Bush met secretly last week with
By on Sep 12th, 2005 at 10:59 am
Bush met secretly last week with
Federal Appellate Judge Priscilla Owen to discuss her possible nomination to the Supreme Court, Robert Novak reports. (Background on Owen here)
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Hoffman
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Mrs. Enron P. Halliburton WILL be filibustered. She doesn’t have a chance in hell.
September 12th, 2005 at 11:20 amLet’s Hope Darth…
God! I’m so pessimistic right now!
Z.
September 12th, 2005 at 11:25 amWho “leaked” her name to No-less? If we impeach Bush soon enough there will be no need to filibuster.
September 12th, 2005 at 11:31 amWe can only hope she is not really his next nomination. However, I think that this may be a big push for this skel administration. It is their last hope for a “legacy”, when all else has gone to shit. Which also means, they will go into full attack and spin mode. We need to be careful in the coming months not to allow the supreme court to become the nations focus, it must remain on the corrupt GOP skel party.
September 12th, 2005 at 11:40 amNovak blowing the whistle?….it must be a trick.
September 12th, 2005 at 11:47 amwe have entered those infamous “exraordinary circumstances” – I hope Landrieux and Salazar are paying attention.
September 12th, 2005 at 12:06 pmIf this is true, it may be a gift.
As a Texas Supreme Court Justice, Owen repeatedly took campaign donations from parties before her court, then refused to recuse herself from their cases. Where I come from, we call that “taking bribes.”
Given the fallout from Michael Brown and other corrupt Bush cronies, Owen may not only be shot down (or killed by filibuster), but she could become the banner girl for the rot that eats the Bush Administration from within.
September 12th, 2005 at 12:06 pmBush made a “nudge nudge wink wink” comment to Gonzalez last week in front of the cameras, prompting Jon Stewart to joke, “Either Bush is going to pick Gonzalez, or Bush is totally being a dick to Gonzalez!”
I think it’s Gitmo Gonzo.
September 12th, 2005 at 12:14 pmI would be shocked if it were Gonzales.
Bush is hated–loathed even–by everyone in America except for the crazy right-wing. He has no motivation to piss off the only people who don’t think he is scum. Worse, at every time in his Presidency when Bush has come under fire, he has retreated into increasingly radical policies. If anything, Bush’s low numbers increase the possibility of a nutjob like Owen.
September 12th, 2005 at 12:18 pmF*ck Novak.
September 12th, 2005 at 12:33 pmWho gives a sh*t what he says? He’s a treasonous shill.
Oh, you people are always assuming the worst! Maybe it wasn’t about the Supreme Court at all. Maybe they were just engaging in old-fashioned adultery.
September 12th, 2005 at 12:35 pmJust John, Are you suggesting that the President of the United States committed Adultery?
Isn’t that the sort of thing that “you people” like to impeach Presidents for?
Z.
September 12th, 2005 at 12:45 pmThis would be wonderful news. If Owen is filibustered, I then expect Sens. DeWine and Graham to side with Republicans to change the rules. Owen will then be confirmed and changing the rules on judges strips Democrats of the only tool they have left to keep the Courts in their bloody hands.
AND there is likely at least one more justice that will retire before Bush leaves office. Do Democrats want to change the rules so early and risk getting steam rolled with four conservatives? Even you people can’t be that stupid.
September 12th, 2005 at 12:58 pmNorthEastDummie,
So you believe that your party should rule by force even though only 38% of americans approve of bush’s handling of the presidency? You really do make a fine fascist fool you know. If you really want a right wing theocracy so bad, move to iran – they already have one…
September 12th, 2005 at 1:00 pmshe’s a nightmare. think: “the cross flies higher than the flag.”
September 12th, 2005 at 1:08 pmNorthEastDummie,
Of the 9 justices 7 were already appointed by a republican president. Considering you always poll less than 50% of the american vote, and that you REALLY lost both of the last elections except through voter fraud, you are not entitled to ’shutting down’ liberal voices although your little goose stepping nazi instincts tell you tell… What an idiot you are! Are you sure you grew up in this country? Did you ever read history or talk to anyone who wasn’t as stupid as you are? Because it’s clear you know less than nothing, you only know lies, deception and hatred. How tragic of a figure you make…
September 12th, 2005 at 1:13 pmThey’re all a nightmare. Every partisan, every ally, every shill, and pundit. Everything that the GOP touches is a nightmare. It’s America’s nightmare. There will be even greater tradgedy before this Presidency ends, you can take that to the bank.
Bushboy knows he’s in trouble though, you can see it in his “I don’t want to play this game anymore….it’s really hard work” facial expressions. If he’s not drinking again, he’s on serious meds. This fool is a ticking time bomb!
September 12th, 2005 at 1:16 pm#14 – yo sh*thead, Clinton appointed the liberal Breyer with similar approval ratings in 1994? Is Clinton a fascist, as well?
Ryan – you and your people have NO IDEA what you are up against. The days of Borking are long over. The right has assembled a large coalition who vote solely on the issue of changing the Courts (you can thank the liberals for that). We will DESTROY you over the Courts. AND the nastier the left gets, the easier it will be to paint red state Democrats like Landrieu and Kent Conrad as extremists come election day.
Go ahead and try to smear Owen – conservatives are banking on it to gain seats next year.
September 12th, 2005 at 1:16 pmRyan – of the seven appointed justices by Republican presidents, four were left of center and two are outright liberals. Doesn’t matter anyway – we’re taking the Courts and there is nothing you can do to stop it.
September 12th, 2005 at 1:19 pm#18~
1. At his lowest point, Clinton still polled five points higher than Bush.
2. Orrin Hatch chose Steven Breyer.
But thank you for making your lies easy to debunk this time.
September 12th, 2005 at 1:20 pm20 – not according to Gallup. AND Breyer is still liberal. Hatch did not impose a hateful ideological litmus test the way Democrats want to. Ian – it doesn’t’ matter. You lost the elections and will lose even more if you f*ck with us over this. Conservatives will go to the mat for that COurt.
September 12th, 2005 at 1:24 pmImpeach bush and all of his ‘buddy’ appointments will stop. We must all try as the ‘lifetime’ job will set the jerk in cement. The rats are starting to leave the sinking ship and want to ’stack the deck’ on departure.
September 12th, 2005 at 1:27 pm#22 – good luck. That requires liberal have a single power base in DC. Hillary’s vibrator doesn’t count, dipshit.
September 12th, 2005 at 1:28 pmOne more warning before I get out of the mud with you retards. Conservatives have been waiting for years to change the composition of the Court. It is now a huge winner in red states and has given the GOP the edge in the numbers they hold in both Houses of Congress.
You people can cry smear and fear all you want. Every little nasty thing you say is being noted and will be used to strangle Red State Democrats come elections 2006 and 2008. My advice to you hateful lunatics wuold be to let the Court shift right. It is your only hope of ever getting back in power again.
September 12th, 2005 at 1:47 pmWhy does anyone here allow ned to have a reaction from us? I mean, the guy is a moron. His only desire is to get into flame wars. Why bother? It’s a complete waste of bandwidth.
On Topic – I would look forward to Owen being nominated as I’d love a filibuster fight & she’d get one. The “gang of 14″ democrats have already said she’d be one that would break their accord.
But in reality, bush43 won’t nominate anyone who I’d like, ever. Let’s hope that Roberts actually answers questions this week and doesn’t politely opt not to.
September 12th, 2005 at 1:55 pm#12 – I dunno. I’m not part of any “you people” I can think of. (It’s just a function of how second-person pronouns work.) Heck, I’m seldom part of any “us people.”
But the notion of a sex scandal on top of all the other bad news for Bush kinda made me grin.
#22 – Problem with a Bush impeachment is that then we’d have Cheney, and I don’t think he’d do any different. Only procedural way to get a GOOD person in would be to impeach Cheney first (or force a resignation ala Spiro), somehow get Bush to appoint a good veep, and THEN impeach Bush or get him to resign.
Or some variation thereof … get somebody useful inserted in the line of succession and then start impeaching everybody above them. I don’t really see that happening unless we get an unprecendentedly energized new congress in ‘06.
Nah, my guess is that if Bush leaves office prematurely, it’ll be from some Secret Service person getting sick of him and terminating him in an extra-procedural manner.
September 12th, 2005 at 1:57 pm#25 – any filibuster launched by the hateful will be broken via constitutional option. Then, you really are screwed. Pack it up, Mr. President!!
September 12th, 2005 at 1:58 pmLook a the effeminate skel ZED, “cry, cry, you are going to be bad liberals, cry, you are stupid, no idea what your up against”
We do effeminate skel boy, pussies like you. Your problem is you don’t know what is about to come crashing down on your skull. Go peck some rocks chickenhawk skel.
September 12th, 2005 at 2:09 pm#28 – Are you sure you’re trolling the correct site? I couldn’t make head nor tail of that.
September 12th, 2005 at 2:18 pmJust John
It is to the skel troll NED
September 12th, 2005 at 2:20 pm#30 – Ah. I was wondering “ZED? Um, Zionist Elitist Democrats? Zero Enchiladas Daily? Zappa’s Enchanted Dulcimer?”
September 12th, 2005 at 2:23 pm#28 – whatever, loser. Your problem is you refuse to deal with what has already come crashing down on your head.
I bet you’ve never even served in the military. You just like to say you did to keep on top of all yoru liberal talking points. You’ve been siding with the enemy since then.
September 12th, 2005 at 2:31 pm#28 – if you did serve in the military, why do you slander their efforts in Iraq? Why would you slander the men and women at Gitmo. Oh – I’m sorry, you’re a traitor.
September 12th, 2005 at 2:34 pmJust John, My apologies for implying that you might be one of “you People”… I don’t feel part of “you people” much myself.
I really don’t want to have anything to do with people like NED though, and reading ZED confused me, as I always sign myself “Z” pronounced Zed in some other non-American English speaking countries.
Z.
September 12th, 2005 at 2:48 pm#34 – Thanks. I think I’ve got it figured out, Nwack.
September 12th, 2005 at 2:56 pmYea right skel ned
Problem is chickenhawk, I did serve and got shot at. You are such a pussy it really is laughable, go suck and swallow skel because it’s obvious you are to frightened to serve. Homework for ya skel, write “I am a traitor too frightened to be an American” a hundred times.
September 12th, 2005 at 2:57 pmNED,
traitor n.
One who betrays one’s country, a cause, or a trust, especially one who commits treason.
The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
I can’t see why disagreeing with “military efforts in Iraq” or “slandering people at Guantanamo Bay”, makes anyone, even if they are ex-military, a traitor.
The invasion of Iraq does not really have anything to do with this Country. The administration maybe, but it has never been considered treachery to disagree with a War before. Some religious groups object to all wars, does that make them traitors?
I don’t think Citizen80203 is in a position of responsibility within this administration so he definitely isn’t betraying a trust. I doubt that he is comitting treason (he never armed the Iraqi insurgents did he?). That leaves betraying a cause. I doubt that Invading Iraq or detaining “Men and Women at Guantanamo Bay” was his cause.
So, would you care to explain WHY he is a traitor? I believe that you are allowed to criticise the president, I think that the First amendment allows for that.
Z.
September 12th, 2005 at 2:57 pm#36 – Citizen loser – sure, right after you write “I served in the military so I have the privelege slandering them later in life for political gain.” You are a disgusting human being. No one you liked John Kerry.
September 12th, 2005 at 3:04 pmI use ZED from the character from Pulp Fiction, you know the one who was a right wing S&M homosexual who ends up dead, “ZED’s dead baby, zed’s dead”. Just seems apropriate for this skel.
September 12th, 2005 at 3:06 pmNo actually ZED skel you are the disgusting pig.
You are the one slandering our brave troops, hell any mention of our troops coming from the slit you call a mouth is a slander from a traitor. Again, Homework for ya skel, write “I am a traitor too frightened to be an American†a hundred times.
September 12th, 2005 at 3:10 pm#38 – You’re getting sloppy, as if you’re not enjoying your job posting here any more. Maybe you should ask them for a raise?
September 12th, 2005 at 3:12 pm#39 – Interesting how liberals attack their opponents as homosexuals. Deep down, they hate gays more than conservatives. Kinda sick, but what do you expect from liars who hate piss on their country for political gain.
September 12th, 2005 at 3:12 pmCitizen – it’s too much fun arguing with you. I have work to do now. Why don’t you go beat up your wife since you’re so mad. That should keep you occupied.
September 12th, 2005 at 3:14 pmActually ZED skel
We are fine with homosexuals, we just don’t like closeted ones on the right (like yourself) who turn around and attack homosexuals for a lack of morals.
Question ZED skel, why did your mother carve that slit you call a mouth? Couldn’t you draw breath through your nose?
September 12th, 2005 at 3:16 pmThis is known as a “float”. Someone in the WH, probably fatboy rove, calls on a person they know to be a friend and ask him to “float” a name.
They then sit back and see what sort of reaction spins through the press and broadcast media.
I was wondering what happened to Novak, now I know, they kept him in reserve until really, really needed.
September 12th, 2005 at 3:25 pm#22
Just exactly how are you planning to impeach Bush? Since your party does not hold a majority in either house, this is just not a possibility. My personal hope is that Bush appoints the most right wing judge he can find just to drive another stake in your last stronghold of any political power in this country. If the dems try to filibuster, we pull out the nuclear option, which will come in handy for the next appointment. Having fun yet?
September 12th, 2005 at 3:31 pmHello always wrong skel
What happens when you lose your filibuster proof majority in 2006? You funny little skels, always so wrong on everything.
September 12th, 2005 at 3:43 pmAlways right,
Is it fun supporting a complete and total failure? The worst president in the history of this country. Is it fun to watch incompetence destroy lives in Iraq and in New Orleans? Is it fun watching the Bush administration piss away our nation’s treasure and the lives of its young soldiers? Is it fun giving tax breaks to the wealthiest Americans and to Exxon/Mobil? Are you having fun you dimwitted Ahole? When all is said and done, you will be among the fools that all the fingers point to when the nation asks: How did this country get so screwed up? Hope its fun.
September 12th, 2005 at 3:54 pmJay,
Funny thing, the left never liked Reagan either and nasty things about him as well. Well, history sure looks at him differently now don’t they? They also look at Clinton much differently as well as they should. Bush has the same vision as he fights the War on Terror as Reagan did fighting the Cold War. Its too bad idiots such as yourself cannot understand this. Maybe your children will.
September 12th, 2005 at 4:01 pm“Funny thing, the left never liked Reagan either and nasty things about him as well. Well, history sure looks at him differently now don’t they?”
Depends on which history books. The ones that cover the illegal wars in central america, the fact that 450 members of his administration were indicted, the fact that he sold WMDs to Iraq, the fact that he trained and funded alqueda, the fact that he undid the fairness doctrine and many controls on wallstreet that led to the abuses of the 80s and 90s, the fact that he began the process of bankrupting the country still in progress, or the fact that he increased the gap between the rich and poor almost as much as hoover did. The history books that aren’t puff pieces by fellow reichwingers show what a crap president reagan was – but then again, reich wingers never like the truth, and call others idiots for pointing it out.
As for fighting the cold war, him doing so created increased drug trade, mass murders in central america, alqueda, increased hostility in the middle east and a host of other systemic failures. The fact that you would love to write off the legacy of failure of reagan shows just how delusional and self reichous you really are…
September 12th, 2005 at 4:38 pmRyan, you are so good. Thank You again for posting what many of us want to say….Blessings
September 12th, 2005 at 4:58 pmNortheast Dilemma reminds me of something I wrote to describe a rabid republican in another forum:
Every time a Republican/conservative attempts to describe a Democrat/Liberal he always, ALWAYS describes himself!
Read, listen to their comments. All the while they are smearing and lying through their teeth they are accusing Democrats who have said nothing of doing the lying and smearing.
September 13th, 2005 at 10:07 am