Thursday, October 27, 2005

Bye, bye, Harriet.

Well, what a completely, totally, breathtakingly unexpected development. And to think she was absolutely the best-qualified person for the position. Damn shame that.

And now that the conservative wingnutosphere has made it clear they're driving this particular bus, any bets on which complete fucking loon is next in line? Come on, feel free to speculate. Alberto Gonzales? Priscilla Owen? Charles Pickering? Janice Rogers Brown? Michael McConnell? Ex-FEMA director Michael Brown? Karl Rove? Jenna Bush? Ann Coulter? Bernie Kerik? Private Lynndie England?

The lines are open.

UPDATE: At this point, out of sheer self-preservation, the Dems should make some kind of announcement before the next nomination that they're going to have some minimum requirements for that nominee.

It doesn't really matter what those requirements are but they should draw some kind of line in the sand -- fire a warning shot, as it were. At the very least (and as I've mentioned before), they should take the position that they will absolutely not even consider a nominee who has publicly advocated the overturning of Roe v. Wade.

Another requirement might be that they will want all of the possible documentation on that nominee, and that they won't tolerate the administration withholding that kind of information. You get the idea.

Any other requirements you think would fit here?


aweb said...

Democrats should demand someone who does not have large sections of their legal history covered by executive priviledge. You know, not an actual employee of Bush (or his father, or Reagan) at any point. A non-crony requirement.

How about, I don't know, a qualified judge. With a long public record.

CC said...

The trick for this to be effective is that those prerequisites have to be so no-brainer and reasonable that it would be hard for anyone to come out howling in anger against them.

Now, the Roe v. Wade requirement would definitely cause some people heartburn but I think that's a mandatory line in the sand.

Yours sound reasonable as well. Any others? What about, no one who's been previously nominated for a federal judgeship and been rejected? Would that be pushing it?

I'll have more to say about this later, but I think it's critically important the Dems not wait until the name comes out. They need to do some sort of pre-emptive strike.

Luna said...

You know what Bush thought about Roe v. Wade, right?

Row, wade, didn't matter to him how people got out of New Orleans, so long as they did.