Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 9/3/2005 8:01:15 PM EDT
I'm thinking Bush might "push" it and pick Thomas...what do you think?
Link Posted: 9/3/2005 8:08:31 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/3/2005 8:13:49 PM EDT
Awesome idea but what's the process? Aren't they selected based on a vote and scenority? Patty
Link Posted: 9/3/2005 8:14:19 PM EDT
NOBODY. DumoRats will block everything at this point
Link Posted: 9/3/2005 8:18:58 PM EDT
Scalia.
Link Posted: 9/3/2005 8:19:58 PM EDT

Originally Posted By UmlautArms:
+1 Thomas



OH hell yeah.
Link Posted: 9/3/2005 8:21:45 PM EDT

Originally Posted By squeezecockerp7m8:
I'm thinking Bush might "push" it and pick Thomas...what do you think?



Thomas or Scalia...

Those are the 2 that have been floated...
Link Posted: 9/3/2005 8:22:14 PM EDT
Scalia or Thomas, either way he can't go wrong.
Link Posted: 9/3/2005 8:23:07 PM EDT

Originally Posted By pattymcn:
Awesome idea but what's the process? Aren't they selected based on a vote and scenority? Patty



I believe the nomination for Chief Justice is the same as any other Supreme Court nomination, regardless if the the nomination is an Associate Justice. If he picked Thomas, he would also have to pick another nominee to take the 9th spot (so we could be looking at 3 fights in the Senate over the Supreme Court). Bush could pick someone new as Chief Justice I believe, but I highly doubt that would happen. This is something that hasn't happened since Reagan promoted Rehnquist in '82...
Link Posted: 9/3/2005 8:24:55 PM EDT
I just had a Long Dong Silver flashback...
Link Posted: 9/3/2005 8:37:44 PM EDT

Originally Posted By squeezecockerp7m8:
Bush could pick someone new as Chief Justice I believe, but I highly doubt that would happen. This is something that hasn't happened since Reagan promoted Rehnquist in '82...



Rehnquist was a sitting justice when Reagan nominated him for the Chief spot in '86. Rehnquist was a Nixon nominee. You are correct though, the President does not have to pick a sitting justice for the top spot. He can do a "two-fer".
Link Posted: 9/3/2005 8:58:13 PM EDT

Originally Posted By rickinvegas:

Originally Posted By squeezecockerp7m8:
Bush could pick someone new as Chief Justice I believe, but I highly doubt that would happen. This is something that hasn't happened since Reagan promoted Rehnquist in '82...



Rehnquist was a sitting justice when Reagan nominated him for the Chief spot in '86. Rehnquist was a Nixon nominee. You are correct though, the President does not have to pick a sitting justice for the top spot. He can do a "two-fer".



Yeah, when Nixon picked Rehnquist he was the youngest Justice on the Court. At least Nixon got one nomination right lol...
Link Posted: 9/3/2005 9:06:03 PM EDT
Scalia.
Link Posted: 9/3/2005 9:07:55 PM EDT
I'm hoping for Justice Thomas, and President GW Bush should nominate Karl Rove for the SCOTUS as a joke and see how many Libs pass out.
Link Posted: 9/3/2005 9:12:29 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/3/2005 9:15:05 PM EDT
+1 Thomas, would be a good move due to his conservative status and voting history. Good Justice, good man.

Second choice that would make sense politically anyway would be O'Connor. If only for the fact that she has proven to be more of a moderate than originally predicted.

Thomas would be a better choice though.
Link Posted: 9/3/2005 9:21:40 PM EDT
Link Posted: 9/3/2005 9:33:09 PM EDT

Originally Posted By cmoth:

Second choice that would make sense politically anyway would be O'Connor. If only for the fact that she has proven to be more of a moderate than originally predicted.




OMFG!!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I swear I am laughing so hard. I cn't hrdly tipe......
Link Posted: 9/3/2005 9:34:12 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Sylvan:
ASHCROFT!!!

choke on this, assholes.



Good Luck getting him confirmed. Would be great for the 2nd amendment. Patty
Link Posted: 9/3/2005 9:35:05 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Sylvan:
ASHCROFT!!!

choke on this, assholes.



Pure moxie.
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 4:57:44 AM EDT
Thomas would be awesome
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 6:53:15 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/4/2005 6:55:32 AM EDT by arbob]

Originally Posted By squeezecockerp7m8:
I'm thinking Bush might "push" it and pick Thomas...what do you think?





Not a chance. Thomas hasn`t written any particulary brilliant decisions on the court, and nobody wants to hear about Anita Hill again. I`m hoping for Scalia myself. Brilliant constitutional scholar and firebreathing conservative, that would be a knockdown, dragout confirmation vote!
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 7:39:26 AM EDT
Ginsburg!!!
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 7:41:28 AM EDT
Thomas or Scalia, then replace the one chosen with another Bork, Thomas or Scalia.

Let the libs wet their nappies!
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 8:17:44 AM EDT
Scalia, Thomas, Roberts in that order.
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 8:18:45 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/4/2005 8:21:17 AM EDT by Dukota]

Originally Posted By Dave_A:

Originally Posted By squeezecockerp7m8:
I'm thinking Bush might "push" it and pick Thomas...what do you think?



Thomas or Scalia...

Those are the 2 that have been floated...



Only way to go...
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 9:43:25 AM EDT

Originally Posted By eodtech2000:
Scalia.



+1 and we couldn't ask for a better pro gun judge. Patty
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 9:49:56 AM EDT
I had a libtard coworker make a comment like "great, just great. How he gets to appoint another one". I was all warm and fuzzy inside (if it wasn't for the minor little inconvenience of it being midnight and I was sitting in the Volunteer Medical Personnel call center taking calls)
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 9:51:51 AM EDT
Bush will end up picking someone no one likes because that's what happens when there is a compromise even though the wimpy Republicans have the majority.
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 9:53:36 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/4/2005 9:57:38 AM EDT by JoseyWales]

Originally Posted By pattymcn:
Awesome idea but what's the process? Aren't they selected based on a vote and scenority? Patty



Link Posted: 9/4/2005 9:54:54 AM EDT
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 9:55:36 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Sylvan:
ASHCROFT!!!

choke on this, assholes.



Link Posted: 9/4/2005 12:30:37 PM EDT

Originally Posted By cmjohnson:
The Democraps are so anti-Bush that they'd try to derail Bush's nomination of Hillary Clinton.


CJ



They'd probably oppose that because they want a woman on there, not Hitlery lol...
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 12:34:40 PM EDT
I think he will go with Roberts or whom ever he nominates in the next few weeks. This is based on what some of the talking heads are saying. Janis Rogers Brown would be the way to go. A conservative, a woman and a minority. This would cause them poor libtards to go postal. If not her Scalia would do nicely.
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 1:55:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By pattymcn:

Originally Posted By Sylvan:
ASHCROFT!!!

choke on this, assholes.



Good Luck getting him confirmed. Would be great for the 2nd amendment. Patty



Fantastic, since that's the only one we'd have left when he's through.
Link Posted: 9/4/2005 2:24:38 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 9/4/2005 2:24:58 PM EDT by Special-K]
I'd volunteer to do it myself, but I don't think I could handle the DC traffic.



-K
Top Top