MSCL.com

So what does everyone think?

I will tell you what I said when O'Connor announced her retirement.

"We are so screwed."

Being here in California I got quite a few affirmations of this. Given that the appeasement wing of the Democratic Party is still alive and well (Liberman, Biden) I don't think the filibuster fight is going to be all that. I think Bush will pretty much get who he wants.

The only interesting thing may be the old Earl Warren scenario. Warren having been nominated by Eisenhower who thought he was putting a conservative justice on the court but ended up with a much liberal judge. I suspect that Karl Rove's vetting team will be a bit more thorough than that.

Did you hear of the Right's displeasure with the possibility of Alberto Gonzales nomination? That strikes me as extremely amusing. Approval of torture is not right wing enough? Who knew.

-LanceMan

I think Bush will go with Gonzales, the current AG. He's Hispanic (historic pick), and Bush can't count on more than one vacancy. Plus, Gonzales recently was confirmed for AG. If Bork potential was there, we would know by now. Is Gonzales too liberal for Bush? Maybe. But Gonzales is an easy pick. I don't think Bush will pick a woman just to fill a quota. I mean a woman replacing a woman. And, Bush wants more Hispanic votes for the GOP.

TomSpeed wrote:I think Bush will go with Gonzales, the current AG. He's Hispanic (historic pick), and Bush can't count on more than one vacancy. Plus, Gonzales recently was confirmed for AG. If Bork potential was there, we would know by now. Is Gonzales too liberal for Bush? Maybe. But Gonzales is an easy pick. I don't think Bush will pick a woman just to fill a quota. I mean a woman replacing a woman. And, Bush wants more Hispanic votes for the GOP.

Does make sense.

-LanceMan