President Bush is asking everyone to remain calm about his upcoming Supreme Court nominee. He’s right - a quick look at the short list (obtained from a White House official who describes himself only “The PlameSlayer”) tells us that we’ve got nothing to fear. It’s a long “short list,” but let’s start by looking at a few of the frontrunners.
Alberto Gonzalez - Current Attorney General and former White House counsel, we don’t need a litmus test to know that “Gonzo” is a centrist. While he has described the First Amendment as “quaint,” he balances this with a staunch belief in the Second Amendment.
Judge Benjamin Wanamaker - A veteran of the Fifth Circuit Court in Texas, “Benny” believes in truth, the rule of law, and that suspected criminals ought to be subject to “compulsory organ harvesting.” Wanamaker is contemptuous of judicial extremists and has written several influential scholarly tracts on the subject, including “An Analysis of Current Tort Reform Proposals,” and “What’s With Those Liberal Faggots?”
Angelina Borowski - Though lacking in actual law experience, longtime Bush friend Borowski “really likes legal stuff.” Though she’s somewhat of a right-to-lifer, she has always staked out the middle ground in the debate, arguing that those who favor abortion rights “ought to be allowed to live.”
Judge Harry Carter - A beloved Oklahoma personality from the popular local program “Judge Carter,” this TV gavel-wielder balances his tough-but-fair rhetoric with fair-but-tough judgments. He’s been known to be an advocate of states’ rights, but he tempers this with his belief that this “shouldn’t include East Coast states.”





22 comments
norbizness
July 5, 2005 at 4:02 pm
1That may be the case, but I don’t believe that you have the right to ask Judge Wannabaker how he would rule on a Supreme Court case concerning compulsory organ harvesting. That would be the height of fucking incivility. Ask him about which Darren was better on Bewitched. If he expresses a preference for the recent Nora Ephron movie, then you can vote his ass down.
dee
July 5, 2005 at 10:18 pm
2Don’t forget Walter “Spanky” McLaurin, DKE Ritual Master, Virginia Polytechnic Institute. So maybe he barely made it through to graduation, but if you’re looking for a strict constructionist, you won’t find one better than the man who spent seven years overseeing rush.
Scott McClellan
July 6, 2005 at 4:33 am
3Um, I can’t believe I’m not on the list. Am I on the list? C’mon, you can tell me.
sly
July 6, 2005 at 9:48 am
4two words:
Justice Santorum.
Murray
July 6, 2005 at 10:09 am
5What’s the deal, is Terry Randall unavailable? Maybe to replace a woman we could get Phyllis Schaffley. How about a bold choice, say, Bill O’Reilly?
So many choices. Maybe Bush can nominate two or three people for the opening, nothing says we have to have only 9 judges.
craig
July 6, 2005 at 10:47 am
6Why isn’t Terri Schiavo on the short list? So what if she’s brain dead?
What about that Judge from Night Court. He was really smart.
Lily
July 6, 2005 at 11:20 am
7I went to college in a Republican stronghold, not far from where they’re building the new Creation Museum. (To give you some sense of the locale!) We had a token Women’s Studies class, and I was surprised to learn that the quite feminist instructor was a Republican. When I asked her why, she said “Because I plan to run for elective office, and the only way I can do that in this county is by being a registered Republican.”
Wouldn’t it be delicious irony if Shrub ended up appointing a closet liberal like that? We can dream…
Landis
July 6, 2005 at 11:35 am
8Ann Coulter: not only a lawyer, but a compassionate conservative in much the same way as Mr. Bush.
Keith
July 6, 2005 at 1:10 pm
9Rather than appointing somebody new and untested to the bench, why not just give Scalia two votes on every decision? When Rehnquist resigns, he can be Chief Justice and have 3 votes.
That way when a case comes before the court where the defendant is say somebody he’s gone duck hunting with, he can recuse one of his seats and still weigh in with two. Of course anybody who can be two-thirds objective can certainly be wholly objective, so why bother recusing at all?
Allison in Santa Cruz
July 6, 2005 at 2:20 pm
10Lily — A creation museum! You have got to be kidding. I hope you are, but fear you aren’t.
Just what in the holy name of Lobster are they planning on displaying in the creation museum? I mean, even if Lobster created the world in only 6 days, they can’t really expect tourists to stick around that long. Maybe they’ll have 6 little Earths in jars, representing the state of affairs during each of the 6 days of creation.
Michael
July 6, 2005 at 2:22 pm
11Leftists are faggoty Communists!
GWB won in 2000 precisely because he said that he was a moderate. (Remember “I’m a uniter, not a divider”?)
You really believe that? I mean really?
In 2004, it was war, war, and nothing but war.
You forgot the fact that the dems put up a loser for their candidate. After all the hoopla, money, “new” campaign techniques, MSM support, and criticism of the war and President Bush’s job as commander-in-chief, he won anyway. You can swallow these facts if you just hold your nose.
As far as the “ranting, screaming tirade the left is on” before Bush has named a nominee, please provide examples.
You can’t be serious.
The only tirade I see is coming from the right as they yell about Alberto Gonzales. Or didn’t you realize that when Bush asked people to tone down rhetoric about Gonzales, he was talking to the right?
Sure he was. Hahaha.
Still, you are correct that there is no moral equivalence between the left and the right.
You’re wise in recognizing that. The left has no morals so how could they be equivalent to anything except the International Organization of Hedonists?
The left simply wants the right to do what they want with their own body.
See what I mean?
The right wants to force everyone to follow their concept of morality.
Nope. You’re as wrong as you can be about that.
I choose freedom,..
What you choose is Socialism, hedonism, and a society based on the lowest common denominator. That way be monsters.
its sad that you choose the American Taliban.
See what I mean? You actually asked me to provide examples of ranting, screaming tirades, and then you call conservatives the “American Taliban.” You’d better get to the nearest pet hospital ‘cuz you are one sick puppy.
Harold
July 6, 2005 at 3:27 pm
12I am wondering: once Rehnquist is gone, how will Scalia know which way to vote? What’s his track record for voting differently from Rehnquist?
ellen
July 6, 2005 at 3:42 pm
13Oh, Keith, good idea!
It’s bound to be somebody’s clone, so really Bush will have greatest effect by putting in the most young and healthy person on his list.
Mike
July 6, 2005 at 4:33 pm
14Just a little aside…
From the Creation Museum website:
19 - T. rex
T. rex—the real king of the beasts. That’s the terror that Adam’s sin unleashed! You’ll run into this monster lurking near Adam and Eve. How’s this possible? Find out soon!
http://www.answersingenesis.org/museum/walkthrough/
Leslie
July 6, 2005 at 6:38 pm
15Oh my God, Mike, you’re not kidding! I thought you were being clever, but I went on the website just in case…you’re not kidding!
I just keep hoping that Dubya chooses a justice who shocks the ever-lovin’ barbeque sauce out of him once (s)he takes the oath. It happens often enough for me to hope at least.
ginny
July 6, 2005 at 7:33 pm
16Apparently we on the left are expected to foam at the mouth and make our opposite numbers look comparatively sane by comparison.
I now view toothpaste with alarm, as the GOP is positioning itself as “the moderate party.”
tess
July 6, 2005 at 7:39 pm
17sly,
I need to stop eating in front of my computer. I kept thinking of frothy goo stains on a judge’s robe and spat a load of masticated chips onto my keyboard. DON’T DO THAT TO ME!
craig
July 6, 2005 at 11:49 pm
18Is it too late to start a “draft Adam” campaign? He’s not President, so he’s gotta have some free time. And he writes well.
hedera
July 7, 2005 at 12:01 am
19I’m remembering that Ike once said appointing Earl Warren and William Brennan to the court were the two biggest mistakes he ever made. Maybe there’s hope yet.
Harold
July 7, 2005 at 9:35 am
20The “Bible Authority Room” is my favorite part of the Creation Museum:
12 - Bible Authority Room
“The Bible is true. No doubt about it! Paul explains God’s authoritative Word, and everyone who rejects His history-including six-day creation and Noah’s Flood-is ‘willfully’ ignorant.”
Expect to have “Bible Authority Rooms” popping up in federal buildings and public schools nationwide!
Pete IVDL
July 7, 2005 at 9:02 pm
21Why do you have to have so many justices? I know it’s best to have an odd number, but imagine the opportunities in a “tied” ruling! Whee!
Alternatively, start the Organ Harvestin’ with the least compassionately conservative member of the remaining justices. “Nine Judges of Beer on the Bench, Nine Judges of Beer…”
Oh, that bloody Creationist website. Scary, but true. The trouble is, reading the descriptions, I can’t help but think “Pissweak World!” You know the type - the advertising reads “Whoa, don’t be scared by the Death Flight”, while the reality is a poorly welded cartoon copter mounted on a 3 ft. concrete pole.
hedera
July 8, 2005 at 12:10 am
22But on the positive side, the Tulsa Zoo will not have an exhibit on the origin of life based on the Bible.