‘The battle royal.’
By on Feb 20th, 2007 at 12:56 pm
‘The battle royal.’
U.S. News reports: “The White House is still holding out hope that it will have a chance to name a third justice to the Supreme Court and cement its conservative tilt for generations to come. ‘We need one more on the Supreme Court,’” said a Bush insider. The source added, “That will be the battle royal.”
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
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
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
can we please please please limit the terms of supreme court justices?
February 20th, 2007 at 12:59 pmhttp://www.jibjab.com/jokebox/jokebox/jibjab/id/32517/jokeid/27044
Here is a cute picture I thought I would share to brighten some spirits around here.
February 20th, 2007 at 12:59 pmHeh.
We should limit the terms of justices, I was thinking of another way, but nevermind that, heh, heh.
February 20th, 2007 at 1:02 pmLame duck Bush doesn’t stand a chance. It’s too close to a national presidential election, and the Right needs a consensus candidate, not whackjobs like Hunter or Brownback. So while the hard Right might still entertain such hopes, the party leadership won’t be pushing it till after the next election. They realize that they’s squandered a lot of political capital, and that their “brand” has lost its luster with mainstream voters.
February 20th, 2007 at 1:04 pmNo More Bush appointees. No matter what.
February 20th, 2007 at 1:05 pmBlock that Kick!
Someone get the life support out for the remaining justices.
February 20th, 2007 at 1:06 pm#3 buzzbomb
there is the possibility of making them elected offices, but I think that makes the positions too political. Better to have them appointed and vetted over by the legislature which can determine if they are qualified or not rather than turning it into a popularity contest.
February 20th, 2007 at 1:06 pmIt speaks to there character that they openly admit rooting for an event to relieve someone from their duty on the SCOTUS. Moral? Yeah right.
February 20th, 2007 at 1:13 pmNo way in hell will the Bush crime regime get another shot at naming another justice.
February 20th, 2007 at 1:28 pmQUICK, yank The Pelican Brief off the book and video shelves!
February 20th, 2007 at 1:30 pmEverytime I watch 24, and see the elements of the fictional government on that show work their right-wing crazy agenda, I think, fact is often stranger than fiction.
February 20th, 2007 at 1:41 pmSo, is Ann Coulter preparing some creme broule?
February 20th, 2007 at 2:09 pm11: I’ll say it again – hippies on acid could provide better government, and would be easier to understand, than these radical wackos.
The good news is, with Dems back in play there’s no way Dubbie will get to install another rightie-ological tool on the scotus, which might be the only thing that prevents dubbie from being our democracy’s terminal “leader”.
February 20th, 2007 at 2:16 pmBNF ~
February 20th, 2007 at 2:19 pmMore likely a pinch of bat piss,
a dollop of lizard feces,
a dash of nightshade…
14 – I was referring to Ann Coulter’s remark about someone should put rat poison in a Supreme Court Justice’s creme broule.
February 20th, 2007 at 3:01 pmOnce again, bush43 & co are tone deaf and blind.
They won’t get to name another SC Justice. I say that because, even if one died tomorrow, anyone they put up will never get approved. The post will go vacant for 2 years.
February 20th, 2007 at 3:04 pm‘We need one more on the Supreme Court,’†said a Bush insider. The source added, “That will be the battle royal.â€
Do you understand the meaning of the term “fat chance”?
February 20th, 2007 at 3:15 pmHarriet Miers!
February 20th, 2007 at 3:32 pmThe right “needs” one more on the SCOTUS because after the performance of this current administration, there wont be a Republican House, Senate or Executive for the next 8-16 years. Its going to take a long, long time for the memory of the sheer incompetence and downright shadiness of the current administration to work its way out of peoples minds. The investigations are just warming up!
Part of me is terrified of the possibility of another Bush appointee, and part of me thinks “Well, we deserve it for electing these idiots, and it will surely guarantee the other two branches are left leaning for the first half of the century.”
February 20th, 2007 at 4:17 pmI agree. It’s likely that any Busch tool will be shelved for the duration. That is barring his going through with the plan to suspend the constitution.
regards
ed
http://.www.CBRproject-podcast.org
February 20th, 2007 at 6:59 pmCONGRESS HAS TO DO EVEYTHING IN ITS POWER TO DEFEAT THE FOURTH Bush supreme court APPOINTEE AND MAKE SURE THEY NEVER GET A MAJORITY–IN ADDITION, THEY HAVE TO FIND A WAY TO GET RID OF Scalia, Alito, Roberts and Thomas FROM THE supreme court, WHETHER IT BE BY IMPEACHMENT OR OTHER MEANS LIKE THE USE IN “24″!!!!! Scalia is the point-man and the diehard BAD APPLE in the barrel–HE MUST BE GOTTEN RID OF FIRST, AND THE FASTER IT IS DONE, THE BETTER IT WILL BE–I CHALLENGE Scalia to a duel–I WILL FILL HIM MORE FULL OF HOLES THAN A SWISS CHEESE or CUT HIM INTO RIBBONS WITH ME SWORD!!!!!
February 20th, 2007 at 9:00 pmThat’s because they are all hoping some one will follow Ann Coulter’s suggestion of poisoning Justice Stevens.
February 20th, 2007 at 10:41 pm