These clowns shouldn’t be allowed to judge livestock!

They're Back, and Still Unworthy
New York Times Editorial, March 11, 2005

The Senate is preparing for a major showdown over the Democrats' use of the filibuster to block a handful of President Bush's judicial nominees. When the arguments about procedures are over, the key question will remain: Has Mr. Bush put up men and women who deserve lifetime appointments to the federal bench? The three nominees who had hearings this month - a mining and ranching industry flunky, a much-reversed judge with an antipathy for individual rights, and a lawyer with a bad habit of not following the rules for practicing law - show why Democrats should stand firm. [snip]

William Myers III, one of the seven filibustered nominees, has built a career as an anti-environmental extremist. He was a longtime lobbyist for the mining and cattle industries. Then, as the Interior Department's top lawyer, he put those industries' interests ahead of the public interest. [snip]

Terrence Boyle, who has been nominated to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, based in Richmond, is also a troubling choice. He has an extraordinarily high reversal rate for a district court judge. Many of the decisions that have been criticized [and overturned] by higher courts wrongly rejected claims involving civil rights, sex discrimination, and disability rights. [snip]

Thomas Griffith, who has been nominated to the powerful Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, has the unfortunate distinction of having practiced law in two jurisdictions without the required licenses. [snip]

Mr. Myers, Mr. Boyle, and Mr. Griffith were chosen for their archconservative political views, not their qualifications for the bench. No impartial person interested in choosing only the best possible judges would have put them at the top of the list. The federal judiciary is one of the cornerstones of American government - one of the three branches the nation's founders created, and set against one another, to guide the nation and keep it free. Surely this vital institution deserves better.

Back on November 4th, two days after he won that “mandate.” Dear Leader announced that he would reach out to “people who share our goals,” not everyone, just those who “share our goals.” Interesting message there - I guess the rest of us can go Cheney ourselves if we don’t share the Bush administration goals. The goal the Times is discussing: stacking the courts with right wing ideologues; plus the other administration “goals:” destruction of the environment, war on false pretenses, dismantling the New Deal, AmeriKan gulags, tax cuts for fatcats, and our go-it-alone foreign “policy” are all worthy of our deepest contempt.

What is truly ironic is that the little people who voted these people in still don’t see what the Bush administration is doing to them. Damn, it sure makes me proud to be an AmeriKan!