Posted on 12/31/2004 6:04:13 AM PST by OESY
If Chief Justice William Rehnquist retires next year, President Bush likely won't face a tough battle over his successor. So reports the New York Times, citing consultant Howard Wolfson and "other Democrats." The Times attributes this to the Democrats' desire to soften their image as pro-abortion zealots. The court has a 6-3 majority in favor of Roe v. Wade, and Chief Justice Rehnquist is among the dissenters. Why should the Democrats spend political capital merely to run up the score?
Anyway, this is a battle the Democrats would almost certainly lose. With only 45 senators..., they would need the support of six Republicans to vote down a nominee. A minority could filibuster to block a vote (unless Republicans change rules), but five Democratic defections would vitiate that tactic. Tom Daschle's filibustering of low-profile appellate court nominees is one reason he is about to become an ex-senator....
If Democrats are lucky, Mr. Bush won't get a second chance to appoint a justice until after the 2006 election.... If the Democrats pick up three seats, they could even sink an anti-Roe nominee with the help of GOP liberals Lincoln Chafee, Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe.
Since it looks as though President Bush is going to get a free pass on his first Supreme Court pick, how can he make the most of the political opportunity? By elevating Clarence Thomas to chief justice. Justice Thomas is the youngest member of the court, and his appointment might provoke Democrats into a futile fight. As a black conservative, he drives liberals and Democrats to irrational extremes. They depict him as an "Uncle Tom" and an intellectually inferior beneficiary of affirmative action. If Democrats cannot resist expressing such prejudices, they will damage their reputation as the party of racial equality, which can only help the GOP....
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Clarence Thomas is much older than Antonin Scalia, so he should replace William Rehmquist as chief justice.
He'll expose Harry Reid and the 'Rats as the racists they are.
Sorry, I meant YOUNGER, not "older".
Thomas is 12 years younger than Scalia.
Clarence Thomas. Birth Date: June 23, 1948.
Antonin Scalia Birth Date: March 11, 1936
See #4.
A vote for Scalia, he's the most senior conservative justice...
And anyone who thinks that the Democrats won't rip into Judge Thomas in a confirmation hearing is naieve.
From today's headlines:
Thomas has taken much more in gifts than other justices
WASHINGTON - Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has accepted tens of thousands of dollars in gifts since joining the Supreme Court, from $1,200 worth of tires to valuable historical items and a $5,000 personal check to help pay a relative's education expenses.
He also took a free trip aboard a private jet to the exclusive Bohemian Grove club in Northern California -- a trip arranged by a Dallas real estate investor who has helped run an advocacy group that filed briefs with the Supreme Court.
The timing of that story on Justice Thomas and gifts is not an accident. It is a preemptive strike by the MSM.
Read the article carefully and you will see that other justices have also accepted expensive gifts but reported them differently so they were not counted in the total.
This is a hit piece on Thomas clear and simple. Expect more in the near future.
What is the source?
Unless they appoint an outsider to be Chief Justice, they'll need two hearings anyway. Is your point that a Chief Justice Scalia would take less political capital?
Other than the authority to convene meetings of the Justices and to appoint the Justice on the winning side of an issue to write the opinion, I'm not sure that the "Chief" Justice has a lot of power.
If those 'powers' (plus the dubious PR value conveyed by an opinion written by the Chief Justice) is all there is, why is the titlular head of nine equal bretheren an important post?
Anyone have an opinion or information on this?
Thomas not only is younger, I believe he has a deeper grasp of the issues even than Scalia, whom I greatly admire. He would be a superb Chief Justice.
The Democrats name subservient "poverty pimps" to office, whose chief talents are the ability to bring lots of black voters to the booths. George Bush names capable blacks to office, whose chief talents are to administer wisely and well. There's a huge difference.
What a poke in the eye this would be for the Rats, too! The ultimate Schadenfreude.
PLEASE DO NOT POST EXCERPTS FROM ARTICLES ON FOR-PAY SITES! It just pisses people off...
My point is that here is absolutely nothing gained by appointing the next Chief Justice from the ranks of the current court, and much to lose. Getting bogged down in two hearings may delay other items on the president's agenda. Appoint the Rehnquist replacement from outside the court.
pabianice, AVOID all posts with a "WSJ" prefix, or don't be so CHEAP.
An ANNUAL subscription probably costs less than what you pay to fill up your gas tank each WEEK.
Why should others sometimes numbering in the thousands be denied the editorial opinions from an influential news source because you inadvertently stumbled onto the thread and got, as you say, pissed off?
You remind me of the joke about the guy floating down the river on a raft while lying on his back with an erection and yelling ahead for the drawbridge to open.
If you don't like the excerpt policy, change it. I don't happen to like it either.
In the future, don't clutter my threads with your comments, and have a better year in 2005!
On the pro side,
1) He's conservative,
2) he's young, and
3) he provides the GOP with a very effective way to skewer the RATs over a filibuster. The moment the RATs try to filibuster, the GOP can start to go on about how the Democrats used the filibuster to torpedo civil rights legislation up through the 60's, and how they are still using it against blacks. Yes, that's playing the race card from the bottom of the deck, but that's the way the RATs play the game.
On the con side, elevating Thomas means that Bush will be facing two fights - one for Thomas, and one for his successor.
Having worked in the inner city for over 20 years I can tell you that the average black American would agree with the dems fighting his 'promotion'.
They hate Thomas .
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.