[The Wizard]

someday hildebeast will stab schumer in the back, repeatedly, and no one wil give a damn

[js1138]

The schmuck should have been prepared for this question. It was from a published story, for cripe's sake. Anyone who wants to be a high powered judge should never, never, never, change testimony in the middle of a question.

I can't say what his answer should have been, but he should have delivered it and stood by it. He should have been prepared.

[joltinjoe]

Wow, In the DemonRat's America you can't even face your accusers. An unnamed person in a magazine article is enough to disqualify you, but having sex with interns is OK.

Nice.

[mike_9958]

I agree that he should have been prepared... that was an easy question. What was he expecting ? And to recant his answer later.... mmmmm I'll be surprised if he makes it.

[thinktwice]

Clarence Thomas successfully used the word "lynching" to describe his treatment before Kennedy et al; and now it's Estrada that's being lynched.

[binger]

[alnick]

"You attempted to block liberal applicants" from becoming clerks," Schumer then said, and began reading a long, carefully worded question: "Have you ever told anyone that you do not believe any person should clerk for Justice Kennedy because that person is too liberal, not conservative enough, or because that person did not have the appropriate ideology, politics, or judicial philosophy, or because you were concerned that person would influence Justice Kennedy to take positions you did not want him taking?"

He should have said, Senator Schumer, have you ever told anyone that you do not believe any person should become a federal judge because that person is too conservative, not liberal enough, or because that person did not have the appropriate ideology, politics, or judicial philosophy, or because you were concerned that person would take positions you did not want him taking?"

[Marysecretary]

Schumer and his ilk: you think at one point they've sunk about as low as they can get and then they keep surprising you and get lower and lower. He's my congresscritter, but I would never vote for him. I never did and I never will. He's despicable!

[soycd]

The Nation Magazine!!!!!! How can this far-leftwing rag be used in a Senate proceeding? Has a far-right article ever been used before? This is just plain crazy!!!

The democRATs want a civil war in America it looks like. We MUST get these anti-American leftists out of power and SOON!!!!!!!!!

[Uncle Miltie]

"I don't recall."

For crying out loud, if a question isn't crystal clear and safe, the Clintons showed the way.

[kcvl]

Schumer stopped him. "I think we have some credibility problems here,"

For a politician to tell someone else that they have a credibility problem must be a sick joke!

[Stallone]

Wake up, Republicans.

Democrats are scum, and you are far too naive to get it.

Evil exists in your own backyard. It is called "Democrat".

[linn37]

when do they vote?

[marron]

Schumer is going on about the Repubs sending "stealth" conservatives as candidates for judgeships.

And Republicans are trying to deny it, no, we would never try to sneak a conservative past you guys.

Obviously the Demos have a litmus test, and obviously they have made a decision to wait it out until the midterm elections, and to approve no Republican judges. At all. All of them are doomed from the outset, because they will all be borked on some pretext or other. The Republicans have to sent them up, and watch them be savaged, because people need to see what the Demos are doing.

But the Demos are not considering these candidates for office. If they can, and I believe they can, they will not approve anyone until Bush leaves office, or they lose control of the Senate.

Which makes it silly for them to accuse Estrada of having a litmus test for making his recommendations. Of course he's a conservative. Of course he would not recommend a leftist ideologue for any position whatever.

Why ever would a conservative deny what he is? No one believes what you are saying anyway, so denying settled fact is not a clever tactic in this case, it is merely self-abasing. And why would you deny not recommending a leftist for a responsible position? If indeed the event happened, he should have admitted it boldly.

There are times when you keep your views close to the vest. But in this kind of hearing, when they are planning to bork you anyway, you should be bold. Storm the battlements, and if you go down, go down in flames, not simpering like a battered puppy.

[dark_lord]

Perhaps someone who knows the ins and outs of this can answer this question for me, which is: If the Republicans take the Senate, than can these candidates which the Democrats are dropping be recalled, and then recommended so that Bush can seat them as judges? Because if so, then the key and most critical issue is for the Republicans to capture the Senate.

[Aunt Polgara]

The hearing is available here

[copycat]

Schumer's arguments consist of magazine articles and newspaper articles. I'm getting a little tired of government by the press and it's about time someone called them on it.

This man received extremely good ratings from his superiors and all appropriate bodies, yet we are going to deny him based on magazine and newspaper articles?

W.!! Tell the American people your judges are being attacked with newspaper and magazine articles.

[votelife]

Dear President Bush,
With the Surpeme Court session getting ready to close, it may well be time for perhaps the most important domestic decision of your presidency: the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice(s). The main reason why I supported you in 2000 and why I wanted Daschle out of power in 02 (and 04) has to do with the courts. I want America courts to interpret law, not write law. During your presidential campaign you said Thomas and Scalia were your two model justices. Those are excellent models. The High Court needs more like them. Clarence Thomas recently said to students that the tough cases were when what he wanted to do was different from what the law said. And he goes by the law. This should be a model philosophy for our justices. Your father, President Bush lost his reelection campaign for 3 main reasosn, as far as I can see. 1. he broke the no new taxes pledge 2. David Souter 3. Clinton convinced people we were in a Bush recession (which we had already come out of by the time Clinton was getting sworn in)

I urge you to learn from all three of these: 1. on taxes, you're doing great. Awesome job on the tax cut. 2. good job so far on judicial appointments. I want to see more of a fight for Estrada, Owen, and Pickering, but I commend you on your nominations. 3. by staying engaged in the economic debate you'll serve yourself well

I have been thoroughly impressed with your handling of al Queida, Iraq, and terrorism. You have inspired confidence and have shown great leadership.

But I want to remind you that your Supreme Court pick(s) will be with us LONG after you have departed office. I urge you to avoid the tempation to find a "compromise" pick. Go for a Scalia or Thomas. Don't go for an O'Connor or Kennedy. To be specific, get someone who is pro-life. Roe v Wade is one of the worst court decisions I know of, and it's the perfect example of unrestrained judicial power.

I know the temptation will be tremendous on you to nominate a moderate. But remember who your true supporters are. I am not a important leader or politician. I am "simply" a citizen who has been an enthusiatic supporter of you. I am willing to accept compromise in many areas of government but I will watch your Court nomiantions extremely closely. What the Senate Dems are doing right now is disgusting, but as the President you have the bully pulpit to stop it. Democrats will back down if you turn up serious heat on them.

Moreover, I think public opinion is shifting towards the pro-life position. Dems will want you to nominate a moderate, but almost all will vote against you anyways. Pro-choice Repubs will likely still vote for you if you nominate a Scalia, after all, you campaigned on it. So Mr. President, I urge you to stick with your campaign statements and nominate justices who believe in judicial restraint, like Scalia and Thomas.

Happy Memorial Day and may God bless you and your family.