Im a little shocked by this. I thought they would wait until December or January. Now Is Powell far behind? And what about Rumsfield? Im sure Rumsfield, if he is leaving, isnt going anywhere until Fallujah is settled. But I still think he should be replaced.
"I could be wrong, but I doubt it"---Charles Barkley
I'm sure a lot of people are relieved that he's gone. I still remember the story where he had the Spirit of Justice's breast tarped...at a cool $8,000. If that doesn't say "religious nut", I don't know what does.
So long, John. Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
When the hell did SNITSKYMANIA start to run wild???
Can you say Chief Justice Ashcroft? I knew you could.
The OFB, helping his fellow liberals feel even worse one post at a time.
"Four more years of American soldiers being used as cannon fodder. Four more years of scientific decisions being made by people who believe in a ghost in the clouds. Four more years of debt that our children and grandchildren will have to pay off. Four more years of racists and lunatics for judicial appointments. Four more years of looting the treasury and squandering it on corporate cronies. Four more years of making enemies faster than we can kill them. Four more years of fear and darkness and racism and hatred and stupidity and guns and bad country music.
I look at the big map and all of the red in flyover country and I feel like I've been locked in a room with the slow learners. We have become the country that pulls a dry cleaning bag over its head to play astronaut." -----TBogg
Originally posted by OlFuzzyBastardCan you say Chief Justice Ashcroft? I knew you could.
The OFB, helping his fellow liberals feel even worse one post at a time.
That's not funny. Seriously man, you gotta put a warning before that sort of thing. We don't want to even put that idea out there in case they haven't thought of it yet.
Seriously though, too much baggage. If they were going to appoint a right wing non-judicial ideologue, I'd guess someone like Bill Bennett or something (though the gambling could hurt him).
The hell with the witty cartoon. They won, there's really nothing worth laughing about right now. There is only the prospect of endless war and endless death.
Originally posted by OlFuzzyBastardCan you say Chief Justice Ashcroft? I knew you could.
The OFB, helping his fellow liberals feel even worse one post at a time.
That's not funny. Seriously man, you gotta put a warning before that sort of thing. We don't want to even put that idea out there in case they haven't thought of it yet.
Seriously though, too much baggage. If they were going to appoint a right wing non-judicial ideologue, I'd guess someone like Bill Bennett or something (though the gambling could hurt him).
IF Bennett goes on the Supreme Court, does that mean Vegas will put a point spread on rulings? Truthfully, I hope everyone on the left begins preparing themselves for Chief Justice Ashcroft. That way, it will make whomever Bush does appoint look much better by comparison and lessen the venom from the left.
(edited by redsoxnation on 9.11.04 2033) The Ottoman Empire is coming. The Ottoman Empire is coming. Hide the couches.
Originally posted by OlFuzzyBastardCan you say Chief Justice Ashcroft? I knew you could.
The OFB, helping his fellow liberals feel even worse one post at a time.
That's not funny. Seriously man, you gotta put a warning before that sort of thing. We don't want to even put that idea out there in case they haven't thought of it yet.
Seriously though, too much baggage. If they were going to appoint a right wing non-judicial ideologue, I'd guess someone like Bill Bennett or something (though the gambling could hurt him).
You forget that the Senate loves their own.
Taking this tangent and running with it, could their be a worse nominee than Clarence Thomas? He's had the most spectacularly uneventful term on the Supreme Court. Giving him the Chief Justice spot would be downright insulting.
There is no way that Ashcroft could ever be on the Supreme Court.....EVER, thankfully.
Incidentally, I know it is customary for Cabinet secretaries to resign at the end of a President's term, but I'm not certain if that is a custom for a President who is re-eelcted.
Frankly, I see no harm in them leaving now. The timing isn't that peculiar since the election is over.
The Left, the base of the Democratic Party, hail the virtues of tolerance and consider themselves to be the tolerant citizens of America. In their touting of tolerance they express their obvious disdain for those whose views run contrary to that of enlightened Liberalism.
Dare to make a statement of conviction of any kind, and one of these Leftists will set down his cheese and wine, pause his lecture on the virtues of plurality and the absurdity of the belief in absolute Truth, and tell you your convictions -- everything you believe and hold dear -- are absolutely wrong. Where does he get his understanding that what you claim is "right" is actually not? Against what standard is this wrongness measured? He can't say. All he knows is that you're a bigot, you're intolerant, you're not worthy of being an American. In fact, you're not smart enough to understand what it means to be an American.
And not only are you dumb, you're dangerous. Fanatics like you don't belong in a "tolerant" culture like ours. You and your beliefs and the people who share them should not be allowed in our civilized society . . . or, at the very least, you should be denied the right to vote. Because when you vote, when you're politically active, you screw everything up. -Chris Field, Human Events, 11/5/04
Originally posted by Von MaestroInteresting move to go with a Hispanic AG, & probably a result of the way the Hispanic vote turned out for Bush this election.
Probably not. Gonzales is a long-term Bushie and probably would have been nominated to the Supreme Court if a vacancy came up in the first term, and may still be a nominee to the Court if multiple vacancies occur.
The Left, the base of the Democratic Party, hail the virtues of tolerance and consider themselves to be the tolerant citizens of America. In their touting of tolerance they express their obvious disdain for those whose views run contrary to that of enlightened Liberalism.
Dare to make a statement of conviction of any kind, and one of these Leftists will set down his cheese and wine, pause his lecture on the virtues of plurality and the absurdity of the belief in absolute Truth, and tell you your convictions -- everything you believe and hold dear -- are absolutely wrong. Where does he get his understanding that what you claim is "right" is actually not? Against what standard is this wrongness measured? He can't say. All he knows is that you're a bigot, you're intolerant, you're not worthy of being an American. In fact, you're not smart enough to understand what it means to be an American.
And not only are you dumb, you're dangerous. Fanatics like you don't belong in a "tolerant" culture like ours. You and your beliefs and the people who share them should not be allowed in our civilized society . . . or, at the very least, you should be denied the right to vote. Because when you vote, when you're politically active, you screw everything up. -Chris Field, Human Events, 11/5/04
So much for a seat on the Supreme Court, at least anytime soon. I'm surprised that Bush and company would put him in the A.G. spot instead of prepping/pushing for a Supreme Court nomination.
Thread ahead: Thanks for speaking for us! Next thread: Pharmacists are allowed to refuse meds on moral or religious grounds Previous thread: Less than shocking new study on the root causes of terrorism....
She starting to make some headway down here now, seems much more credible than Vitter. She's got my vote if she runs. http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2009/05/porn_star_considering_run_agai.html