<p>Yeah! An “up or down” vote for the candidate the President of the United States considers the best qualified in the nation would seem only fair. Now he will be forced to choose someone he believes to be less qualified.</p>
<p>While some people might think, “Well he tried the one woman lawyer he knew of so now he can go with a white guy between 50 and 57 years old.” I think Bush is still underpressure to produce a woman candidate, it doesn’t matter what her education or experience is as long as she is conservative…Where is Anita Bryant when he needs her?</p>
<p>the name getting the most buzz now is Samuel Alito of Philadelphia. Others include Michael Luttig, Maureen Mahoney, and Karen Williams. Personally, my top two are Luttig and Janice Rogers Brown.</p>
<p>Hi, everyone. I’ve been away for a while so I haven’t been able to participate in the “Bush is Hitler”, “war for oil”, “Cindy Sheehan is a saint”, etc. threads. I’ll try to catch up.</p>
<p>Alito’s nickname is “Scalito” because his opinions so closely resemble those of current Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. Sounds like just the right guy. Winning elections is fun.</p>
<p>Welcome back Brownie. The barbarians are still at the gates so not much has changed.</p>
<p>one political wag in SoCal suggested, half-heartedly, a double switch: Chris Cox to the Supremes, and Harriet to SEC…</p>
<p>looks like the buzz was right - it’s alito.</p>
<p><a href=“http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051031/ap_on_go_su_co/bush_scotus[/url]”>http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051031/ap_on_go_su_co/bush_scotus</a></p>
<p>He had to move fast, the indictment time is just beginning. Alito sounds like he came from a short list Dad gave him.</p>
<p>Yup. Distinctly second-best, according to the Prez. ;)</p>
<p>Scalia “lite”. I guess Bork wasn’t available. Buckle your seat belts as our trip back to the 50’s approaches for final (crash) landing.</p>
<p>The positive aspect of going back to the 50’s would then be that thos of us who are younger can actually “LIVE” the 60’s and 70’s again? Is that the silver lining in this Theocratic Crap???</p>
<p>hazmat-just to be clear, I meant the 1850’s.</p>
<p>Back to the dawning of the age of Aquarius and hope that peace will come and the oldies will realize the values of peace and happiness. yup…back to the 60’s and 70’s. Hopefully we’ll go back to the better music of that time, too. We shall overcome and give peace a chance. It wasn’t a bad time. We had hope of a better future. What the hell happened to some of my generation. They found God and big time religion…and God help us for that. They even found a religion that thinks torture is okay, sometimes! If it’s used against “them”.
BTW I heard Alito was not Scalia lite…he was just as bad. But, hey, there is no litmus test and the neo cons don’t want an activist court! They want what the writer of the constitution had in mind. I guess we’ll have to go back to slavery :-). Oh wait! We have that with the neo cons wanting all the illegal aliens coming in on work visas! Next woman will have to give up their right to vote, as well as the right to decide what happens to they bodies…back to the 1700’s, never mind the 1950’s!!!
Let me go burn some incense…maybe it will get rid of the stench coming from DC!</p>
<p>Well the suburbanite neocons…having trouble getting their kiddies into good colleges these next 10 years, we can only hope that with all of the education issues, they will prove to have been breeders of a lesser stock…and we all know about Scopes and Darwin. Can we only hope?</p>
<p>You guys are funny! Where do you come up with this stuff? You could be Teddy’s speech writers with your paranoid doom and gloom. Lighten up a bit. The worst that will happen (from your perspective) is that our elected representatives will be back to the business of making laws instead of the courts - just as the founders had intended it. Democracy can be a good thing - give it a chance.</p>
<p>That sounds great, but abortion (approved of by the majority of Americans) is settled law and your group wants to get rid of it. Sounds like activisim to me!!!</p>
<p>Well you know…just getting the vote, war discussions, scrambling for grades for grad school…gloom and doom is just a pleasant relief from our academic rack…the one on which we sleep daily…well do we sleep? Not much.</p>
<p>It is settled law in your mind and by an activist court. (Remember, at one time, slavery and separate-but-equal were also “settled laws” - do you propose that we go back to that?) If it is approved by the majority of Americans, why are you afraid of it being addressed in a democratic fashion as it has been in Europe? Come on, you know the music by Lennon:
*All we are saying … is give democracy a chance<a href=“but%20we%20need%20a%20single%20syllable%20word%20for%20%22democracy%22%20-%20%20%20unfortunately,%20slogans%20and%20chants%20are%20the%20strength%20of%20the%20left%20and%20not%20the%20right.”>/i</a></p>
<p>You mean remember that we have three separate but equal and a vote?? How confusing is that…</p>
<p>It only gets confusing when one body tries to take on the role of another. Let’s let the courts get back to interpretting the law - not reading things into the constitution that they would like to think “should” be there.</p>