SHOCK! Sandra Day O'Connor Steps Down- Page 2

[PalJoey]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 11:12am

I'm hoping he picks a real right-wing monster: the worst, most objectionable and least confirmable justice imaginable.

That way Sandra Day can stay for a long time while McCain and his buddies attempt to broker a compromise between an increasingly isolated president and an increasingly unified congress.

Meanwhile, read the link on my Watergate 2005 thread for a fascinating analysis of what the Time magazine documents may contain.

We live in exciting times. ANYTHING can happen.

Updated On: 7/1/05 at 11:12 AM

[Millie42]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 11:12am

She certainly has every right to step down because she's been at it for a LONG time.

With that said, it makes me sad. Not just because she is an amazing woman, but because I hate the political fallout from these decisions.
The Dems will always complain about who a Rep president will nominate.
The Reps will always complain about who a Dem president will nominate.

I consider myself to be a realist, but I SO desperately want my generation to be the ones to rise to the occasion and try putting aside party lines and work with the issues!
It's high hopes and I understand that most people, esp the older they get, will not be as moderate or open to other opinions as me, but I just feel SUCH an obligation to this country to try and make a difference.

Seeing threads like me remind me of all the work I have cut out for me in the future.

Sometimes I wish I could just start over...

[baddadnpa]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 11:13am

I watch lots of news and news programs and have never heard any rumblings about O'Conner. Many of the anchors are talking about the bombshell of the announcement.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 11:37am

Things are already combustable. Anyone hear Robert Bork phone in and talk to CNN? He practically trashed Ms. O'Connor's entire voting record, calling her an activist. He bristled at Ms. Kagan's characterization of her as a "moderate." Oh, what times!

I'm with PJ, this unexpected bombshell means things will be anything but dull in the coming months. Watching them shove in Gonzalez is scary, but if nothing else, promises drama full of fire and music.

The anti-abortion legions are circling, no doubt ready to march with pickled fetuses. We know all those noble white men in congress are eager to stop all abortions across the land. Oh, except those expensive, hush-hush ones, behind closed doors--needed for their abstinance-pledge-signing daughters when they have a "whoops" experience at some frat party.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 11:39am

I hereby nominate an eminent female Republican lawyer, a true paragon of conservative virtue:












ANN COULTER!!!!!!

Posted: 7/1/05 at 11:49am

Millie, I love your youthful idealism, but I have to speak to a comment you made:
"The Dems will always complain about who a Rep president will nominate.
The Reps will always complain about who a Dem president will nominate."

It's way beyond simplistic to boil it down like this. There are basic, fundamental differences between the parties. Of course a D would nominate candidates with different values and priorities than a R, a vice versa. We don't know who George Bush will nominate, but one could certainly guess he will be, like Bush himself, deeply interested in advancing the conservative cause.

Perhaps you don't recall Bill Clinton's appointees: Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer. Both were approved easily because Clinton was a consensus builder; he didn't choose extremely liberal nominees and he consulted with Republican leaders to find candidates that both sides could agree on. I'm sure conservatives weren't delighted by either of the candidates, but they were much more palatable than say Mario Cuomo, who was mentioned by many liberals.

I geuss we'll see what kind of candidate Bush puts forth, but as far as Democrats are concerned, efforts have been made to "put aside party lines and work with the issues."

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 11:57am

for anyone who's been following the supreme court in any way lately this is anything but a shock as it's been bandied about for weeks now that it would be sandy who stepped down rather than willlie. her husband is in need of almost constant care and she's going back to arizona to take care of him.

but really, it didn't matter who steppped down because the president could nominate thurgood marshall in his prime and he'd be filibistered. it's not about the nominee, it's about the nominator.

[RobbO]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 11:59am

The Nominator. It sounds like the title of a bad movie. A bad Republican movie that does not get very high reviews!!

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 12:03pm

but still manages to do hundreds of millions of dollars of business in the face of bad reviews.

[RobbO]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 12:06pm

I didn't say people didn't want to SEE the movie, but there's no accounting for taste. Damn summer-popcorn-blockbusters! How about a nice, late-fall drama with a smart lead and an interesting story line? Is that too much to ask?

[Forester]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 12:07pm

Tom Cruise as Judge Dredd

[Millie42]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 12:08pm

"It's way beyond simplistic to boil it down like this. There are basic, fundamental differences between the parties. Of course a D would nominate candidates with different values and priorities than a R, a vice versa."

I wish it were more like this. But from what I see, the general public who would prefer to not thoughtfully analysis more than is necessary, will say "I dont like ____, therefore, I do not like his/her candidate."

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 12:08pm

take yer sensitive drama needs to cannes, robbo. this here's america and summertime means big, big, big!

[RobbO]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 12:12pm

okay, good, but as long as this movie fades away after august. it's already been playing in theatres way too long. i hear it almost didn't get made. then it won a last minute reprieve even though people really did not want to see it. then it someone was made into a sequel but the sequel is even worse than the first one!

[PalJoey]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 12:12pm

Here's the statement from Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid:

---

Statement of Senator Harry Reid on the Retirement of Justice Sandra Day O’Connor

Justice Sandra Day O’Connor has been an inspirational figure to all Americans. As the first woman to serve on the United States Supreme Court, she blazed a trail that many will follow. As a Westerner, she brought to the Court a love of the land and an appreciation for individual rights. And as a former state legislator, she had a practical sense of how to balance the will of the majority with the rights of the minority in our society.

Above all, Justice O’Connor has been a voice of reason and moderation on the Court. It is vital that she be replaced by someone like her, someone who embodies the fundamental American values of freedom, equality and fairness.

The decisions handed down by the Supreme Court profoundly affect the daily lives of all Americans. The Court is the final guardian of our constitutional rights and liberties. That is why the process of filling a Supreme Court vacancy is so important.

The Constitution gives the President and the Senate shared responsibility to fill this vacancy, because the President may only act with the “Advice and Consent” of the Senate. At this critical moment, the President must recognize the Senate’s constitutional role. He should give life to the Advice and Consent Clause by engaging in meaningful consultation with Senators of both political parties.

Working with the Senate, the President should identify a highly qualified candidate whose views are within the broad constitutional mainstream and who will make all Americans proud. With this nomination the President should choose to unite the country, not divide it. I look forward to working with the President and my colleagues in the Senate to fill this critical vacancy.

[Millie42]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 12:24pm

Ann Coulter is actually a Libertarian.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 12:28pm

Well, I STILL think Bush should nominate her.

[Gothampc]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 12:35pm

"Perhaps you don't recall Bill Clinton's appointees: Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen Breyer. Both were approved easily because Clinton was a consensus builder; he didn't choose extremely liberal nominees and he consulted with Republican leaders to find candidates that both sides could agree on."

Ginsburg not extremely liberal?? Are we talking about the same person? This is the woman that tried to rule that Mothers Day & Fathers Day should be the same day so as not to offend anyone who was gender confused.

[SueleenGay]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 12:36pm

"You, Sir, are an IDIOT. SIT DOWN!!!"

Updated On: 7/1/05 at 12:36 PM

[WindyCityActor]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 12:54pm

Bush's Remarks on her Announcement:

Good morning. A short time ago I had a warm conversation with Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who has decided to retire from the Supreme Court of the United States. America is proud of Justice O'Connor's distinguished service and I'm proud to know her. Today, she has the gratitude of her fellow citizens, and she and John and their family have our respect and good wishes.

Sandra Day O'Connor joined the nation's highest court in 1981 as the first woman ever appointed to that position. Throughout her tenure she has been a discerning and conscientious judge, and a public servant of complete integrity. Justice O'Connor's great intellect, wisdom and personal decency have won her the esteem of her colleagues and our country.

Under the Constitution, I am responsible for nominating a successor to Justice O'Connor. I take this responsibility seriously. I will be deliberate and thorough in this process. I have directed my staff, in cooperation with the Department of Justice, to compile information and recommend for my review potential nominees who meet a high standard of legal ability, judgment and integrity and who will faithfully interpret the Constitution and laws of our country.

As well, I will continue to consult, as will my advisors, with members of the United States Senate. The nation deserves, and I will select, a Supreme Court Justice that Americans can be proud of. The nation also deserves a dignified process of confirmation in the United States Senate, characterized by fair treatment, a fair hearing and a fair vote. I will choose a nominee in a timely manner so that the hearing and the vote can be completed before the new Supreme Court term begins.

Today, however, is a day to honor the contributions of a fine citizen and a great patriot. Many years ago, Sandra Day O'Connor chose the path of public service, and she served with distinction as a legislator and a judge in Arizona before joining the Supreme Court. When President Ronald Reagan appointed Justice O'Connor 24 years ago, Americans had high expectations of her - and she has surpassed those expectations in the performance of her duties.

This great lady, born in El Paso, Texas, rose above the obstacles of an earlier time and became one of the most admired Americans of our time. She leaves an outstanding record of service to the United States and our nation is deeply grateful. Thank you.

[PalJoey]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 12:57pm

"As well, I will continue to consult, as will my advisors, with members of the United States Senate. The nation deserves, and I will select, a Supreme Court Justice that Americans can be proud of. The nation also deserves a dignified process of confirmation in the United States Senate, characterized by fair treatment, a fair hearing and a fair vote."

Nowhere does he say he will consult with Democratic senators.

Clinton consulted with Republican senators so the confirmations went smoothly.

Bush has no interest in bipartisanship.

[Rose_MacShane]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 1:05pm

Oh, this is bad. Oh, this is SOOOOOOO bad...

Posted: 7/1/05 at 1:05pm

Gotham, I say this with total sincerity: What the hell are you talking about?

[bwaysinger]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 1:05pm

But he did make sure to get an overt dig in on the filibuster so they can b*tch and moan again when they pick a wacked out Branch Davidian nominee who the Democrats will block.

[WindyCityActor]

Posted: 7/1/05 at 1:12pm

My feeling is that this is gonna be the biggest circus since Terri.

The public is gonna focus on any lurid details (public hair on a coke can) and then eventually tune out when it gets dull, and really not care about the selection.

Then months from now when the Supreme Court hands down a ruling which directly affects them, the reaction is gonna be...

"HUH?! I didn't vote for these people! Who are they? Fire them!"

"UH, what?....they stay on the bench until they retire?! Why didn't somebody tell me?!?!"