At this point if you don't think the courts are already a partisan institution, you're fooling yourself.
Nah, there are hundreds of judges with bland to non-existent records and no skeletons that will sail through confirmation hearings by not saying anything, that will be easily confirmed as long as the president has a friendly majority in the Senate. There are dozens of Kavanaugh clones that probably don't have any partisan past and are regular Charlie Churches.
While everyone has bias, I'd like to think most people appointed to the USSC would rise to the occasion and put the country ahead of politics. Which might explain why some appointments don't work out as partisans envision... the justices actually work for the country instead of a party.
On another note, I've seen a few references to page 136 and I feel foolishly out of the loop on that. What happens at page 136?
The courts are political institutions, and should be regarded as such. And for at least 30 years, all supreme court appointees have been sure votes for the party that appointed them. This isn't even a recent development.
Restating your post, the competent rational relatively moderate Republican candidates (Kasich, Jeb, Rubio, Christie) split the vote leaving the field to two candidates, a bombastic reality tv star and an unlikable right-wing ideologue (Ted Cruz).
if they turn everyone into an ideological demon no matter what their record for electoral gain, then the same thing is going to happen over and over. Kavanaugh was relatively moderate compared to others on the list and he was portrayed as the evil spawn of Clarence Thomas and Hitler. Everybody has some kind of skeleton that could be blown out of proportion with the right kind of media spin. Or even if it isn't there, unsubstantiated allegations will work. Also what happens when the executive and senate are split and the senate decides they don't want to confirm anybody no matter how moderate they are?
I think the takeaway here is that Trump should stop bothering with mainstream judicial conservatives, because they're still going to be met with the same opposition that they would be if they literally ascended from hell to take a seat on the Supreme Court. Moving forward, nominate lifelong nerds who are (judicially) Thomas clones. The left will have a stroke over it, but they were going to anyways. #MUSSCGA
In a perverse way, that's probably what the Democrats want because it gives them another issue to run on. The Republicans get their seat and the pissed off left electorate secures jobs for more Democrat senators. They would be trying to replicate the importance the right has placed on gaining seats on the bench.
Update: Kelly buzz..."The Thread" Hall of Fame bound. | Page 136 | Swamp Gas Forums You may not want to go there.....
Greatest dozens ever! When Mrs. GK is a Jeopardy freak, and when she and I were first seeing each other, we watched a Jeopardy episode, then I popped that one on the tube. She was watching in horror, and I was on the floor crying with laughter. She married me anyway.
Trump nominated and is standing by Kavanaugh primarily for one reason. Brett Kavanaugh’s Radical View of Executive Power 7 legal experts on how Kavanaugh views executive power — and what it could mean for Mueller Kavanaugh on presidential power: Law-review article on investigations of sitting presidents (UPDATED) - SCOTUSblog
That's good though. Maybe it will finally convince people that the courts, particularly the Supreme Court are anti-democratic institutions that aren't above reproach.
From SCOTUSblog: Anyway, it's kind of a moot point now if Rosenstein is stepping down and Trump will appoint Donnie Jr. as the new deputy AG.
I agreed with several points in your post up until your last paragraph. There is no "rushing" here. If anyone is "rushing", it's Feinstein and the accusers. Waiting until the very last minute to drop this and then expecting everyone else to kowtow to their timeline. THAT is NOT America. The accused has rights. One's career should not be derailed by allegations when there doesn't even exist a formal criminal complaint, nor charges filed. In my heart of hearts, I do not know who is telling the truth here, but we have a justice system for this and I'm trying to be as sympathetic to the possible victim here as much as possible, but no matter what, her and her attorney must understand that they do not get to put the defendant at a disadvantage in this process. Again, THAT is NOT America. The onus is on the accuser to prove what he did. If she's at all concerned about that, well, waiting 36 years to report it formally didn't help her cause. There is no rushing here by the Senate or Kavanaugh's team. If Dr. Ford feels as though a crime been committed, she should pursue her justice. Kavanaugh's guilt or lack of cannot be ascertained by the Senate judiciary committee. If this is taken to the State of Maryland, based on what we know now, it likely never sees a court room, as it is simply a he said - she said at this point and all the eyewitnesses are stating they don't recall anything like this at all happening.
At least they are in theory accountable to me. The supreme court has a terrible track record in protecting my rights and the rights of others so they aren't even that good at it.
