John Hawkins asked a number of bloggers (me included) who they would pick, who they thought Bush would pick, and who they hoped Bush would not pick.
The results are here.
Reader Interactions
30Comments
Comments are closed.
Come for the politics, stay for the snark.
When your entire life is steeped in white supremacy, equality feels like discrimination.
Not all heroes wear capes.
Wow, you are pre-disappointed. How surprising.
Glad to see john eastman going through some things.
It’s a doggy dog world.
Putting aside our relentless self-interest because the moral imperative is crystal clear.
Sadly, there is no cure for stupid.
Good lord, these people are nuts.
American History and Black History Cannot Be Separated
Accused of treason; bitches about the ratings. I am in awe.
That’s my take and I am available for criticism at this time.
Republicans are radicals, not conservatives.
Red lights blinking on democracy’s dashboard
Let there be snark.
We’re not going back!
And now I have baud making fun of me. this day can’t get worse.
They were going to turn on one another at some point. It was inevitable.
🎶 Those boots were made for mockin’ 🎵
Let me eat cake. The rest of you could stand to lose some weight, frankly.
Despite his magical powers, I don’t think Trump is thinking this through, to be honest.
Proof that we need a blogger ethics panel.
Sitting here in limbo waiting for the dice to roll
White supremacy is terrorism.
You can’t love your country only when you win.
Shygetz
Michael McConnell? You really want a fight over abortion, don’t you?
Interesting how NO ONE wants Gonzales.
John Cole
I really don’t care about abortion as an issue…
But yes, I wanted to see a bloody fight, which is, in large part, why I selected him. PFAW and NARAL would shit bricks.
Remember, John’s question was:
“If you were given the opportunity to make the pick, who would you choose?”
Not, “who do you think would be the best justice” or “who do you think would be the best for America” or “who do you think will faithfully interpret the Constitution.”
carpeicthus
I’m glad you’d rather piss a few people off than make a choice that, under your own worldview, would be the best person for the job. Spite rulez.
Shygetz
Personally, I agree with you, John. I want Bush to put up a serious, out-in-the-open anti-abortion candidate and watch as everyone has to finally pick a side. While I don’t have a personal stake in abortion, it has been a defining issue for a long time, and maybe if it gets thoroughly fought, the loser will slink off for at least a couple of years.
Marcus Wellby
I agree completely. Let’s have the definitive debate once and for all and move on. It is beyond silly that abortion is the most well defined difference between the parties. Though, being such a key fundraising issue, I don’t think we will ever have closure one way or the other.
Geek, Esq.
Don’t worry about some wishy-washy person like Gonzales or Clement.
My prediction:
Edith Jones–ultra-rightwing and a woman.
foolishmortal
If Bush wants to pick someone eminently qualified who will get confirmed with a minimum of fuss:
Richard Posner
Steve
McConnell would be a poor strategic pick. If you wanted to provoke a fight by picking someone who is openly against Roe v. Wade, you’d want to pick someone like Garza who would be a reliable vote on other issues as well. McConnell is too much of an intellectual to be an ideologue for either side – and, frankly, I’m not even 100% convinced McConnell would overturn Roe v. Wade, notwithstanding his personal feelings.
In my book, Bush is in no position to pick a fight right now, because the political landscape is very bad for him. He needs to regain his momentum elsewhere. So I don’t think it would be smart for him to send anyone more controversial than Roberts. Oh, and I’d be surprised if they aren’t bending over backwards to name someone who isn’t a white male.
Shygetz
According to Wiki, McConnell has said publically that Roe v Wade is not based on sound Constitutional footing.
Andrew J. Lazarus
According to Wiki, McConnell has said publically that Roe v Wade is not based on sound Constitutional footing.
My brother has said that too, and he’s pro-choice, much less unwilling to overturn Roe.
McConnell is too intellectual for Dubya. Look for Jones or Janice rodgers Brown. After sending up a (relative) moderate, Bush will be looking to stick it to his enemies as hard as he can.
Also look for a filibuster.
danelectro
how much advance notice will the white house have regarding whether indictments are coming down? i read where earle had told delay last week.
danelectro
how’d that comment get put in this thread? weird.
Steve
Yeah, what Andrew said. Rehnquist thought the Miranda case wasn’t based on constitutional footing, but he still voted to uphold the precedent. And you could just as easily uphold Roe by proposing an alternative constitutional footing, like the Ninth Amendment. The smart money says he would vote to overturn it, mind you, but it’s not a 100% slam dunk.
bains
It appears that Gonzales isnt very popular…
Geek, Esq.
There’s no way Bush’s base would tolerate Posner. There’d be an open revolt.
Cynical Nation
Funny, I nearly always agree with you, but Janice Rogers Brown would be my first pick, not my last. I really hope it’s not AG the AG. It has nothing to do with his infamous “torture” memo, but I don’t want anyone on the High Court who thinks that fighting pornography should be a top federal priority at this point in history.
My preferences aside, my prediction is Clement.
slightlybad
I love Richard Posner, but anybody that thinks that he could get confirmed without a bloody confirmation fight is crazy. He’s written too widely on a lot of things that would provide opponents (and as a Bush nominee, there will be opponents) ammunition. I believe that he wrote an article attempting to explain why black women have big asses using economic analysis. That was probably partially tongue in cheek, but can you imagine what some of these bloviating Senators would do with something like that?
Besides, Posner’s pretty old and he’s too much of a libertarian for Bush.
Alex Kozinski would be awesome, but again, too much of a libertarian for Bush.
Geek, Esq.
Posner is pro-choice. That would send the redstate crowd to the golf courses for ’06.
Shygetz
Didn’t know anything about Posner before this thread–I would definitely support him.
Geek, Esq.
If you’re talking in terms of pure merit, Posner makes Roberts look like a second-year law student.
slightlybad
Agreed — he’s probably the biggest intellectual heavyweight on the federal bench (Posner).
Cynical Nation
I like Posner myself. But isn’t he a bit long in the tooth at this point?
Tim F
Bush has no political capital and his party’s in a tailspin. If potential indictments against both Frist and Rove do occur they’ll hardly be able to put up much of a coordinated fight, against either the Democrats or the Republicans’ own extremist fringe.
I expect Bush to punt. That is to say, he’ll pick somebody old enough and reasonable reasonable enough to put off a gruesome Senate fight.
Tony Alva
Hillary Clinton, and why not?
Otto Man
True. But he’ll never get the nod. Too old and too outspoken.
I can understand John’s preference for McConnell, but there’s no way he gets apppointed. Too intellectual and occasionally a maverick.
If it weren’t for the obvious desire to appoint a minority or a woman, I’d say Luttig would be the easy choice.
Garza, maybe. Gonzales, no way — the left hates him for Abu Ghraib and the right thinks he’s soft on abortion.
Jones might get the nod, though that would be guaranteed to light a fire under the Dems.
Longshot prediction: Consuelo Callahan from the 9th. Minority female conservative, and it would let Bush tinker with the right’s least favorite circuit court, too.
Greg
ROFL. Must mean Gonzales is gonna be the pick…
Sinequanon
That is the 2nd scariest site I have been to in a long time. The first scariest is the poll at the bottom about Delay which takes you to the NewsMax garbage about their evidence of a conspiracy against Delay – give me strength – how can anyone actually ever defend that scumbag. It looks like complete garbage to me.
Interesting choices – John’s choice of McConnell seems the most coherent – in line with Roberts.
Geek, Esq.
I’ve heard from a source mildly connected to the process that the Gang of Fourteen have let Bush know that Janice Rogers Brown extremists are DOA.
Just what I hear.
Katherine
Gonzales sure is popular.
McConnell seems like the safest pick in a lot of ways. He’s opposed to abortion, he’s got Roberts’ creds, he’s got a bunch of liberal law professors who are big fans. I would vote for him with less hesitation than for Roberts.
The administration doesn’t seem at all concerned with the torture issue as a political risk–it’s not just Gonzales, it’s also Thompson, and no one is reporting any worry about this.
They may be right. They also may be wrong. Four of the five Democrats who are most upset about the torture issue sit on the Senate Judiciary committee. (Kennedy, Feingold, Durbin, Leahy.) In Gonzales’ case you’ve got the fact that he was confirmed for AG but you also have pro-lifers having fits. In Thompson’s case you have his name on the order that sent a very sympathetic victim–innocent, fluent in English, cute kids–to be tortured in Syria, in fairly blatant violation of U.S. law, as part of a policy that cannot possibly be blamed on a few bad apples.
The Disenfranchised Voter
Well thankfully Republicans dislike Gonzalaz as much as Democrats.
I can’t stand the bastard because he is obviously pro-torture. I’m beginning to hope Bush picks him so he can be shot down. :)
Other than Gonzalaz, I’d like to see him nominate Harriet Mairs because she doesn’t have a chance as well.