I don’t really have much to say about the retirement of SCOTUS Justice David Souter, except that the man was clearly not who GHW Bush was told he would be. Promoted by then-White House Chief of Staff John Sununu as a thoughtful conservative with an inoffensive judicial record, he came quickly and reliably to align himself with that wing of the Supreme Court believing that federal law has to do as much with judicial experiences, personal preferences and feelings as it does with some moldy old piece of parchment sitting in the National Archives. Whomever the president picks to replace him will probably be no better or worse.
Still, I found the headline to this NYT article rather amusing, given the cast of characters in play:
Obama Has Chance to Select Justice With Varied Résumé
I suppose that depends on what you mean by “varied,” but it seems like a remarkably homogeneous assortment given the overall make-up of the federal judiciary.
I’m not saying that the bench ought to only be stacked with gray-haired white men from Harvard, but there is something unseemly in such an utterly unselfconscious lack of pretense. In elder days, we at least pretended to fill a vacant seat in the highest court in the land with the most qualified candidate regardless of the accidents of his or her birth.
One might almost call it sexist. If one were so inclined.
Still, this is, after all, a political appointment and there are identity groups that must be pandered to bills to pay.
Lex,
One of the others that is in possible running is Washington State Governor Christine Gregorie. That is the rumor running through WA state media, since yesterday. That would be an interesting person on the SCOTUS, some one who won two highly contested governor elections, someone who raised taxes after saying no new taxes, and as AG for WA State only serious claim to fame is winning a tabacco suite.
some one who
wonstole two highly contested governor electionsFTFY
Yeah,
There was more leftist hanky panky in those two elections than in the backseats of a dozen cars on prom night.
The fun will be the fight to see how many left-wing and minority ‘boxes’ will need to be checked off to qualify the person nominated, and to watch the fight on the left about who “needs” to be placed on the court.
As for Souter: His resignation now, when he was obviously not happy during the Bush years, shows where Justice Milktoast’s sympathies have always been. Thanks Sununu; thanks G.H.W.B.. Really, could it have been all that difficult to find some real conservative judge back then?? How incompetent the process was that gave us Souter.
My money will be on any of them who “comes out” to get ahead.
Yep…best take my advice and go for the lesbian, minority female.
Now, if one of them had different plumbing at launching…that will trump all else.
Sorry, but I no longer believe the Government is incapable of placing someone based on professional qualification.
Correction: …I no longer believe the Government is capable of placing someone based on professional qualifications.
Funny… I didn’t see HRH in the mix of photos…
Possibility?
SteveC: less incompetent a process than the one that determines who we get to vote for President?
Sometimes you just don’t know what you will get. Think of 20th century Presidents. I believe that the general consensus on Truman, FDR and Reagan was that they were not qualified and would be terrible Presidents.
IMO history is judging all three to be rather good Presidents.
FDR? The more I’m seeing FDR lite in the current president, and the more that I’m hearing about the FDR years, the more I realize that my education was slanted in favor of a guy who I knew to have been unpopular with a lot of people for being “a traitor to his class”, but the full picture is only being painted for me now.
As to your comment on the process of electing President: The only way I see to fix the flaws in the process is to ensure that the people who run, no matter who votes them in, at least understand the Constitution and act as adults when in office. I can’t say that for the current crop of pols in Congress or in the White House and my negative views didn’t originate with the last election, either.
As for the incompetence that got Souter nominated and appointed, Judges have records. His was not scrutinized enough – not to mention that the dishonest jerk stood silently by knowing full well what the President and his good friend Sununu believed to be his point of view on Constitutional interpretation. A small and basically dishonest man. Good riddance to him.
Well, two out of three, Ron. My personal jury is still out on FDR, but Truman turned out quite well, and Reagan was a great President, just as Carter was one of the worst presidents. But Carter, at least, did not go around bad-mouthing the United States to foreign countries– until he became an ex-President. Now he never stops. But I think he has late-onset senility or something. Did you know that there are more than 30 kinds of senility, as one ‘expert’ insisted on telling me at a luncheon the other day? Isn’t that reassuring? Now you have 30 bullets to dodge instead of just one.
Me too.
Marianne
Oh, and by the way, friends … there seems to be a certain ‘sameness’ about the candidates for a position on the “Supremes” shown in Lex’s post above. Isn’t that discrimination? Or something? Gosh, I thought that was against the law. Oh, well. Like the White Queen in Alice in Wonderland, “words mean what I want them to mean,” to Mr. Obama.
Marianne
A famous astrologer whose name I forget once said that: “Not only is the universe stranger than we believe; it’s stranger then we CAN believe.” I’m beginning to feel much the same way about Obama and what will be the effect of his tenure. That is, not only will the damage to America be worse than many of us believed it would be with his accession to office; it will be turn out after the fact to have been far, far worse than we could have EVER believed in our wildest imaginations.
“Pray for an asteroid.” (h/t Kate @ Small Dead Animals)
While still on-site I noticed an add on tv for one of those Casino’s on a local Indian Reservation. Which caused me to think that if one wants a possible view into our Obama-derived future, one need look no further that the history of the Bureau of Indian affairs. One would have to prospect far and wide among the various Galaxies to find a more corrupt, venal, mis-managed, politicized organization than the Bureau. And it’s Socialist paternal style kept the Indians in abject poverty and misery for generations. Only when (no thanks to the Bureau) the Indians broke free and feneagled the laws so that good old capitalist greed could work it’s way via Casinos did the Indian Tribes lucky enough to seize their destiny from the Bureau via this route prosper and thrive via the green-back express.
Is it so far off the mark to suggest that the future “shared” spread misery under Obama will simply be the history of the misery of the Indian tribes and their lands as paternally administered under the tender mercies of the Bureau of Indian Affairs writ large?
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
VX,
I can assure you the Indian Casinos solved nothing. It simply allowed them to waste more money, and a large part of it is still BIA funding.
I know far more about the subject (quite detailed), but can’t go any further than that.
“The Universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose.”
J.B.S. Haldane, British biologist, 1892 – 1964.
LOL, steveH, I just realized that I said “astrologer” as opposed to “astronomer.” Doah! I knew SOMEONE would know the exact quote, although perhaps I was thinking of the Dutch astronomer–again whose name escapes me–who opined that he was surprised that the universe was actually so seemingly small….
TV commercials have been a gold-mine of inspiration today. Even as I was typing my thoughts on our collective future under Obama inspired by an Indian Casino ad, another ad came on for a cruise-ship line which talks of breaking free of land and government restraints and forming the sea-borne “….Nation of ‘Why Not?’ “–a sea-borne mobile fantasy island of fun and pleasure.
Perhaps that might be one response. I believe I’ve also read about a proposal to band together several barges to create a floating tax haven for those wishing to escape the grasp of the tax-man. So why not? If retirement condos are still seen desirable in Mexico (flying pigs–”swine flew”–notwithstanding despite the crime, graft and corruption, why not floating condos in int. waters just off the coast in a sub-tropical benign climate without either taxes , crime OR regulatory Kafka-like bureaucrats?
“I’m not saying that the bench ought to only be stacked with gray-haired white men from Harvard, but there is something unseemly in such an utterly unselfconscious lack of pretense that the president might seek to fill a vacant seat in the highest court in the land with the most qualified candidate regardless of the accidents of his or her birth.”
What’s particularly confusing to me is why there seem to be so many gray-haired white dudes in so many of the jobs that clearly require a more qualified person to fill them…you know, if we’re using the whole most qualified in the land criteria? Oh wait…could it be that when old gray-haired white dudes “evaluate” credentials, they more often than not decide the most qualified candidate looks just like them?
Not that I’m accusing the old gray haired white dudes of playing idenities politics or anything–or is it only identity politics when someone who doesn’t have a seat at the table wonders why not?
Laurie,
Idea such as you have broached will not play well here. I have seen those “old grey” types evaluate experience and credentials and end up with someone that did not look like them. The major problem is the pool we have to draw from is rather thin when it comes time for those others. Too many whine and belly ache when they aren’t considered, simply because they aren’t prepared for the job in the first place.
The entire system his been bolixed by the falsely labeled civil rights types who insist that opportunity is the same as outcome. The two are very different, and will remain so. The result has been the promotion of the unqualified into positions they are not prepared for, and cheating the poeple they supposedly serve because they are unqualified.
I would bet a very large amount of money that everyone of those women pictured are where they are simply because they have the politically correct genitalia, and not their qualifications. Unless, of course, you consider being a left-wingnut a qualification
Well, clearly a retired naval officer has no personal dog in this fight. But in the post-war era, 4% of law school students were female. By 1974, that number had quadrupled to 16%. That cohort of lawyers is now arriving at an age/experience matrix which makes the best of them suitable candidates for the Supreme Court. Unless we’re arguing that female lawyers are innately better jurists than males by a factor of eight or so to one, it seems rational to ask why the current slate of candidates is overweighted by gender.
The way to stop discrimination is to stop discriminating.
Not so very long ago the political class had the decency to maintain the polite fiction of “seeking the most qualified candidate” among a broadly diverse pool, and then picking the race/gender/religion/class person they wanted anyway. As a fig leaf it didn’t have much to offer, but it at least paid obeisance to a useful national myth of egalitarianism and merit-based advancement. Now we apparently no longer feel that necessary.
Thus, progress.
That comment is beautifully written, btw.
Sombody’s ideology appears to get in the way of reason. Again.
Can we spell “Axe-to-grind” boys and girls?
Oh? Excuse me. Just the girls.
Look, guys and dolls, I ,for one, wouldn’t care if the Supreme court was populated by 9 Phillipino-American females as long as they imbibed of the same philosophical waters as our Founding Fathers. My problem is with the blatant left-leaning politicization of the place. Anybody that thinks Obama is going for even the “best and the brightest” of what would constitute “the left” is utterly delusional.
I should have added to “…Phillipinio-American females” –ESPECIALLY if they were all clones of Michelle Malkin.
Some of her readers have been trying to get her to pose in a Bikini. She told them she would not given the state of he physique since her last bout with child birth. Methinks she would still be quite pleasing to the eye, but there are things that should be reserved for her husband.
But, that doesn’t have anything to do with SCOTUS. It does provide a pleasant thought interlude.
QM/
You do me a great injustice sir! You mistake me for a base and degraded creature caring only about the crass world of physical and visual gratification! How wrong you are! (partially) Rather, kind sir, I was contemplating Ms. Malkin’s political ideology and philosophical temperament whence I opined on the subject of the SCOTUS.
Shame on you. Fie on you, QM! I’ll have you know in no uncertain terms I hadn’t given the physique of Ms. Malkin the merest of thoughts (well, maybe for a few nano-seconds) But since you mentioned it……
I’m with VX–hot babes on the bench, that’s the way to go!
Can’t do any worse than the current lot’s been doing.
Nah, Virg. I knew you are an LSU grad and would never think on such things. Angel. Driven snow.
Too bad such things don’t exist in Nawlins. LOL!
One issue, however. She ain’t a Filipina. She’s a good native born Amergirl type. Her parents were Philippino, however. One of the islands better contributions to American Civilization. Her hubby is a lucky guy too.
I guess I never get why these women are OK with it. I’d be offended if I were in a pool of just other women. If I’m going to be selected for something, then select me based on my merit and not based upon how I was built.
I have spent too many years, fighting for people to ignore the face or the body. If I want them to ignore it on a daily basis, and just pay attention to the brain and the ideas, then why in the hell would I want someone to suddenly pay attention to it?
It’s one way or the other in my book. Either you fight to be heard for who you are, regardless of your color or gender, or you use it and lose the right to gripe when someone uses it against you.
Period.
And yes, people still make comments about me at work being I’m a woman, and no, I never say anything. I ignore it. Why stoop to those levels? It is what it is. In all honesty, I truly believe I’m treated as an equal, push come to shove, and what I bring to the table is assessed strictly on my proven merit.
To think otherwise is offensive to me. I think these women should be embarrassed.
MM: I agree that Carter is the worst ex-President in my lifetime. My inclusion of FDR as a great President is primarily based on his wartime performance (except for the last few months before his death).
A subjective determination, though most of what I’ve read over the last forty years or so has been fairly consistent. I suspect that Reagan will be rated higher as the decades roll by.
Good sources in this wiki article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_United_States_Presidents
Who was the best ex-President in the 1900′s? IMO, probably Nixon.
VX: If an astrologer said it, I could not believe it. An astronomer perhaps, but not an astrologer.
Diffferent context, though Hamlet’s phrase “There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” captures the essence.
Offhand I know that I have read, and listened to, this or very similar quotes by Feynman, Einstein, Asimov and Sagan. Might even be in Alice in Wonderland.
Good on you, Bou! You said what I was trying to say better than I did. I agree with you that “it’s one way or the other… Either you fight to be heard for who you are, regardless of your color or gender, or you use” that color or gender to achieve a goal, and therefore lose the right to gripe when someone else uses that against you.
During my working life, [which began in the 1950s,] we didn’t have specialized groups intervening for us. The recently formed National Organization of Women held its first national convention here in Houston, shortly after I arrived here in 1971. My new husband and I attended some of the meetings, and were invited to Gloria Steinem’s suite after the formal part of the evening meeting, to join in the informal discussion. Men joining into this kind of meeting were still somewhat of a novelty in those days, but Downs was curious and fascinated by this new organization, being himself the child of an unusual woman, a college graduate herself and a dedicated botanist. He was used to the idea of women as achievers, and he wanted to assess whether an organization like NOW would be a help or a hindrance in the lives of working women. Thirty-seven years later, I’m still somewhat on the fence about that.
When you accept an organization’s help and intervention to fight your battles, you give up something in yourself… the right to struggle and achieve on your own, and the right to feel that ‘you own’ your success. Sure, you can get knocked around a bit by life, if you make unwise decisions that result in bad outcomes. But they’re your achievements and your mistakes, and you don’t have to make excuses for either. The Captain, and his courteous and kindly commenters, both male and female, know this. It’s the way the real world works.
Of course there’s the “old boy network” and the “old girl network” too. Bound to be. And we all use it when we have to.
But if we’re smart and capable, we don’t have to use it very often. And that makes for good memories and honest pride in your sunset years.
Marianne
Souter is just the beginning.
John Paul Stevens will turn 89 this year.
Ruth Bader Ginsberg, just recovering from pancreatic cancer treatments, is 76.
Steven Breyer is “only” 71.
What worries me is if Obama gets to choose a successor to someone like Antonin Scalia who is 73, or even Anthony M. Kennedy, who is also 73. Replacing them with someone of a much more liberal persuasion would change the “balance” of the current court.
After recently rewatching Conspiracy Theory I wonder if Justices Thomas, Alito, Roberts and Kennedy spend a lot of time looking over the shoulders and checking underneath their cars each time they enter them. I hope they never join the same carpool. There are some seriously deranged people out there.
Curtiss/
I would be. William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn are still alive and breathing, aren’t they?
The left learned long ago they could win from the bench what would never pass muster from the legislature. Hence the dearth of meaningful legislation (oh those oh so daming recorded votes) and adopted as strategy appointing dictators hopefully to do their bidding for them.
Hence school busing, gay marriage, abortion for teenagers, etc.
More change you can count on…..Stage 2 of the disease awaits us.
I agree with Laurie darlin’, sorta.
Want equality? Get a pool of candidates of all qualified folks of all stripes- judges with suitable experience preferably. Give ‘em all an advanced LSAT o’sorts and pick the high score as the winner. Open the envelope after a blind confirmation. Analytics, like.
O’course if old white men or woman or Ivy grads o’color/ethnic backgrounds win consistently it’ll tell you something.
Otherwise it’s politics as usual. With long term implications…Judges are like doctors- they can heal but they also make mistakes and take positions that can get people killed. BWTFDIK?
b2
Oddly enough, we have relied upon the ABA et al for decades to vet the various nominees to the Supreme Court and to the Circuit Courts and we expect a certain amount of due diligence on their part. We expect them to review every opinion and legal stand and to provide a “qualified” measure of the nominees judicial stance and prowess. We used to rely upon the 4th estate for this type of due diligence for presidential candidates but it seems that they only know how to do this sort of in-depth investigation on Alaskan women. I think the press has given me more information and background on the mother of Palin’s daughter’s former fiance than they have on the One. I know they’ve given me 500 times as much background on Palin as on the One.