The Argument against Hootie

[LegalSmash]

Okay,

I've tried to be nice, civil, and clean and articulate.... but this

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/...an_you_sa.html

is the last straw.

I cannot begin to understand where the rationale for such an idea would come from, but Barack Obama has just made a detractor out of me. The bench is made for Jurists, not douchebags with feelings.

I hope this is a joke....

Even so, What does everyone think about Barack's qualities and chances as president? Lets get past the Hillary questions, but rather, what will this guy do, if he beats the GOP nominee?

[Italian Jew]

Umm...he does not mention proposing people who have no background whatsoever in law, so there is nothing wrong with his idea. As a matter of fact, this is what many, if not all, candidates would propose to do with the Court. A lot of those judges are puppets who vote for what party they are affiliated with. Some people would be better judges than *GASP* a judge.

Obama has a shot at reforming things. If the legislature helps him accomplish things, then good things can happen. That blog is reading too much into it and trying to convince people of what is not there. I don't know why you would use a blog as a source though because those people tend to be morons with great diction.

Every person you put on that bench has feelings and uses them in their rulings, so having someone who doesn't wear a robe makes the same decisions as someone who makes a career of wearing one. Old windbags with political ties get placed there, not the people who should be there.

[LegalSmash]

Not withstanding, I disagree with the idea of placing nonlawyers to a position that has characteristically been held by attorneys. It has not helped in the past, and it wont achieve much now, in my honest opinion. As an attorney himself he should know not to flout our profession and guild by appointing blunt feeling-filled imbeciles to a position that must be held by someone with a mind capable of separating LAW from feeling and pity.

I think the blog, while simply a blog, really kicks up an interesting point: while we may not LIKE politically tied people, they will have ties in that sense one way or another... the only difference here is that they would be flagrantly liberal ties, as opposed to conservative ones.
I could care less for the swing or sway there, however, what I want is a qualified individual with experience in jurisprudence, and legal matters. The SCOTUS holds a very tenuous position in the US, it is respected because of its implied authority.. but no one has to listen to it... my deal is that appointing persons wholly unqualified to do a job such as this will erode the respect of the court, possibly casting it down from its tenuous position.

I care much more for the court's esteem than I do for the politicization or non-thereof.

[Italian Jew]

Well, he is not going to for two reasons...

1) the blog takes what he says way out of context as no president would ever dare try to make a non-legal professional a judge. Obama knows that a judge would need specific knowledge of the law, so he is not going to pick that random guy off the street to be on the bench

2) his appointment has to go through the Senate, so if he was crazy enough to try it, the Senate would not let him have it.

Also, why is this thread called Argument against Hootie?

[phatman76]

Obama is a politically expedient pig. Because of that, he is trying to dress up putting politicians and activist judges on the bench. It isn't some "fresh look," it is just "my stupid view."

[Italian Jew]

Yeah, you could make that argument for ANY and ALL politicians and people involved in the U.S. government...

of course you would need evidence for such a wild claim....

[LegalSmash]

Hopefully no judges die or leave soon, they have made some really good decisions this term and I'd prefer to have a fiscally conservative court through an era largely controlled by a spend crazy congress and uncertain whitehouse.

He reminds me of Hootie from Hootie and the blowfish, because he is popular among an otherwise rather non- politically inclusive soccer mom section of the nation.

[Italian Jew]

We need a computer to make the decisions! lol

If it were that easy...maybe we should just use a Magic 8-Ball?

The system will never be perfect, but the judges should change with the times, and their decisions should reflect what needs to be done in the era they are in. Our current judges are some of the better ones in history though...

[LegalSmash]

I agree in part and disagree in part.

I think the current jurist are excellent judges. I believe that their decisions have been well measured, verbose at times, but informative, and given a degree of guidance to otherwise difficult to navigate areas of the law. However, Far too many decisions have been unneccesary.
I will never be able to fully respect the Court for Taking Bush v. Gore. It was not their place to... I dont give a flying shit if inauguration wouldnt have happened till may, but the Supreme Court was not to do this, it was written into the bulwarks of justice that they are supposed to follow.

I believe that decision, and their willingness to take it rather than soundly smacking it down and stating that they do not do advisory work or decide elections, tarnished their reputation worst than anything else in the past century that they have done, including the late 19th century Plessy decision.

[Italian Jew]

Well, I think the problem there was who let them decide it anyway? Also, the verdict of the Supreme Court does not force someone to do anything, I believe that resides within the executive branch, correct? I disagree with their ruling and participation in the incident, because they had no business being there.

The court said don't count the votes,but somebody else listened.

If anything, you would think they would count the votes no matter what, seeing as how we like to believe we are the world's greatest democracy. Craziness is what its about...