Posted on 01/31/2006 10:28:22 AM PST by katieanna
THANK you. Someone gets what I was saying! :)
Good advice for all of us. :)
Regardless of circumstance, it took seven months.
Congratulations.
Janice Rogers Brown on deck.
A considerable change from, and far more accurate than, your original post.
"I felt it was pretty selfish of the Dems in the US Senate to prolong this nomination process for so long... it took what seven months."
"in one of the most partisan victories in modern history"
You can read whatever you want into my post; no matter how inaccurate is your understanding.
You betch ya!
I've got no glowing terms for that ex justice either.
O'Connor was a United States Supreme Court internationalist, as are Ginsburg, Kennedy, Breyer, John Paul Stevens and David Souter.
In fact she, Ginsburg, and Stephen Breyer discussed the death penalty and terrorism with French President Jacques Chirac during a European tour that included a conference on the European constitution.
Good riddance to her and those that support her here, on FR, or anyplace else.
With all sue respect it isn't wasn't her job to further any "cause" - period. "Causes" have squat to do with the Law and the Constitution. And any judge/justice that wants to 'further causes' should get the 'heck' off the bench PDQ and run for political office.
Furthermore, her legal reasoning SUCKED lemons. Her opinions were sophomoric at best and mostly idiotic contrary gibberish. And contrary to the point were she reversed her own PREVIOUS written opinions.
She no more deserved to be on SCOTUS than I do being a Thoracic Surgeon. Admire her? Hell I despise her, she's an idiot.
I admire her for what she represented to women. There's a huge diff between that and you are saying in your post. She is to be greatly admired by women for that of which she accomplished.
Nor, for that matter, could Mary Jo Kopechne...
"I'll waste no time with you, other that to point you to post # 68."
I pointed out in my post that I do not agree with O'Connor all the time. I also stated she was right on Bush v Gore. The point I'm trying to make is that none of us will agree with all the justices ALL THE TIME. That said, there's no reason, in my view, to take cheap shots at the woman. I'm sure you can find a decision of hers that was correct. She was right to dissent in the recent eminent domain decision. As for wasting your time, gee man, take a chill pill.
AMEN! You took the words right off my keyboard Condor.
Sandra Day O'Connor can take a hike and I for one won't miss her abortion, affirmative action, etc. decisions. all in all she was a dissapointment just as Souter & Kennedy.
If Stevens retires, it'll probably be at the end of this cycle which is June - he gives notice on July 1, 2006 and Bush gets to nominate someone say, Janice Rogers Brown in AN ELECTION YEAR. Too many democrats running in the senate in RED states in November...GAME/SET/MATCH!!! I'll bet Karl Rove is already lined it all up neatly.
Woo hoo!!
I'm not one to wish anyone any bad luck, but Ginsburg had a bout with colon cancer in 1999--guess it is in remission. Looks like she has had a lifelong bout with the uglies, though that isn't fatal.
Thank you God.
Thank you President Bush.
Thank you to the U.S. Senate, especially the Republicans for coming through.
Thank you Justice Alito!
And thanks to everyone here or elsewhere in the conservative movement that worked for years to reach this point, or to those that simply cast a vote for those that made it possible.
One seat closer....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.