Supreme Court

Posts you want to find years later go here.
Post Reply
skanks
Poser
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2003 6:16 am

Supreme Court

Post by skanks »

Justice O'Connor resigned. Roe v Wade is about to die. Whoever replaces O'Connor will be at least as statist as Scalia.

Alan
Veteran Doodler
Posts: 2758
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2003 2:32 am
Location: Where I am
Contact:

Post by Alan »

Miers? Are you kidding me?

Talk about cronyism. Bush isn't even trying to hide it anymore. If the Dems don't block this I'll lose faith in the entire fucked up system.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cronyism
Wikipedia wrote: Cronyism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Cronyism is partiality to long-standing friends, especially by appointing them to public office without regard for their qualifications. The word "cronyism" is always used derogatorily.
Governments are particularly susceptible to accusations of cronyism as they spend public money. This is why democratic governments are encouraged to have transparency in their accounting and contracting processes.
Virtually all Presidents of the United States have been accused of cronyism by someone at some time. But since the word means appointment of long-standing friends who are not qualified for the position, the appointment of long-standing friends who are qualified is not cronyism; this would be more akin to political patronage, where political supporters or merely members of the same party are appointed by the patron in power.

See also: nepotism George W Bush
Image

skanks
Poser
Posts: 290
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2003 6:16 am

Post by skanks »

Image

I know. This woman hasn't presided over so much as a traffic court. Her only public face has been manufacturing kitschy sentimental crap for the "Ask the Whitehouse" feature on Whitehouse.gov. Behind the scenes, her career has been plagued by scandals. Her crazed googly-eyed demeanor suggests a fanatical loyalty to President Bush characteristic of other prominent Whitehouse females such as Karen Hughes, and Condelezza Rice.

This woman is worse than Scalia because I don't believe she's personally constrained to consistently act within a judicial philosophy. I have no doubt that she's a loyalist drone who's going to act as a direct arm of George Bush's White House. I expect her jurisprudence to be that of the vicious sunday school teacher whom she resembles: the defense of authority cloaked in niceties and righteousness.

VLSmooth
Tenth Dan Procrastinator
Posts: 3055
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2003 3:02 am
Location: Varies
Contact:

Post by VLSmooth »

Is that image edited?

The first time I saw that I thought of emperor palpatine...

Post Reply