Free Republic

The history channel's program on Lincoln was the worst slock job of yellow journalism I have seen in years. All speculation with NO facts to substaniate their BS.

I feel sorry for the youth of America and the world that would even consider this garbage worth the time they wasted watching it. This is a low point - even for a bias network like A&E.

tuck

Lubbock is a wonderful city, excellent place to raise a family, but, not a place for a Presidential Library. To all the citizens of Lubbock, suggest you prepare yourself for the ground breaking of the Presidential Library on land located in Las Colinas that will be donated to SMU. For y'all that are not fortunate enough to live in the Grand State of Texas, Las Colinas is in the Dallas-Ft. Worth metroplex.

tuck

You're corrected - sorry you are wrong - as indicated by the number of Circuit Court Judges that were (and are) being fillibustered in the Senate - i.e. Brent Kavanaugh - currently still stuck in the Senate vortex awaiting confirmation to the DC Court of Appeals.

tuck

Once again everyone, recess appointments are only for Executive Branch positions that require approval from the Senate. There are NO - Nada "recess appointments" in regards to the Judicial Branch, sorry everyone - that is what the Constitution requires.

tuck

Sorry guys and gals. . . .

For your educational benefit, there is not a "recess appointment" available to the Pres when it comes to the Courts. The Judiciary is a 3rd and totally separate branch of our government. Per the Constitution the Pres nominates candidates for the bench(s) and the Senate provides advice and consent. The Pres can perform recess appointments for Executive Branch personel that require Constitutional approval - ONLY.

O'Conner's only impact might be that an 8 justice court might choose to wait to hear a case.

tuck

"This is positively the WORST SCOTUS decision I have ever heard of."


SCOTUS has made alot of bad decisions since 1791, while Kelo is right up there, I'd chose Dred Scott as the number 1, foolish decision, with Roe as a close 2nd.

tuck

Damn, you folks have the 3 next positions all lined up. . .

I'll just focus on the only OPEN seat, and delay addressing possible future openings, until they are open. Spent alot of time reviewing and considering the possible candidates for the current opening, and most if not all would be excellent nominees. But, after my review I can assure you the A.G. Gonzales will not be the nominee for this opening, (and likely will not be a nominee at all during Bush's term as President). The President will choose one of the following:

Garza, Luttig, or E.Jones. Having watched Bush operate as my Gov and President, I'll guess Garza. BTW, relax, sip on a cool frosty soda or suds, the nominee will not be announced until mid to late July 7/15 thru 7/31.

tuck

Everyone is guessing Gonzales as the nominee. I'd guess that would upset the conservative base and not really aid in the confirmation process in the Senate.

I think Bush will nominate John Cornyn, a sitting Senator from Texas, he has been a Circuit Judge and a Supreme Court Judge in Texas. Has an excellent reputation as a jurist, good conservative creditials and I'd guess Senate Dems would have a tough time ranting that one of their own is "an extremist", though I'd think that Reid, the Turbine, Kennedy and that ol "Shu" from NY would embarrasing themselves trying.

tuck

"This time, if they start a war "over there" let us stay "over here"!

I concur, the world has rarely seen frog blood spilled for France, much less Europe. But, I'd be more than supportive of helping the Brits with a Lend-Lease program again. Then again; considering French and Germany military abilities, it's probably not needed.

tuck

Here is my take on each of these Senators vote:

Group of seven possible filibuster defections.(only one darn Dem).

Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) - loyal to McCain, but not foolish enough to go down bucking the voters in SC. He will attempt to structure a deal, but without either a commitment to vote for all filibustered nominee's, or concurrence from the Rep leaders, he will vote for the Byrd option to bar filibuster of judges.

John Warner (R-Va.) If needed he will vote to bar filibusters of judges, but, he would love to not alter the "Genteel" nature of the Senate harmony.

Arlen Specter (R-Pa.) - Would love to vote against his party leaders, but he knows he would lose his coveted Chairmanship of the Judiciary Committee, so if needed he will vote to bar filibuster of judges.

Susan Collins (R-Maine) - This one is hard to call if she is the final determinate vote. But she wants a leadership positon in the Senate, so I'd guess if she can vote against he party without being the deciding vote she probably will, if she would give the Dems a win, I'd guess she would vote for with the Rep's.

Mike DeWine (R-Ohio) - Wants for not have to vote, but if he must he will vote with the Rep's.

Gordon Smith (R-Ore.) - MSM needs to learn to read his speech, he is with the Rep's no matter what.

Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) - It is really funny that this is the only Dem mentioned. There as 4 or more other Dem's from RED states that like DeWine, do not want to vote. They will out alot of pressure on the Dem leaders to "stand down" on these filibustered judges. They will try to spin it as an effort to save the filibuster for SCOUS judges, but the real reason will be the do not wish to cut their own throats Dems today, or give the Reps in their states a butcher knife to cut each Senator to pieces in 2006.

Thats my take of the issue. Feedback anyone?