HOLY CRAP!!! Rehnquist Dead - Page 3

Franklinnoble · 09-04-2005, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

If what we've seen from you and capsicum is moral righteousness, I for one hope fervently for decay. I think religous nuts who consign science to the dustbin are a great sign of righteousness, or nuts who think their religous beliefs should become the barometer of all policy.

In essence, I'm going to echo Glengoyle here- Christian Conservatives have ruined the individualist, libertarian leaning Rockefeller Republican party - and its a shame. One may well point that this is where the Republican party had to go to be electable, which raises another debate in itself.

And yet we hold a majority in Congress and were able to get W. elected to another term...

SirFozzie · 09-04-2005, 07:15 PM

yeah, this thread is going to go to hell quickly.

RIP, Judge Rehnquist.

bronconick · 09-04-2005, 07:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

It is my fundamental belief that the federal govt has gathered too much power, not only in itself but in their hold over the states as well. The SC, unfortunately, went along with much of it. In my simplistic opinion, much of what Congress have done the 40 years should be stricken down by the Court. I look for judges that are strict Constitutionalists, not liberal or conservative in their rulings.

Bingo. Of course, the entire debate will be Roe v. Wade. Not like I'd rather know their opinion on property rights, for instance, among other things.

SFL Cat · 09-04-2005, 08:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

In essence, I'm going to echo Glengoyle here- Christian Conservatives have ruined the individualist, libertarian leaning Rockefeller Republican party - and its a shame. One may well point that this is where the Republican party had to go to be electable, which raises another debate in itself.

The Rockerfeller Republicans never won shit. In fact, today's Democratic Party is fast becomming what the Rockerfeller Republicans were (at least in terms of winning elections).

Young Drachma · 09-04-2005, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swaggs

From a historical standpoint, a potentially interesting event may happen.

Judge Roberts may get nominated to become the Chief Justice, as well as "just" a Supreme Court justice, so that there will only need to be two confirmations made, rather than the two replacements and a new Chief. Anyone know if that has ever happened before?

I wonder how the sitting Justices would react to that. It makes sense, but most judges have fairly sizeable egos and it could be a tough pill to swallow for some of them (in private).

That's an interesting prospect.

I don't see it happening. But indeed it's interesting. Scalia seems the bet for CJ.

Swaggs · 09-04-2005, 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

That's an interesting prospect.

I don't see it happening. But indeed it's interesting. Scalia seems the bet for CJ.

Here is the article: http://apnews.excite.com/article/200...D8CDONCO0.html

In all honesty, it makes some sense. Rather than having three confirmation hearings beforing fielding a full set of Justices, this would only require two hearings.

capsicum · 09-05-2005, 12:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

But I'm staunchly & adamantly in favor of legal abortion, so I'm probably the wrong guy to even get involved in this thread.

Whoa Dude

Glad im not your FOFC wife anymore or we'd be having an FOFC divorce about now

Galaxy · 09-05-2005, 12:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

yeah, this thread is going to go to hell quickly.

RIP, Judge Rehnquist.

I called it on page one...I never quite understood discussing politics with people who you don't agree with. Politics is one of those things you are set in, and aren't chaning regardless.

Galaxy · 09-05-2005, 01:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Um... the guy was a sitting Supreme Court justice... his death is ultimately of great significance politically (though I did say "RIP" in my first post). There is NOTHING wrong with talking about the political consequences of that death.

I agree with you...But this is FOFC.

NoMyths · 09-05-2005, 01:08 AM

Scalia will be Chief Justice. Roberts will be confirmed with little conflict.

Honolulu_Blue · 09-05-2005, 06:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by capsicum

Whoa Dude

Glad im not your FOFC wife anymore or we'd be having an FOFC divorce about now

I thought you were Bubba Wheels' FOFC wife?

Mr. Wednesday · 09-05-2005, 08:21 AM

MSN says that Roberts is now up for Chief.

amdaily · 09-05-2005, 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Wednesday

MSN says that Roberts is now up for Chief.

Add this to the list of Bush's fuck ups. Now we could potentially have a Souter sitting in the Chief Justices chair, and have to appoint another moderate to fill O'Conners seat. We assumed when Rehnquist retired/died that a real conservative would be picked and that a fight would be put up for him. So much for that, this is just Bush looking to avoid another battle.

flere-imsaho · 09-05-2005, 10:57 AM

Roberts to be CJ nominee has been confirmed by all the major media outlets.

Crapshoot · 09-05-2005, 10:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SFL Cat

The Rockerfeller Republicans never won shit. In fact, today's Democratic Party is fast becomming what the Rockerfeller Republicans were (at least in terms of winning elections).

A point I conceded, SFL - it may well be that the plank I like is unelectable by itself, which is a shame.

Crapshoot · 09-05-2005, 11:00 AM

Interesting choice - I was sure Scalia was going to be CJ - he's probably the most intelligent (albeit hypocritical at times) member of the court, and it was thought to be his for the taking. Isn't it gutsy putting a guy on straight as the CJ ?

CamEdwards · 09-05-2005, 11:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Interesting choice - I was sure Scalia was going to be CJ - he's probably the most intelligent (albeit hypocritical at times) member of the court, and it was thought to be his for the taking. Isn't it gutsy putting a guy on straight as the CJ ?

Historically, it's not all that uncommon. I confess, I would love to see Scalia as Chief Justice, but a friend of mine who's more in the know than I am made this point: Roberts is a guy who's known as a great persuader. Scalia's not. By that standard, it makes a lot of sense to have a Chief Justice who's good at convincing others to go along with him.

John Galt · 09-05-2005, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Interesting choice - I was sure Scalia was going to be CJ - he's probably the most intelligent (albeit hypocritical at times) member of the court, and it was thought to be his for the taking. Isn't it gutsy putting a guy on straight as the CJ ?

Not really. It is not uncommon. And Scalia was never really the best choice for CJ. What made Rehnquist one of the best CJ's in history was his organizational skills, his small ego, and his effectiveness in getting things done. Scalia has never been known for those qualities. A CJ isn't anymore important than the other judges except in organizational ways. His or her vote counts the same and there really isn't any extra control from being CJ. By the accounts I have heard, Roberts is much more in the Rehnquist mold than Scalia would have been.

HomerJSimpson · 09-05-2005, 11:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

Historically, it's not all that uncommon. I confess, I would love to see Scalia as Chief Justice, but a friend of mine who's more in the know than I am made this point: Roberts is a guy who's known as a great persuader. Scalia's not. By that standard, it makes a lot of sense to have a Chief Justice who's good at convincing others to go along with him.

Don't you think that has to hurt Scalia, though? I bet he was already sizing up the robe with special stripes.

clintl · 09-05-2005, 11:23 AM

I think one of two possible things is going on here:

1) The timing of Rehnquist's death is awkward for a lot of reasons. There's not much chance of getting through three confirmation hearings this fall, and the new session is due to start soon. O'Connor has apparently agreed to stay on the Court until her successor is confirmed, so with Roberts as CJ, there's still a chance the Court can start its session with a full set of justices.

2) Roberts impressed Bush in his interview even more than the Bush folks have let on, and moved ahead of Scalia as Bush's favored CJ candidate.

CamEdwards · 09-05-2005, 11:39 AM

I really think all the talk of a Chief Justice Scalia is overblown. I'm sure it was discussed and debated, but no one I know in DC political circles ever thought it was a realistic suggestion.

Crapshoot · 09-05-2005, 11:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

Historically, it's not all that uncommon. I confess, I would love to see Scalia as Chief Justice, but a friend of mine who's more in the know than I am made this point: Roberts is a guy who's known as a great persuader. Scalia's not. By that standard, it makes a lot of sense to have a Chief Justice who's good at convincing others to go along with him.

That is a good point - Scalia's not one to seek compromise. I understand its been a role filled by newcomers in the past, but it seems strange to me that you would nominate a "noob" to the highest role.

Crapshoot · 09-05-2005, 11:42 AM

Question - is Gonzales done as far as SCOTUS is concerned ? Does Bush go wide right (I mean stupid right, like Janice Brown) or go unconventational with an Orrin Hatch or something ?

Arles · 09-05-2005, 12:07 PM

Arizona senator John Kyl is a darkhorse. He's very conservative, but extremely well-respected in the senate. I could see Bush go that way if he doesn't have the fortitude to nominate someone like Janice Rogers Brown. Still, I think an unquestionable conservative will be nominated for Rehnquist's spot. I can't see that being Gonzalez.

JonInMiddleGA · 09-05-2005, 12:07 PM

Assuming the media reports are right about the CJ choice (which is probably a dangerous assumption on my part), I'm disappointed. Roberts was passable as a moderate choice for a "regular" seat, but has too many unknowns for me to be comfortable with giving him the Chief chair.

I suspect now I'll get the double whammy on the other seat -- a far right pick for the remaining vacancy ... but one that's only far right on abortion (where I part ways with the majority on the right) and provides little else for me to be happy about.

That possibility brings up something that's interesting (at least to me) --
here in Georgia, Sonny Perdue has already managed to send my support to a (D) (barring the unlikely emergence of an R challenger for the nomination). I have a tough time seeing how anything on the Federal level could do the same, but the simple fact that I even wondered about the prospect may say something about how easy it might be to royally screw up the future.

Crapshoot · 09-05-2005, 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Assuming the media reports are right about the CJ choice (which is probably a dangerous assumption on my part), I'm disappointed. Roberts was passable as a moderate choice for a "regular" seat, but has too many unknowns for me to be comfortable with giving him the Chief chair.

I suspect now I'll get the double whammy on the other seat -- a far right pick for the remaining vacancy ... but one that's only far right on abortion (where I part ways with the majority on the right) and provides little else for me to be happy about.

That possibility brings up something that's interesting (at least to me) --
here in Georgia, Sonny Perdue has already managed to send my support to a (D) (barring the unlikely emergence of an R challenger for the nomination). I have a tough time seeing how anything on the Federal level could do the same, but the simple fact that I even wondered about the prospect may say something about how easy it might be to royally screw up the future.

Okay, who got JIMGA's password ?

Young Drachma · 09-05-2005, 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Swaggs

Here is the article: http://apnews.excite.com/article/200...D8CDONCO0.html

In all honesty, it makes some sense. Rather than having three confirmation hearings beforing fielding a full set of Justices, this would only require two hearings.

He sure did call it.

Young Drachma · 09-05-2005, 12:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by amdaily

Add this to the list of Bush's fuck ups. Now we could potentially have a Souter sitting in the Chief Justices chair, and have to appoint another moderate to fill O'Conners seat. We assumed when Rehnquist retired/died that a real conservative would be picked and that a fight would be put up for him. So much for that, this is just Bush looking to avoid another battle.

Roberts is no Souter. No way.

JonInMiddleGA · 09-05-2005, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

Okay, who got JIMGA's password ?

LOL, like I said, a quick pass through the notion makes it seem pretty unlikely ... but I'm a little concerned that such a review was even neccessary.

It's politics, where anything is possible (however unlikely it might be). After all, who could have possibly imagined that a Governor that I had such high hopes for could so utterly destroy my interest in the state GOP by the midpoint of his term?

Crapshoot · 09-05-2005, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

LOL, like I said, a quick pass through the notion makes it seem pretty unlikely ... but I'm a little concerned that such a review was even neccessary.

It's politics, where anything is possible (however unlikely it might be). After all, who could have possibly imagined that a Governor that I had such high hopes for could so utterly destroy my interest in the state GOP by the midpoint of his term?

What has Perdue done ? I admit not hearing much about him on a national scale - wasn't he supposedly one of the new Turks - the up and coming Republican governers ?

JonInMiddleGA · 09-05-2005, 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crapshoot

What has Perdue done ? I admit not hearing much about him on a national scale - wasn't he supposedly one of the new Turks - the up and coming Republican governers ?

He didn't exactly get off to a sparkling start when he chose to make his very first offical action ... a tax increase. From there, it's been a series of failures & disappointments for his supporters, from mishandling the flag issue to falling short of his education promises to signing the smoking ban bill (ftr, he had lost me before that).

The problem in Georgia seems to have been this -- after 100+ years out of power, when the GOP finally got that power ... they had virtually no one who actually knew how to lead anything. There seems to be a small handful, mostly younger from more rural areas, who at least have a clue but they're badly outnumbered by those who spent too many years as the opposition party & really have proven themselves ill-prepared for their new role.

For Perdue to lose me isn't neccessarily that big a surprise in some ways -- you have to remember that I have no real history with the Rep. party here, I'm far more akin to Zell Miller, basically a Southern Democrat who was abandoned by his party over the years -- but the unrest is reaching into the lifelong GOP'ers as well. When I had a very good friend, who has never voted a Dem for any office in his life (he's in his 40's) show me the check he wrote to one of the Dem contenders ... that's why I don't believe Perdue has a chance in hell of being re-elected. He's lost the coalition that gave him a victory AND he's losing parts of the party core, which isn't a formula that gives him a snowball's chance of winning another term.

HomerJSimpson · 09-05-2005, 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

He didn't exactly get off to a sparkling start when he chose to make his very first offical action ... a tax increase. From there, it's been a series of failures & disappointments for his supporters, from mishandling the flag issue to falling short of his education promises to signing the smoking ban bill (ftr, he had lost me before that, but that is enough in itself not only to refuse to vote for him but wish I could beat his tubby butt).

Fix it for ya.

sterlingice · 09-05-2005, 03:33 PM

Yeah, but, Jon- votes are always easier to give to the unnamed candidate than someone you don't like. As soon as the Dems put some sort of dope up against him, you'll be voting for him as the "lesser of two evils".

SI

JonInMiddleGA · 09-05-2005, 04:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Yeah, but, Jon- votes are always easier to give to the unnamed candidate than someone you don't like. As soon as the Dems put some sort of dope up against him, you'll be voting for him as the "lesser of two evils".

SI

No, I don't believe so. If the eventual nominee is Lt. Gov Mark Taylor, I can't see myself voting for either of them, a pair of worthless fat bastards. If it's current Sec. of State Cathy Cox, I'll vote for her (obviously, since I'm ready to send her a check to help beat that p.o.s. she's facing in the Dem primary).

ISiddiqui · 09-05-2005, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

What you're talking about (I think) would be akin to the charges that exist in some states to cover vehicular homicide charges for unborn babies killed in car crashes & such - different circumstances but same basic principle. And I think charges like you're talking about do exist in some states, although I believe they're usually prosecuted against 3rd parties moreso than against the (prospective) mother.

But I'm staunchly & adamantly in favor of legal abortion, so I'm probably the wrong guy to even get involved in this thread. Basically just adding there I believe there is at least some statutes like you're talking about on the books in some states already (same kind of laws that allow crack mothers to be charged for using while pregnant).

Yep, Jon, that is true. Those laws are on the books in some states, but I've never heard of one being used against the mother (I'm not sure they've even really been used against crack mothers.. though I could be wrong). Say a mother changed lanes without looking, hit a car and the stress caused a miscarriage. What then (not you personally, because I know your views are opposite of the type of person I'm asking this of)?

I'm not being an ass, just pointing out that there are consequences that may not have been fully thought through.

MrBigglesworth · 09-06-2005, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by capsicum

I very much agree!

All 3 of my babies were alive and growing from the moment of conception....dont know of to many lifeless things that "grow."

...cancer, hair, fingernails...

HomerJSimpson · 09-06-2005, 05:03 PM

After a couple of threads on here today, I'm begining to envy him.

09-04-2005, 07:15 PM	#102
SirFozzie Hall Of Famer Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: The State of Insanity	yeah, this thread is going to go to hell quickly. RIP, Judge Rehnquist. __________________ Check out Foz's New Video Game Site, An 8-bit Mind in an 8GB world! http://an8bitmind.com

09-05-2005, 08:21 AM	#112
Mr. Wednesday Pro Starter Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: South Bend, IN	MSN says that Roberts is now up for Chief. __________________ Hattrick - Brays Bayou FC (70854) / USA III.4 Hockey Arena - Houston Aeros / USA II.1 Thanks to my FOFC Hattrick supporters - Blackout, Brillig, kingfc22, RPI-fan, Rich1033, antbacker, One_to7, ur_land, KevinNU7, and TonyR (PM me if you support me and I've missed you)

09-05-2005, 11:39 AM	#121
CamEdwards Stadium Announcer Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Burke, VA	I really think all the talk of a Chief Justice Scalia is overblown. I'm sure it was discussed and debated, but no one I know in DC political circles ever thought it was a realistic suggestion. __________________ I don't want the world. I just want your half.

09-05-2005, 12:07 PM	#125
JonInMiddleGA Hall Of Famer Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Behind Enemy Lines in Athens, GA	Assuming the media reports are right about the CJ choice (which is probably a dangerous assumption on my part), I'm disappointed. Roberts was passable as a moderate choice for a "regular" seat, but has too many unknowns for me to be comfortable with giving him the Chief chair. I suspect now I'll get the double whammy on the other seat -- a far right pick for the remaining vacancy ... but one that's only far right on abortion (where I part ways with the majority on the right) and provides little else for me to be happy about. That possibility brings up something that's interesting (at least to me) -- here in Georgia, Sonny Perdue has already managed to send my support to a (D) (barring the unlikely emergence of an R challenger for the nomination). I have a tough time seeing how anything on the Federal level could do the same, but the simple fact that I even wondered about the prospect may say something about how easy it might be to royally screw up the future. __________________ "I lit another cigarette. Unless I specifically inform you to the contrary, I am always lighting another cigarette." - from a novel by Martin Amis

09-05-2005, 03:33 PM	#133
sterlingice Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: Back in Houston!	Yeah, but, Jon- votes are always easier to give to the unnamed candidate than someone you don't like. As soon as the Dems put some sort of dope up against him, you'll be voting for him as the "lesser of two evils". SI __________________ Houston Hippopotami, III.3: 20th Anniversary Thread - All former HT players are encouraged to check it out! Janos: "Only America could produce an imbecile of your caliber!" Freakazoid: "That's because we make lots of things better than other people!" Last edited by sterlingice : 09-05-2005 at 03:33 PM.

09-05-2005, 01:08 AM	#110
NoMyths Poet in Residence Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Charleston, SC	Scalia will be Chief Justice. Roberts will be confirmed with little conflict.

09-05-2005, 10:57 AM	#114
flere-imsaho Coordinator Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Chicagoland	Roberts to be CJ nominee has been confirmed by all the major media outlets.

09-05-2005, 11:00 AM	#116
Crapshoot Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Dec 2003	Interesting choice - I was sure Scalia was going to be CJ - he's probably the most intelligent (albeit hypocritical at times) member of the court, and it was thought to be his for the taking. Isn't it gutsy putting a guy on straight as the CJ ?

09-05-2005, 11:23 AM	#120
clintl College Starter Join Date: Dec 2000 Location: Davis, CA	I think one of two possible things is going on here: 1) The timing of Rehnquist's death is awkward for a lot of reasons. There's not much chance of getting through three confirmation hearings this fall, and the new session is due to start soon. O'Connor has apparently agreed to stay on the Court until her successor is confirmed, so with Roberts as CJ, there's still a chance the Court can start its session with a full set of justices. 2) Roberts impressed Bush in his interview even more than the Bush folks have let on, and moved ahead of Scalia as Bush's favored CJ candidate.

09-05-2005, 11:42 AM	#123
Crapshoot Grizzled Veteran Join Date: Dec 2003	Question - is Gonzales done as far as SCOTUS is concerned ? Does Bush go wide right (I mean stupid right, like Janice Brown) or go unconventational with an Orrin Hatch or something ?

09-05-2005, 12:07 PM	#124
Arles Grey Dog Software Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Phoenix, AZ by way of Belleville, IL	Arizona senator John Kyl is a darkhorse. He's very conservative, but extremely well-respected in the senate. I could see Bush go that way if he doesn't have the fortitude to nominate someone like Janice Rogers Brown. Still, I think an unquestionable conservative will be nominated for Rehnquist's spot. I can't see that being Gonzalez.

09-06-2005, 05:03 PM	#137
HomerJSimpson College Benchwarmer Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Springfield, USA	After a couple of threads on here today, I'm begining to envy him.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)