I watched this early this morning.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9215790/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9215790/
Bush taps Roberts to Succeed Rehnquist
- Thread starter pepperman
- Start date
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
YA Baby. Smart as a fox.
B
bigdog1279
Guest
man :q:q:q:q i was hoping to becom chief justice man
LOL
LOL
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
I especially love this part of the article:
Democrats said Roberts will now be held to a higher standard, although they had found little in his record to suggest they would thwart his nomination as associate justice.
“Now that the president has said he will nominate Judge Roberts as chief justice, the stakes are higher and the Senate’s advice and consent responsibility is even more important,” Democratic leader Harry Reid said Monday in a statement. “The Senate must be vigilant.”
I will now translate this snip into what it really means (Satire Alert):
Democrats said they will really have to fight Roberts' nomination now, although they really don't stand a chance since he's pure as the driven snow.
"Now that the president has double-crossed us, we've really got to stop this guy or we'll lose all our power for a very long time," Democratic leader Dingy Harry Reid whined Monday in a statement. "This is our last chance."
:dancefool
Democrats said Roberts will now be held to a higher standard, although they had found little in his record to suggest they would thwart his nomination as associate justice.
“Now that the president has said he will nominate Judge Roberts as chief justice, the stakes are higher and the Senate’s advice and consent responsibility is even more important,” Democratic leader Harry Reid said Monday in a statement. “The Senate must be vigilant.”
I will now translate this snip into what it really means (Satire Alert):
Democrats said they will really have to fight Roberts' nomination now, although they really don't stand a chance since he's pure as the driven snow.
"Now that the president has double-crossed us, we've really got to stop this guy or we'll lose all our power for a very long time," Democratic leader Dingy Harry Reid whined Monday in a statement. "This is our last chance."
:dancefool
raVeneyes
Dedicated LVC Member
Regardless of Roberts' politics or record the Chief Justice should really be appointed from one of the associate justices who are familiar with the court. Pushing someone new from the outside in to the top dog spot never works.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
raVeneyes said:
I totally disagree. Someone from the outside has a better chance of being unbiased in judgments.
You're trying to compare this to politics, i.e. Congress and the Senate, where a proven insider connection and experience makes legislative success more likely. The fact of the matter is that the Supreme Court is NOT a political institution and should not be viewed as such.
Besides, it doesn't matter what you think. Since the Constitution says so, Bush can nominate anyone he chooses.
raVeneyes
Dedicated LVC Member
fossten said:
Even conservative pundits have said that one of Renquest's key advantages was that he knew the high court's inner workings well before he became chief.
In any situation involving people pushing someone new in to the mix requires a feeling out period...and a length of time for that person to ramp up to speed on how things are supposed to work and another length of time for them to impose the way they want to work on others. Political organization or not, it's still people working together.
Also there should be no more bias from someone who has been an associate justice for 30 years than there is from someone who is new to the court. They are all mandated to be unbiased.
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
I think it would be a great decision. Elevating any of the other justices at this time would create a great chasm within the court. At least this way, they can all be envious of the same guy.
fossten
Dedicated LVC Member
I'm not sure which circus I would rather attend...
Published: Sep 13, 2005
Modified: Sep 13, 2005 7:09 PM
Roberts hearings get historic start
Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr., right, is welcomed by Sens. Arlen Specter and Patrick Leahy.
AP Photo by Pablo Martinez Monsivais
By DANA MILBANK, The Washington Post
WASHINGTON -- Monday's opening of the John G. Roberts Jr. Supreme Court confirmation hearings was a time for historic firsts.
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., made 49 first-person references in a 10-minute statement that was, ostensibly, not about himself.
Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., showed exceptional versatility, working a crossword puzzle during the hearing and then breaking down in a sob while making a prosaic statement about partisanship.
Roberts, President Bush's pick for chief justice, delivered what may have been the shortest opening statement by a modern Supreme Court nominee: eight minutes, including the thank-yous and two baseball metaphors.
Opening statements
"We must use a judicial, rather than a political, standard to evaluate Judge Roberts. ... That standard must be based on the fundamental principle that judges interpret and apply but do not make law."
Orrin Hatch, R-Utah
"To me the pivotal question, which will determine my vote, is this: Are you within the mainstream -- albeit the conservative mainstream -- or are you an ideologue?"
Charles Schumer, D-N.Y.
"The people rightly demand judges who follow, not make law. From everything I have seen, Judge John Roberts, you are just the man to fill that need -- straight from central casting."
Jeff Sessions, R-Ala.
"This is your chance to explain what you meant by what you have said and what you have written." Joseph Biden, D-Del.
But in the end, the confirmation kickoff was anticlimactic: As word spread through the gallery midway through the session that FEMA Director Michael Brown had quit, reporters knew the Roberts story would, once again, be a sideshow. Roberts may well be confirmed as chief justice of the Supreme Court, but in the case before the court of public attention, in re: Katrina v. Roberts, the defendant doesn't have a chance.
With the nation distracted by the hurricane and flooding down South, neither left nor right nor middle displayed much energy. By 10:30 a.m., only 170 people had showed up for public tickets to witness the noon proceedings -- making unnecessary the plastic cordons and the queue signs. Outside the Russell Senate Office Building at 11 a.m., a grand total of 21 people demonstrated against Roberts, chanting: "Two-four-six-eight, separation of church and state!"
Even inside the storied Senate Caucus Room -- scene of the Teapot Dome, McCarthy and Watergate hearings -- some were preoccupied with Katrina.
Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the committee's ranking Democrat, observed that the hurricane was "a tragic reminder of why we have a federal government."
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., opening the hearing, called the confirmation "perhaps the biggest challenge of the decade."
Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., seemed to be taking confirmation for granted when he listed a range of issues likely to come before the court and telling Roberts, "You will rule on that." Across the street from the Russell building, a modest but confident group of conservatives sipped from water bottles labeled "Roberts YES."
Sen. John Warner, R-Va., who had the job of formally introducing Roberts to the committee, offered some advice to the nominee's playful young son Jack: "You can wiggle a little bit. Don't worry."
But the nominee sat still, shoulders slightly rounded, moving his head thoughtfully from side to side, and keeping a polite gaze on each speaking senator; after three hours of this, Roberts shamed the lawmakers with a brief speech blending jurisprudence and the national pastime. "I will remember that it's my job to call balls and strikes and not to pitch or bat," he said.
There were unscripted moments. Cornyn and Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kansas, spent a chunk of the afternoon whispering and joking. A woman in a 19th-century hat and dress sat in the back of the room wearing a "Women for Roberts" sticker. After Feingold predicted longevity for the 50-year-old nominee because he looks "healthy," Coburn, a doctor, said that cannot be predicted without a "physical exam or a family history" -- neither of which is on this week's hearing schedule. A camera behind Coburn caught the senator working a crossword puzzle. But Coburn went from detachment to emotional overdrive when it was his turn to talk; seconds after asserting that "a super-legislator body is not what the court was intended to be," he paused and wept.
Published: Sep 13, 2005
Modified: Sep 13, 2005 7:09 PM
Roberts hearings get historic start
Supreme Court nominee John G. Roberts Jr., right, is welcomed by Sens. Arlen Specter and Patrick Leahy.
By DANA MILBANK, The Washington Post
WASHINGTON -- Monday's opening of the John G. Roberts Jr. Supreme Court confirmation hearings was a time for historic firsts.
Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., made 49 first-person references in a 10-minute statement that was, ostensibly, not about himself.
Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., showed exceptional versatility, working a crossword puzzle during the hearing and then breaking down in a sob while making a prosaic statement about partisanship.
Roberts, President Bush's pick for chief justice, delivered what may have been the shortest opening statement by a modern Supreme Court nominee: eight minutes, including the thank-yous and two baseball metaphors.
Opening statements
"We must use a judicial, rather than a political, standard to evaluate Judge Roberts. ... That standard must be based on the fundamental principle that judges interpret and apply but do not make law."
Orrin Hatch, R-Utah
"To me the pivotal question, which will determine my vote, is this: Are you within the mainstream -- albeit the conservative mainstream -- or are you an ideologue?"
Charles Schumer, D-N.Y.
"The people rightly demand judges who follow, not make law. From everything I have seen, Judge John Roberts, you are just the man to fill that need -- straight from central casting."
Jeff Sessions, R-Ala.
"This is your chance to explain what you meant by what you have said and what you have written." Joseph Biden, D-Del.
But in the end, the confirmation kickoff was anticlimactic: As word spread through the gallery midway through the session that FEMA Director Michael Brown had quit, reporters knew the Roberts story would, once again, be a sideshow. Roberts may well be confirmed as chief justice of the Supreme Court, but in the case before the court of public attention, in re: Katrina v. Roberts, the defendant doesn't have a chance.
With the nation distracted by the hurricane and flooding down South, neither left nor right nor middle displayed much energy. By 10:30 a.m., only 170 people had showed up for public tickets to witness the noon proceedings -- making unnecessary the plastic cordons and the queue signs. Outside the Russell Senate Office Building at 11 a.m., a grand total of 21 people demonstrated against Roberts, chanting: "Two-four-six-eight, separation of church and state!"
Even inside the storied Senate Caucus Room -- scene of the Teapot Dome, McCarthy and Watergate hearings -- some were preoccupied with Katrina.
Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont, the committee's ranking Democrat, observed that the hurricane was "a tragic reminder of why we have a federal government."
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., opening the hearing, called the confirmation "perhaps the biggest challenge of the decade."
Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., seemed to be taking confirmation for granted when he listed a range of issues likely to come before the court and telling Roberts, "You will rule on that." Across the street from the Russell building, a modest but confident group of conservatives sipped from water bottles labeled "Roberts YES."
Sen. John Warner, R-Va., who had the job of formally introducing Roberts to the committee, offered some advice to the nominee's playful young son Jack: "You can wiggle a little bit. Don't worry."
But the nominee sat still, shoulders slightly rounded, moving his head thoughtfully from side to side, and keeping a polite gaze on each speaking senator; after three hours of this, Roberts shamed the lawmakers with a brief speech blending jurisprudence and the national pastime. "I will remember that it's my job to call balls and strikes and not to pitch or bat," he said.
There were unscripted moments. Cornyn and Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kansas, spent a chunk of the afternoon whispering and joking. A woman in a 19th-century hat and dress sat in the back of the room wearing a "Women for Roberts" sticker. After Feingold predicted longevity for the 50-year-old nominee because he looks "healthy," Coburn, a doctor, said that cannot be predicted without a "physical exam or a family history" -- neither of which is on this week's hearing schedule. A camera behind Coburn caught the senator working a crossword puzzle. But Coburn went from detachment to emotional overdrive when it was his turn to talk; seconds after asserting that "a super-legislator body is not what the court was intended to be," he paused and wept.