ConfirmThem

WHAT????? Something illegal is not a crime???? I may agree with Giuliani that it should not be a crime (or I may not agree), but surely we can agree that things illegal (like bombings and murder and assault) are crime!

Anybody but Giuliani!!!! is my 'cry'.

It was used as a short cut by people speeding through the neighborhood. One proposed police solution to reduce speeding was to raise the speed limit from 20 to 30.

Rudy's shooting his own campaign in the mouth again. he sounds suspiciously like a lefty whose solution to overcrowding prisons is to make everything legal. I mean, a lefty is what he is, but he was supposed to be tough on crime too. so much for that. I guess it's a good thing he thinks the war is actually a war and not a police action, at least...

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/?hpid=news-col-blog

"The news that Hagel will leave the Senate creates a potentially competitive open seat, with former Sen. Bob Kerrey (D) and former Gov. Mike Johanns (R) -- two titans of Cornhusker politics -- mentioned prominently as his replacement."

I certainly hope Johanns win this match-up. We need as many GOP senators as possible in the next Senate.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/07/AR200709...

"The persistent mention of Olson as a possible candidate has surprised and upset some Democrats, who view the well-known GOP attorney as a sharp-edged partisan who they contend would not be the best choice for a Justice Department accused of becoming overly politicized. Leahy voted against Olson's appointment as solicitor general in 2001, citing his "non-responsiveness" to questions about alleged ties to a conservative magazine's investigation of Bill and Hillary Clinton."

The nomination of Olson could spark a huge battle in the Senate Judiciary Committee that could derail all Fourth Circuit COA candidates. Expect only Southwick, Elrod and Tinder to get confirmed this year if such a battle ensues. Maybe after an AG confirmation in October, Haynes might also get through.

last night's episode of Monk featured the 9th Circuit COA releasing an inmate who had been imprisoned for 14 years after conviction of a gruesome double homicide based on new DNA evidence. turns out the DNA belonged to an at-the-time unknown accomplice. another great episode, with a perhaps unintentional "laugh" (it wouldn't be funny if it happened in reality...oh, wait...) at the 9th circuit. It does make me worry if such problems could lead to the misuse of DNA evidence to exonerate guilty parties with the help of corrupt organizations/attorneys and sympathetic judges though.

If he'd accept the nomination, that'd be great. Do it in honor of his beloved, beatiful and sharp wife who was murdered in the plane that hit the Pentagon. Maybe Bush should announce the nomination on 9/11.

If the Dims draw out the nomination process, no problem--Clement's at the helm in the mean time. If they block the senate floor vote or vote him down, either recess appoint him or someone else who wouldn't mind the one time gig. I'd like to save Clement for a judgeship (hopefully not too far) down the line.

Would Olson accept it and therefore leave the Rudy campaign? If he does, maybe it's because he understands Rudy just doesn't have what it takes to win the nomination. Electability in the general's another matter.

And since this is an open thread I'll take advantage of that to go on a bit of a tangent. I believe Romney's both nominatable AND electable in the generabubble. He's currently ahead in the polls in Iowa (with great staff and organization in that state, I happen to know), NH, Nevada, and Michigan (which is looking like it'll be held 1/15). No one else is any where close to being in first in key early states.

http://www.rocktownweekly.com/opinion_details.php?AID=12098&sub=Editoria...

"The president’s action has been blasted by Sen. James Webb and, it must be acknowledged, Sen. Webb has a point."

"However, one hopes that Mr. Getchell will be judged on his qualifications for the bench and that Sen. Webb will not allow personal pique to color his views of the nomination. President Bush does have a strong background of nominating experienced, intelligent, well-qualified men and women to the federal bench."

I'm usually inclined to support the WH more than most, but its quite disturbing how much this situation has been botched by the President and his staff.

First, why wasn't this nomination made last year, to the Luttig seat? Even if the President wanted to stick by the Haynes/Boyle failed picks, there was still a 2nd VA seat that could have been filled concurrently.

Second, as others have said, why wasn't this nomination made this year joined with a 2nd from the WW list, which would have been more acceptable? There must be at least 1 reasonable name on that list.

The problem that I have with some of this White House's judicial nominees has to do with Bush's apparent lack of interest concerning the issue of confirmability. Rather than finding confirmable replacements for the likes of Boyle, Myers, Haynes and Wallace, the White House refused to withdraw their nominations until the Dems won an outright victory in November 2006. This was despite the fact that they must've known for at least a year that some of these people were unconfirmable.

Wasn't the White House worried in the least when Frist refused to bring up the nominations of Boyle and Myers for a floor vote when he had a chance? If your own Senate majority leader won't step up to the plate, it seems obvious to me that the nominee is dead. Bush should've realized this.

In addition, it became pretty obvious in the summer of 2006 that Haynes and Wallace were nonconfirmable. Why didn't Bush move strategically to replace them with someone confirmable before the November 2006 election? Just because someone has integrity and sound ideology, it doesn't mean that he also is confirmable.

Now, Bush seems to be going out of his way to poke the Democrats in the eye with the nominations of Conrad, Gretchell and Matthews to the Fourth Circuit. At least in the case of Boyle, Myers, Haynes and Wallace, Bush had a majority in the Senate to which he could expect a certain level of cooperation. That is not the case with Conrad, Gretchell and Matthews. Now the Democrats control the process more than they ever have during the entire Bush presidency. Ideological obstinacy at this point seems like a sure fire way to encourage obstruction and reduce the number of COA confirmations. Some may welcome continued warfare, but I don't think they are seeing the forest for the trees. By putting up nonconfirmable nominees now, Bush is saving slots for President Hillary or Obama to fill in 2009. He might as well be kissing the 4th and 6th Circuits ideologically goodbye for a long time.

won't win, and I doubt Hillary will.

Although many on this site would prefer otherwise, the political momentum is with the Democrats right now. As long as the Iraq War is the main issue, they will remain ahead of the Republicans. In addition, they will likely get a further boost if the decline in home sales radically depresses the economy. To make matters worse, history is on their side. The opposing party has won the White House after a two-term president every time except once since World War II. This does not mean I want a Dem president in 2008, but it does mean that one is likely. It doesn't matter if the person really is Hillary or Obama. Those are just two names I use to describe whomever the actual Dem candidate turns out to be.

(P.S. Before I get a lot of nasty feedback about my pessimism, I want to make it clear that I think a really dynamic, non-Washington, D.C. Republican can still win in 2008. I just don't see any candidate who fits that bill right now. Social conservatives would rather stay at home than vote for Giuliani, Thompson and Romney appear hypocritical based on a comparison of their present rhetoric and their past records, and McCain is sunk as long as he ties his boat to the Iraq War.)

http://www.timesdispatch.com/cva/ric/news/politics.apx.-content-articles...

"Webb's aide said the Virginia Democrat was likely to withhold a "blue slip," a paper a home-state senator uses to indicate to the Judiciary Committee whether he approves a nominee. Until the committee gets both home-state senator's "blue slips" it doesn't start the confirmation process."

Your last point is right on: Why not nominate Getchell and someone on the WW list at the same time? Wouldn't that have diffused some of the criticism? This White House continues to prove it has no political acumen.

The GOP in Virginia should make Webb's hold an issue in the 08 race for Warner's seat.

Second, Giuliani pointed out that deportation is a civil proceeding, not a criminal one. This is small fry. Romney is going to need to do better than this.

Rudy was going to have to fight for the GOP nomination anyway. Now he's has blown it completely, I believe. The nomination is now Fred's for the taking.