Back in January of 2007 — more than a year ago — I posted the following:
I think we should as a nation agree everyone to the following premise; Never again for any reason and at any level will we vote for anyone named Clinton, Bush, Dole, or Kennedy.
Today, Roger Simon says pretty much the same thing:
But I do know this: We are a democracy. As I wrote yesterday in the comments section, it’s time to end the Divine Right of Kings in this country. That means no more Bushes, Clintons, Kennedys, Roosevelts, etc. I don’t even want to hear from Kennedys for their recommendations. Enough of this monarchical crap and these over-blown, over-important political families. We might as well bring back the Romanoffs.
We agree. Except that The Instapundit didn’t link my post that pre-dated Simon’s by a year.
My biggest fear about another Clinton is the White House isn’t so much the damage that Hillary will do in another 4 to 8 years, but rather the danger that Bill will do. My biggest fear would be Bill Clinton appointed to the Supreme Court.
Email This Post
⋅
Print This Post
I don’t know, I sure like Jeb.
The Clintoons?
To Hell with them.
/or off with their heads…whatever works
This would have had a lot more impact in, say, 1999 or 2000. Now, it looks sort of a convenient stance for you to take.
Exactly what would be your fear of Bill Clinton on the Supreme Court distinct from any other non-conservative?
Exactly what would be your fear of Bill Clinton on the Supreme Court distinct from any other non-conservative?
Thanks for asking — it’s an easy answer: because Bill Clinton has almost no morals. His lack of a moral or ethical compass has proven led him to make some exceptionally stupid and embarrassing mistakes. I’d hate to see Ruth bring up sexual harassment charges against a fellow Supreme Court Justice.
While I don’t want to see any other Liberal on the Supreme Court, it’s because I don’t want activist judges on the bench. However, I wouldn’t throw a fit over a morally honest (though I would disagree with their views) and capable judge, such as the uber-liberal Ruth Bader Ginsberg.
because Bill Clinton has almost no morals.
I would think that an Originalist interpretation of the Constitution would preclude an imposition of personal morals into legal rulings.
I don’t want activist judges on the bench
Then you must have been outraged by Bush v. Gore.
Absolutely unqualified.
Clinton was disbarred.
Clinton subjorned perjury.
Clinton would have to recuse himself from every sexual harassment case.
Clinton has no judicial experience.
Clinton’s last appellate experience was probably when he clerked for Judge Dupree for a year a billion years ago.
The Constitution doesn’t state any necesary qualifications- if you have personal qualifications it seems reasonable to actually state what they are.
11:01-
Clinton has been eligible to practice law since 2006- in any case your points are irrelevant according to the Constitution.
Preston — how would you feel if Hillary nominated Bill for SCOTUS? How would you feel if he was confirmed?
I wouldn’t support the nomination- I believe in separation of powers and, at least during a Clinton Adminstration, this could create conflict of interest.
That said, many appointees are close friends or allies of the President- most recently Harriet Miers- and I do think he is very qualified- the criticisms of his lack of judicial experience I believe are misplaced.
In fact, I hope that the next justice comes from a legislative or executive background so that at least one justice on the Court can inject real world experience of how these decisions impact government. (This in fact was a goal of Bill Clinton himself when he hoped to appoint Cuomo or Bruce Babbitt to the Court before accepting the politically easier appoinments of Ginsburg and Breyer.)
Only a totally deluded person would think that a person who perjured himself and suborned anther to commit perjury is qualified to sit as a supreme court justice. Disgusting.
the criticisms of his lack of judicial experience I believe are misplaced.
Because of all his years on the bench? Oops!
I don’t worry about her getting elected, and I certainly wouldn’t worry about Bubba getting on the SCOTUS, even if she were.
Not only is he unfit for the job intellectually, emotionally, or behaviorally, he has no record of judicial achievement that could be examined. The spin and pretzel logic required to justify his nomination would be breathtaking, and the verbal gymnastics to justify his confirmation would break the minds of most Americans. The confirmation process would be the most entertaining, as the old tyme filibuster would surely be invoked. I wonder if C-Span would cover the reading of the entire Baltimore-D.C. white and yellow pages?
There ain’t no way Bill Clinton will ever sit on the Supreme Court. It takes months for the SCOTUS to decide, write and publish their decisions and Bill Clinton can’t keep his mouth shut that long. End of story.
Are Americans so much like sheep that we consistently vote Bush with Reagan 8years, Big Bush 4 years, Bill Clinton 8 years, Son of Bush 8 years, (I see a monarchy developing here), and now the sheep that we are, Wife of Clinton for what 8 years, then sick of her, next, Brother of Bush (Jeb), 8 , then what? Chelsea daughter of Clinton…
Enough already, are there really just two families that rule America’s spot for the presidency? When will it end? Oh yes, when sheep stop voting for them BAAAAH!!! I am a white upper class Republican who does not care for McCain, voted for Obama, and trust me would LOVE to see a woman for president, but not THAT WOMAN!!!! Another jewel added to that BUSH/CLINTON crown. Enough already!