Ashcroft is not a qualified jurist for the Supreme Court

Not just from an ideological standpoint - we all know what his views are - but from a legal professional standpoint. He has no judgeship experience whatsoever. Usually, Supreme Court nominees are those who have some significant experience on the bench - whether it be at a state supreme court level or US Circuit Court of Appeals level. Ashcroft has been a politician all of his life. He may possess a law degree, but putting ideology aside, he is NOT a qualified jurist for the Supreme Court.

The most unqualified person every to sit on that Court.

Reminds me of a simpler time, really...

Thanks! :D

Mandate remember, mandate.

But, a very good point.

horse.

When did lack of qualifications stop anybody in the bush administration?
Starting at the top, none of them have any qualities required for actually running a country.

from being appointed and confirmed. And I remind you that that pseudo "moderate" (NOT) Arlen Specter championed Thomas, and brags that he voted in favor of EVERY SINGLE JUDICIAL APPOINTMENT put up by W, both in committee and in the full Senate.

Has he hired anyone competent yet?

http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/legal_entity/88/background

Bar Admission California, 1914
Experience Prior judicial experience: None. Warren played politics as Governor of California.
Extra Judicial Position(s) Chair, commision to investigate the assassination of President John F. Kennedy
Father's Office None
Federal Political Position(s) Republican vice-presidential nominee, 1948
Law Practice California, 1914-17
Law School California, Graduated 1914
Military Service Army Lieutenant, 1917-18
State Political Position(s) Deputy city attorney, Oakland, CA, 1919-20; deputy assistant DA, Alameda County, CA, 1920-23; chief deputy DA, Alameda County, CA, 1923-25; DA, Alameda County, CA, 1925-39; attorney general, CA, 1939-43; governor, CA, 1943-53
Undergraduate Education California, B.A. 1912

the nomination will ignite a whirlwind of protest and likely a filibuster. But after he steps aside, Dubya will be able to put anyone else he pleases on the court.

Come on, how long can the minority talk? They'll either get cloture or they'll find a way to work around it. They have all the machinery. Every time we pretend we still matter, we just volunteer for the blame when the next thing goes wrong. Remember how the anti-war left "lost" the war in Vietnam? Like that.

It is their M.O.

The greatest heroics occur when the odds are stacked heavily against you.

I don't know whether the Democrats will stand and fight or not. I do know that attitudes such as yours aren't very helpful either way.

Every person on here that bemoans how hard it will be (or impossible it will be) to stop them is making it harder for the people here who DO want to make the effort.

Lay down if you want, but please don't insist that they can't be stopped.

They own it, bro. The "fight" is over - they won. When you're outnumbered on a battlefield, you can fight harder, but when you're outnumbered in the Senate, you can't vote harder. The numbers are all that matters, and the numbers say we lose.

And if you don't want to be a part of it that's fine.

If this is your attitude, you're not needed.

I guess what I'm saying is get on the sidelines and shut up.

I apologize for my harshness but my tolerance for those who say it's over and why bother fighting is at an ALL TIME low right now.

the more years the Republicans get a free ride, blaming us every time the damn ship runs aground. We need to get our hands well away from those levers. Let the Republicans take the blame for their own screw-ups. Because no matter what we do we will not win any fights, not until the Republicans implode or atrophy, and that'll take decades. They control the electoral process and they control all the mechanisms for policing or reforming that process. They will be in power as long as they want or as long as they can keep it together.

The harshness doesn't bother me at all. What I object to is the blindness. Because we are actually hurting ourselves by pretending that, for the time being, we still matter.

...and we should encourage that candidacy 100%. It wil split the fundies off from the 'mainstream' republicans and weaken them (like Buchannan did in 92).

we'll be wondering how such a divisive dumbfuck could possibly be elected President. Again.

The last free and fair Presidential election in the United States was in 1996. And I don't mean the most recent one. I mean the last one.

is not qualified to be dog catcher (or cat catcher, as this case may be), much less a Supreme Court Justice!