Quote:
Originally posted by ARTIC-U-LATE
Hello GC Family. During the "Today Show," there was an interruption to show the nomination. Though extremely excited to see a minority nominated, I have reservations about this woman's ability to be an effective
judge.
1. She has never been a judge. Experience should be mandatory. In this position she will have influence on a legal system that serves an entire country and sets an example for others. Being the head of a Texas lawfirm doesn't cut it.
2. Morale. Will the other judges warmly welcome someone who lacks experience in that particular positioning.
3. Societal Views. If I recall, there is no record of her views in existance. It will be the job of the senate and the house to flush any and all needed information from her during the hearings.
I look forward to hearing what happens next. I am sure most of you keep up with current events. It will be in our best interest to say tuned, there is a strong possibility that the conservatives are attempting to overturn Roe v. Wade.
What are your thoughts on the matter?
|
"minority?" did I miss something, bruh? Politically speaking, this is surprising. Given the "pass" the Ds signaled, then gave to Roberts, I'd think this woman is going to get severe scrutiny. That she would replace O'Connor's swing vote, rather than Rehnquist's conservative spot, just ups the ante for both sides.
Politically, given Bush's weakened political state, post-Katrina, declining polling numbers, etc.., I'd expected someone more readily "confirmable" but hey, this is legacy time. Bush's political strength may affect many elements of this:
-How hard will he/can he fight for Miers if she runs into opposition?
-how hard will elements of his own party, some positioning themselves for their own futures, post-Bush, fight for her?
Chuck D says don't believe the blank slate hype. Every president has a dayum good idea of the views of someone they're giving a lifetime appointment to. Her blank slate, however, will be a green light for Ds to press her to the wall. Plus, the D's got rolled last time. They have to fire up their base (06 mid-terms) by flexing their political muscle. Peep which advocacy groups line up for/against her early. that may be an indicator of where she stands politically.
morale at the SC? please. the SC has been a political entity for many years now. the justices are big boys/girls who know and have worked the political/legal game. Lifetime appointments, self-set workload, hours....we should all have such morale issues.
...shoot, let me get there. (making me the 2nd Alpha bruh justice the court has seen) --> "justice TonyB06, um, what is your vote?"
me: hol up, playa. My Bengals are on the one yard line, about to take it to the house! I'll be there in a minute
