Democrats Warn Bush on Choosing Successor to O’Connor
WASHINGTON, July 1 – Senators from both parties heaped praise on retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor today, and Democrats warned President Bush not to try to replace her with someone whose views they consider extreme. Republicans, meanwhile, signaled that they were girding for a fight.
Mr. Reid said the president should respect the Senate’s “advice and consent” role spelled out in the Constitution and nominate “a highly qualified candidate whose views are within the broad constitutional mainstream and who will make all Americans proud.”
Senator Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, who sits on the Senate Judiciary Committee, was just as warm as Senator Reid in his praise of Justice O’Connor – but blunter in threatening to resist a nominee he would find unpalatable.
Mr. Kennedy called Justice O’Connor “a mainstream conservative” and “a wise judge who served the nation and the Constitution well.” Mr. Bush’s choice for a replacement, Senator Kennedy went on, “affects each and every American and has the potential to impact every facet of constitutional law and the freedoms this country was founded upon.”
“If the president abuses his power and nominates someone who threatens to roll back the rights and freedoms of the American people,” Mr. Kennedy said, “then the American people will insist that we oppose that nominee, and we intend to do so.”
Why don’t the ranking Democrats save everybody the time and send the POTUS their pre-approved list:roll:
I bet they would put Ashcroft at the top of their list:razz:
This is where W needs to get nasty and play hard ball like the Democrats never dreamed of. The GOP better get some spine implants or they’ll be out the next election like the obstructionist Democrats. Maybe Iowa will finlly get rid of that lying SOB whose home is the Bahamas, not iowa, Tom Harkin.
This is where someone from the SC needs to sit down with the democratic party and give them a refresher coure on how a SC justise is chosen. The POTUS nominates and the senate approves or disapproves of the choice. He doesn’t need to advise and consent the senate prior to nominating someone.
do you think the ‘advise’ part of the Constitutional mandate is supposed to go on during the confirmation process?
that’s what i’ve always thought. it’s certainly not the Senate’s business who gets nominated, but after the nomination, they share co-equal responsibility to vet the person.
5-yes it is Shiloh. The Potus nominates to the senate his choice and they vote up or down.
I agree with your assesment.
What a bunch of loud mouthed liberal dipwads these jackasses should have their tails twisted or have a few knots tied in them:razz:
2.
Ashcroft’s at the top of my “list”.
My hit list
8- be nice:wink:
touché:cool:
“someone who threatens to roll back the rights and freedoms of the American people”
This fat, drunken, murdering bastard has a lot of nerve……
11- That was dedicated to you Mike:wink:
How was the holiday, Peejz?
Canada was beautiful… but, good to be back in USA!
13-Fun filled. It rained last night, but I was ready for the break.
Glad you had a good time:smile:
13, Mike, Think we could get rich off of a pay-per-view of Kennedy driving his Oldsmobile over the falls?
11- You know Mike, it really isn’t his fault. He never had rules and was never held accountable. He thinks everyone should be this way:wink: