The Next Woman Nominated to the Court: This Time, No Death of a Thousand Cuts

Special to FreeRepublic ^ | 29 October, 2005 | John Armor (Congressman Billybob)

[El Gato]

All federal officials take oaths to protect and defend the Constitution,

Executive and Judicial officers of the states, as well as State legislators, are also required to take oaths to support the *federal* Constitution. Those are likely even more honored in the breach than the oaths taken by federal officials.

[Tolik]

Nailed It!

This ping list is not author-specific for articles I'd like to share. Some for the perfect moral clarity, some for provocative thoughts; or simply interesting articles I'd hate to miss myself. (I don't have to agree with the author all 100% to feel the need to share an article.) I will try not to abuse the ping list and not to annoy you too much, but on some days there is more of the good stuff that is worthy of attention. You can see the list of articles I pinged to lately  on  my page.
You are welcome in or out, just freepmail me (and note which PING list you are talking about). Besides this one, I keep 2 separate PING lists for my favorite authors Victor Davis Hanson and Orson Scott Card.  

[shhrubbery!]

Just my opinion.

OK, but that's pretty weak if you can't come up with specific reasons.

I do recall "the dynamics of the Thomas situation" quite well.

Thomas's qualifications were roundly ridiculed by the Left; and the Intellectual Right, e.g. National Review, was not thrilled with his nomination either.

But Thomas has turned out to be the best justice, bar none, including Scalia.

[George Smiley]

An extremely astute observation.

You must have gotten new glasses recently.

: ^ )

[George Smiley]

I happen to agree with you that Professor Thomas Sowell would be an outstanding Justice on the Court.

What that man could do to the opinions the clerks rough out would be outstanding.

If we're going to appoint an economist to the Big Nine, I'd like to state for the record that Walter Williams would really liven the place up and poke some holes in that stuffier-than-thou decorum up there.

[Congressman Billybob]

Actually, it is more than a political ploy to nominate another woman Justice. I noticed when I went to law school in the late 60s that about a quarter of the students were women. By today, that proportion has grown to one half.

Over the last 35 years, I have worked closely with state legislators in all states. The proportion of them who are women has also been growing, from about 10% to 23% most recently. Also, women are a small but growing portion of the CEO's of the Fortune 500.

I do not mean that women should have a quota of half the Justices on the Court! It should not be forced to alternate between 4 and 5 women on the Court, with every other Chief Justice appointed being a woman. On the other hand, I do NOT believe that the attitude should be expressed to half the population and half of all lawyers that women will be secondary to men in such appointments. It should be clear that women are as welcome as men, no more no less, to be considered for each appointment.

I write all this in part because I have two able and accomplished daughters who are also wives and mothers. I add that neither are lawyers, though I wouldn't be displeased if any of my granddaughters (or grandsons) became lawyers.

John / Billybob

[Congressman Billybob]

I very much like your comment that it is time to "roll the guns to the top of the ridge" for a fully conservative judicial nominee.

John / Billybob

[Rodney King]

OK, but that's pretty weak if you can't come up with specific reasons.

You really need me to list reasons why I think that its laughable that Miers is the best qualified person for SCOTUS? Haven't you been reading FR for the last month?

[Congressman Billybob]

Why do you think that the nomination of Janice Rogers Brown would "split" the conservatives? I thought she was highly favored by that community. BTW, I think she would be an excellent nominee, but in all fairness I'd say her odds are about 25-75 of getting the nod.

John / Billybob

[George Smiley]

Quoted by the BBC this time, on Wednesday although it hardly sounded the same coming out in a clipped upper-class accent.

And they changed the spellings of several words.

[kenth]

But do you bet eight possible years against the rest of her unnatural life?

[You Dirty Rats]

I very much like your comment that it is time to "roll the guns to the top of the ridge" for a fully conservative judicial nominee.

We'd better get our guns ready -- because the 'Rats are going to fight dirty -- ESPECIALLY if the nominee is JRB. They view African-Americans who have minds of their own and leave the Liberal plantation as traitors to their race -- and the MSM will actively help them.

We need to sharpen our bayonets as well. This will go hand-to-hand before it's over.

[hershey]

Thomas went to Yale Law School, and the Left publicly lynched him. In fact, he called it that, himself, during the hearings.. It was heinous, disgusting, shameful, and he bore it all with dignity and grace.

[RobbyS]

Who is BEST qualified? No, you are saying that she was already UNqualified when she was nominated. But not by any reasonable standard. As Justice Scalia has pointed out, BEST qualified may work in England but not in the USA because ours is a political process. She was not proved to be unqualified until she could not make it through the political process.

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

You're not getting JRB this time out. Bush could not afford to do so. Frankly, were Bush to give you what you want in return for helping inflict the death of a thousand cuts on Harriet Miers, he would be rightfully scorned by the American public as being a castrated wimp.

My bet: he appoints Hillary Rodham Clinton to the court, to do two things: (1) say "F*** you very much" to Frum, Will, Coulter, Ingraham, and the other professional pundits, and (2) remove her from the chessboard for the 2008 election.

[Southack]

"(2) remove her from the chessboard for the 2008 election."

SCOTUS Justices are **not** removed from running for President.

[GOPJ]

Thanks for the ping.

[RHINO369]

>>
That might happen if Ruth Buizzy-Ginsberg exits stage-right. And it would be a shrewd political move - the confirmation hearings would be a site to see...and if she were to fail to be confirmed, the bloodletting in the process would ruin Hildabeast for '08 and ever after...<<

I'm usually not rude to a person, but are you joking, or stupid. You nominate a socialist, democrat to the court so you don't have to run against her. Do you invite drifters into your house to rape your wife in exchange for them promising not to kill her?

[BeHoldAPaleHorse]

"SCOTUS Justices are **not** removed from running for President."

No, they aren't. But unless she resigns and allows her replacement to be appointed by Bush, her chances of winning are nil--because no one would take her seriously.

[RHINO369]

A justice could run for president and just resign a day before the inaugaration. The person would actually nominate their own sucessor.


BTW why would a so called Republican president nominate a liberal to fill a liberals spot, you do know justices don't have to be carbon copies of who they are replacing. I'd want to replace Souter with a Thomas or Scalia type.