Please Mr. Bush: Appoint A New Judiciary Committee Chair

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Annie, Nov 8, 2005.

  1. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/Commentary/com-11_8_05_TS2.html

     
  2. Bullypulpit
    Offline

    Bullypulpit Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Messages:
    5,849
    Thanks Received:
    378
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Columbus, OH
    Ratings:
    +379
    Given the extent to which the judicial nomination process ahs been politicized, changes to the system would be appropriate. I would suggest blind nominations. In this process candidates would be nominated based solely upon their qualifications and the quality of their judgements as show by the number of times their decisions have been overturned on, Constitutional grounds, by higher courts. Their names and party affiliations would not be considered in this process...only their qualifications and quality of their decisions.

    We don't need an ideologically driven judicial system, save where that ideology protects our freedoms from unconstituional usurpation by the legislative and executive branches.
     
  3. rtwngAvngr
    Offline

    rtwngAvngr Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    15,755
    Thanks Received:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +511
    Oh I see, since you cannot enforce your agenda for society through the courts, you'd like no agenda to be enforced. Let's do this, let's just go with strict constructionists, which is what ALL judges are supposed to be. Going by number of overturned cases reveals nothing and means nothing.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. Bonnie
    Offline

    Bonnie Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    9,476
    Thanks Received:
    668
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Wherever
    Ratings:
    +669
  5. KarlMarx
    Offline

    KarlMarx Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    Messages:
    3,231
    Thanks Received:
    490
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    ...
    Ratings:
    +490
    When justices like Ruth Bader Ginsberg, a card carrying member of the ACLU, was appointed to the Supreme Court, not a word about how political considerations were tainting the judicial nomination process from the Left. Now Bush is calling the shots and it's all this talk about "qualified justices".

    Anyway Bully, when Robert Bork, a former Solicitor General, acting Attorney General, circuit judge for United States Court of Appeals and law professor was nominated by Reagan, he was "borked" by the NOW and rated "unqualified" (!!!!!!!!) by the American Bar Association.

    Then, when Thomas Clarence was nominated by the first President Bush, the NOW made the whole nomination process a three ring circus by dragging Anita Hill who practically perjured herself. Talk about a shameful spectacle.

    And the freaking Democrats have filibustered just about every judicial nominee of Bush's....

    It takes a lot of brass when the Left pulls crap like that and then put on airs about "politicizing the judicial process"

    No, the only way the Left will be satisfied is when Bush's nominees will say that they are for Roe vs. Wade. That's the Left's definition of a "qualified" justice.

    Frankly, I'd like to see a whole bunch of Senators impeached, first and foremost that rat I call a Senator .... Chuck Schumer!

    You must be joking....... the unconstitutional usurpation has been by the courts, and has been every since Marbury vs Madison in 1803!
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  6. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,511
    Thanks Received:
    8,156
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,135
    Yeah we do need an idealogical driven judicial system. We need a judicial system that is loyal to the ideals found in the Constitution of the United States of America. You are living in a fantasy world if you think that somehow the judicial branch hasn't been politicized before. It has been since Marbury v Madison and the first shift in power between political parties in history.

    Besides, how do you determine quality of decisions without the standard of the constitution?
     
  7. KarlMarx
    Offline

    KarlMarx Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2004
    Messages:
    3,231
    Thanks Received:
    490
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    ...
    Ratings:
    +490
    Marbury vs Madison as in "the judiciary alone has the power to interpret the Constitution"....

    I read that Thomas Jefferson had a fit when he heard what Justice John Marshall pulled

    Link to "Men in Black" on amazon.com

    [ame]http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0895260506/002-4607091-9910467?v=glance[/ame]
     

Share This Page