Bypassing Congress, Bush Installs Judge on Federal Appeals Court

[zimv20]

link (http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/national/AP-Bush-Pickering.html?hp)


President Bush bypassed Congress and installed Charles Pickering on the federal appeals court Friday in an election-year slap at Democrats who had blocked the nomination for more than two years.

Bush installed Pickering by a recess appointment, which avoids the confirmation process. Such appointments are valid until the next Congress takes office, in this case in January 2005.

(more)


every day, i feel more and more included in this 'democracy' :rolleyes:

[Stelliform]

Well they were using filibustering to require a 2/3's vote for judicial nominations when a simple majority should be all that is required.

It is all perfectly legal, just like their blocking of his nomination...

[wwworry]

and so close to MLK day

[zimv20]

Originally posted by Stelliform

It is all perfectly legal, just like their blocking of his nomination...

legal, yes, cooperative, no.

democrats now have a very small voice in how the country is run (from a federal level, anyway). a recess appointment, from the self-proclaimed uniter, negates that voice.

that's why i said i feel very unincluded these days.

[Dont Hurt Me]

well your voice here is making up for it.;)

[Rower_CPU]

How many appointees were approved by this Congress, again?

[IJ Reilly]

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
How many appointees were approved by this Congress, again?

As of the end of last year, the Senate had approved 168 of 172 Bush nominations to the Federal bench (97.7%). Anything less then 100% is called "obstructionism." Can we say "entitlement?" I knew we could.

[pseudobrit]

A uniter, not a divider.

[zimv20]

Originally posted by wwworry
and so close to MLK day

speaking of which...

http://img.coxnewsweb.com/B/04/05/70/image_370054.jpg


Protesters were blocked by MARTA buses as they stood across the street on Auburn Avenue protesting the visit of President Bush to the King Center in Atlanta.

link (http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/photos/0104/bushvisit/image9.html)

edit: what's a guy gotta do to get an image to show up? i'm using the IMG tag. it's like black magic to me -- sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

[Rower_CPU]

Originally posted by zimv20
...
edit: what's a guy gotta do to get an image to show up? i'm using the IMG tag. it's like black magic to me -- sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

Certain forums won't display images inline, this being one.

[zimv20]

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
Certain forums won't display images inline, this being one.

science and reason have trumped my black magic

[wwworry]

not only that, but this:

Bush Exploits MLK's Grave For Political Fundraiser (http://www.misleader.org/daily_mislead/read.asp?fn=df01152004.html)

The New York Times reports that the President "hastily planned" a visit to Dr. King's grave, and then will immediately go to "a $2,000-a-person fundraiser in Atlanta."2 Even though Bush may spend the majority of his time hobnobbing with donors at the fundraiser, because he will briefly visit Dr. King's grave, he is allowed to deem the entire trip "official" and then bill taxpayers for portions of the huge cost of hotel rooms, rental cars, security, and travel. And those are no small costs - the Washington Post notes that Air Force One alone costs $57,000 an hour to operate.

fundraising and power trumps all...

[zimv20]

the NYT weighs in...

link (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/17/opinion/17SAT2.html?pagewanted=print&position=)


January 17, 2004

A Judicial End Run

resident Bush has used the only avenue remaining to him to install Charles Pickering Sr. of Mississippi on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals: a recess appointment, which avoids the confirmation process. That recess appointments are a perfectly legal device used by other presidents in the past does not make this appointment any more palatable. Mr. Pickering is absolutely the wrong choice for one of the nation's most sensitive courts.

Mr. Bush claimed that only a "handful" of senators had opposed Mr. Pickering. The opposition was in fact a good deal broader than that.

Mr. Pickering was rejected in 2002 by the Judiciary Committee when the Senate was still in Democratic hands. When the same committee, in Republican control, approved him last fall, the nomination was blocked by a filibuster. Another attempt on the president's part to win Senate approval of Mr. Pickering's nomination would almost certainly have produced the same result.

The reasons are clear enough. Over the years, Mr. Pickering has displayed skepticism toward cases involving civil rights and expressed doubts about well-settled principles like one person one vote. The Senate inquiry into the nomination uncovered troubling questions of judicial ethics. Mr. Pickering took up the case of a man convicted of burning a cross on the lawn of an interracial couple, urging prosecutors to drop a central charge and calling a prosecutor directly. He also seems outside the mainstream on abortion rights.

Mr. Pickering is not the only hard-right candidate Mr. Bush has pushed for high judicial office. But his nomination was among the most troublesome. As Senator Charles Schumer said, Mr. Bush's decision to bypass the Senate in this manner is "a finger in the eye" for all those seeking fairness in the nomination process.

[amnesiac1984]

what is the point of hiding protestors from Bush? Its like he doesn't have to answer to his people, what the hell is going on? They even thought htat the whole of england was supporting them when they visited here. If Bush was at all a strong leader he would not cower away from his oponents. Blair knew full well that he was unpopular and he faced it with courage, and for that I admire him, but not for his policies.