tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post1062615730708655785..comments2023-10-16T07:13:12.123-05:00Comments on A plain blog about politics: Catch of the DayJonathan Bernsteinhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15931039630306253241noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-3900846142038282882012-08-02T22:52:13.618-05:002012-08-02T22:52:13.618-05:00Doesn't anyone remember this article from the ...Doesn't anyone remember this article from the Times last year, noting that the ABA has been giving Obama's nominees (especially minorities and women) a much harder time than they've given previous presidents? http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/23/us/politics/screening-panel-rejects-many-obama-picks-for-federal-judgeships.html?pagewanted=all<br /><br />The upshot is that the ABA had given, by last November, 7.5% of Obama's nominees "unqualified" ratings, and only 2% of both Bush's and Clinton's. Couple that with the fact that Republican Senators have refused to cooperate with the White House in sending up district court nominees, or in sending in blue slips on circuit court nominees. If you don't believe me, check out how many vacancies there are for Texas and tell me that Cornyn and Hutchison have been cooperative, or Google the names Victoria Nourse and Louis Butler for examples of Ron Johnson's obstructionism. <br /><br />If you have to fill your quota of Obama bashing, do it on another issue. Judicial nominations, as this President has done it (with prior vetting by ABA and with consultation with Republican Senators), do not begin and end at the White House. Even more so than the filibuster, the blue slip process has to end to give the White House more autonomy to name nominees and get them a hearing.rayspacenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-49933272534889365062012-08-01T20:02:12.202-05:002012-08-01T20:02:12.202-05:00I just don't think there are good judges willi...I just don't think there are good judges willing to sit through the two-year dead-end Senate process and enough White House staff to manage all the Senate inquiries. Just how much time and money should he waste on this? I don't know.Crissahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13389565751169783614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-47380774253017833292012-08-01T09:37:02.026-05:002012-08-01T09:37:02.026-05:00Obama has been grossly negligent in making nominat...Obama has been grossly negligent in making nominations, but how many more judges would actually have been confirmed in the current 60 votes required for everything environment if he had made nominations for all of them? Not too many, I'd guess. We need to get rid of the routine filibuster so Senate and Presidential elections mean something again. It should be the job of voters not the Senate minority to hold Presidents accountable for bad nominations. I would only allow filibusters for Supreme Court appointments since those are lifetime jobs with an absurd amount of power in the hands of a determined ideologue.Ron E.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-2901015997884459862012-08-01T00:13:24.153-05:002012-08-01T00:13:24.153-05:00The recruitment of judges just isn't the simpl...The recruitment of judges just isn't the simple, complimentary act it once was. The nominee must undergo an anal exam-like vetting, then have everything he or she has ever said twisted out-of-context obnoxiously, then wait for the feckless Senate to actually do its job, all while putting their professional life on hold indefinitely. I think Obama is being very careful with his judicial nominees, probably too careful, but it's somewhat understandable given the current political realities. Why nominate a judge who won't get a vote anyway?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-32423796229009505262012-07-31T22:12:38.600-05:002012-07-31T22:12:38.600-05:00There's a saying in marketing that goes someth...There's a saying in marketing that goes something like: if you have the leading brand in a category, you should never acknowledge your lesser competitors. Perhaps a related thing happens in politics: if a politician owns an equity, s/he should never place that equity up for discussion.<br /><br />For better or worse, Obama seems to have the whole consitutional law nerd thing cornered. Judicial appointments are like a box of chocolates, you never know what you're gonna get ("Paging John Roberts: your office is calling"). <br /><br />If Obama can't enhance his image with an especially savvy appointment, since he already owns that equity, perhaps he is excessively risk-averse in the face of all the ways those appointments can disappoint, thus dragging his law geek cred down with a bad appointment.CSHnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6926413038778731189.post-18696683058952340242012-07-31T17:06:38.884-05:002012-07-31T17:06:38.884-05:00Regarding the lack of noise from interest groups, ...Regarding the lack of noise from interest groups, it seems like part of the problem is that there isn't really a natural constituency to advocate on behalf of this and other process-intense issues. Plenty of people care deeply about gay marriage or the environment or abortion issues, but who gives deeply of their time and money to create a federal judiciary nomination process that runs more smoothly? It's just too wonky and unromantic.<br /><br />Coupled with this is that the obstructionism by Republicans has been, as you say, unprecedented. Whatever constituency might have been there to vocally nudge the president and his party perhaps wasn't prepared for this to even be a fight (though maybe they should have been).Drewnoreply@blogger.com