[SeekAndFind]

IF YOU DON’T LIKE MITT FOR PRESIDENT, HERE’S SOMETHING TO CONSIDER...

Columnist Andrew McCarthy gives us what probably is the most important question regarding the upcoming presidential election….

“…..if Mitt is the nominee, I will support his candidacy because I dread the alternative. For my friends who have hesitation on that score, I’d just ask you to keep four things in mind:

1.. Justice Scalia just turned 78
2.. Justice Kennedy will turn 78 later this year
3.. Justice Breyer will be 76 in August
4.. Justice Ginsburg turned 81 about a week ago.

We wish them all well, of course, but the brute fact is that whoever we elect as president in November is almost certainly going to choose at least one and maybe more new members of the Supreme Court — in addition to hundreds of other life-tenured federal judges, all of whom will be making momentous decisions about our lives for decades to come.

If you don’t think it matters whether the guy making those calls is Mitt Romney or Barack Obama, I think you’re smokin’ something funky….”

So for anybody who is thinking of not voting because your favorite didn’t get nominated, or writing in a candidate who can’t win... Imagine this: SUPREME COURT JUSTICE ERIC HOLDER.

[SamuraiScot]

And if she fails to announce her retirement during 0bummer’s current (and final) term, soon enough to leave time to be confirmed by the Senate, will she have an accident, Chicago style?

[GeronL]

If sheb resigns, the GOP should bottle up any confirmation hearings until the next President takes office. The Democrats do that kind of thing all the time.

The GOP won’t of course

[taxcontrol]

Ok, folks, correct me if I’m wrong, but doesn’t the nomination and appointment process take 6 months or so? If we assume that the process were started next week, wouldn’t it be too late? I would think that any nomination now would be held up in the Senate, until there election is over with.

[Uncle Slayton]

It does not matter as Obama will be shown to be constitutionally unqualified for office and each of his appointments to the court will be disqualified.

[Hugin]

that pretense took a hit in 2000 by the vote in Bush v. Gore, the core of which was decided 5-4, with the conservative justices (including Kennedy) voting in favor of Bush’s argument and the liberal justices voting in favor of Gore’s.

No it wasn't, it was a 7-2 decision. Breyer and Souter said there should ideally be a recount, but there wasn't enough time in any case.

[tbw2]

Sounds like a rush to try to get another Obama appointee in.

[LucianOfSamasota]

Its a big concern. Liberals can’t get their vile agenda through legislative process, so they need activist judges to break the law and force the public into liberalism. Its hard to be a tyrant without suppressing the voice of the citizens.

[Tanniker Smith]

For them to retire would be akin to admitting that 0 is a failure whom they believe is likely to lose the election.

[Zakeet]

Separated at birth?

[Ingtar]

The vote that stopped the counting in 2000 was 7-2, not 5-4.

[okie01]

But that pretense took a hit in 2000 by the vote in Bush v. Gore, the core of which was decided 5-4, with the conservative justices (including Kennedy) voting in favor of Bush’s argument and the liberal justices voting in favor of Gore’s.

For the umpteenth time, no! The actual vote was 7-2 -- with Breyer and Ginsburg joining the majority in deciding that the Gore argument had no merit.

The 5-4 vote came on a secondary issue -- the remedy. Which was to allow Florida to meet its electoral requirements under the Constitution...

Liberals lie.

[SoFloFreeper]

Yes, I hope the liberals retire AND THE REPUBLICANS HOLD UP CONFIRMATION OF ANY OF THE KENYAN CLOWN’S APPOINTEES—BORK THE HELL OUT OF THEM—UNTIL WE CAN GET SOMEONE ELSE IN THE WHITE HOUSE. :)

[napscoordinator]

Can’t they wait to see who wins and then put in for retirement? I mean I know they are Democrats but so what? They can leave when they dang well please. I can just see it now when the Republicans feel that our conservatives should retire, they will use the ole “but the democrats forced their’s out.....no thank you.

[Chewbarkah]

Doesn’t the fact that this issue is being raised now reflect panic on the left? As many have pointed out, it’s a bit late to even manage the process going into the Fall election.

The Dems are in a nice bind. If the leftist Justices stay, the left risks losing the court if (when) O loses. If they resign now, it is a clear signal that O’s crowd is sure he will lose, which will undermine fund-raising and become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

[luvbach1]

I suppose they want Obama to appoint two more liberal candidates to replace them.

[Road Glide]

Ginsburg may be a liberal, but she’s also Jewish. I sense that she’s both smart and perceptive, and that she sees Obama for who and what he is — either a Muslim sympathizer or an out-and-out Muslim who must keep his beliefs “under wraps” for public consumption.

I sense that regardless of her leftism, deep down she despises him and even in the face of severe health problems refuses to resign and give him the opportunity to “fill HER seat” on the Court.

Of course I could be completely wrong, and she may announce her retirement after the Court adjourns in June.

But if she stays, it’s my guess that she’s “waiting Obama out”.

She’s not “risking” the future of the Court — she’s doing what she believes to be her duty to preserve it.

[Ironfocus]

The difference is simple. If Obama wins, we will get the most liberal activist judges he can find. If Romney wins we at least have a chance to influence who is appointed, like we did with President Bush and Miers. And it is not just about the Supreme Court, it is also about all federal judges.

We have zero chance to influence who Obama picks. And if the senate doesn’t want to confirm, he may just try to make recess appointments.

This is crucial, all legislation the left doesn’t like ends up in court.