:
*He supported legislation that would allow for a challenge of Roe vs. Wade.
*He adopted the "Mexico City Policy" halting federal aid to private groups promoting abortions abroad.
*His administration cut off funding to the United Nations Fund for Population Activities because the global agency violated U.S. law by participating in China's mandatory abortion program.
*His administration adopted regulations prohibiting federally funded "family planning clinics" from promoting abortion as birth control.
*The Reagan White House blocked use of federal money for research using the tissue of aborted babies.
*It helped win approval of the "Danforth Amendment," which said federally funded educational institutions could not be guilty of "sex discrimination" for refusing to pay for abortions.
*Reagan himself introduced the issue of fetal pain into the public debate over abortion.
*His administration was key in enactment of laws protecting the right to life of handicapped newborns.
*Reagan designated a National Sanctity of Human Life Day, to recognize the value of life at all stages.
Stop lying about the Reagan legacy.
And if you don't know that there are lots of DU trolls around here, you're not paying any attention...........or aren't too bright.
But nice try, newbie. :)
President Bush the younger is so far from being a "chip off the old block" of his father, that that line, alone, is certifiable.
And FYI...lots of great men came out of the New England prep schools; dear. Some absolutely dreadful ones did as well...such as Kerry and Teddy Kennedy and JFK, to name but a few.
thanx , I'm not a troll . I have better things to do .I wish I had a dime for every time I've quoted things I've seen on FR and used knowledge I've gained here to support conservative ideals.( Ive been reading here for 2 years but have only recently joined in the discussions) I'm in NYC and I need all the support I can get .I'm in the middle of maddness here and sometimes I get very down.FR at least lets me know Im not alone in my views and there is still some hope .
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.