Yes, if we are to believe the Hartford Courant whose report says substantive discussions have taken place with both Connecticut’s Democratic Senators – Christopher Dodd and Joseph Lieberman.
Lieberman said he was pleased with how the White House has handled the process so far.
“The administration has taken very encouraging and constructive steps,” Lieberman said.
Lieberman cited in particular President Bush’s statements that he had ruled out a litmus test for a nominee and that he would not be pressured by interest groups.
This morning the Gang of 14 will hold its first meeting since O’Connor’s announcement, and although no names are expected to come up, the topic could involve the standards for filibustering.
So far, though, Bush’s comments “all sound like what most of us were hoping for,” Lieberman said.
Bush has been reaching out to Democrats all week.
New York Times, your turn…
I’m not sure what to make of this, since all acts of “consultation” will have to be mere window dressing, or else surrender. There is no middle ground. Any nominee acceptable to the Democrats (let alone pleasing) will be unacceptable to Bush’s base as well as libertarian (small “L”) allies such as me.
President Bush needs to pick a nominee who shuns postmodernist rhetoric. Our rights are in danger when judges ignore the actual Constitution and instead refer to their prejudices and willy-nilly progressive inclinations. The progeny of Michel Foucault and Paul De Man must not be allowed to do further damage with their decisions based on “emanations and penumbra.”
I suppose it’s all right for Bush to reach out to Democrats, as long as he then rejects most, if not all, they have to say on the matter. If I wanted Democrats selecting SCOTUS nominees, I would vote for Democrats for president.
I hope he nominates Ralph Neas and Norman Lear. I want a good centrist Supreme Court that disagrees with the Constitution. That way we can join our allies in the mideast and have a terror war. I’d really like that. Really.
I want to join the Constitutional Revolutionaries–how ’bout you, al Kyda?
Buddy, I think the Constitution is a living, breathing document and should reflect the times in which we live. And I expect President Bush to nominate justices who feel the same.
And that’s Ms. al Kyda to you (boy did I get a lot of that right after 9-11; it wouldn’t even be an issue if people would pronounce al Qaeda properly, but I gave up long ago and learned to let it go).
President Bush doesn’t need a litmus test and he won’t be pressured by special interests because he knows his own mind and knows who he wants to nominate.
My hope is for a strict constructionist. And my belief is that the founders anticipated the need for an adaptive constitution by building in the ability to amend it. Instead, it is being ever increasingly modified by jurists who, not finding support for their positions within the confines of the constitution, are willing to borrow their precedents from outside institutions, and abrogate the power of our legislative branch of government in the process.
Here come de judge, here come de judge, first among de equal branches, here come de judge!
I’m with Kyda.
If Americans wanted Democrats to pick the judges, then Americans would have voted for Democrats. That’s the system.