About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unread


Post 0

Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 10:44amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
He's holding a press conference tonight to announce his choice for the U.S. Supreme Court.  I assume the person he selected is from the lawyer category among the walks of life.

Post 1

Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 1:46pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I think Bush will select Alberto Gonzalez.  A day or two after O'Conner's announcement, Gonzalez flew to Iraq to "review" the troops and offer "moral support"--a move transparently designed to shore up his "loyalty" to and standing with the President.  The press has been promoting the centrist Gonzalez for two months, probably in response to leaks from the Bush people concerned about the reaction from conservatives. Like his empty-suited father before him, GW Bush cares little about abstract theory and a great deal about the loyalty of "his people".

Post 2

Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 1:56pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Bill Perry said:  “He's holding a press conference tonight to announce his choice for the U.S. Supreme Court.  I assume the person he selected is from the lawyer category among the walks of life.”

 

Typically, I wouldn’t speculate on who it will be.  However, based on the hits my site is getting today (specifically my pages related to Edith Jones based on searches for Edith Jones), especially from media outlets and some government agencies, I think it might be Edith Jones.

 

- B.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

www.loveisearned.com

Instant Messenger:

AOL:  brilovett, MSN:  blovett@gsb.uchicago.edu, Yahoo:  bm_lovett

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Post 3

Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 2:29pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
It will be Edith.  But Clements not Jones.  At least that is the heavy gossip here in D.C. and on various sites.

Post 4

Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 2:45pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I think they said its at 9pm EST, so 8pm my time, can't wait. It does look bad for Janice Brown, I was hoping she would get the nod.

Just read from the Washington Post. They're saying a lot of Republican reps are telling them it won't be Edith Clement, but then again they are reporters and hence should not be trusted.
(Edited by Clarence Hardy
on 7/19, 4:48pm)


Post 5

Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 5:45pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
It is Federal Judge John G. Roberts, Jr......

Post 6

Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 7:22pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Bah!  He sucks!!!

"Roberts, as an advocate, also represented liberal positions, arguing in favor of affirmative action, against broad protections for property rights, and on behalf of prisoners' rights."

http://www.tnr.com/doc.mhtml?i=20041129&s=rosen112904
scroll down

 John Roberts, 49. U.S. Court of Appeals for the Washington, D.C., Circuit. Top of his class at Harvard Law School and a former law clerk for Rehnquist, Roberts is one of the most impressive appellate lawyers around today. Liberal groups object to the fact that, in 1990, as a deputy solicitor general, Roberts signed a brief in a case involving abortion-financing that called, in a footnote, for Roe v. Wade to be overturned. But it would be absurd to Bork him for this: Overturning Roe was the Bush administration's position at the time, and Roberts, as an advocate, also represented liberal positions, arguing in favor of affirmative action, against broad protections for property rights, and on behalf of prisoners' rights. In little more than a year on the bench, he has won the respect of his liberal and conservative colleagues but has not had enough cases to develop a clear record on questions involving the Constitution in Exile. On the positive side, Roberts joined Judge Merrick Garland's opinion allowing a former employee to sue the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority for disability discrimination. He pointedly declined to join the unsettling dissent of Judge David Sentelle, a partisan of the Constitution in Exile, who argued that Congress had no power to condition the receipt of federal transportation funds on the Metro's willingness to waive its immunity from lawsuits. In another case, however, Roberts joined Sentelle in questioning whether the Endangered Species Act is constitutional under Congress's power to regulate interstate commerce. The regulation in question prevented developers from building on private lands in order to protect a rare species of toad, and Roberts noted with deadpan wit that "the hapless toad ... for reasons of its own, lives its entire life in California," and therefore could not affect interstate commerce. Nevertheless, Roberts appears willing to draw sensible lines: He said that he might be willing to sustain the constitutionality of the Endangered Species Act on other grounds. All in all, an extremely able lawyer whose committed conservatism seems to be leavened by a judicious temperament. 


Post 7

Tuesday, July 19, 2005 - 7:27pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Mark,

Gonzalez flew to Iraq to "review" the troops and offer "moral support"--a move transparently designed to shore up his "loyalty" to and standing with the President.
Shows one the value of cynicism. 


Post 8

Wednesday, July 20, 2005 - 11:34amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Ewe! So Scalia and Thomas now have competition for most offensive.

Post to this thread


User ID Password or create a free account.