Help Wanted: Supreme Court Justice

Judicial experience not required, will train.

Published on October 27, 2005 By singrdave In US Domestic

Harriet Miers has withdrawn her nomination, which causes all who care about judicial integrity to breathe a collective sigh of relief. While I did not publish my opinion here on JU, I am very happy that the sycophantic, fawning Miers, who had no judicial experience whatsoever, has been retracted as a nominee for a Supreme Court Justiceship.

I think she was a bad pick. Completely unqualified as a judge. Hopefully she can get some nice district court or even circuit court appointment, if she does not return to her post as White House legal counsel.

So who's next? Alberto Gonzalez? Or another woman, just for woman's sake?

Comments

Spc Nobody Special

on Oct 27, 2005

What, are you trying to suggest that the nominations are using affirmative action to be as politically correct as the heavily edited Six Flags version of Looney Tunes?

Dr Guy

on Oct 27, 2005

I am very happy that the sycophantic, fawning Miers, who had no judicial experience whatsoever, has been retracted as a nominee for a Supreme Court Justiceship.

Singr, if you are going to blog here, you really have to let your feelings out! Dont Pussy foot around the stuff. Say what you Mean!

As for my prediction, it is sealed on JU and will be opened when the next justice is sworn in. I wrote it a month ago. We will see if I am stupid, or sly!

kingbee

on Oct 27, 2005

judge joe brown is back in the running!

singrdave

on Oct 27, 2005

As for my prediction, it is sealed on JU and will be opened when the next justice is sworn in. I wrote it a month ago. We will see if I am stupid, or sly!

I must have piscine halitosis, because I wait with "baited" breath.

I can hardly wait to hear who you have, in future retrospect, chosen... ummm, I can hardly wait to see who you will have already chosen... ?

Proper grammar eludes me.

singrdave

on Oct 27, 2005

On my way home from work today, I heard an interview with Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) who claimed that not one Democrat had ever been opposed to Miers going before the confirmation process.

All right, blogosphere, do your stuff. Confirm or deny that statement!

Dr Guy

on Oct 28, 2005

On my way home from work today, I heard an interview with Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) who claimed that not one Democrat had ever been opposed to Miers going before the confirmation process.

Chuck Schumer. That one is easy.

drmiler

on Oct 28, 2005

On my way home from work today, I heard an interview with Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) who claimed that not one Democrat had ever been opposed to Miers going before the confirmation process.

All right, blogosphere, do your stuff. Confirm or deny that statement!

Way to easy! Took all of about 30 sec with a google search.

Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) blasted Miers’s responses to a standard Judiciary Committee questionnaire, which was submitted yesterday.

“The questionnaire was bipartisan and reasonable, but the answers are disappointing, spare and unilluminating,” said Schumer, who is a junior member of the Judiciary Committee and chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee. “This questionnaire should have been completed with care and candor, but it seems to be a bit rushed and not as carefully prepared as one would hope.”

singrdave

on Oct 28, 2005

Yeah, well... that quote says that Schumer was upset with her responses. He did not explicitly say that he felt her unqualified, or that he felt she should not go before the committee. He said that she didn't fill out the questionnaire to his satisfaction.

Anything else, people?

Dr Guy

on Oct 28, 2005

Yeah, well... that quote says that Schumer was upset with her responses. He did not explicitly say that he felt her unqualified, or that he felt she should not go before the committee. He said that she didn't fill out the questionnaire to his satisfaction.

Jesus Christ would not satisfy Schumer!

Barbara Boxer. But I will add that no one said they would vote against her - yet. Many, including Schumer and Boxer expressed regrets about her. Leahy is just trying to be coy.

singrdave

on Oct 28, 2005

My point is that Leahy was playing with words. He said there was no Democrat opposed to her going before the committee. Not that there was no Democrat opposed to HER.

And no, Jesus would be seen as too soft on crime. (Remember the woman caught in adultery? How about him forgiving his Roman floggers? Or the thieves that would be with him in paradise?)

joe schmo

on Oct 28, 2005

i like the idea of miers passing around MASH notes with the other judges about how she and bush are going to live in a shack, and driving a maserati.

Chakgogka

on Oct 28, 2005

And no, Jesus would be seen as too soft on crime.

Excellent point! I've often wondered for example why American evangelical protestants are so often pro-death penalty (sometimes also catholics, although their church has basically decided that it's a no-no). Is it through a belief that Jesus' teaching is really too soft and needs to be made more 'realistic'?

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!