Comments on: Krauthammer: Don’t Put The Flowers On Conservatism’s Grave Just Yet

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 13 Nov 2006 02:40:43 +0000

To the commenter above, we’re not gonna get a strict constructionist to replace ANY SCOTUS Justice with a Democratic Senate. So the issue is moot. There is now a firewall against a 5th anti-Roe vote, and there’s nothing we can do about it other than winning back the Senate.

That said, Rudy has basically come out and said that he’ll support as conservative a judge as he can get. He even said Scalia is his ideal. His picks couldn’t be any worse than Bush’s. Who cares what his personal views on social issues are given his judicial positions?

By: jpe

jpe — Sat, 11 Nov 2006 18:39:30 +0000

Secondly, I don’t know how electable he really is considering his ugly personal past.

Rudy’s teflon. And that he knows he’s a scoundrel and isn’t a moral crusader kinda deflect a lot of the impact.

By: jpe

jpe — Sat, 11 Nov 2006 18:37:44 +0000

Some dems oppose abortion but want to wholly roll back free trade and initiate UHC, and they’re considered to be moving right. Strange times we’re in.

By: Dmac

Dmac — Sat, 11 Nov 2006 01:43:28 +0000

JB – point taken.

By: Aaron

Aaron — Fri, 10 Nov 2006 21:49:28 +0000

Now that we’ve lost the Senate, we can’t be assured that a fifth conservative could replace JPS (currently 86 years old) if he leaves before 2009. However, Chaffee isn’t really a loss in this regard (voted against Alito). Bob Casey says he’s pro-life, but promises he won’t vote that way (putting us down by 1). I don’t know that much about Brown or McCaskill in general, but I’d assume they’d vote against us (down by 3). Bob Corker has waffled on the issue of abortion, but had he been in the Senate to vote down Alito, he’d have been dead politically in TN, just like the scum governor he worked for back in the late 90′s.

But there were four Democrats who voted in favor of Alito: Conrad, Byrd, Johnson, and Nelson (plus almost a couple dozen more who voted for Roberts). To that list in the future, we could likely add Tester and Webb. And I would be surprised if it took that much to get Landrieu on board, too (she’ll have to move to the right if she expects to survive 2008). Add that to the 49 Republicans in the Senate, and we have 56. Hopefully we can count on the old gangsters — Lieberman, Pryor, Inouye, and Salazr — to at least stop a filibuster.

Anyway, if we get in one more conservative judge before 2009, Rudy’s social views are largely irrelevant. And if we get back a majority in the Senate in 2008, the conservatives there could put more pressure on Rudy to appoint someone more like Roberts.

By: JB

JB — Fri, 10 Nov 2006 21:45:47 +0000

Yeah, but you and I both know that the big “R” next to rudy’s name means that his past will receive much much more play by our unbiased media. I like Rudy, but let’s not pretend that Rs and Ds play on the same playing field.

By: Dmac

Dmac — Fri, 10 Nov 2006 21:30:20 +0000

Yeah, his “ugly personal past” is quite a cause for concern for me as well. I mean, look at how clean Clinton’s past was (Gennifer Flowers, TrooperGate, Juanita Broaddrick, draft – dodging) – he had no chance at all for the Presidency. What on earth was he thinking?

By: JB

JB — Fri, 10 Nov 2006 20:44:17 +0000

One thing that concerns me is the type of judges rudy would appoint. Secondly, I don’t know how electable he really is considering his ugly personal past.

By: Mark

Mark — Fri, 10 Nov 2006 20:36:02 +0000

Hey, I also like McCain and Huckabee…jury’s still out on Romney, as far as I’m concerned. I just think Rudy looks very, very appealing right now…

By: JB

JB — Fri, 10 Nov 2006 20:27:56 +0000

Why don’t you just rename the site ‘Rudy G. ’08′?