The Big News. . .
. . . today is, of course, that July 1 is Canada Day, the happiest day of the year. Unfortunately, the celebration may wind up overshadowing the news of Sandra Day O'Connor's retirement which is also kind of a big deal.
Advertisement
Can we get it out there early and often that there is NO WAY Bush is going to appoint a qualified, relatively moderate person to the Supreme Court who is going to be acceptable to a broad, representative swath of people? Absent some fire-breathing fundamentalist, Bush is probably going to pick Alberto Gonzales, and he's the author of the Torture Memo, for Pete's sake. And sadly, he's probably the least offensive choice to progressives and moderates.
I bring this up because the mainstream media has to be made to understand that the right's mantra is "no more Kennedys or Souters", which renders it impossible for a non-ultra conservative to get appointed by this administration. Drilling this reality into the heads of the media is one of the few chances Dems will have to shape what is going to be a clearly momentous debate.
July 1, 2005 8:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Let the festivities begin. If it were Rehnquist retiring I don't think it would be a big deal. Bush could nominate a judge from the far right and it wouldn't affect the idealogical of The Court. O'Connor is a completely different story!! She is a moderate, just right of center, and is often the swing vote on the 5-4 rulings.
The wingnuts (who are not having a good year, just like Bush) will DEMAND that Bush nominate a judge of the judicial philosophy of Scalia or Thomas. And I think Bush will nominate a judge with a far right judicial philosophy. The focus then turns to the Senate. A Bush nominee from the hinterlands of the far right will surely have the democrats seriously thinking of a filibuster...and then the Senate will be revisiting it's "nuclear option".
Politically O'Connor's resignation couldn't come at a worse time for the left. This is the issue, and the ensuing fight, which will revitalize a demoralized wingnut base of the GOP and distract the american people from all of Bush's failing policies.
July 1, 2005 8:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
Am I the only one who feels that O’Connor’s resignation casts this weekend’s Fourth of July stuff in a whole other light? Maybe I’m being melodramatic but it’s going to be weird having a big ole celebration for the U-S-of-A knowing that things are likely going to get even worse than they are in the very near future.
Dammit - why is this the year I finally decided to do the "fireworks on the National Mall" thing and not my usual "get really drunk all day on the roof of my friend's Brooklyn brownstone"? Sigh.
Oh well, party like your rights are going out of style. (‘Cause they are.) As Wonkette sez: “It’s going to be one bullshit celebration of American freedoms this weekend! Barbecue a flag while you still can!”
July 1, 2005 8:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bush is not a popular president at this time. He won the election primarily on the terrorism issue. Most Americans disagree with Bush when it comes to social/domestic issues. Don't let a few wignuts obscure the reality that most Americans prefer moderates on the bench. We can win these battles as long as we are willing to fight them.
July 1, 2005 8:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Most Americans disagree with Bush when it comes to social/domestic issues. Don't let a few wignuts obscure the reality that most Americans prefer moderates on the bench.
I does help that Specter is Chair of the Judiciary Committee, instead of someone like Hatch. The silver lining (albeit a very thin lining) is I am sure Specter grasps the significance of who retired and the effect on The Court of the next nominee. I hope Leahy, very clearly, speaks to Specter and the committee just isn't a "rubber stamp".
July 1, 2005 8:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
You're more optimistic than me. I think they'll do like Voinovich with Bolton and let anyone through committee, although perhaps without a recommendation, because "all candidates deserve and up or down vote" to preserve their ammo against a Democratic filibuster.
July 1, 2005 8:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
It really isn't optimism Becks...it is more like holding onto a sliver of hope. Like hoping I hit the lottery.
July 1, 2005 9:01 AM | Reply | Permalink
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"
July 1, 2005 11:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
OMG! Let's not overreact here. It is the retirement of one - ONE - already moderately conservative Supreme Court justice. If that ruins your holiday, you are taking it way, way, WAY too seriously.
I frankly just don't understand the extreme pessimism of Democrats. Were Republicans this demoralized about everything in, say, 1965? Because there was a vast political majority for the other party then and the country seemed to be in objectively much worse shape. It is really quite baffling.
The fireworks on the Mall are great. Enjoy them! I'll keep watch in NYC for you from the rooftop of my sister's new apartment in Greenpoint...
July 1, 2005 11:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
I frankly just don't understand the extreme pessimism of Democrats. Were Republicans this demoralized about everything in, say, 1965?
I couldn't say from firsthand experience, but maybe the Johnson administration wasn't holding giddy discussions about driving conservatives from all aspects of public life, calling them traitors, or penalizing lobbyists that worked with them.
Though I do agree that there's no reason to let a "long train of abuses and usurpations" by some guy named George ruin your Independence Day. The only thing that used to keep me away from the National Mall was the prospect of waiting in line for a porta-john. If you're up to the crowd scene, it's definitely worth going.
July 1, 2005 12:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I disagree with Matt. Canada Day is not the happiest day of the year.
Sure some on this blog may be happy that Canada approved gay marriages. Others may be following the debate over whether Canada will block drug reimportation to the US.
However, for me Canada Day is a sad reminder of the conflict. 288 days later, the NHL lockout continues. There have been claims of progress in negotiations. But more recently, harsh words have ruled the day.
Canada has tried to ease some of the pain today by announcing the names for their 2006 Olympic hockey team, but for many of us here in the US, we're still focused on the fighting between the two sides of Canada's national pasttime.
July 1, 2005 1:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, but Boz, you missed the big Canadian news of the day -- the Globe found a new Stephen Leacock essay!
July 1, 2005 1:38 PM | Reply | Permalink