home

Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement

By Jeralyn, Section Judiciary
Posted on Fri Jul 01, 2005 at 10:38:45 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

DNC Chair Howard Dean issued this press release today. Here's a portion:

President Bush should follow the example established by President Reagan when he nominated Justice O'Connor. President Reagan had the courage to stand up to the right wing extremists in his party by choosing a moderate, thoughtful jurist.

"A President faces no more important decision in terms of protecting the rights and liberties of all Americans than nominating a Supreme Court Justice. President Bush has a constitutional responsibility to do what presidents before him have done -- seek the advice of senators from both parties before making a nomination, and choose a mainstream nominee who will protect our most important rights and freedoms.

"Democrats hope this process can be one of consensus, rather than confrontation, but that will be up to President Bush."

< James Dobson is Already Mobilizing, We Must Too | Bork Blasts O'Connor's Legacy >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement | 25 comments (25 topical)
    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#1)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:46 PM EST
    The departure of Sandra Day O'Connor from the Supreme Court will no doubt start the much anticipated war over the judicial filibuster and reproductive rights. But the biggest long term issue may be the intent of the coming Bush judges to dramatically reduce Federal regulatory power by the narrow interpretation of the Commerce Clause. For more on this and the impact of the "Constiitution in Exile" advocates, see: "Sharpening Their Clause: The Coming Bush Judges."

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#2)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:46 PM EST
    Shrub can't care less about what all of the citizens of this country want in regards to whom will replace the Sandra O'Connor. He has never had a thoughtful, reflective moment in his whole life. The PPJs and Richard Aubreys of this country got what they wanted. The chance to repeal women's right to choose just what is or isn't done to her body and make them return to the home where they belong, to destroy all the freedoms we have enjoyed for the last couple hundred years, to repeal the voting rights act of 1964, to step all over the liberties enjoyed by political and racial minorities, and a chance to make this country go backwards to the 19th century. And do you know who is really to blame for giving these fanatics the opening to push forward their repressive agenda? All of us who are Democrats, progressives, liberals, and any other leftist type. For too long we saw the hand writing on the wall and convinced ourselves that we could reasonably discuss things with our rightist brothers and sisters. Unfortuantely they don't believe in real dialogue, they believe in control. Control over every aspect of our lives, and soon they will get it. So slap yourselves on the back, Dems, for supporting political hacks like Al Gore and John Kerry. In doing so we handed the fascists the keys to the country and now we will have to pay the price.

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#3)
    by glanton on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:46 PM EST
    Nicely said, Sherm. It was always a mistake to view these wastes of skin as our "brothers and sisters," or even as fellow citizens. They have marked us for enemies--in the true spirit of the word-- all along, and it is time we recognized and marked them in kind.

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#4)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:46 PM EST
    Dean: "President Bush should follow the example established by President Reagan when he nominated Justice O'Connor." He should also learn to tie his penis in a bow. Chances of this happening are exactly ZERO.

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:46 PM EST
    "And do you know who is really to blame for giving these fanatics the opening to push forward their repressive agenda? All of us who are Democrats, progressives, liberals, and any other leftist type." Wow, that's idiotic. You meant and the MIC (military-industrial complex). You really think we thought we could reason with racists and warmongers? Not on my block we didn't.

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:46 PM EST
    I wrote (and haloscan deleted): You meant DIEBOLD and the MIC. Vote-fraud is how they got the opening, Sherm. 30 states had their recount rights STOLEN. Blaming that on the American people or progressives is just plain silly.

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:46 PM EST
    Paul, no disrespect, but you proved my point. I am sure the dearth of evidence out there to highlight Republicans aiding voting fraud in the 2000 and 2004 elections is something that needs to be discussed and investigated, but you are falling into the mistake of not fighting the battle of the here and now. And you can't escape the fact that putting a Shrub-lite candidate like John Kerry before the "liberals" and progressives in the Democratic party and then asking us to hold our noses and vote for him wasn't a monumentally STUPID move. Sure the pickin's were pretty slim, but come on. Is it really unreasonable or silly to suggest that the "left" didn't play to win in the last election, merely to look like good guys(btw, thanks for also proving the point that we on the left fight best among ourselves and not those who really have it out for us). I think you might just suffer from the resentment of being duped into making a decision that you would later regret, regardless of the voting fraud. I understand you are passionate about your beliefs, but when you start going after folks who are on your side and calling them silly or idiotic you undermine any unity that exists among leftists and you further the cause of the fascists. Hope you can possibly one day see that I and other liberals don't need to agree with you on every single little thing to be in this fight together. But like I said earlier you perfectly illustrate the fact that liberals are good at infighting and copping a "lefter than thou" attitude.

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#8)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:46 PM EST
    ShermBuck writes:
    The PPJs and Richard Aubreys of this country got what they wanted. The chance to repeal women's right to choose..
    Sherm, you are full of BS. I have commented numerous times that I am a social liberal, and that I support a woman's right to choose. Catch a clue. It is possible to multi-task on support. You can be pro WOT, support the troops and believe in National Defense, and still be a liberal. Now. You may apologize for your comment or just continue on as a known BS'er who attacks without knowing the position of the person he attacks. Gesh.

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#9)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:46 PM EST
    ShermBuck, I completely agree with your statement
    you undermine any unity that exists among leftists, and you further the cause of the fascists.
    The infighting is exactly what the right-wing activists are promoting, and they have been doing a bang-up job in that respect. I am appalled at anyone who claims to be a leftist, on any level, eating his/her own kind. That is unacceptable to me, and many other true Leftists. I also am disgusted when I read so-called leftists slamming people like Churchill, again falling right into the oldest trap in the world. It' called Divide and Conquer, and we on the left must stop allowing them to get away with it. If we don't, we are standing out in the open without a shield or weapon.

    I almost decided to just stop commenting on this site for exactly these reasons, but I want to give a hearty second to your comment. People on the left, please, stop attacking your own. THE FASCISTS DON'T NEED YOUR HELP!

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#10)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:46 PM EST
    PPJ, With all due respect, I think your position is actually quite easy to figure out. You are unbelievably transparent, and only a fool wouldn't quickly grasp your agenda.

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#11)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:46 PM EST
    Sherm: "And you can't escape the fact that putting a Shrub-lite candidate like John Kerry before the "liberals" and progressives in the Democratic party and then asking us to hold our noses and vote for him wasn't a monumentally STUPID move. " I think you meant 'was' a stupid move. You are totally wrong about that. John Kerry WAS elected by popular vote, AND by electoral college if Ohio had been recounted. We paid for the recount, and the right-wing machine which is currently MELTING DOWN in Ohio stole the election. Kerry is no 'watered down Shrub.' Kerry is a man who volunteered to defend his country TWICE, the second time insisting on a direct combat role in command of a small boat, very much like the other JFK. He distinguished himself through bravery, and through wounding, and was duly awarded. In the Senate, Kerry outed both BCCI and Iran-Contra, and in the first debate of 2004 outed the USPNAC illegal airbases scheme. On the other side of the equation, he was Skull n' Bones. Do the math. You leftists who slur this good man as 'Bush lite' are WAY out of your brains.

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#12)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:46 PM EST
    Paul in LA, Here is one Leftist who does not "slur" John Kerry's name. As with all politicians, I find some things I'm in agreement with, some not. I also commend him on his remarkable investigation into the BCCI scandals, and own his book on the matter. I was outraged at the SVFT lies and propaganda. I saw candidates in the Dem lineup who I would have been much less happy with. This comes from a Leftist however, not a Democrat, so of course he wasn't the perfect candidate for me. But "slur" him? No, not me. Hold my nose to vote for him? No.

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#13)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:46 PM EST
    ShermBuck - I have been commenting here for right at two years, and have stated my positions time and time again, and they are consistently been in support of social liberal issues. That is a long time for anyone to be working an agenda, don't you think? So, when you write,
    PPJ, With all due respect, I think your position is actually quite easy to figure out. You are unbelievably transparent, and only a fool wouldn't quickly grasp your agenda
    . I think you define yourself quite well.

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#14)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:46 PM EST
    Cheetah, thanks. PPJ, cover yourself all you want. Cheetah, the person whom actually called your position as being transparent, is totally spot on. Ok, Paul, you think Kerry was such a great candidate and actually won the election, answer me this: Why didn't he have the guts to challenge the results if there is the amount of evidence out there to vindicate your assertion that he should be president? As a leftist who voted for him, and I agree with Cheetah that his work on BCCI(also on IranContra and Vietnam Conflict MIA/POW issues) set him apart from the majority of his peers in the Senate, I felt betrayed, like with Gore, when he didn't press the voting irregularities in the 2004 election. Having said that I would like to know just how he distinguished himself from Shrub enough to make the American people believe that he was the better choice for president? He didn't! And that, more than voting fraud, cost him the election. Yet again you want to get petty and counterproductive, which is fine by me Paul. Don't expect me to drop to your level, since I really believe it takes all kinds, not just in the Democratic party, to make this country work. Apparently you just like folks who agree with you. Who says demagougery is limited to the PPJ's of this world? Our side has them too.

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#15)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:46 PM EST
    All my pessimism of late comes from the fear that the Democrats will not hold Shurb to the whole advise and consent portion of putting forth a person to replace Justice O'Connor. And I think the way the Dem's have been acting lately, the Social Security issue being the exception, does nothing to assuade this feeling. I want to be wrong, but I won't delude myself into thinking that the Dems will put forth a credible and, most importantly, united front against any of the loons Shurb will try to appoint as a Supreme Court Justice. I want to be wrong, and I hope under the leadership of Harry Reid I will be eating crow. I really do.

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#16)
    by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:46 PM EST
    If the nominee is radical right, the Democrats have to force the issue with a filibuster. If the nuke option is used, the Republicans get branded as fascists (and rightly so) going into 2006. The socio-geographic conditions of the 2006 Senate elections are much different than 2004. A lot less influence from the southern evangelicals means a much better chance for a backlash to the Republican hardline tactics this time. Bush and the RNC should be aware of that, but apparently aren't.

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#17)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:46 PM EST
    I'm also pessimistic. I didn't like the compromise on the evil Dr."she'll be dancing any day now" Frist's "nukular" option, and this replacement is much more important. I really don't know what to expect from the Dems, but I'm petitioning and writing my a** off!

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#18)
    by ppjakajim on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:46 PM EST
    ShermanBuck writes:
    PPJ, cover yourself all you want. Cheetah, the person whom actually called your position as being transparent, is totally spot on.
    Cheetah, the person who never links, just makes talking point comments and yo, should do this: Show us a comment that I have made a social liberal would not have made. Come now, you have the archives of TL at your disposal. As I noted, your problem is that you are not a liberal, but a leftist. Cheetah even says so. And, like many Leftists you demand that everyone agree with your total position - see the comments between you and Cheetah above. But the real difference is that I suopport the troops, and the WOT. You do not. The sad thing about the Demos anti-war wingers is that they have destroyed the Demo party, and it will be years, if ever, that we get National Health Care. Just as bad, you have ran millions into the Repubs arms and have given Bush the ammunition to actually stack the court into destroying women's rights, gay rights, etc. I'll say it again. If the Far Left didn't exist, the Repubs would have to invent you.

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#19)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:46 PM EST
    ShermBuck, Now you are "spot on". Demagoguery will find it's way into any, and all, political parties and movements. You're right, and we have to be aware of that, and hold people on all sides accountable.

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#20)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:46 PM EST
    PPJ, I believe you just made my case for me.

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#23)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:49 PM EST
    Paul in LA, "Cheetah didn't vote for Kerry?" Here is the perfect example of you 1:not reading what people write, or 2:misunderstanding what they write. READ MY COMMENT AGAIN! Where does it say I didn't vote for Kerry? I said I didn't have to hold my nose to vote for him! This is where you make your mistake. Instead of seeing where people agree with you, you LOOK for an argument. Read exactly what I said for a change, OK?

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#24)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:49 PM EST
    Here's EXACTLY what you said: "Hold my nose to vote for him? No." That is an ambiguous statement, cheetah. For the record, you did NOT say that you didn't HAVE to hold your nose. I apologize for mistaking your meaning. As for 'looking for an argument,' that isn't necessary. I have PLENTY of argument to spare.

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#25)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:49 PM EST
    PPJ, make my case? About what? You accuse me of not providing links, and I say, so what? As I've stated before, at the end of posted stories on this site, there is a blue highlighted word spelled c-o-m-m-e-n-t. Too many letters for you? Do your own research! And as far as we "leftists" are concerned, what's this website called again? Oh-h-h-h-h-! Talkleft! Get it?

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#26)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:49 PM EST
    Paul, ambiguity implies uncertainty. If you were uncertain about what I meant, why didn't you just ask me first?

    Re: Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement (none / 0) (#28)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:00:49 PM EST
    Dark Avenger- Thanks. You are the voice of reason.

    Howard Dean on O'Connor's Replacement | 25 comments (25 topical)