Montana’s next Senator and what this may mean for the U.S. Supreme Court
October 15th, 2006 | by Walter Greenspan |TownHall.com executive editor Hugh Hewitt wants all Montanans to read his Friday, October 13 opinion essay, “Conrad Burns and the Future Of the United States Supreme Court”.
23 Responses to “Montana’s next Senator and what this may mean for the U.S. Supreme Court”
By Dani on Oct 16, 2006 | Reply
Yup.
The headline on this page is enough to make me vote against Tester.
By Walter Greenspan on Oct 16, 2006 | Reply
Dani, you’re referring to this picture, I presume.
By touchstone on Oct 16, 2006 | Reply
Um, isn’t that Nancy Pelosi? Last time I checked, she was in the House. When Tester’s Senator, he’s not going to be able to vote for her as Speaker.
It’s telling you people would put Burns back in office because of party allegiance. Screw ethics! Screw competency! Makes my heart tingle.
By Gman on Oct 16, 2006 | Reply
And, Touchstone, I’m sure you’ve never made a pragmatic vote in your life.
This is a consideration I’m weighing very heavily in my decision. I’ve filled out my absentee ballot completely, except for the US Senate race. What to do? What to do?
By Craig on Oct 16, 2006 | Reply
I took Dani’s reference to Pelosi as an iconic representation of the Dems taking control of both houses.
By Dave Budge on Oct 16, 2006 | Reply
As I pondered Dani’s “iconic representation” I couldn’t decided if I should stock up on Kaopectate, Pepcid AC, nitrous oxide or campaign signs reading “Vote for Gridlock.”
But as the voices in my head grew louder I decided the proper action would be to go home and clean my guns.
By Wulfgar on Oct 16, 2006 | Reply
300 WinMag was brushed through last night. .44mag is already sparkling. And I should have the AK about 5 days after the election.
In other words, I’m agreeing with Dave.
By Rocky Smith on Oct 16, 2006 | Reply
Say what you like- I’m holding my nose and voting for Burns. The alternative is millions of dead in Iraq after the Dems pull out too soon (remember Pol Pot?) and the destruction of our economy when the Dems raise taxes. Harry Reid, the Dems Senate leader is no prize of ethics either.
When was the last time you eagerly voted for a major candidate? Me? I don’t recall.
By touchstone on Oct 16, 2006 | Reply
And, Touchstone, I’m sure you’ve never made a pragmatic vote in your life.
Well, yes, of course I have. Democrats have fielded plenty of their own noxious candidates as well, but they’ve always been paired with equally noxious Republicans.
In ‘08, I’ll have a hard time deciding which Senator lever to pull if the GOP actually fields a candidate who’s somewhat honest. (Hint, that’s not Dennis Rehberg.)
By touchstone on Oct 16, 2006 | Reply
Oh yeah…while I realize the Pelosi comment was a representation, it’s likely that the Democrats won’t win the majority in the Senate, so Senator Tester won’t have a say in who’s the majority leader. Also, last time I checked my Constitution, it’s the executive that actually nominates judicial appointments, which, last time I checked was in GOP hands.
So, combined, the judicial appointments and the specter of a Pelosi-led House add up to hyperbole rather than serious “threats.” If anything, the more Dems in the Senate, the more likely we’ll see moderate judicial appointments, a good thing for everybody…
By Walter Greenspan on Oct 16, 2006 | Reply
And, touchstone, whose definition of a moderate judicial appointment will be using?
By Craig on Oct 16, 2006 | Reply
I would expect that Touchstone would find John Paul Stevens to be right down the middle of the road.
By Dani on Oct 17, 2006 | Reply
Gman
Thanks for the image link to Pelosi. I do (really) know she’s in the House. As Craig mentioned, she’s the poster girl for Dems taking control of the Hill, since she’s a little more photogenic than Harry Reid. She is however, why I would like the Republicans to retain control of the Senate.
Although I actually think having her at the helm in the House is an excellent Rovian plot for another Republican in the White House in 2008.
By Craig on Oct 17, 2006 | Reply
Errr…not so much.
By Dani on Oct 17, 2006 | Reply
Well, I did say she was a little more photogenic than Reid.
By touchstone on Oct 17, 2006 | Reply
And, touchstone, whose definition of a moderate judicial appointment will be using?
I would expect that Touchstone would find John Paul Stevens to be right down the middle of the road.
LOL!
I admit I’m a partisan hack, an unredeemable left-winger, and all that, but how about some judicial nominees that are concerned with law and not politics? Some moderation in the name of stability, peace, and prosperity would be a welcome change.
Anybody here think Bush will start nominating liberal judges if the Senate goes Democratic? Anybody?
By Craig on Oct 17, 2006 | Reply
And do stuff like, oh, I don’t know, interpret the actual law, instead of looking for penumbras and emanations and so forth?
Gosh, it’s just nutty enough to work!
As I’m sure you know, senators elected this year will outlast Bush. No one is worried about what Bush will do, it’s those who come after.
By Gman on Oct 17, 2006 | Reply
Dani, I didn’t provide the image link to Pelosi.
By Dani on Oct 17, 2006 | Reply
Oh dear, my thanks to Walter!
By Walter Greenspan on Oct 17, 2006 | Reply
You’re quite welcome, Dani.
By Mark T on Oct 18, 2006 | Reply
“The current majority of the Supreme Court is pro-terrorist rights …”
Why is it that you on the right wing are so free to indulge in hyperbole without repercussion? Hewitt’s rant is full of it - on a grander scale there are Hannity and Malkin and Coulter and all the other windbags of rightism seemingly free to cast any aspersion and given mucho airtime to do so. Right wing hype permeates discussion these days.
Anyway, the Hewitt piece was a rant, not worth much in my opinion. Jon Tester is a pretty moderate fellow, so far as I can see. (So’s Ned Lamont.) I’m not cowering under my bed in fear of terrorists and I value my personal freedom. I’m not interested in the illusiion of security provided by those who say they want to protect me. Life is a crap shoot - you fly by the seat of your pants, play the odds, relax and have fun. When a politician says he wants to make me safe, I reach for my gun.
By Craig on Oct 18, 2006 | Reply
We get a pass in our membership kit.