The Next Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States - Hillary Clinton?

vanity post | February 2, 2004 | HAL9000

[HAL9000]

IE: it only comes down to whether 51 Senators will vote for her.

Or to put it another way - someone please check my math on this - if a vote was conducted today, Hillary would need only two Republican votes for confirmation.

[OXENinFLA]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACCCCKKKK

That is EXACTALY what I was thinking when I read the title.

[Lancey Howard]

Any Republican Senator who voted to confirm Hillary Clinton for anything would lose his or her seat.
It will never happen.

[Lancey Howard]

Or to put it another way - someone please check my math on this - if a vote was conducted today, Hillary would need only two Republican votes for confirmation.

A Hillary nomination would be filibustered, and 40 GOP Senators would support the filibuster.
Guaranteed.

And guess what? The only reason that such a filibuster would succeed is because the scumbag Democrats themselves have set the stage for it with their recent unprecedented and shameless filibusters of Estrada, Pickering, and Brown - - all supported, by the way, by Bride of Scumbag herself! Talk about biting yourself in the rear-end!

[mrsmith]

"It can't happen here" _{TM Frank Zappa}

Seriously though, you do make the good point!
It's a electoral question for the Senators.

It can be fairly phrased this way:
Are there two Republican Senators who would lose their seats if they didn't vote for her?

Looking especially at the Northeast- maybe so don't you think?

And then there's McCain... who knows what he'd do.

[Lancey Howard]

It can be fairly phrased this way: Are there two Republican Senators who would lose their seats if they didn't vote for her? Looking especially at the Northeast- maybe so don't you think? And then there's McCain... who knows what he'd do.

True, and that is a chilling thought. But again, it would presumably never get that far because it only takes 41 Senators to sustain a filibuster. And Republican Senators who failed to support such a filibuster of Hillary, let alone actually vote to confirm her, would be risking their seats.

By the way, Who Are the Brain Police?

[mrsmith]

The real Brain Police or the Sears Brain Police?

You know, that fillibustering of judicial nominees isn't constitutional. The media might point that out if we tried it against a Dem nominee like Hillary!.

I firmly think the media would drive a Hillary nomintion all the way to a vote. Perhaps then there would not be two Republicans to let us down. But I don't feel very sure.

Anyway, I've found a tag line to use for a while!

[Lancey Howard]

Well, after you quoted Frank Zappa I went and pulled my old copy of 'Freak Out' by The Mothers of Invention and fondly recalled songs such as The Return of the Son of Monster Magnet, Wowie Zowie, and Who Are the Brain Police? I can only "fondly recall" them because I have not had an operational turntable for at least 15 years.

Regards,
LH

[mrsmith]

LOL! Break down and buy one of them new-fangled eight track cassette CDs!
What amazes me is that I never hear him on the "oldies" satations like the rest of my favs. Zappa was awful tight about his copyrights maybe that has something to do with it.

Zappa lyrics by album (sing along in your mind).

[Non-Sequitur]

Flaw in this article. You do not have to be a lawyer to sit on the supreme court.

Name a justice who wasn't.

[longtermmemmory]

true enough, it is just good to know BECAUSE a disbarred person is "not a laywer".

It is just a piece of trivia. Stanger things have happened.