Bush Tells Harry Reid To Eff Off
Nah, nah, nah, nah...
Nah,nah, nah, nah...
Hey, hey, hey...
Goodbye.
A weak President Bush would never have nominated Alito. Never. As I said earlier, it doesn't matter if YOU think he is weak, it's what Bush thinks about Bush that matters.
He doesn't think he's weak. He doesn't think he needs to work with the Dems. They fucked him when they suggested Miers and then didn't fight for her. Bush won't be listening to Harry Reid's bullshit advice anymore.
The Democrats don't want to work with Bush, they want to opppose him. They need to oppose him. Opposing him makes them more money, gets their base all riled up. It will be that way until Bush is out of office. Why? You can't be seriously wondering why, can you?
Because the left is full of sore losers, worse than spoiled children. The poor little wretches aren't "over" losing in 2000. They will never be over it. If you think they are crazy now, just wait until they lose in 2008.
Nah,nah, nah, nah...
Hey, hey, hey...
Goodbye.
A weak President Bush would never have nominated Alito. Never. As I said earlier, it doesn't matter if YOU think he is weak, it's what Bush thinks about Bush that matters.
He doesn't think he's weak. He doesn't think he needs to work with the Dems. They fucked him when they suggested Miers and then didn't fight for her. Bush won't be listening to Harry Reid's bullshit advice anymore.
The Democrats don't want to work with Bush, they want to opppose him. They need to oppose him. Opposing him makes them more money, gets their base all riled up. It will be that way until Bush is out of office. Why? You can't be seriously wondering why, can you?
Because the left is full of sore losers, worse than spoiled children. The poor little wretches aren't "over" losing in 2000. They will never be over it. If you think they are crazy now, just wait until they lose in 2008.
Posted by Rosemary on
10.31.2005
R.I.P. Steven Malcolm Anderson
Minion
of the Week
Oh what a beautiful morning!
The Commander in Chief has been transformed into the Wingnuts' Waterboy.
What a pussy.
Well, that's why I am NOT a Democrat anymore.
I'm keeping my powder dry on this one. He has credentials for sure, education and experience. He's made some controversial decisions, including the husband notification ruling, but so far I've seen one where he was to the right of Rhenquist and another to the left of Scallia.
Don't get me wrong -- he sux big time and Ara is absolutely right about Bush being too wounded to pick someone that would be a fitting replacement for O'Conner: female, moderate, competent. Bush went to the base but if he really thought he could pull it off and was strong enough politically he would have seeb Janice Brown or Priscilla Owen.
What, are there no other conservative women out there with enough experience to avoid the Miers crony/incompetent label? Uhm . . . nope. Believe it or not ladies, if you want bench strength you have a vast amount of extremely qualified women to pick from -- all of whom Dobson would destroy if given the chance.
If Bush was strong enough to look to his legacy and be an independant force of nature he would have been able to push through Miers in the first place, or now would pick the guy he's never made a secret about wanting to wear those robes -- Gitmo Gonzales.
Do you think a weakened liberal president would have been able to get chief counsel for the ACLU to join those nine intellectuals?
Alito was a politically expedient move, and I'm sure WH spokesmodel Scotty McManiquin was hoping that it would change the subject from Libby/Rove/Plame -- but boy is he getting grilled. A strong President would have been able to change the subject instead of allowing his Press Secretary do a monologue on his own credibility.
I don't think there will be a fillibuster, I do think Alito will get through the Senate. I know that Bush's political clout is completely gone, swuandered like so many other opportunities he botched.
"Keeping promises to people that elected you makes you a pussy?"
He blew it Rose. By nominating Miers AND THEN caving, he presents himself as a weakling to thinking people on BOTH sides of the aisle.
It takes real political skill to do that.
Mark:
"Com'on Ara, It has a nice ring, but you totally ripped that off."
Doesn't make it any less true, my friend. ;^)
BTW, you skated past Alito's notorious "husband notification" provision pretty fast. Let's slow down and be perfectly clear about how odious his notion really is. Here's what O'Connor/Souter/Kennedy said about it in their co-written majority opinion in Planned Parenthood v. Casey (paraphrasing):
"The husband-notification provision constitutes an undue burden, and is therefore invalid.
"A significant number of women will likely be prevented from obtaining an abortion just as surely as if Pennsylvania had outlawed the procedure entirely. The fact that the provision may affect fewer than one percent of women seeking abortions does not save it from invalidity, since the proper focus of a constitutional inquiry is the group for whom the law is a restriction, not the group for whom it is irrelevant.
"Furthermore, it cannot be claimed that the father's interest in the fetus' welfare is equal to the mother's protected liberty, since it is an inescapable biological fact that state regulation with respect to the fetus will have a far greater impact on the pregnant woman's bodily integrity than it will on the husband.
"The husband-notification provision embodies a view of marriage consonant with the common law status of married women, but repugnant to this Court's present understanding of marriage and of the nature of the rights secured by the Constitution."
Got that? REPUGNANT.
Alito represents a very dangerous negation of a woman's Constitutional right to control her own body's reproductive system.
I can hear you Rose: who says a woman has that right? In that same majority opinion, O'Connor/Souter/Kennedy say this (again, paraphrasing):
"Women have a right to participate equally and fully in the economic and social life of our nation. This right has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives. If our Constitution is to be meaningful at all, it is to do this: to serve human values. And this value is one of the most basic of all — to be in control of your own body."
Rose, I expected better from you.
Husband-notification? You have got to be kidding. This sounds like something the Taliban would do.
seeb=sent?
Sorry, rented fingers -- had to rush out the door to pick up the little libs from skrewel.
Just a thought, having spent many billable hours getting fathers access to their children and trying to even the playing field for men when it comes to parental rights. Men who are often convinced (rightly or wrongly) that the family laws are slanted unfairly towards women; how would opinions have played out if the husband notification law were written that a dad-not-to-be got notified after the fact?
Certainly a "gotcha" if the pregnancy was the result of an affair. Pretty draconian if you ask me. I would think that the decision is so personal and so traumatic that husband notification is seriously burdensome, before or after the fact. Medical procedures are by default confidential for very good reasons.
Any woman who did not want her husband to know has enough troubles already. We shouldn't add to them.
I keep having a flashback from Godfather II where Kay tells her husband Michael Corleone at the end that she didn't have a miscarriage, but aborted his son. He's outraged, but still left to wonder if she really did it or was just telling him that out of spite.
A murdering scum like that didn't deserve the right to be able to stop her -- and he could have under the PA notification law -- and would have been able to stop her with a whisper to one of his soldiers. And can you imagine what her life would have been worth if he got a letter in the mail from Planned Parenthood informing him that his wife underwent a procedure.
No, Alito and the PA Legislature and Governor for that matter don't give a rats ass about those very few women who would face seriously tragic consequences resulting from that notice. That's why we need courts with judges who appreciate the idea of privacy, to protect individuals from politicians pandering to the greatest number of voters and only balance their reflection of what most of their constituents want against what their biggest contributors desire.
Not sure how that is an undue burden. Seriously, if you are prepared to abort your baby, is lying that you told your hubby that big of a burden?
I keep having a flashback from Godfather II where Kay tells her husband Michael Corleone at the end that she didn't have a miscarriage, but aborted his son. He's outraged, but still left to wonder if she really did it or was just telling him that out of spite.
That bitch did it to be spiteful. Plain and simple.
Ara,
Rose, I expected better from you.
Husband-notification? You have got to be kidding. This sounds like something the Taliban would do.
You're kidding, right? First off, the Taliban wouldn't allow abortion so husband notification would be irrelavent. Second, better from me? I would never, NEVER, have an abortion. Ever. But if for some reason you think that I wouldn't tell my husband something about me, my body or our future child, you are nuts. N-V-T-S, nuts.
My husband is my partner and I chose him because I trust and love him. I feel he has every right to know what is going on with me because it affects him. And if some women out there aren't fortunate enough to have a husband that they love and trust, then that is their fucking problem and she should have divorced him long ago. I mean seriously, she CHOSE him, didn't she? This is 2005, not 1805, she made her choice and she should have to respect it.
If it's that easy, why do we need a law?
The laws against abortion were struck down because they were unconstitutional.
And it's a good thing they were -- many desperate women resorted to means that, well, killed and injured them.
Rosemary, all I can say is that I guess you are too young to remember what it was like before abortion became legal.
Have you learned nothing from Libby's indictment?
Since when is an abortion doctor a govt official?
Look, anyone willing to murder their own child can't cry about integrity and anyone that wouldn't tell the father of their child that they are carrying their child obviously doesn't feel the need to be honest overwhelming. So, I have no pity.
Rosemary, all I can say is that I guess you are too young to remember what it was like before abortion became legal.
No, I'm not. I just don't think that legal murder is okay.
And it's a good thing they were -- many desperate women resorted to means that, well, killed and injured them.
Too bad. Poor women got pregnant then hurt themselves trying to kill their children. I don't feel sorry for those women anymore than I feel sorry for Andrea Yates.
You seem to not understand that I believe that abortion is murder and I don't feel sorry for people that put their selfish needs above the children they created.
For example, if you believe the 10 Commandments are the word of God that's OK. If you believe in a literal interpretation of the Book of Leviticus, that's cool. If you believe that a dictum from the Pope is the final word, that fine with me.
You are not, however, allowed to judge the law by putting the Commandments or Leviticus or the Pope above the US Constitution.
In other words, in our system of governance the US Constitution is the final authority on the law.
As Scalia said, if a judge can't do that, he should resign the bench.
Enough said. Ara-1, Rosemary-0.
Second, better from me? I would never, NEVER, have an abortion. Ever.
Good for you. Unfortunately you want to project that choice onto everybody else, too. But I guess that's you call yourself "Queen."
:^)
But if for some reason you think that I wouldn't tell my husband something about me, my body or our future child, you are nuts. N-V-T-S, nuts.
That is as it should be. But like the SCOTUS said:
Fixed that for you. Don't let your political leanings blind you to the tremendous owning the Queen just handed you.
This is the difference between the conservative and the socialist. Lying is generally wrong, but to a conservative lying to your own spouse is far worse than lying to a government official. To a conservative, marriage is sacred and government is our servant. To a socialist, it's the other way around, marriage is expendable and government is our master.
THANK YOU!!!! I've never been called an earl before. I've got to think of a title for you!