ConfirmThem

http://judiciary.senate.gov/member_statement.cfm?id=2871&wit_id=2629

1) If anyone had any doubts that Elrod is being fast-tracked, read Leahy's statement from her hearing today. NOT ONCE IS SHE MENTIONED. There are no comments about her being "controversial", "ideological" or "racist". Indeed, there are no comments about her at all! This, taken with the fact that only Cardin and Cornyn showed up for hearing, tells me that there has most definitely been a Southwick-for-Elrod deal. If the Dems wanted to really block Elrod, Leahy would have made some nasty comments about her and how the White House chose her in order to rally score some points with Neas and Aron, which is exactly what he did in reference to Shalom Stone.

1) Leahy essentially says the Dems will not support any Bush nominees from states with two Dem senators. Leahy uses Stone as an example of how the White House is refusing to consult Dem senators in the selection of COA judges from blue states:

"It appears the Senators from New Jersey were not consulted about the new nomination to the Third Circuit for their state. This is a break from the practice that has worked in the past of cooperation and consultation that has led to success and a sign that the White House is returning to its tired playbook of picking unnecessary fights over nominations rather than filling vacancies."

"Of the 15 circuit court vacancies, almost half are without a nominee. If the President had worked with the Senators from Michigan, Rhode Island, Maryland, California and New Jersey, we could be in position to make even more progress."

3)Leahy also essentially says that the Dems will not allow Keisler, Kethledge, Murphy and Southwick to be confirmed:

"Senate Republicans know the difficulties with four of the President’s current circuit nominees."

4)Leahy essentially says that the Dems will only confirm African-American judge Henry Wingate for the Mississipppi COA seat:

"I continue to try to work with this White House and to make progress. Next year the Thurmond rule will kick in until after a new president is inaugurated. That is why I have urged the White House to work with Senators of both parties and to fill the 5th Circuit vacancy from Mississippi with the nomination of the Honorable Henry Wingate. Judge Wingate would be the first African American from Mississippi to serve on the 5th Circuit."

1) I think that the Dems are acting as if Elrod is invisible in order to hide her confirmation from the liberal special-interest groups. They did something similar with Deborah Livingston. Her confirmation was so low-key it was as if she didn't exist. It is also interesting to note, that at least for the moment, the Dems in general have chosen NOT to focus on any of Bush's female nominees (Livingston, Elrod and Haynes).

2) I am highly suspicious of Henry Wingate. If he was a true conservative or Republican, why would he so willingly allow the Dems to talk him up so blatantly? My supposition is that either he himself or some of his close friends are really campaigning hard for him with the Democrats - not exactly ethical behavior in my opinion.

That's baseless speculation, Bobo. Federal judges should not be accused of unethical behavior without evidence. It's just as baseless as the accusations against Southwick. Ed.

Unfortunately, Elrod for Southwick would be no "trade" at all. It is (if true) a blatant capitulation by the Senate GOP. Essentally, it is ditching one non-controversial, "slam-dunk" nominee to secure confirmation of another. At the very least, the GOP Senators should be working to get Keisler in exchange for surrendering Southwick to the liberal hyenas. The defensiveness of Leahy's Statement indicates that he's uncomfortable and feeling the pressure.

Southwick for Elrod and some DJ's is little more than a pathetic joke--you can almost hear the chortles now from the Dem side. Of course they'll fast-track her--they'd put her on the Tokyo-Osaka Bullet train if necessary to get this fleecing finalized. I only wish I could play poker for a living against our esteemed GOP Senators. I could retire right now and enjoy the easy pickings that go on and on.

Days elapsed since last CCA confirmation: 71

From the previous thread:

"Souter takes forever to write the simplest of opinions. How much more pressure would he feel he is under if he actually had to start assigning cases?"

I think it is only human nature to overestimate our capabilities if we can gain a once-in-a-lifetime career opportunity in the process. Despite the greater nervousness and stress it may later engender in him, I think Souter would be thrilled initially to control the liberal opposition to what I'm sure he feels is an out-of-control conservative court. In his own mind, I think Souter feels he does have a strong ideological message to send. I have read that he became close friends with his immediate predecessor, William Brennan, and has modelled his jurisprudence in Brennan's image. I think he might find it his duty to make sure that Brennan's legacy is not tarnished by Roberts and company.

You may be right, though, that in the end a decision to become the ranking liberal member of the court might cause Souter to eventually have a nervous breakdown. After all, that is exactly what happened to one of Eisenhower's appointees, Charles Evans Whittaker. After having a nervous breakdown due to work-related stress, Whittaker resigned from the court in 1962. However, I am sure that initially Whittaker thought that he could succeed in the job. Otherwise, he never would've accepted Eisenhower's nomination.

"I only wish I could play poker for a living against our esteemed GOP Senators. I could retire right now and enjoy the easy pickings that go on and on."

I believe I've written almost identical things here several times. In fact, the 'old' site's filter used to block posts with the word "poker" in them.... ;)

Yep, the bitter harvest of blindly sticking with Boyle, J. Haynes, and Myers long after they were 'killed' has come to full reap. Call it the Frist Vintage.

At least Boyle & Myers (and Saad) were essentially exchanged for JRB, Pryor, Owen & Kavanaugh, which is a deal I take 365 days a year. Had they (and Wallace) been promptly withdrawn after Kav's confirmation, Keisler & maybe even Kethledge & Murphy also would've been in, provided Dumbback had not put a hold on Neff. Sure, their feelings would've been hurt. So what? Happened anyway.

Haynes managed to take the McCain-Graham '08 Campaign down with him, so he didn't 'die' in vain.

Keisler is finished. "My good friends from Alabama & Iowa had serious concerns about this controversial nominee last year when they were in the majority, therefore I can not see why..." It's over. He could've been rammed thru in December, but oh, no.

Hopefully, McConnell & Specter can bluff Leahy & sacrifice Keisler for Southwick, but I wouldn't hold your breath.

As you well know, of all of Bush's present nominees, the one I most want confirmed is Keisler. I would love to see a deal to get him confirmed, but the Senate Republicans may feel, however, that, despite all their rhetoric to the contrary, they are in a powerless situation with the majority Democrats. Rather than wasting their time on judges, they may feel they need to reserve their political capital for fights over legislation. In that case, they may have tried to cut a deal that saves them at least some face and gets a few more solid nominees like Elrod confirmed.

If it came down to a Keisler-for-Southwick or a Southwick-for-Keisler deal, I would choose the Southwick-for-Keisler deal every time. Although I feel sorry for the way Southwick's reputation has been sullied by the Dems' accusations of racism, I would trade him for Keisler in a hearbeat. The worst thing the Dems have said about Keisler is that he is a co-founder of the Federalist Society (and that scares them a lot). Even the Dems admit that he is an extremely intelligent, well-mannered lawyer.

I know how much you want Keisler confirmed, as do I. Perhaps it can still happen with a confluence of possible favorable circumstances. It's been uphill since the GOP 109th, in a final display of unfathomable fecklessness, failed to force through his confirmation last fall. O.K., that's admittedly history.

But they should make him their # 1 priority now. As you and I wrote earlier, perhaps the Southwick fiasco presents an unexpected opportunity to ge4t Keisler. It's at least worth a hard try.

over on my blog.

The article is here: http://first-cut-politics.blogspot.com/2006/07/does-bush-have-strategy-o...

Oz

www.first-cut-politics.blospot.com

Your link in post 1 doesnt seem to be working. Can you relink it please?

I just tried the link again and its seems to be working fine. If it continues not to work, you can access it through the SJC website link to Elrod's hearing:

http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearing.cfm?id=2871

http://www.dallasbar.org/judiciary/profiles.asp?item=25

"Fairness is Judge Haynes' top priority as a judge. She has been influenced by her experiences as a trial lawyer and the input she has received from residents of the county, other judges and attorneys. Without forgetting what it was like to be a trial lawyer, she also tries to balance the interests of other participants in the litigation process, such as jurors, and the integrity of the judicial system as a whole. Trial settings, pre-trial deadlines and expedient hearings and trials are important aspects of justice and fairness.

It looks like Judge Haynes has found a new home. Lawyers and non-lawyers should feel free to stop in and see what’s going on in the 191st District Court. You are likely to find a judge hard at work. And if you are set for trial in Judge Haynes' court, remember to be there early–she starts at 8 a.m."

http://today.fit.edu/archives/spring06/alumni/profile/index.html

"“Respect the person you’re going to be—give that person a chance,” advised Catharina Haynes ’83.

That was Haynes’ response when she was asked for the best advice she could give students who are attending Florida Tech today. She explained: “When you are making decisions about life at a young age, it will affect you down the road. Step back and envision yourself in the future, then ask, ‘What will I think of myself?’ I call that respecting your future self. Even now I apply it.”"

http://dallas.bizjournals.com/dallas/stories/2007/01/08/story7.html

"After the title "judge" is on your résumé, what's next?

That question has weighed heavily on the minds of 42 former Republican Dallas County jurists since Nov. 7, when they were summarily dismissed from their jobs by voters."

"Lawyer Jason Franklin, who appeared before outgoing Judge Catharina Haynes on her final day on the bench, said he regretted the wholesale turnover of judges.

"It was a complete surprise to me," Franklin said.

"I don't think judges should be assigned to a party. We're about to lose a bunch of good judges. Judge Haynes is one of them."

Haynes, who presided over the 191st District Court since 1999, will return to her civil law practice at Baker Botts LLP.

She said she learned some valuable lessons on the bench."

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/editorials/storie...

"We recommend incumbent Catharina Haynes, a Republican, over Democratic challenger Gena Slaughter.

First elected in 1998, Judge Haynes, 42, is seeking a third term. She is considered an efficient administrator who handles her caseload smoothly and knows the law."

Another reason to see why electing judges in retarded. The public barely knows what they are voting for when it comes to POTUS and Congressional election let alone judicial elections. PA has all its judicial positions filled by election. However judges arent even allowed to discuss their positions on any cases or issues. What a joke! It is just a matter of who has the prettiest sign or flashiest TV commercial or best sounding name. I think it was Aristotle that said democracy is the worst form of governemnt. Elections removing Haynes, who seems like a wrokaholic fair judge, and the 42 other judges on the ballot prove that point.

keisler will just have to wait to be appointed by the next WH.

I'd point out that with 49 Republicans, it's going to be tough to get strong conservatives confirmed, especially for the SC.

Alito, for example, would NEVER have been confirmed by this Senate. In fact, he probably would NEVER have been nominated. Roberts, since he was replacing Rehnquist, perhaps, but things owuld have been a lot tougher fo him as well.

If the GOP wins in 2008, and that's a big if as of now, there's going ot be probably fewere than 49 Republicans and they'll include people like Specter, Snowe, Collins and a few others who aren't keen on putting the 5th vote against Roe on the court.

Regardlss of who the President is, given the Senate breakdown, the shortlist is probably going to be the same, and won't include people like Alito with a long track records of being a strong conservative and being anti Roe.

Just who do you think would be confirmed with say, 47 Republicans?

I do NOT share your extreme pessimism with the 2008 Senate elections. Aside from Colorado, I think all of our seats our fairly safe. Even CO is looking better. There was an article on thehill.com tonight that said the GOP candidate did really well with fundraising last quarter and almost beat Udall. Secondly, Landrieu and Johnson are toast. All the black voters that saved her last time are now sitting in Texas thanks to Katrina and Johnson is lucky if he knows who he is let alone him running a successful reelection campaign. Lastly I really dont think Mahoney would be all that bad. She would not be my first choice but she would be fine and tons better than any of the pinko four. We will not be able to get another young conservative superstar like Roberts or Alito in this Senate. Instead of putting up a mushy nominee though, I say put up an old conservative. Someone like an Olson, Easterbrook, or Silberman. They would be able to hold the seat for at least 4 years should the great satan (Hillary) win the presidency. You arent going to get 15-20 years out of them. Ten max. But oh what a good ten years it would be!!!!

Make them block Estrada from Rudy's first pick first

More news and info:

1. Wingate:
To clear up speculation on Judge Henry Wingate, he does not enjoy wide support in Mississippi because he is extremely slow in his work. He often complains about the work load in Mississippi’s Southern District, but other judges (like Pickering) did not take so long to decide motions, etc… In Wingate’s defense, the Southern District was very busy, but nothing a federal judge should not be able to handle.
This is probably why the Whitehouse has not nominated Wingate, even when Lott included Wingate on a short list of potential nominees. Wingate is bitter about not being elevated to 5th CCA. I would also be bitter if I stayed at the district level for two decades.

2. Local Mississippi article on Cochran’s speech entitled:
“Cochran's plea aims to shame Dems who oppose Southwick nomination”
http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070720/NEWS/70...

3. Senator Whitehouse actually responded to my letter to him about Southwick. He cites the two opinions with which we are all familiar and has taken a solid position opposing Southwick.

In addition to my previously stated concern about his possible campaigning for the 5th Circuit job, SOP, you have given me a new reason to worry about Wingate's possible nomination. If he truly is bitter about being passed over by Bush for the last 6 1/2 years, might he turn on conservatives and Republicans once confirmed as a form of retribution for past crimes? I sincerely think that David Souter has become more liberal over the years due to what he considers poor treatment from conservatives and Republicans ("No more Souters!"). Bitterness can do odd things to a person.

Widespread recess appointments if shutting down the Senate doesn't work. Enough is enough. Screw 'em.

Basically, only Southwick and Keisler would be viable recess appointments. Southwick comes from a conservative state with two Republican senators. Keisler is up for a position that requires no blue slips. In addition, neither Southwick or Keisler are sitting judges and would not have to sacrifice government pensions if recess-appointed. Conrad would not be a good recess-appointment because he is a sitting judge. Kethledge, Murphy and Stone would not be good because all three come from blue states with two Democrat senators. In their cases, the Dems could make a lot of noise about homestate senators not being consulted, and the nominees not being ideologically representative of their states' populations.

Because the solution is only temporarily, and it sets very bad precedent.

If Bush recess-appoints 10 judges, a future democratic president will recess-appoint 20 judges and so on. And that will escalate.

This way a judgeship will be similar as a position of secretary: serve by the pleasure of the President.

Your concern is noted, but equally as tragic is that the SJC chairperson is now deciding who should be nominated for the MS 5th CCA seat (Wingate or nobody!) I think Leahy forgot he does not have the constitutional authority to made that decision.

A staffer on the SJC told me that all of the five district court nominees (Osteen, Reidinger, DeGiusti, Sammartino and Mauskopf) were voted out of committee yesterday evening at 6:00 pm. Because of the late timing of the vote, the five names have not yet been posted on the Senate's Executive Calendar.

Yesterday, a seemingly noncontroversial bill on student loans and grants became bogged down on the Senate floor by a multitude of nongermane Republican amendments concerning things like presidential pardons and immigration reform. The Democrats were furious with the Republicans for delaying the final vote on the bill which eventually did occur hours after it was supposed to. Kennedy yelled at McConnell several times during the amendment debates. This rancorous Senate session lasted until about 1:00 am in the morning. As I watched it, I wondered if this might be the beginning of Senate slow-down in order to get Southwick confirmed. This situation might just be Republican payback for the all-nighter on Tuesday and Wednesday that the Dems forced the Republicans to go through concerning Iraq, but I hope McConnell is just beginning the fight over Southwick. Only time will tell.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/19/AR200707...

Strangely, the article omits any reference to the heated dust-up over the bill's delay because of nongermane Republican amendments.

SOP, I agree that each nominee should be voted out of committee, either favorably or unfavorably.

That's why I think that McConnell should file a discharge petition. Of course that will be voted down, but it puts the dems on record that they don't want to consider the nominee.
After that McConnell can start thinking about shutting down the senate.

For me recess-appointments are a slippery slope, that I don't want to enter.

Bobo, do you know whether there was a discussion on Southwick yesterday? And whether someone voted against Mauskopf?

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/20/washington/20cong.html?_r=1&ref=washin...

"The angry attacks nearly spiraled out of control Thursday night as the two parties lobbed political bombs at each other during the windup of work on an otherwise popular higher education measure.

After Republicans brought forward proposals intended to embarrass Democrats on terror detainees and union elections, Democrats countered with a resolution urging President Bush not to pardon I. Lewis Libby Jr., a former top White House aide. Republicans struck back with a resolution deploring the pardons issued by President Bill Clinton.

The floor descended into chaos as members of the two parties glowered at one another across the aisle. Evidently recognizing they had gone too far, party leaders pulled back and agreed to try to finish the education bill as Democrats struck their Libby proposal from the record.

Hard feelings have consequences. Without agreements between the leaders of the opposing parties, the Senate has been plunged into a procedural knife fight, with Democrats forced to scramble to find 60 votes not just on contentious issues like an Iraq withdrawal plan, but on once-routine matters like motions to proceed to a spending bill.

The feuding has spilled into subjects that would seem to hold the potential for common ground, like antiterror legislation and lobbying reform, and will doubtless tie up other measures to come.

Democrats contend that Republicans have embarked on a strategy of delay, using Senate rules to chew up scarce legislative time and deny Democrats any accomplishments. Republicans complain that Democrats are trying to jam through objectionable bills and are mainly interested in building a political case for 2008. The relationship between Mr. Reid and his Republican counterpart, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, has cooled after it was initially thought the two Senate tacticians would be able to do business."

Hopefully, Southwick and/or Keisler will get confirmed because of all these procedural delays. Oddly, no one seems to be tying the delay to judges. Most mainstream pundits are tying it instead to bitterness over Iraq.

no, I do not know if Southwick's name was brought up or if anyone voted against Mauskopf. In the past, though, if any nominee has received at least one Democrat vote in committee, then he has been confirmed by the full Senate. The Dems have only blocked those people that the SJC Democrats have united unanimously against. To be voted out of committee, Mauskopf had to get at least one Dem vote, so I think her confirmation is assured.

so it looks like they are trying to create a shutdown of the Senate that they can blame on Republicans.

Thanks, that is at least some good news. Although I prefer to read that kind of news about circuit court nominations...

Agreed that if forced to choose, I take Keisler over Southwick, same as with JRB/Pryor over Meyers/Saad. Also agreed with your's & Outsider's analysis that the possibility exists that the moonbats' overreaction may inadvertantly allow Keisler to slip thru.

I doubt Leahy would allow this, as he wisely wants to stop Keisler and in a vaccuum would vote for Southwick, but McConnell, Specter & Cochran could outflank him if they play their cards right.

And in a perfect world, Saad & Southwick would be co-Attorneys General in the Giuliani Administration.

Courtesy of How Appealing:

http://starbulletin.com/2007/07/20/news/story03.html

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=200770720036...

From the Honolulu Advertiser article:

"Stevens, however, downplayed what others say is the increased polarization of the court and even characterized himself more as a judicial conservative who views the court's role as refraining from issuing decisions that should be made by the legislative and executive branches of government."

"Stevens doesn't agree that there will be an erosion of civil liberties under the Roberts court. He said it's not correct to assume there's a trend to predict the future. "I would not think doom is around the corner or anything like that," he said."

"Stevens believes he has a "wonderful job" and he enjoys it, but he does have someone whom he trusts who would tell him when it's time to retire. He didn't mention names, but added, "He's apt to do it when I'm dissenting on one of his decisions.""

Who is Stevens' conservative friend on the court?

There's probably a better way, but you can start here and keep bumping up the page number in the URL to get to the next few pages.

It was absolutely brilliant how McConnell had this ready to roll out for this situation. And even better you can get a good picture of Senator Kennedy's head being even bigger and redder than usual as it was ready to explode at various times during the evening.

Here is the first article that implies that last night's Republican antics are related to Southwick:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070720/NATIO...

"Senior Republican aides tell The Washington Times that Mr. Specter is willing to join an effort led by Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican, that would stall parts of the Democratic legislative agenda through the summer if the Southwick nomination does not go to a vote on the Senate floor.

"We'd rather have the accomplishment than a fight," said Don Stewart, spokesman for Mr. McConnell. "But we're willing to have the fight if we have to."

"Democrats responded by saying Republicans have already attempted to obstruct a number of bills. "When it comes to obstructing, the Republican leadership is the best in the business," said Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat.

Mr. Manley said the Senate is not blocking the nomination and that Democrats have held votes on nominees at a higher rate than under the previous Republican majority."

http://www.washingtontimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070720/COMME...

"D.C. Mayor Adrian Fenty does not see guns the way our Founders did. In his view, they are not tools for defending individual liberty, they are instruments of criminality.

This week, Mr. Fenty announced the District would appeal to the Supreme Court a March U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia decision that ruled a District gun law unconstitutional. The law flatly bans possession of a handgun — even in one's own home — unless the gun was registered before 1976."

Feingold and Schumer voted for Mauskopf, and perhaps others. The administration provided Feingold with info showing she hadn't gone for the death penalty more often than the average for her position, and Feingold then said he would support her.

I read about the debate last night and had a huge smile on my face. It couldnt happen to a nicer guy. Reid is the one that knifed Lott in the back in 2001 over the "power sharing" deal and then with Jeffords. The Dems then obstructed everything. The Homeland Security bill comes to mind in addition to all their fillibustering with judges. Im glad we are finally starting to fight back. It really would have been nice to see Frist pull a few all nighters over Estrada when he had the chance or for ANWR at the end of 2005. What a waste. Anyway keep it up. I would make Reid get a cloture vote for everything. It is time to teach them a lesson. We all know that Keisler nor any other CCA are going to get confirmed. Just throw it down after Elrod gets through.

Just bump him down to the SD-MS seat that is vacant and let President Romney elevate him later.

If Conservatives were bashing Souter, it's a consequence of him becoming more liberal, not the cause.

The man is already well qualified to fit the circuit seat.

I know several people who strongly supported the Alito filibuster (and at least then they had somewhat logically sound arguments), and believe the treatment of Southwick/Keisler is deplorable.

Getting him a vote for DJ would further expose the Dems. He almost suredly would be confirmed by a wide margin for the DJ spot. The Dems will then have a hard time expaining how they could support a racist for a DJ spot. Their whole charade will come crashing down. Plus it is one less vacancy for a potential Dem president to fill. If Brownback hadnt placed that hold last fall, Southwick would have been a sitting DJ and it would have been impossible for the Dems to do what they did. I am just extending that logic to today.

Expose the Dems as what, exactly? They've already been exposed...to the extend that a lower court nomination can be exposed, anyway.

They're just resort to their 'African American or nothing' argument. The media isn't going to do anything about it; the Senate GOP leaders have to.

Can Michael Wallace be nominated to the District Court seat? Or if the vote on Southwick for the Circuit court fails - as in he gets voted on and doesn't get out of committee...would he accept and be confirmed for the district court seat he was originally nominated for?

Leahy and the Dems have told Bush they would confirm Southwick to a district judgeship if Bush pulled him from his COA slot and substituted Wingate or another African-American for him. Bush immediately rejected the plan.

http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070622/NEWS/70...

"Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, the highest-ranking Republican on the Judiciary Committee, has said he and Leahy talked to the White House about nominating another for the seat on the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and naming Southwick to district court. "

http://public.cq.com/docs/cqt/news110-000002532169.html

"Last week, Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick J. Leahy, D-Vt., suggested that Bush withdraw Southwick’s nomination and instead nominate an African-American candidate and name Southwick to a district court seat.

“Mississippi has never had an African-American on the circuit even though it has the largest African-American population of any state,” Leahy said.

The senator said White House counsel Fred F. Fielding told him June 13 that Bush will not follow Leahy’s advice."

Wallace I believe received a 'unqualified' from the ABA. He's done, fair or not. Southwick received a unanimous 'well-qualified'.

I would go for a Southwick to DCC-Thomas/JRB clone to COA AND Keisler confirmed to COA deal, but Bush never would.

And frankly, Southwick appears to finally be the one the heretofore ele-sheep are gathering around. Should've been Estrada back in '01, but better late than never, tho the price for procrastination has been steep.

Forcing a floor vote on Southwick is a huge win. He'll get by barely, and the kossacks will be absolutely livid. Leahy shouldn't have caved to Neas & Aron. Pizzed Arlen right off.

Leahy wants to vote for Southwick & knows Keisler is far more 'dangerous' to his side. But the fringe has just gone berserk over those two opinions Swick joined, plus they went irrational over the recent SCOTUS rulings and can't stop bemoaning Alito's confirmation.

Judges. Wins every time for the GOP, but try telling them that....

The Dems and their Neas et al allies clearly require a CCA nominee scalp this summer. We don't want it to be Southwick or Keisler or Conrad. But they need to taste some blood, and then might let some other nominees slip through. They require a victim, and it's up to us to give them the proper one.

So here's a plan right out of The Maltese Falcon: give them a Fall Guy. My suggestion is to renominate Claude Allen for the Maryland 4th Circuit seat. The Dem-Libs couldn't resist that juicy bait and should go quickly into a berserk feeding frenzy. While they're totally engaged in furious attacks on Allen, that will be the time for the GOP to slip Keisler and Southwick through as relatively uncontroversial.

Southwick IS the fall guy.

Nominating Allen would just result in Ben Cardin releasing some Sarbanes statement from a few years ago, Leahy would never even schedule a hearing, and that would be the end of it. Fall guy Southwick got the priviledge of a hearing and the dog/pony show.

That said, to be completely honest, I'd rather have the fall guy on the highly Republican 5th circuit.

You seem to be out of the loop. Claude Allen was arrested and convicted in 2006 for committing refund theft. He received 18 months of probation. Bush would look like a fool if he made the huge mistake of nominating Allen to any government position ever again.

Rumsfeld to the DC circuit seat, Delay/Gonzalez to the 5th Circuit TX seats, Bolton to the 4th Circuit MD seat, and Santorum to the 3rd Circuit PA seat.

You seem to have missed the essence of my message: it was a joke. The fact of Allen's subsequent legal problems, of which I've been aware for years, was the kicker. Rather than me being "out of the loop", I think you've been "looped the loop" (WWI aerial dogfighting terminology, since we apparently have to explain every reference.) I thought that the inclusion of "whimsical" in my title would clearly signal that my post was in jest.

But like all good humour, there is a kernel of truth beneath the whimsy. A real strawman nominee might be a useful diversion.

I may be good at analysis, but I seem to be deficient in detecting written humor. In all honesty, I wish the comments section on this site were capable of doing the html happy and sad faces. It sure would help me with my ability to detect humor and sarcasm! Andrew, any help on the way for html tagging? :)

Sorry, smiley face pictures are beyond my control. :-(

plz help my, need money cum shot hand job cum shot movie cum facial free movie shot cum shot video free gay cum shot video cunt licking mature dog licking dog excessive licking ebony blow job slut face fucking mature facial cum shot black