Dems Started It, Now They Should End It
Democrats went way "out of bounds" with the Bork nomination and in the process opened a "Pandora's Box" of sorts that has effectively wreaked havoc on the nomination process for Federal Judges for over two decades now... and now's as good a time as any for them to own up to the mistake they made and call a halt to this BS before it causes any further harm.
Although I don't like his politics or views on the law (anymore than I like Scalia's or Rehnquist's, the fact of the matter is that Bork was fully qualified and should have been confirmed. Period. And while I'm sure I won't like Robert's views either, his resume is sterling and, barring some major skeleton in the closet emerging - a highly unlikely event, seeing as how he just went through this process 2 years ago for seat on Fed Appeals Court - he, too is fully qualified and should be confirmed... WITHOUT ALL THE "LITMUS TESTING BS." Period.
Some of what we've been doing with the partisan fighting is causing serious harm to the country... and, to the extent that's the case, the responsible Party, be it Republicans or Democrats, should grow the fuck up and stop this kind of shit!
have overstepped
Re: Dems Started It, Now They Should End It
I agree, GnBeret. I agree. I was watching a Bork interview last night (looks better without that scraggle on his face) and he mentioned the Supreme Court is becoming a political institution, not a legal institution.
I was dumbfounded on Ted Kennedy's little speech about Bork BEFORE he even was asked any questions. Talk about already having your mind made up.
We really need a third party - then if one of the other trouble makers want to do something, they need to get "the middle" into the mix. Perot had a good thing going - and then he flaked out on us man.
It would be nice if there was a fourth and fifth party too - then ruling would require coalitions.
Re: Dems Started It, Now They Should End It
After reading the title of this thread I'm stuck with the mental picture of two, red faced kids pointing their little fingers at eachother and telling the teacher:
"but, but... he started it"
Re: Dems Started It, Now They Should End It
I disagree with the notion that there is something wrong with partisanship... we have differences, so what's wrong with talking about them? And what's wrong with asking the person you are thinking of making a Supreme Court justice their opinions about the law, and if you think they are wrong, not wanting to confirm them? ::) That's what 'advise and consent' means...
Re: Dems Started It, Now They Should End It
Quote:
Originally Posted by dlabtot
I disagree with the notion that there is something wrong with partisanship... we have differences, so what's wrong with talking about them? And what's wrong with asking the person you are thinking of making a Supreme Court justice their opinions about the law, and if you think they are wrong, not wanting to confirm them? ::) That's what 'advise and consent' means...
Here is an example of the problem.
Instead of the legislatures growing a sack and making abortion out-right legal (instead of chipping away at the corner's of making it illegal) - they want to know they can saddle the SC candidate with the problem.
Right now there is no law settling it (unless it is an underage child seeking an abortion or a late-term abortion) so the SC has to figure out if there is a law that applies (preferably something in the constitution.)
So instead of making a law that guides the justices, they want to politicalize the justice's views and turn it into a political showdown instead of a legal thing. Unfortunately it is easier to make speeches than it is to take responsibility.
Re: Dems Started It, Now They Should End It
Sorry I just don't see the connection between the comment of mine that you quoted and your response....
Re: Dems Started It, Now They Should End It
We're very likely to wind up with a three party system in the near future if the extremism continues ... democrats, republicans and liberals (think about it)!
Seriously, it's time for this country to return to the principle upon which it was founded i.e. democracy. Democracy means that, in general, those who garner a majority of votes are entitled/expected to implement the principles and policies upon which they campaigned to the voters prior to winning the election. Logically following, GWB should have nominated Luttig or Janice Rogers Brown or some other nominee with a clear strict constructionist/originalist/ non-legislating from the bench history.
The nomination of Roberts, motivated by GWB's supposed need to 'reach out' to the mainstream and to try to avoid some measure of partisan conflict, is at some level a betrayal of the voters who put GWB back in office. More importantly, GWB's 'olive branch' candidate will STILL be assaulted by Ted Kennedy, Chuck Schumer, Pat Leahy etc. meaning that his effort at compromise will ultimately amount to nothing. All I can hope is that after the coming battle over Roberts, that Bill Frist finally acknowledges the democrats' de-facto lack of compromising and will call for the 'nuclear' option. At least by doing so he would return the senatorial role in judicial nominations to that which the constition spelled out ... 'advise and consent' ... with 51 votes amounting to consent.
Re: Dems Started It, Now They Should End It
Quote:
Originally Posted by GnBeret
Democrats went way "out of bounds" with the Bork nomination and in the process opened a "Pandora's Box" of sorts that has effectively wreaked havoc on the nomination process for Federal Judges for over two decades now
Actually there were republicans as well as democrats who didn't support Bork, don't blame that only on Democrats.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GnBeret
... and now's as good a time as any for them to own up to the mistake they made and call a halt to this BS before it causes any further harm.
Sorry but I really don't think giving a free pass to someone who will have this job for life is the way to go.
Re: Dems Started It, Now They Should End It
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deogol
Here is an example of the problem.
Instead of the legislatures growing a sack and making abortion out-right legal (instead of chipping away at the corner's of making it illegal) - they want to know they can saddle the SC candidate with the problem.
Right now there is no law settling it (unless it is an underage child seeking an abortion or a late-term abortion) so the SC has to figure out if there is a law that applies (preferably something in the constitution.)
So instead of making a law that guides the justices, they want to politicalize the justice's views and turn it into a political showdown instead of a legal thing. Unfortunately it is easier to make speeches than it is to take responsibility.
Well said Deogol!
Re: Dems Started It, Now They Should End It
I can live with Roberts. It could have been a lot worse.