This is the best time for Rehnquist to die

First... let me say something VERY unpopular here.

I respect his service to the court. I respect that he served until the end. I respect the fairness he showed during the Clinton impeachment. Beyond that, I don't have much respect for his past or his votes. But I will ALWAYS respect people who devote their lives with honesty and good-will to their country. I disagree with his definition of good-will, but I believe he did what he felt was right, and was sincere. Except for Bush v. Gore. For that he can rot in hell.

But... if a justice has to die, this week couldn't be a better time. Bush's political capital is at an all-time low. The country hates him right now. He will NOT be able to force an idealogue through the Senate.

And... even if he could, it's still not a change in the idealogical makeup of the court. Rehnquist was a conservative, no doubt. His replacement will be conservative, no doubt. But I really don't think another Scalia could be approved now.

The very best outcome would be for O'Connor and Bush to take the offer presented by a number of senators recently - appoint O'Connor Chief Justice, let's make Roberts the Rehnquist replacement and let's maintain some stability on the court in this time of EXTREME national instability. I don't think that will happen, though - it's just my fantasy.

But to repeat - if another vacancy were to occur, this is the perfect time for our side. Thank God it's not Stevens.

edit: LOL... I wrote Brennan instead of Stevens. Shows how old I am.

well done.

I also think he did what he believed was the interpretation of the laws. (Scalia on the other hand is VERY political!)

You mentioned O'Connor coming back. What have you heard about her husband? I know she retired to take care of him. It's unfair of us to ask her to come back if he needs her. I would love for her to return, but I don't want to ask that much if she really need to care for her ailing spouse.

I think they will cave as usual.

A national disaster does not change in Bush's mind his ability to spend political capital. He won the election, and can appoint whoever he damn well please. Idealogue's run the Senate, and the nuclear option is still, well, an option.

There will likely be three confirmation battles going now:

-Roberts (though not that much of a battle it seems)

-Rehnquist replacement (Estrada?Gonzales?Olsen?RogersBrown?) - this will be a minority person, because they need to work on their minority relations...

-Chief Justice Scalia(most likely, imo)/Thomas

New Orleans, bad approval ratings, prospect of losing Congress in '06 (it just won't happen)... none of that will deter him or the fundy fuckedups in this world, because this is their golden opportunity. There's no wrath of Mother Nature strong enough to wipe them or their influence on the Republican party off the face of this Earth.

and the future of his party.

The notion of political capital is a real one - it has real consequences, and Bush has NO political capital right now.

It's possible he could force through an idealogue now, but at the cost of the House and Senate next year.

Just not how it works because of the way districts are drawn, and the way incumbents don't lose. It also has a lot to do with the prowess of the Republican Party actually being able to run a campaign.

whether his next nominee is controversial or not is important.

A happily-accepted moderate will help him. A hard-right nutcase will now be opposed openly by newly-embolded democrats, AS WELL AS republicans who want to run away from Bush.

You don't understand how much Bush is damaged.

I personally, thank God the loss isn't JPS, though I'm afraid he's next.

they have free reign to put in a Bolton. It will be some neo.

:cry:

on a bad nomination to replace him, if they were to win back a majority in congress, so that the nuclear option could no longer be a threat to them.

if you respect Rehnquist I can only assume you are not that well informed. The man wrote briefs while he was a clerk at the Supreme Court urging the Justice he worked for to support the concept of "seperate but equal" as laid out in Plessy v. Ferguson.

He worked in Arizona intimidating blacks at the polls.

He never met a police state he didn't like. (Go read up on his decisions pertaining to search and seizure or Miranda)

And he was a complete hypocrite as evidenced by his decision in Bush v. Gore. States rights my ass.

understand my point.

I'm familiar with the points you made. I'm also familiar with their context.

I already said he should rot in hell for Bush v. Gore.

I respect his service to the country and his determination to serve the court until his death. I think that's sort of cool. He could've resigned this summer, but he didn't. He died as Chief Justice. I respect that.

On edit: I can only assume you didn't read my original post to the end.

but i guess you see it differently. you see service; i see paranoid bigot clutching to last vestige of power he had in the face of mortality. funny how we can all see different things...

You assign pure evil motives to people who have differing political views than you. You believe it's impossible for people of good will to disagree with you on policy.

Oddly...

the other side feels the same way. They think liberals are just evil, lazy, crap-sucking, butt-loving suck-wads.

You hate them on principle. They hate you on principle.

Justice Rehnquist, as much as disagree with him (and please note I said in O.P. he should rot in hell for Bush v. Gore), was a man who devoted his life to service.

You think that's not worthy of respect. I disagree.

The man died today. We disagreed with a lot of decisions... we agreed with a lot of them. How is that different from out friends or family?

Or someone to the right of them. Who would stop the nominee? The Dems can't. The media "woke up" for about two seconds this week, but they'll be back to repeating talking points soon.

asking her to stay on the court if Bush would appoint her chief justice.

She's still on the court... she said she'd stay there until her replacement was approved.

Conservatives will be on the defensive, so that may help prevent a really bad choice from being put forward.

Rehnquist had died was "you picked a fine time to leave me, Lucille".

I think you're wrong on your scenario. It's more likely to be that everyone will be so involved with trying to do something about the Gulf Coast that results in people actually being helped that they won't notice when another Scalia is snuck onto the bench.

Right now, it's the balance of the court favors Democrats and if no replacements are selected, court work will still go on.

First, Roberts hearings must be delayed. If anything, to honor the late Just. Rehnquist...at least a 7 day mourning period. Then let's see where things are at.

I agree, meester boosh's ratings are at an all-time low, but that won't stop these goons from trying the shove an ultra-right wing scumb bag...claiming that Rehnquist was a "strict constructionist" or whatever name they conjur up and this is the only person who qualifies for that seat.

There's so many chickens coming home to roost for this regime, they're having troubles keeping their spin straight.

knows that Roberts will be approved with little-to-no opposition.

I expect a 97-0 vote (three abstentions). There really is no reason to oppose him beyond the fact that he's a republican. We don't like it... it sucks that Bush is President... but Roberts is extremely qualified and nothing indicates he's a crazy idealogue.

The Republicans control the White House and the Senate. Roberts is, believe it or not, a compromise choice for the court. Luckily, the new seat is going to be chosen when Bush is at his political low-point. It won't be Janice Rogers-Brown or anyone like her. It MIGHT be Gonzales, who is a prick, but again, another moderate-republican prick, not a crazed idealogue. We'll see.