dawgball said:
Yes, my point was that a woman has more of a right to have an abortion than her husband has to have an abortion. Glad you got my point.
Samuel Alito Next Justice
- Thread starter Clem D
- Start date
Yes, my point was that a woman has more of a right to have an abortion than her husband has to have an abortion. Glad you got my point.
WOOT WOOT !!!!! Thankgod Meyer (sp?) stepped down !!!! This Guy would never make the mistake the Libaral SCJ's just did on Emminent Domain !!!!
This guy was a unanimous choice by the Senate the last time he came before them to be approved as a Dist court Judge .I'm sure that he hasn't changed since then. It's too bad that politicians make it more about politics than making it what is best for the country.
Scrapper when was that 12/15 years ago. Where all same Senators there that are today. Did he have along track record like he does now. Enough new facts to make some one wish they never had voted for him first time. That old saying they did it before just holds no water.
Read a great artical today ...I will try to find it on the web ...any help would be appreciated I believe the headline goes something like this:
IF YOUR A LIBERAL YOUR GOING TO LIKE SCALIA MORE THAN YOU LIKE ALITO
Totally Awesome !! This could be the best thing Bush dose for the country domestically !! :mj07: :mj14: :clap:
IF YOUR A LIBERAL YOUR GOING TO LIKE SCALIA MORE THAN YOU LIKE ALITO
Totally Awesome !! This could be the best thing Bush dose for the country domestically !! :mj07: :mj14: :clap:
Of course, this story appeared in the Christian Science Monitor, and Freeze thinks that publication is "jibberish"according to another thread here. This one seems to paint Alito in a balanced light regarding personal values and his rulings. I found it interesting and thought I'd post it. Not sure if Freeze will dismiss it as worthless, since it forwards his thinking, but...
___________________________________
On abortion, a nuanced stand
In 3 of 4 cases, Supreme Court nominee Alito voted on the side of abortion rights.
By Warren Richey | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
WASHINGTON ? If there was any doubt about where US Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito stands on abortion, his 90-year-old mother quickly and decisively put that question to rest.
"Of course he's against abortion," Rose Alito told the Associated Press in a telephone interview from her Hamilton, N.J., home.
Her candid statement may go down in history as the most blunt and honest admission of a Supreme Court nominee's view on the hot-button issue.
But the true test of appeals court judges isn't which personal views they hold, but to what extent those personal views may influence how they rule in a particular case.
On this issue, legal analysts disagree in their assessments of Judge Alito. Some say he is a conservative ideologue. Others say he is a smart, careful jurist who leaves personal views behind when he dons his black robes.
The best evidence of his work as a judge are his published opinions. They contain a few surprises and some ammunition - for both the left and the right.
For example, of the four abortion cases in which he participated as an appeals court judge, he voted on the pro-choice side in all but one. A 1995 Alito vote striking down a Pennsylvania abortion restriction in particular is raising eyebrows among some legal scholars.
"That [1995 case] strongly seems to indicate that Alito is not a policy-driven true-believer who's used every possible opportunity to advance one side's preferred outcome, but instead a judge who has indeed come down on both sides, in different cases," says David Garrow, a constitutional historian and expert in reproductive rights cases at the high court.
Senate investigators, legal scholars, and special interest group lawyers are poring over Judge Alito's opinions written during 15-years of work on the Third US Circuit Court of Appeals. They are looking for clues of what kind of justice Alito might become if confirmed to a life-tenure post on the nation's highest court.
How he may rule in abortion cases is particularly relevant to the inquiry since President Bush has named him to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, a key swing voter and defender of abortion rights.
If Alito holds a different view on that issue, his vote could shift the balance of power on the court. His four abortion cases include:
? A 1991 challenge to a Pennsylvania law requiring married women to notify their husbands before seeking an abortion. The court struck down the restriction. Alito dissented.
? A 1995 challenge to a Pennsylvania law that required women seeking to use Medicaid funds to abort a pregnancy resulting from rape or incest to report the incident to law enforcement officials and identify the offender. Alito provided the decisive vote striking down the abortion restriction.
? A 1997 challenge to a New Jersey law that prevents parents from suing for damages on behalf of the wrongful death of a fetus. Alito ruled that the Constitution does not afford protection to the unborn.
? A 2000 challenge to New Jersey's ban on so-called partial-birth abortions. Alito struck down the law based on a recent Supreme Court decision.
Analysts are divided over the meaning of Alito's votes and his various writings while on the bench.
"I don't think these cases tell us anything about whether he would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade or not," says James Bopp, general counsel for National Right to Life. "Nor do they tell us whether he supports pro-life as a value."
But Mr. Bopp says examining Alito's approach to deciding cases can reveal what kind of justice he might become. "In these cases he didn't go beyond the issues that needed to be resolved," he says. "He wasn't trying to create law. He was just carefully following the existing law."
Bopp says Alito's style of judging is likely to carry over to his work on the high court. "He's not a rookie. He's been doing this for 15 years," he says. "That usually doesn't change. He will do the same thing as a justice."
The Alito case receiving the most attention is his dissent in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. In his 15-page dissent, Alito said that while the provision might impose some limitation on a woman's ability to obtain an abortion it was not so severe as to rise to the level of an "undue burden."
The judge based that conclusion on his study of Justice O'Connor's writings on the issue.
Alito's dissent says that the potential implications on women in abusive relationships were "a matter of grave concern" to him.
But he added that it was for state lawmakers, not judges, to decide the wisdom of such measures. "Whether the legislature's approach represents sound public policy is not a question for us to decide," he wrote. "Our task here is simply to decide whether [the abortion law] meets constitutional standards."
The US Supreme Court took up the case the following year and used the case to broaden the "undue burden" standard, in a way that rejected Alito's analysis.
But his work was not totally cast aside. Then Chief Justice William Rehnquist embraced and quoted the Alito dissent in his own dissent, which was joined by three other members of the court.
Critics say Alito's dissent suggests he is not sensitive enough to the concerns of women. They see it as an example of his personal views on abortion influencing his approach to the law.
Supporters say he made an honest effort to identify and apply O'Connor's "undue burden" standard as it existed at the time.
In the 1995 Medicaid case, Alito cast the deciding vote striking down a Pennsylvania abortion restriction. Analysts say it was a close legal question and Alito could have decided the case either way.
"If he has antiabortion philosophical leanings he did not let that warp his judgment in the case," says Seth Kreimer, professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School and co-counsel on the winning side in the 1995 case. "But there are a lot more degrees of freedom at the Supreme Court level than at the court of appeals."
___________________________________
On abortion, a nuanced stand
In 3 of 4 cases, Supreme Court nominee Alito voted on the side of abortion rights.
By Warren Richey | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor
WASHINGTON ? If there was any doubt about where US Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito stands on abortion, his 90-year-old mother quickly and decisively put that question to rest.
"Of course he's against abortion," Rose Alito told the Associated Press in a telephone interview from her Hamilton, N.J., home.
Her candid statement may go down in history as the most blunt and honest admission of a Supreme Court nominee's view on the hot-button issue.
But the true test of appeals court judges isn't which personal views they hold, but to what extent those personal views may influence how they rule in a particular case.
On this issue, legal analysts disagree in their assessments of Judge Alito. Some say he is a conservative ideologue. Others say he is a smart, careful jurist who leaves personal views behind when he dons his black robes.
The best evidence of his work as a judge are his published opinions. They contain a few surprises and some ammunition - for both the left and the right.
For example, of the four abortion cases in which he participated as an appeals court judge, he voted on the pro-choice side in all but one. A 1995 Alito vote striking down a Pennsylvania abortion restriction in particular is raising eyebrows among some legal scholars.
"That [1995 case] strongly seems to indicate that Alito is not a policy-driven true-believer who's used every possible opportunity to advance one side's preferred outcome, but instead a judge who has indeed come down on both sides, in different cases," says David Garrow, a constitutional historian and expert in reproductive rights cases at the high court.
Senate investigators, legal scholars, and special interest group lawyers are poring over Judge Alito's opinions written during 15-years of work on the Third US Circuit Court of Appeals. They are looking for clues of what kind of justice Alito might become if confirmed to a life-tenure post on the nation's highest court.
How he may rule in abortion cases is particularly relevant to the inquiry since President Bush has named him to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, a key swing voter and defender of abortion rights.
If Alito holds a different view on that issue, his vote could shift the balance of power on the court. His four abortion cases include:
? A 1991 challenge to a Pennsylvania law requiring married women to notify their husbands before seeking an abortion. The court struck down the restriction. Alito dissented.
? A 1995 challenge to a Pennsylvania law that required women seeking to use Medicaid funds to abort a pregnancy resulting from rape or incest to report the incident to law enforcement officials and identify the offender. Alito provided the decisive vote striking down the abortion restriction.
? A 1997 challenge to a New Jersey law that prevents parents from suing for damages on behalf of the wrongful death of a fetus. Alito ruled that the Constitution does not afford protection to the unborn.
? A 2000 challenge to New Jersey's ban on so-called partial-birth abortions. Alito struck down the law based on a recent Supreme Court decision.
Analysts are divided over the meaning of Alito's votes and his various writings while on the bench.
"I don't think these cases tell us anything about whether he would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade or not," says James Bopp, general counsel for National Right to Life. "Nor do they tell us whether he supports pro-life as a value."
But Mr. Bopp says examining Alito's approach to deciding cases can reveal what kind of justice he might become. "In these cases he didn't go beyond the issues that needed to be resolved," he says. "He wasn't trying to create law. He was just carefully following the existing law."
Bopp says Alito's style of judging is likely to carry over to his work on the high court. "He's not a rookie. He's been doing this for 15 years," he says. "That usually doesn't change. He will do the same thing as a justice."
The Alito case receiving the most attention is his dissent in Planned Parenthood v. Casey. In his 15-page dissent, Alito said that while the provision might impose some limitation on a woman's ability to obtain an abortion it was not so severe as to rise to the level of an "undue burden."
The judge based that conclusion on his study of Justice O'Connor's writings on the issue.
Alito's dissent says that the potential implications on women in abusive relationships were "a matter of grave concern" to him.
But he added that it was for state lawmakers, not judges, to decide the wisdom of such measures. "Whether the legislature's approach represents sound public policy is not a question for us to decide," he wrote. "Our task here is simply to decide whether [the abortion law] meets constitutional standards."
The US Supreme Court took up the case the following year and used the case to broaden the "undue burden" standard, in a way that rejected Alito's analysis.
But his work was not totally cast aside. Then Chief Justice William Rehnquist embraced and quoted the Alito dissent in his own dissent, which was joined by three other members of the court.
Critics say Alito's dissent suggests he is not sensitive enough to the concerns of women. They see it as an example of his personal views on abortion influencing his approach to the law.
Supporters say he made an honest effort to identify and apply O'Connor's "undue burden" standard as it existed at the time.
In the 1995 Medicaid case, Alito cast the deciding vote striking down a Pennsylvania abortion restriction. Analysts say it was a close legal question and Alito could have decided the case either way.
"If he has antiabortion philosophical leanings he did not let that warp his judgment in the case," says Seth Kreimer, professor at the University of Pennsylvania Law School and co-counsel on the winning side in the 1995 case. "But there are a lot more degrees of freedom at the Supreme Court level than at the court of appeals."
The CSM is a credible, albeit slightly right leaning news source. They are generally very balanced and sober, not bent towards hyperbole. Freeze doesn't know what he's talking about here.
On the other hand, Freeze is exactly right about the religion itself. My aunt is a hard-core Christian Scientist and on her pleadings my mom, and hence I because I was young, tried it out for like 6 months. Creepy church full of creepy people, including my aunt.
Recently, as my grandfather was dying down here, the aunt kept trying to interfere with my moms efforts to get my grandfather certain medical care. It didn't work because my mom lived 3 miles from the hospice and my aunt is in Cleveland and could only come down every now and then, so my mom had control, but it created a lot of tension before and after he died.
For days before and after he died, the aunt showed no emotion and just sat by herself reading their manual. (I forget what it's called) I think Mary Baker Eddy was the founder and she wrote up this book that they're all supposed to follow.
Just a ridiculous religion.
On the other hand, Freeze is exactly right about the religion itself. My aunt is a hard-core Christian Scientist and on her pleadings my mom, and hence I because I was young, tried it out for like 6 months. Creepy church full of creepy people, including my aunt.
Recently, as my grandfather was dying down here, the aunt kept trying to interfere with my moms efforts to get my grandfather certain medical care. It didn't work because my mom lived 3 miles from the hospice and my aunt is in Cleveland and could only come down every now and then, so my mom had control, but it created a lot of tension before and after he died.
For days before and after he died, the aunt showed no emotion and just sat by herself reading their manual. (I forget what it's called) I think Mary Baker Eddy was the founder and she wrote up this book that they're all supposed to follow.
Just a ridiculous religion.
Before this goes ANY farther, I am not advocating this religion. Far from it. I know little about it. Just reading stories about the issues of the day and a link took me there. I made the point about The CSM because Freeze went off about another post I made taken from it. I thought it was a good story. Here is some info about it, that I also found interesting. Some consider Pulitzer prizes to be of some worth, and the irony in the CSM being awarded them is interesting:
From the Website>>> Why does the Christian Science church publish a newspaper?
One answer might be found in a story the Monitor's Washington bureau chief, David Cook, told in a talk he gave several years ago:
?Consider this case. It is 1907. An elderly New England woman finds herself being targeted by Joseph Pulitzer's New York World. She is 86 years old and holds some unconventional religious beliefs that she expounds in a book. The book becomes a bestseller, making her wealthy and a well-known public figure.
The New York World decides she is incapable of managing her own affairs and persuades some of her friends and her two sons to sue for control of her estate.
Although Boston and New Hampshire newspapers and major wire services interview this person and find her competent, the New York World is unrelenting. The lady in question finally is taken to court where the case against her is dropped.
And the next year this woman, Mary Baker Eddy, founds The Christian Science Monitor.
Given her experience with the press, it is not all that surprising that she sets as the Monitor's goal ?to injure no man, but to bless all mankind.? In one of life's little ironies, Joseph Pulitzer went on to endow the Pulitzer prizes for journalistic excellence. And Mrs. Eddy's newspaper went on to win five Pulitzers so far. [Since Dave gave this talk, the Monitor won a sixth Pulitzer ? the 1996 prize for international reporting, and a seventh Pulitzer in 2002 for editorial cartooning.]
From the Website>>> Why does the Christian Science church publish a newspaper?
One answer might be found in a story the Monitor's Washington bureau chief, David Cook, told in a talk he gave several years ago:
?Consider this case. It is 1907. An elderly New England woman finds herself being targeted by Joseph Pulitzer's New York World. She is 86 years old and holds some unconventional religious beliefs that she expounds in a book. The book becomes a bestseller, making her wealthy and a well-known public figure.
The New York World decides she is incapable of managing her own affairs and persuades some of her friends and her two sons to sue for control of her estate.
Although Boston and New Hampshire newspapers and major wire services interview this person and find her competent, the New York World is unrelenting. The lady in question finally is taken to court where the case against her is dropped.
And the next year this woman, Mary Baker Eddy, founds The Christian Science Monitor.
Given her experience with the press, it is not all that surprising that she sets as the Monitor's goal ?to injure no man, but to bless all mankind.? In one of life's little ironies, Joseph Pulitzer went on to endow the Pulitzer prizes for journalistic excellence. And Mrs. Eddy's newspaper went on to win five Pulitzers so far. [Since Dave gave this talk, the Monitor won a sixth Pulitzer ? the 1996 prize for international reporting, and a seventh Pulitzer in 2002 for editorial cartooning.]
Chadman said:
I know. I wasn't saying that you were endorsing the religion. I am agreeing with you that the CSM is a very credible source. Some people around here immediately dismiss a source without knowing anything about it. Like i've said before, it's much easier to be lazy rather than debate anything within the article.
In this case, the right leaning CSM is dismissed by a rightie because of its name.
stevie..
i think bush chose meier to please those who think a woman should replace a woman on the court.
i think bush chose meier to please those who think a woman should replace a woman on the court.
AR182 said:
There's no question that this is the reason that he chose a woman first, but there were at least 3 that were infinitely more qualified and probably more conservative.
His first choice was bizarre, and I guess he wanted to show his loyalty to his friends(Harriet), or whatever, but man.
He thought that he still had all this 'political capital' and that his own party would take his word, but he miscalculated, as usual.
So instead of choosing a replacement that is a woman who is actually qualified and is suitably conservative, he panics because he knows his base is fuming. He chooses a white, conservative male that will appease these people.
He did this very quickly and has talked non-stop for days about the avian bird 'pandemic.'
The dems counter this with calling for a closed session of congress yesterday and eliciting promises from the pubs that they will finally continue the investigation into pre-war intelligence.
Gotta 'love' politics.
kosar...
i believe in being loyal...but bush has done this to a fault.....with the the guy from fema & now meier....cronyism has no place in politics.
i believe in being loyal...but bush has done this to a fault.....with the the guy from fema & now meier....cronyism has no place in politics.
Wednesday, November 02, 2005
By Brit Hume
Now some fresh pickings from the Political Grapevine:
Abortion rights groups are questioning Supreme Court Nominee Samuel Alito's (search) 1991 opinion defending a Pennsylvania law requiring any woman seeking an abortion to notify her spouse, a requirement The New York Times called "outrageous." But polling analysis by the Pew Research Center shows that the public agrees with Alito's position by a margin of nearly 3 to 1.
A 2003 Gallup poll (search) found that 72 percent of Americans supported a law requiring the husband of a married woman to be notified if she decides to have an abortion, results that were nearly identical to polls taken in 1996 and 1992. Democrats supported the provision by a margin of 2 to 1.
Liberal Support
Meanwhile, even some liberal lawyers and judges who know Alito are wholeheartedly supporting his nomination, calling him an impartial jurist. One former clerk who worked on John Kerry's presidential campaign told the Los Angeles Times, "[Alito's] opinions don't demonstrate an ideological slant," while another self-described Democrat says Alito "didn't decide cases based on ideology and his record was not extremely conservative."
And former 3rd Circuit Court Judge Timothy Lewis (search), who had a liberal record on the court, says, "contrary to what the Republican right is saying about him being a 'home run' Alito does not have an agenda."
Carter Contradiction?
Former President Jimmy Carter (search) joined Senate Democrats Wednesday in charging that the administration's pre-war claims that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction "were manipulated at least to mislead the American people into going to war." Promoting his new book on TV Wednesday, Carter said, "I haven't seen proof yet. I think that's what's going to come out. But there are all kinds of allegations which have not been denied."
But just a month before the Iraq invasion, Carter himself, though he opposed the war, told a British paper that Saddam "obviously has the capability and desire to build prohibited weapons and probably has some hidden in his country."
By Brit Hume
Now some fresh pickings from the Political Grapevine:
Abortion rights groups are questioning Supreme Court Nominee Samuel Alito's (search) 1991 opinion defending a Pennsylvania law requiring any woman seeking an abortion to notify her spouse, a requirement The New York Times called "outrageous." But polling analysis by the Pew Research Center shows that the public agrees with Alito's position by a margin of nearly 3 to 1.
A 2003 Gallup poll (search) found that 72 percent of Americans supported a law requiring the husband of a married woman to be notified if she decides to have an abortion, results that were nearly identical to polls taken in 1996 and 1992. Democrats supported the provision by a margin of 2 to 1.
Liberal Support
Meanwhile, even some liberal lawyers and judges who know Alito are wholeheartedly supporting his nomination, calling him an impartial jurist. One former clerk who worked on John Kerry's presidential campaign told the Los Angeles Times, "[Alito's] opinions don't demonstrate an ideological slant," while another self-described Democrat says Alito "didn't decide cases based on ideology and his record was not extremely conservative."
And former 3rd Circuit Court Judge Timothy Lewis (search), who had a liberal record on the court, says, "contrary to what the Republican right is saying about him being a 'home run' Alito does not have an agenda."
Carter Contradiction?
Former President Jimmy Carter (search) joined Senate Democrats Wednesday in charging that the administration's pre-war claims that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction "were manipulated at least to mislead the American people into going to war." Promoting his new book on TV Wednesday, Carter said, "I haven't seen proof yet. I think that's what's going to come out. But there are all kinds of allegations which have not been denied."
But just a month before the Iraq invasion, Carter himself, though he opposed the war, told a British paper that Saddam "obviously has the capability and desire to build prohibited weapons and probably has some hidden in his country."
Democratic Senate leaders Harry Reid (D-NV), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) issued a letter to Vice President Cheney Thursday calling for a "thorough housecleaning" in his office.
The letter notes that senior Cheney aides named in the Libby indictment are still working -- and in fact both have been promoted.
The aides are David Addington (who was promoted to the Vice President's chief of staff) and John Hannah (was promoted to be his National Security Adviser).
Clinton Leads Pirro By 23 Points
A new Strategic Vision (R) poll finds that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) leads Republican Jeanine Pirro, 57% to 34% with 9% undecided.
Betty Ireland was the GOP's second best hope to unseat Byrd (after Capito) has declined to run. Hiram Lewis looks like the best bet to get the nomination. He is a former Iraq soldier and has ran statewide, but lost, before. It looks like Byrd will be safe for 6 more years.
Pataki Tests Waters in California and Iowa
In preparation for a potential 2008 presidential bid, New York Gov. George Pataki (R) is visiting California this week for a three-day fundraising spree before ?heading to Iowa for his third stop there in four months,? reports the New York Daily News. Earlier this month, Pataki was in New Hampshire to help campaign for local Republican candidates.
Biden in Iowa
"The next Republican that tells me I'm not religious, I'm gonna shove my rosary beads down their throat!". That doesn't sound very religious to me, Senator Biden!
Touche
Prosecutor Wants DeLay Judge Removed
"In an unprecedented move," Travis County (TX) District Attorney Ronnie Earle filed a motion "asking a Republican presiding judge to remove himself from the decision about who will be the trial judge in the conspiracy case against Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX), the Austin American Statesman reports.
Earle argued that the judge "should step aside for the same reasons" that the previous judge "was removed from hearing DeLay's case: Both had given political donations."
Crony Watch
From Newsweek: "President Bush last week appointed nine campaign contributors, including three longtime fund-raisers, to his Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, a 16-member panel of individuals from the private sector who advise the president on the quality and effectiveness of U.S. intelligence efforts."
Quote of the Day
"I wish I could share with you the misleading information I personally was provided in September and October of 2002."
-- Former Sen. Tom Dashle (D-SD), quoted by the Chicago Tribune, in a speech that called for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. Daschle heads to Iowa this weekend
Bush Approval Rating Drops Again
"After suffering what was perhaps the worst week of his administration, President Bush's job approval rating has nosedived to a historic low, settling at 39%," a new Zogby America survey shows.
"His poor rating mirrors pessimism people feel about the direction in which the nation is headed. Just 37% said things are going in the right direction, down 8% from less than two weeks ago."
Key finding: "Respondents were sharply divided by age in their opinion of the president. Just 18% of respondents under age 25 said they think Mr. Bush is doing a good job. 44% of those 55 to 69 approved of his overall performance, while 47% of those over age 70 gave him good marks."
The letter notes that senior Cheney aides named in the Libby indictment are still working -- and in fact both have been promoted.
The aides are David Addington (who was promoted to the Vice President's chief of staff) and John Hannah (was promoted to be his National Security Adviser).
Clinton Leads Pirro By 23 Points
A new Strategic Vision (R) poll finds that Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) leads Republican Jeanine Pirro, 57% to 34% with 9% undecided.
Betty Ireland was the GOP's second best hope to unseat Byrd (after Capito) has declined to run. Hiram Lewis looks like the best bet to get the nomination. He is a former Iraq soldier and has ran statewide, but lost, before. It looks like Byrd will be safe for 6 more years.
Pataki Tests Waters in California and Iowa
In preparation for a potential 2008 presidential bid, New York Gov. George Pataki (R) is visiting California this week for a three-day fundraising spree before ?heading to Iowa for his third stop there in four months,? reports the New York Daily News. Earlier this month, Pataki was in New Hampshire to help campaign for local Republican candidates.
Biden in Iowa
"The next Republican that tells me I'm not religious, I'm gonna shove my rosary beads down their throat!". That doesn't sound very religious to me, Senator Biden!
Touche
Prosecutor Wants DeLay Judge Removed
"In an unprecedented move," Travis County (TX) District Attorney Ronnie Earle filed a motion "asking a Republican presiding judge to remove himself from the decision about who will be the trial judge in the conspiracy case against Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX), the Austin American Statesman reports.
Earle argued that the judge "should step aside for the same reasons" that the previous judge "was removed from hearing DeLay's case: Both had given political donations."
Crony Watch
From Newsweek: "President Bush last week appointed nine campaign contributors, including three longtime fund-raisers, to his Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board, a 16-member panel of individuals from the private sector who advise the president on the quality and effectiveness of U.S. intelligence efforts."
Quote of the Day
"I wish I could share with you the misleading information I personally was provided in September and October of 2002."
-- Former Sen. Tom Dashle (D-SD), quoted by the Chicago Tribune, in a speech that called for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Iraq. Daschle heads to Iowa this weekend
Bush Approval Rating Drops Again
"After suffering what was perhaps the worst week of his administration, President Bush's job approval rating has nosedived to a historic low, settling at 39%," a new Zogby America survey shows.
"His poor rating mirrors pessimism people feel about the direction in which the nation is headed. Just 37% said things are going in the right direction, down 8% from less than two weeks ago."
Key finding: "Respondents were sharply divided by age in their opinion of the president. Just 18% of respondents under age 25 said they think Mr. Bush is doing a good job. 44% of those 55 to 69 approved of his overall performance, while 47% of those over age 70 gave him good marks."
Special Election Hurting Schwarzenegger
"By a 55% to 36% margin California voters are disinclined to re-elect Arnold Schwarzenegger to another term as Governor next year," according to a new Field Poll.
Bush Approval Plummets to 35%
"President Bush's job approval has reached the lowest level yet," according to the latest CBS News poll. "Only 35 percent approve of the job he's doing."
"The plunge in poll numbers is another dose of bad news for a White House mired in it. The only recent president lower at this point in their second term was Richard Nixon."
Meanwhile, Vice President Cheney's approval is just 19 percent
Clinton Reels in Big Fish
Lana Moresky, Ohio's "biggest Democratic money maven from 2004,? is ?throwing her financial support behind Sen. Hillary Clinton,? reports the New York Post. ?Clinton staffers insist Moresky is just helping with her 2006 Senate race -- but insiders laughed that off and said the move is the surest sign yet that she's making a run for the White House in 2008.?
"By a 55% to 36% margin California voters are disinclined to re-elect Arnold Schwarzenegger to another term as Governor next year," according to a new Field Poll.
Bush Approval Plummets to 35%
"President Bush's job approval has reached the lowest level yet," according to the latest CBS News poll. "Only 35 percent approve of the job he's doing."
"The plunge in poll numbers is another dose of bad news for a White House mired in it. The only recent president lower at this point in their second term was Richard Nixon."
Meanwhile, Vice President Cheney's approval is just 19 percent
Clinton Reels in Big Fish
Lana Moresky, Ohio's "biggest Democratic money maven from 2004,? is ?throwing her financial support behind Sen. Hillary Clinton,? reports the New York Post. ?Clinton staffers insist Moresky is just helping with her 2006 Senate race -- but insiders laughed that off and said the move is the surest sign yet that she's making a run for the White House in 2008.?
I like this info MC except on their polls it would help if they presented the question and other catagories ie your last paragraph-
"Key finding: "Respondents were sharply divided by age in their opinion of the president. Just 18% of respondents under age 25 said they think Mr. Bush is doing a good job. 44% of those 55 to 69 approved of his overall performance, while 47% of those over age 70 gave him good marks."
Does not say how many disapprove--have no opinion ect.
The 44% and 47%- or more than likely majorities but the way they present it --it would lead one to think just the opposite--correct--out of curiousity did you consider that?--or did you bite?
---and "which Zogby poll are they quoting?? her is most recent i found---
Zogby America Poll. Oct. 29-Nov. 2, 2005. N=854 likely voters nationwide. MoE ? 3.4.
.
"Is your overall opinion of George W. Bush very favorable, somewhat favorable, somewhat unfavorable, or very unfavorable, or you are not familiar enough to form an opinion?"
.
Favorable
Unfavor-
orable
Not
Familiar/
Unsure
%
%
%
10/29 - 11/2/05 47 50 2
10/19-21/05 52 47 1
9/29 - 10/2/05 49 50 2
9/6-7/05 49 50 1
7/26-30/05 53 45 2
6/27-29/05 50 48 1
6/20-22/05 52 47 1
5/23-25/05 53 44 3
4/15-19/05 55 45 1
2/25-27/05 53 46 1
2/14-17/05 56 42 2
1/18-21/05 57 42 1
12/13-15/04 56 42 2
11/16-19/04 58 40 2
8/30 - 9/2/04 54 44 2
8/12-14/04 51 48 1
7/26-29/04 52 47 2
7/6-7/04 56 43 1
5/10-13/04 52 47 1
4/15-17/04 53 45 2
4/1-4/04 56 42 2
1/15-18/04 58 40 3
12/15-17/03 59 37 3
12/4-6/03 58 40 2
11/3-5/03 55 43 2
10/15-18/03 56 42 1
9/22-24/03 58 41 1
9/3-5/03 54 45 1
8/16-19/03 58 40 2
7/16-17/03 57 42 1
6/6-10/03 66 32 2
1/24-26/03 66 33 1
1/4-6/03 68 29 3
7/12-15/02 70 28 3
4/2-4/02 82 17 1
8/28-30/01 58 36 6
7/26-29/01 57 36 7
6/24-26/01 60 36 4
4/23-25/01 63 35 2
3/27-28/01 60 30 10
2/27-28/01 67 28 5
2/9-14/01 64 30 5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Key finding: "Respondents were sharply divided by age in their opinion of the president. Just 18% of respondents under age 25 said they think Mr. Bush is doing a good job. 44% of those 55 to 69 approved of his overall performance, while 47% of those over age 70 gave him good marks."
Does not say how many disapprove--have no opinion ect.
The 44% and 47%- or more than likely majorities but the way they present it --it would lead one to think just the opposite--correct--out of curiousity did you consider that?--or did you bite?
---and "which Zogby poll are they quoting?? her is most recent i found---
Zogby America Poll. Oct. 29-Nov. 2, 2005. N=854 likely voters nationwide. MoE ? 3.4.
.
"Is your overall opinion of George W. Bush very favorable, somewhat favorable, somewhat unfavorable, or very unfavorable, or you are not familiar enough to form an opinion?"
.
Favorable
Unfavor-
orable
Not
Familiar/
Unsure
%
%
%
10/29 - 11/2/05 47 50 2
10/19-21/05 52 47 1
9/29 - 10/2/05 49 50 2
9/6-7/05 49 50 1
7/26-30/05 53 45 2
6/27-29/05 50 48 1
6/20-22/05 52 47 1
5/23-25/05 53 44 3
4/15-19/05 55 45 1
2/25-27/05 53 46 1
2/14-17/05 56 42 2
1/18-21/05 57 42 1
12/13-15/04 56 42 2
11/16-19/04 58 40 2
8/30 - 9/2/04 54 44 2
8/12-14/04 51 48 1
7/26-29/04 52 47 2
7/6-7/04 56 43 1
5/10-13/04 52 47 1
4/15-17/04 53 45 2
4/1-4/04 56 42 2
1/15-18/04 58 40 3
12/15-17/03 59 37 3
12/4-6/03 58 40 2
11/3-5/03 55 43 2
10/15-18/03 56 42 1
9/22-24/03 58 41 1
9/3-5/03 54 45 1
8/16-19/03 58 40 2
7/16-17/03 57 42 1
6/6-10/03 66 32 2
1/24-26/03 66 33 1
1/4-6/03 68 29 3
7/12-15/02 70 28 3
4/2-4/02 82 17 1
8/28-30/01 58 36 6
7/26-29/01 57 36 7
6/24-26/01 60 36 4
4/23-25/01 63 35 2
3/27-28/01 60 30 10
2/27-28/01 67 28 5
2/9-14/01 64 30 5
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
DTB,
I think it's the new one but I could be wrong, but it's dated with today's date!
http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1036
I think it's the new one but I could be wrong, but it's dated with today's date!
http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1036
Thanks MC
While here is no doubt ratings are down its difficult to tell how far--depends a lot how questions are asked and demogaphics of areas polled--and that is not just accurate on one party because both are quilty of sewing figures.
Now some fresh pickings from the Political Grapevine:
Reasons for Ratings?
A new CBS poll (search) shows the president's job approval rating has hit an all time low of 35 percent and 68 percent of respondents tell CBS that the country is on the wrong track. CBS cites the Iraq war, the Libby indictment, and the response to Hurricane Katrina (search) as reasons for the decline, but the poll's weighted sample may be more telling.
Twenty-eight percent of those polled identified themselves as Republicans, compared to 35 percent who said they were Democrats. But CBS dropped the importance of Republican responses even further weighting the sample so that Republican responses counted for only 24 percent of the final results. Thirty-seven percent of voters in last year's election called themselves Republicans, while 37 percent said they were Democrats, and 26 percent called themselves Independents.
While here is no doubt ratings are down its difficult to tell how far--depends a lot how questions are asked and demogaphics of areas polled--and that is not just accurate on one party because both are quilty of sewing figures.
Now some fresh pickings from the Political Grapevine:
Reasons for Ratings?
A new CBS poll (search) shows the president's job approval rating has hit an all time low of 35 percent and 68 percent of respondents tell CBS that the country is on the wrong track. CBS cites the Iraq war, the Libby indictment, and the response to Hurricane Katrina (search) as reasons for the decline, but the poll's weighted sample may be more telling.
Twenty-eight percent of those polled identified themselves as Republicans, compared to 35 percent who said they were Democrats. But CBS dropped the importance of Republican responses even further weighting the sample so that Republican responses counted for only 24 percent of the final results. Thirty-seven percent of voters in last year's election called themselves Republicans, while 37 percent said they were Democrats, and 26 percent called themselves Independents.
