Somehow I suspect if Bork were nominated..... it would be considered by the dem 7 to be "extroidinary circumstances".
Yes, just on principle - even though Bork, being two decades older than he was when nominated by Reagan, would actually be a more-or-less "moderate" choice in that he wouldn't be on the court so very long - giving the Democrats hope that Hillary would get to name his successor.I doubt Bush names Bork in any event, but if he did it would be as a recess appointment, which is good only for a short time if not confirmed by the Senate after the recess. Since Bork is not otherwise engaged, he'd be a fine choice for that temporary gig.
Pres Bush is not going to take Gonzales away from being the Attorney General -- too important of job. There are plenty of candidates but you doom and gloomers like to concentrate on someone you know he won't nominate as it is better to throw it in to stir the pot.
Get some positive thinking going because President Bush has not nominated to the bench any moderates -- why do you all think the RATs fought so hard to defeat him from being elected and are pulling that crap in the Senate -- they know he didn't approve of his Father picking Souter and who do you think gave Sununu the word he was out after that helicopter fiasco? George W. Bush is who. The RATs know he believes in strict constitutional ruling which they do not want. He has a distate for activist judges and their rulings and that is not going to change but then some of you stirring the pot already knew that!
Whatever happened to the word "optimist" around here?
If Bush's nominee is filibustered, he could name Bork as a temporary "recess apointment." But there is another person who should be considered:On the very day that Reagan named O'Connor, the Wall Street Journal published a convincing letter to the editor making the case that an economist should be named to the Supreme Court. I read it, and I thought "Great idea! And I know who would be perfect for it - Thomas Sowell!" Then I read the byline of the letter to the editor - and it was by Thomas Sowell!
- a person who is renowned for lucid analysis
- a person who Ted Kennedy is contemptuous of
- a person who is a friend of Clarence Thomas
- a person who applied for the very seat on the bench that Reagan named O'Connor to.
When Kennedy was grilling Clarence Thomas he tried to associate Thomas with Sowell as a way of discrediting Thomas in the eyes of the Democratic majority on the Judiciary Committee of the time. Thomas didn't comment, and was confirmed - but he would have loved to have spoken in defense of Sowell!.