News Is Sandra Day O'Connor's Critique of the GOP Too Late?

[scott1]

I wonder how much money the lobyist payed her to say this?

 

[Cyrus]

I thought Lobbyists buy off congressmen.

 

[scott1]

I guess they by off fromer suprme court judges too.

 

[ComputerGeek]

I wonder how much money the lobyist payed her to say this?

Right, because this could not possibly be her real feelings... nope... hey! anyone see a hole in the sand for my head?

 

[deckart]

Now, you all understand that this is second hand information, right? Subject to being filtered and out of context.

Now, Alito is already doing campus speeches. I happened to overhear one recently on the radio about the infuence of foreign precedence on American courts and his opinions on the matter. So, nothing is preventing a SCJ from speaking their mind while in office.

Anyway...

 

[russ_watters]

How did she say one thing and do another?

Saying that things need to change and then not acting to change them herself - or rather, deriding the change when she herself was the cause (the court becoming more conservative because she left). Its the same as the 'if you don't vote, you can't complain' thing. To complain about something that you could have affected but chose not to is hypocritical.

 

[Astronuc]

. . . but why was she silent thorugh the entire Alito nomination? Why did she say nothing before she left the bench? Why the silence when speaking up could have done good? On one hand she condenms the administration, and on the other she sits idly by, . . .

Well, she is a judge or associate justice of the Supreme Court, and the Alito nomination was a political decision, whereby the president nominated and Congress gave advice and consent.

Anyway, is Sandra Day O'Connor concerned about the dictatorship by the Supreme Court - No! She seems to be concerned about one party controlling both houses of Congress and NOT fulfilling its obligation of 'checks and balances' on the executive branch, as well as the fact that some members of congress seem to be motivated to undermine the role of the Federal and Supreme Courts in protecting the Constitution.

She could not comment on the Executive and Legislative branches of the Federal government, because that would be appear prejudicial with respect to any future actions. However, obviously, she has held those views while in office.

Very interesting developments.