Obama Picks Political Expediency Over Principle on Roberts Nomination
By John Kalinger Posted in News — Comments (21) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Excuse me, but wasn’t Obama supposed to be, as one of his friends puts it in an article in Monday’s Washington Post, “a new kind of politician?” Wasn’t he supposed to unite the country and lead us all into a new era of bi-partisanship in which we all hold hands and sing politically correct songs about diversity and tolerance?
Apparently, not.
According to the article, Obama was actually ready to vote for the nomination of John Roberts until he was disabused of that silly notion by his veteran political consigliere and chief of staff, Pete Rouse. According to the Post, “[Obama] expressed admiration for Roberts's intellect. Besides, Obama said, if he were president he wouldn't want his judicial nominees opposed simply on ideological grounds.”
That sounds fair, reasonable and logical to me. But Rouse, who has been working inside the Beltway since Obama was in grade school, knew that Obama’s thinking was naïve:
This was no Harvard moot-court exercise, [Rouse] said. If Obama voted for Roberts, Rouse told him, people would remind him of that every time the Supreme Court issued another conservative ruling, something that could cripple a future presidential run. Obama took it in. And when the roll was called, he voted no.
Is kowtowing to Ralph Neas, Nan Aron and the extreme left-wing of the Democratic base part of the politics of hope?
(Cross-posted at the CFJ Blog.)
Obama is a liberal political hack--don't believe the media hype. If he were white, he would have been laughed out of the presidential race already.
The fact that he contemplated voting in favor of Roberts puts him a small notch above Ted Kennedy, Schumer, Turbin, Edwards, and a few other bottom feeders.
I suppose.
Fifth Circuit nominee Elrod and DJ nominees Jones (W.D.Wash.) and Aycock (N.D. Miss.) are on the agenda for next week's SJC Business Meeting.
http://judiciary.senate.gov/meeting_notice.cfm?id=2891
It would be great if BOTH Southwick and Elrod get confirmed in September. That would give Bush five COA confirmations for 2008 as compared to Clinton's 7 in 1999. Maybe the Dems will let another two be confirmed after that? Haynes and Tinder? Better yet, Keisler and Haynes.
Between holding her over for a couple weeks, and the new AG nomination that is to come, the Dems are likely to kill most of September without a hearing.
Elrod will probably be held over for at least a while in Committee. As we all know, the SJC can be a virtually interminable (and often terminal) tar pit. Remember Southwick, Saad, Haynes, Myers et al?
Holding a new confirmation hearing in September is almost as important as confirming Southwick next month. Dems will probably try to get through Sept. without a hearing, hiding behind more visible controversies (Southwick, new AG, etc.). GOP Senators must not let them get away with it.
And how's the lefter-than-left ABA doing with the four July CCA nominations? They'll doubtless delay the evaluations as long as possible, running out September if they can. The only others available for a hearing are Keisler (rehearing probably required) and the moribund Michigan Two.
Well - maybe not really a 'Hillary supporter', but I do think Hillary would be a better president than Obama. Some of Obama's statements regarding the war, Cuba, terrorist countries, etc really frighten me. He is very personable and is so warm and genuine - I would like to have him as my friend - but definately not my president. Hillary, on the other hand, I really would not like as a my friend or president, but I think she would be more responsible than Obama in the White House.
http://www.discourse.net/archives/2007/08/limits_on_acting.html
Without a nominee, it turns out that Paul Clement can act as AG for 210 days. Under such conditions, I hope Bush doesn't rush into naming a new AG. He should wait until November or December and then simultaneously nominate and recess-appoint Clement.
The danger of putting Clement, Cox or other young conservative super-future SCOTUS candidates into the 18-19 month AG slot is that it may embitter the Dem-Libs and make them permanently unviable for High Court confirmation.
The relevant model here is Robert Bork in 1975. This was for the Douglas seat that Stevens eventually got, to our seemingly endless chagrin. Bork was Solicitor General and the ideal candidate, but his involvement in firing Archibald Cox as Watergate Special Prosecutor in 1973 (after Richardson and Ruckleshouse refused to do so) made him political poison. I think this "stigma" reverberated even in 1987.
Dem-Libs have long memories, and they probably will not forgive or forget actions that AG Clement or Cox might take during the waning days of the 'hateful' (to Dem-Libs) Bush Administration.
From NRO's Digest:
"CHAFEE LOSES TO WHITEHOUSE, THEN TO THE WHITE HOUSE: A DIGEST EXCLUSIVE. National Review Online Hill reporter David Freddoso reports: Rhode Island Republicans are surprised that Robert Flanders, a former member of the state supreme court, has been overlooked for an open seat on the First Circuit Court of Appeals.
In March 2006, liberal former Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R) had been asked by the White House to submit three names as possible nominees, from which the President planned to choose. But Chafee, ever dodgy in his dealings with George W. Bush, only submitted one name, that of Flanders. An active member of the state GOP who is described by sources in the state as a “real Republican,” Flanders is also publicly supported by conservative Gov. Donald Carcieri (R.). He happens to be a personal friend of Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D., R.I.), causing speculation that his confirmation would have been relatively easy.
But the White House was upset that Chafee submitted just one name, and interpreted this as an attempt by the senator to force President Bush’s hand. As a result, Flanders’s recommendation has languished for well over a year with no action taken. The administration is said to be leaning instead toward nominating Robert Clark Corrente, the current U.S. attorney from Rhode Island, whom Chafee had earlier recommended for a federal district judgeship."
As much as I don't mind Bush's sticking it to Chaffee, it's possible this might cause Whitehouse to oppose Corrente since Whitehouse is a personal friend of Flanders. We'll see....
Here's Corrente's bio from the DOJ website. Interestingly, he was a partner at the same law firm at which Flanders now works, so perhaps he has similar connections and his nomination might succeed:
"Robert Clark Corrente was appointed in August of 2004 by President George W. Bush as the United States Attorney for the District of Rhode Island. In this capacity, he oversees the office, which is responsible for prosecuting all federal criminal and civil cases in the State, combating terrorism through preparation, education and response, protecting Rhode Island’s youth and its neighborhoods by developing highly targeted gun violence reduction strategies and reestablishing cleaner, safer communities consistent with the President’s Project Safe Neighborhood and Weed & Seed initiatives. He supervises a staff of approximately 20 attorneys and 24 support personnel. U.S. Attorney Corrente also serves on two subcommittees of the U.S. Attorney General’s Advisory Committee: the Subcommittee on Controlled Substances and the Subcommittee on Violent and Organized Crime.
Mr. Corrente began his legal career in private practice in 1981. He was Managing Partner of Corrente, Brill & Kusinitz, and from 1998 until becoming United States Attorney, he was a partner with the law firm of Hinckley, Allen & Snyder, LLP with offices in Providence, Boston and New Hampshire.
He has over 20 years of trial experience in business and commercial litigation in both the federal and state courts. He also has extensive management experience. In 1997 the Rhode Island Supreme Court appointed Mr. Corrente to its Ethics Advisory Panel, and he was named its Chair in 2002. He chaired the Rhode Island Judicial Nominating Commission from 1998 to 2000. In addition, he served on the Editorial Board of Rhode Island Lawyers’ Weekly.
A native of Rhode Island, Mr. Corrente graduated from Dartmouth College with highest distinction in 1978, and earned his juris doctor degree from New York University School of Law in 1981."
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/31/warner/index.html
"Warner's retirement puts Senate Republicans in a bigger bind as they try to recapture the chamber from the Democrats in next year's election.
Virginia was once a solid red state, but Democrats have won most of the major state wide elections in recent years."
Should Allen try to gain Warner's seat?
This Senatorial nominating process has to stop....even Webb didn't have the audacity to submit only 2 names for the 2 VA seats.
Let the RI seat rot...its at the bottom of the priority list anyway.
Hopefully Hillary gets the Presidential nomination....she will do very poorly in rural Virginia and hinder any Dem Senate nominee.
Stuff like this is absurd.
http://www.projo.com/news/content/projo_20060318_judge18.22174bbb.html
PROVIDENCE -- Robert G. Flanders, a former Rhode Island Supreme Court justice, respected Providence trial lawyer and onetime Brown University football star, was nominated yesterday by Sen. Lincoln Chafee to a seat on the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, one of the nation's most prestigious courts.
I don't want to jeopardize Clement's future chances for POTUS, esp. with possibility of 18 pick up by Dems of a new few more seats.
Ollie! He's gotten great seasoning and exposure at Fox News: commentator, War Stories, and embedded with the troops. I don't think he'd have a "Macaca moment."
a weekend open thread!
Why let the Rhode Island seat "rot"? To spite Chaffee, who's no longer even in the Senate? That risks allowing a Dem to fill it in the future. It's silly for Bush to reject Flanders merely to spite Chaffee, especially if Flanders is the only possibility for a confirmation given his friendship with Whitehouse. Despite the fact he was suggested by Chaffee, Flanders is in fact about as conservative as you'll ever hope to get on the 1st Circuit. If the RI senators will go for Corrente - fine, then nominate him. Otherwise, it's self-defeating not to nominate Flanders. Every COA seat matters, even in the 1st Circuit.
It sets bad precedent. No Senator should be able to obtain the power of nominating anyone they wish to nominate.
The fact that he is friends with Whitehouse means there's at least a reasonable chance President Obama/Hillary will nominate Flanders to the seat anyway.
Frankly, the liberal state of RI deserves a liberal wackjob as their judge. I would place the RI seat only over the MD seat on the list of priorities.

Obama was also eloquent in arguing that filibuster was not the way for the Democratic party to convince the public to accept its view on judges . . . two days before he voted with those filibustering Alito.
Got to walk the walk.