The Stakes in 2012: an Obama-Leahy Supreme Court
Adam Freedman ·
Sep 5, 2010 at 11:51am
Take a break from 2010 prognostication to remember the vital importance of the upcoming battle in 2012. When asked why he thinks he deserves a seventh term in the Senate (itself a scandal), Vermont's Patrick Leahy responded that he really wants to be there to "help" President Obama get 3-to-4 new Supreme Court justices confirmed. Leahy's prediction is optimistic (by his lights) but not impossible.
Yes, if the GOP wins big in 2010, and if they maintain discipline, they might contain some of the worst excesses of the Hope & Change brigade. But presidents get to fill Supreme Court vacancies, and if Obama gets to install four relatively young justices with typical enthusiasm for the Living Constitution, his work will be done.
- Comment (11)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Jun '10
Re: The Stakes in 2012: an Obama-Leahy Supreme Court
Everyday, a new way to interpret the US Constitution. What an adventure.... /s
May '10
Re: The Stakes in 2012: an Obama-Leahy Supreme Court
You're just trying to scare us.
Jun '10
Re: The Stakes in 2012: an Obama-Leahy Supreme Court
Aaron - scares me to the bone. A 6-3 or 7-2 liberal Supreme Court would cause a revolution. Crazy talk? How many core issues do we see that strong majorities are opposed the policies of the ruling class? The lid stays on because the people still think that they are self-governing through the ballot box. From RvW through CA Prop 8 we are coming to understand that the judiciary is not controllable through democratic processes and that the Constitution no longer is a constraint on government if judicial supremacy is tolerated.
Aug '10
Re: The Stakes in 2012: an Obama-Leahy Supreme Court
Shiver.
Aug '10
Re: The Stakes in 2012: an Obama-Leahy Supreme Court
I have wearied of the Supremes thing. I say, let it happen already. Pack the bench with Lefties and let them rule insanely. I was checking out a spider last night that scampered out as I prepared my bed. I observed it with a magnifying glass and a flashlight to make sure it was not a Brown Recluse. I have always been impressed with spiders. They will tolerate your attention briefly with avoidance behavior. Then, with their first set of legs held far forward, using only simple eyes and sensory hairs, they orient towards you letting you know their "displeasure." They'll hold this pose for a short time and that is about all. Despite a mass difference of many orders of magnitude, many spiders will charge you with complete confidence. Like those perturbed little creatures, Americans are getting very fed up with harassment from the judiciary. We will find a procedural way to rein this nonsense in. Who said something about never letting a good crisis go to waste? Oh, yes, clad only in boxers, I got my vulnerable, knobby knees well out of the path of that spider. Have you ever seen how fast a spider can climb?
Jul '10
Re: The Stakes in 2012: an Obama-Leahy Supreme Court
I hope that the Republicans will carry the house but I honestly don't care about the Senate. I think conservatives if not Republicans would be better served to have just enough seats to reliably sustain a filibuster (maybe 47 at most). Senate leadership is where political careers go to die and I have no reason to believe a new brand of Republican leadership would be any different. With Republicans in charge the most important Senators would immediately be the most fickle and unreliable Republicans. We all know the names McCain,Graham and the ladies from Maine. The House and the Presidency are the key to effectively governing leave the rest for the rabble.
Aug '10
Re: The Stakes in 2012: an Obama-Leahy Supreme Court
E Andy Eccleston:
I hope that the Republicans will carry the house but I honestly don't care about the Senate. I think conservatives if not Republicans would be better served to have just enough seats to reliably sustain a filibuster (maybe 47 at most).
Do you have, perhaps, unwarranted optimism that Republicans can muster what it takes to effectively employ the filibuster with sufficient frequency to check Lefty mayhem?
Jul '10
Re: The Stakes in 2012: an Obama-Leahy Supreme Court
David
I would rather have a solidly conservative house confronting the democratic opposition in the Senate than having the squishy republican senate playing at statesman and overshadowing the house.
I am not sure what I which institution I have less faith in the Senate or republicans.
Re: The Stakes in 2012: an Obama-Leahy Supreme Court
I don't know whether this is related to my dread of liberal judges, but I do suffer from terrible arachnophobia.
Re: The Stakes in 2012: an Obama-Leahy Supreme Court
Oh, and I'd rather have a majority of both houses. I take the point about squishy senators, but even if they don't have a majority, that tendency will play out in stunts like the "gang of 14" that just said no to filibusters.
Here's the thing: if all we have is a filibuster, then for the next two years, Obama will call us the "party of no." If we have majorities in both houses, then we could pass some decent legislation and force Obama to use the veto -- making him "Dr. No."
Aug '10
Re: The Stakes in 2012: an Obama-Leahy Supreme Court
If the American people send Republicans to the Capitol in droves, that ought to give the Republicans the political capital to stand up to liberal judicial nominees. But I'm also with Steyn on the GOP. They seem to have a great propensity for blowing it. <Sigh> We'll see.