Surely Armand will have a brilliant analysis when the announcement is made (especially if it is Judge Clement, as CNN is predicting), however, the timing of this whole thing is driving me nuts. No doubt it is supposed to. I read the analyses in the weekend papers that the administration was delaying to shorten the time for debate. The WaPo Sunday had an analysis of all the debate times of various justices, and how the period the Congress has left for whomever is appointed will fall within the shortest of periods, less than average, less than for Scalia, Bader-Ginsburg or the outlier Thomas. Today the report came that there would be an announcement this afternoon, but the afternoon announcement was that the real announcement was to be at 9pm. 9pm?! Oh yes, prime time for high drama.
Posted by binky at July 19, 2005 01:42 PM | TrackBack | Posted to Law and the CourtsBinky,
I'm confused. You see Bush waiting as late as he did to announce a replacement for O'Connor as a scheme to avoid extended debate, but all the liberal kooks calling in to the morning show on C-Span say he made this decision as early as he did to get the spotlight off of Rove. I hope you don't expect me to believe your theory above theirs just because of some advanced courses in government.
i'm pretty sure this announcement was neither late nor early. enough time for debate. enough time for confirmation prior to commencement of the next court term. that said, all of you folks who were shouting wag the dog at clinton every time he dared to do his job while insinuations about his personal life dogged him really can't cry foul when similar accusations are being leveled at bush for starting the supreme court media circus just in time to save rove's skin (whose lies, by the way, are about the real business of government, not who he f*&ks on his downtime).
Posted by: joshua at July 20, 2005 10:10 PM | PERMALINKWell, there also is the fact that I'm not a liberal kook... ;)
Posted by: binky at July 21, 2005 08:57 AM | PERMALINK