Tuesday, September 06, 2005

John Paul Stevens loses again

Bush withdraws nomination of inexperienced judge, nominates him instead for CHIEF JUSTICE OF THE SUPREME COURT!!!

Honest! Could I make up something that stupid?!!

Apparently Bush isn't satisfied with his current (and generous) 44 percent approval rating and wants to diminish it further by nominating John G. Roberts for Chief Justice. If Congress has any sense whatsoever, they will trounce this blatant power grab. This attempt at a right-wing takeover is more naked than Madonna in a mirror-lined shower.

You'd think that a prerequisite for being Chief Justice of the Supreme Court would be, I don't know, experience sitting on the Supreme Court? But as pointed out when Roberts first made news, his experience barely qualifies him for being on the U.S. Court of Appeals. But because Bush's entire life has been about bucking the merit system, I'm not at all surprised that he would bypass convention and really push for his guy. Makes me suspicious of Roberts all over again. I figured Scalia was a lock for Chief Justice, and now I wonder if that would be a better alternative.

But the news isn't all bad! A Roberts appointment could shift the nation in deliciously unprecedented ways. Inspired by Bush's actions, I've since applied for the following positions:

--Editor-in-chief, New York Times
--Head writer, Saturday Night Live
--CEO, Google
--Governor, state of California

Hell, why not? They say that landing the perfect job is all about the connections! And chances are that at least one of these entities is going to see me as the perfect vehicle for the next generation of promulgating its views. It's the New American Way!

More on John G. Roberts (pun intended)


Michael said...

If I remember the stats rightly, Ian, only about half of the 16 Chief Justices we've had so far have been appointed from the Supreme Court itself. But I do think that a prerequisite for landing the highest judicial office in the land would be some significant judicial (and administrative) experience. And that, Roberts doesn't have.

On the other hand, better him in Rehnquist's seat than in O'Connor's. It won't be much of a switch.

rhonda said...

i can't help but think of all the jobs i've been declined for- we're talking jobs that any vertebrate with opposable thumbs can perform- due to lack of experience. you have to laugh about it, right?

Flamingo Jones said...

I said it on the Street already...but I like saying it, so I'll say it here too:

A politically weakened Bush nominates Roberts to be Chief Justice.

Pretty smart move for someone who thinks “embetterment” is a real word.

It also seems like a pretty desperate move, to me.

I assume Dubya realizes that all of his opponents can smell the blood in the water. Anyone he put up for the post is going to be in for a whooping of a nomination process. Democrats can be bold when they sense weakness. But everyone’s already climbed on the Roberts train. It’s hard to find great fault with someone we’ve already agreed is “eh…OK.”

I am a little bit surprised at Roberts’ nomination though. I assumed Bush had someone else in mind for the highest judicial job in the country. But, apparently the Vice President of the American Border Collie Association was busy.