Redstate

Jones is preferable, big time.

That being said, I'm tuning out until I get back from the Nationals game tonight.  Then the hard work starts.

Let it be, dear Lord, in your mercy!

and then nominate Jones.

Anyway, I read all the conservative blogs (I'm a writer stuck at my computer all day) and you OWN the SCOTUS story, Erick.

Good job, if for the sheer entertainment value alone.

If it's Clement, I won't be upset.  If it's Jones, I'll be thrilled.

Do you really think W would let the libs know ahead of time?  And do you really think he would appoint someone who in anyway (from her ideology to her hair style) satisfied the loony left.  THis nomination is not about satisfiying, and it is about more than fulfilling a promise.  It is about exploiting the left for being the facists that they are.  Thus the more enraged they are the better.  Bush understands the nonsense spewed out here will be replayed over and over and over again come time for those 06's midterms.  Eventhough things dont look great now remeber elections are won in novemeber and not 18 months before.  7 dems up for reelection in red states. I wanted Janice Rogers Brown but ill take Jones.  

I want to keep that sticker on my car.  Don't make me take it off.

than Clement as a Bush pick. I was/am struggling trying to understand why Bush would use this pick to nominate someone other than a CLEAR Thomas/Scalia clone. Particularly because this may be the strongest political climate for the President to make a pick. (Next year is an election year and 2007...)

Erick-- we know you're not in conversation with the President, so there is no way to be perfect. But you've done great and are the best source on the net for what's going on. My redstate participation has risen as a result.

I hope it's Jones, but I think you're right to say Clement is still the favorite.

Erick, here ya go.

"You are da man!"

I have thoroughly enjoyed all this SCOTUS stuff.  It is way better than watching soaps and eating bon-bons.  With Redstate, who needs Desperate Housewives?

Give me Edith II.

If it's Clement, I'll be disappointed.  If it's Jones, I'll be comfortable.  If it's Owen, I'll be thrilled.

You know, I'm just not going to worry about this any longer.  Either of the Ediths will be a sterling choice for conservatives.  (I trust my friends who have vetted Joy Clement.)  And with Gonzales off the short list, all of the others are solid enough for me.

Bush has a pretty good record of telling us what he's going to do, then keeping his promises.  He said, over and over, that he will pick justices in the mold of Scalia and Thomas.  I am confident that he will.  I expect to be happy with tonight's announcement, whoever she is.

The siamese-twinning surgery is nearing completion...

I don't understand what the point of such a late-starting "bait and switch" would be. They aren't boosting Jones yet, so there's not advantage in being first out of the gate in shaping public perception. If they really want it to be a surprise that's an odd motivation founded more on glee at the media being wrong than good strategy.

Also, these theories that just happen to be exactly what the people making them want to happen are always suspect. See Democratic theories of result-changing fraud in Ohio and Republican theories of the Clintons' various homicides.

Due to the Rehnquist fiasco I don't really trust your sources or your analysis Erick, but let it be known that if it IS Jones you called it and deserve a lot of credit for being way out in front.

And if you ARE right I'm going to be upset mostly because this'll be a horrid and sanctimonious bipartisan mudslinging to have to put up with for a few months...

Who got goosed? The rumor that it was likely Clement didn't really hit until early this morning, virtually no action has been taken by the Democrats, and the media wasn't full out reporting it was Clement. Maybe a small segment -- like my fellow Kossacks who've gone all out with the Clement diaries -- got goslinged, but if it was a coordinated bait and switch it was kind of pointless.

He was first on Clement too, last night. Like I said, he owns the story.

Unless it's, oooh, Roberts :) - but then he'll still get y vote for best scotus coverage.

Erick, are you still hearing the same? Are others batting this down, or continuing to confirm it?

I agree. He consistently has the best reporting and the most of it. He's definately on top of this story, which is (as you note) proven by his "early adoption" of the Clement rumor. The problem is sometimes that means he's reporting incorrect rumors ahead of everyone else. So. I'll wait and see. I certainly didn't mean disrespect, I'm just wary of some of his sources at this point.

Also, unless Arlen Specter is in on the bait and switch -- or SCOTUSblog.SCTnomination.com is wrong -- it looks like Clement. Maybe. We'll see...

Just posted in the last 10 minutes on "The Conservative Voice."

http://www.theconservativevoice.com/ap/article.html?mi=D8BEKE903&apc=90
09

Don't forget I led the way with the O'Connor retirement, partially making up for the Rehnquist rumor, which my source insists is still true.  Heh.

You know, I'm going to stop worrying too.  The thing is, I voted for Bush because I trusted his instincts, and I'm going to start trusting them now.  W is no Poppy Bush (who was a good man, but whose domestic instincts were bad).

the accuracy of the redstate frenzy over Rehnquist, I'm not going to give the O'Connor replacement issue much thought until it happens.  Its not like it won't take weeks/months to get vetted/grilled by the Senate anyway.

No, I'm not slamming Erick who is probably doing everything humanly possible to get good information.  Its just that its not humanly possible to predict the future.   Chances are bush himself doesn't know who he's going to pick yet.

I didn't check the regular news before I posted.

I didn't realize there was a scheduled television broadcast to announce tonight.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000087&sid=a36mU4_Xpsjk&re
fer=top_world_news



July 19 (Bloomberg) -- President George W. Bush has decided on his nominee to succeed retiring U.S. Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor and will announce his choice in a 9 p.m. televised White House speech, spokesman Scott McClellan said.

With that news, I'll go out on an unoccupied limb and say its noone who has yet been mentioned. (Only because all the other limbs have already been claimed)  ;)

Unlike many on this board, I am not a fan of Judge Clement.  As one liberal commentator wrote a few weeks back, "the landmark decisions that Clement has taken part in can fit on a Post-It."  Her paper trail is minute.  All I hear is that "she's a conservative" and "trust us," which is the same garbage I heard right before David Souter was nominated.

Jones is on par with Luttig and Alito as the best-case scenario.  She would be an excellent justice, so I am really hoping that those that are IMing you know what they are talking about.

Cheers,

Rob

You deserve all the credit in the world for somehow knowing all these developments -- even the WRONG ones -- ahead of virtually everyone else on the net. That the media is late with their wrongness is hardly a compliment to the media (in fact, it's pretty obscene that they don't get things first OR right). I think via sheer volume your occasional unreliability adds a certain thrill that gets people reading and excited. So, it's not even a bad thing...

Somebody who's a proud member of American Taliban?  Just look at my cool signature!  ;)

That would make Cold War with Russia look like a simple bushfire...

Picard90,

Redstate.org is an official 527 site dedicated to spreading and promoting a republican/conservative agenda/concepts.

If you blatantly stray too far from that purpose they will ban you outright.  

(What I'm trying to say is you've got to be more subtle to post here).

Read the posting rules

Here

(I hope the link works, the server seems to be having coniptions right now)

I think this is more like a "ban me right now" comment

Jones has been one of the boogeymen (er. . .women) of the left for over fifteen years.  If she's the nominee, it'll definitely be time to get some popcorn and watch the Democrats and their overlords among the interest groups play "My Aneurysm Is Bigger Than Yours!"  ]:-)

Great coverage Erick...

I think there's been a lack of perspective about the supreme court in general though.  Clement is clearly better looking.  

I'm confused by your post.

I haven't insulted the Left or anything like that, I'm also a conservative, a religious conservative to be sure.  I've been a supporter of Republican Party, though I voted for Michael Peroutka of US Constitution Party.

Could you please clarify your post?  Thanks.

My signature was indeed to make fun of the Left's paranoia, that's all.

Facists? Is that like a stoner fascist?

At any rate, who were you calling fascists? Or are you just calling everybody that disagrees with W fascists.  You should be careful when wielding words like that, especially in an era of consolidation of power in one person.

I really, really hope that this can go smoothly, without the need to define "extraordinary."  A nice 90+ confirmation would be somewhat life-affirming.  And perhaps it would increase public faith in politicians.  But probably not.

Calling someone Taleban is like calling yourself a Nazi.  They both were bloody dictators.

So when you associate others around you with that, we don't like it.