ConfirmThem

Nice article, but this garbage about Souter being "reportedly restless" has to stop. It was reported only here, by Nonsider. I fell for it too, but it's nothing but pure GOTV fable at this point. I wish there was a way to bet on this.

Love the button. They need to make up another one w/JRB & Pryor's pic on it.

STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SCALIA, J., joined.

09--Stevens announces his retirement
10--RBG announces her retirement
11--Souter announces his retirement

McCain will get the best possible conservative(s) through a Democratic senate (though things are looking up re the Senate, with McCain and Palin perhaps lifting the boats of Coleman, Schaeffer, and a few others). Will McCain recess appoint strong originalist judges? Just a thought.

That timeline only fits an Obama Presidency.

Ginsberg will not voluntarily retire under McCain. She'll pull a Douglas and go senile.

There's a great editorial today in the Wall Street Journal about the Democrats sorry record and/or lies about judicial confirmations. Here's the link:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122083022259508379.html?mod=opinion_main...

It's a great analysis of the sorry state of affairs.

...was just unveiled this afternoon. Quite an overhaul from the previous version. Say what you will about Pat Leahy - and there is plenty to say - but the man knows how to run a website. It's pretty nicely dressed-up.

Christine Arguello and Philip Brimmer (both for the District of Colorado) will have a hearing tomorrow:

http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearings/hearing.cfm?id=3537

It doesn't surprise me any that Arguello and Brimmer were added to the hearing tomorrow. I predicted their confirmations in the previous thread. The question now is when and if Conrad, Trenga, Diamond and Short get hearings. Since Conrad and Diamond are COA nominees, the Dems may choose to overlook any Virginia or Pennsylvania deals, but I think they do so with a real risk of looking totally partisan. Such obstruction may not help them in view of Palin's recent revitalization of the McCain campaign. Do Reid and Leahy really want to add more energy to the McCain/Palin ticket with an issue they know conservatives love?

I agree with zendari. I think with a McCain presidency, only Stevens retires, and that won't be until 2011. Souter and Ginsburg will not retire under a Republican president. Although Souter was nominated by a Republican, I think he is a lot like another famous liberal justice, Harry Blackmun. Although nominated by a Republican (Nixon), Blackmun retired under a Democrat (Clinton).

After rereading my comment #7, I realized that I had mistaken Brimmer of Colorado for Goldberg. In this case, I am somewhat surprised. Arguello, as failed Clinton nominee, seemed an obvious choice for a hearing, but not Brimmer. Brimmer was not on Salazar's approved list, and Salazar has explicitly stated that he will not support Brimmer. Because of this, the fact that Brimmer is getting a hearing at all is amazing. In addition, it seems quite interesting that Brimmer is getting a hearing before Goldberg, a Colorado nominee Salazar is supporting.

http://blogs.denverpost.com/opinion/2008/09/08/judicial-nominees-arguell...

According to this link Salazar did not blue slip Brimmer and Allard did not blue slip Arguello. A deal was reached, giving both a hearing.

Goldberg, supported by both Senators, will NOT get a hearing.
Why? I don't know.

...so how dare we question Him?

http://www.eons.com/groups/topic/894197-Obama-s-IQ-The-Highest-Of-Any-Pr...

Sighhhh...

A 172+ IQ is so high that most people have never met someone with one, and would certainly remember if they had. For example, I spent most of my childhood with family members etc. fussing about how smart I was and I think I tested at 138 once.

Barry is a bright boy and speaks wonderfully from prepared texts, but he utterly and completely lacks the long string of concrete achievments at every level and lifelong trail of awestruck classmates, teachers, mentors, employers, co-workers & professional peers that are the hallmarks for example of such federal judges (whatever one thinks of their jurisprudence) as Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Ginsburg, Stevens, Posner, Silberman and the late Rehnquist, Powell & Arnold.

Hell, DOUG Ginsburg at the same age had a far more impressive resume than Barry does now, it's not even close.

What a pathetic joke, and besides, I thought Dems were AGAINST standardized tests. Aren't they racist, sexist, classist, and don't accurately measure intelligence of any kind? Sure wouldn't want to use them for job applications or school admissions now would we?

L to the O to tha muhfuh'n' L

(tried to crosspost this at Red State, but the usual 'technical issues' are happenin' there)

STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SCALIA, J., joined.

I'll give JPS & RBG credit for not being anything like the monomaniacal, embittered, power-crazed disgrace that Douglas was. Even Brennan & Marshall retired under GHWB when the writing was on the wall, and Warren didn't try to rescind his retirement when Nixon (Nixon!) won in '68. Think about that last one for a minute; Warren lived fairly hale & hearty til the summer of '74...

Rehnquist's greatest achievment may well have been as an "institutionist", as some have suggested, raising the level of respect the Court enjoys, esp by it's members, despite the occasional hiccup like the winter of '00.

Stevens actually is golden either way. If it's McCain, he gets to retire under a RPOTUS (and a veteran at that) w/a strong Dem Senate, and of course Barry is the dream liberal 'diverse' Chicagoan Powerball.

Ruthie will hang on as long as possible under McCain, but nobody wants to relive the diapers and clerk spraying Lysol days of Douglas. If Sandy could walk away, anyone can, tho Kennedy won't go quietly, unless it can be painted that he's doing the great magnanimous act of courage, selflessness & judiciousness.

Blackmun may have been the only threat to replicate Douglas; he quit as soon as he was sure about Casey, Ruthie, Clinton (after letting White go first). Who knows what he'd done had GHWB won in '92, but his health was still OK, and he had a front row seat for the Douglas debacle that horrified the other eight.

But of course, the main point is how important this election is for SCOTUS, as ya'll have said. JPS will 95%+ leave, and RBG is prolly at least 50%. Mahoney & Callahan >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Koh & Kagan. And Lord help us is if Scalia or AMK take a turn for the worse under Obama, esp if the Dems hit 60+ senators after 2010 (Liddy Dole now 5 points down??).... [shudder]

STEVENS, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which SCALIA, J., joined.

I wonder if Sandy ever regretted her actions after seeing that Sam Alito was her replacement. People have also noted the timeline surrounding her husband; how she retired to take care of him and ended up unable to take care of him anyway.

People like Earn Warren may hate the President, may hate the Congress, but at the least they have minimal respect for their own institution. You can't rescind your retirement without looking like an utter partisan.

Stevens will leave in 2009 or 2010 under McCain. We have no way of judging the political climate in the 2010 Senate elections, and Stevens is backed up by 55+ dems either way until then. Why risk returning to a more GoP senate?

'"For us to get these two Coloradans was an incredible climb. Besides the five who will get hearings, there are 26 other judicial nominations pending (who will not get hearings),' Salazar said."

This quote seems to imply that Conrad, Trenga, Diamond and Short will NOT get confirmed. I can understand Conrad, Diamond and Short, but Trenga (a Democrat)? Maybe Warner won't let him be processed unless Conrad is processed as well.