STILL NO NOMINEE  11:05 am April 21, 2010

by Ken Layne

MUST CREDIT POLICE-LIGHT ANIMATED GIF.BREAKING: WHY WON’T OBAMA NOMINATE ANTI-ABORTIONISTS? Barack Obama just did a LIVE BREAKING video chat with reporters, after a “bipartisan meeting,” and this Barack Obama character didn’t announce his choice for the Supreme Court vacancy, but *did* answer a reporter’s question by saying that he still supports the cardinal sin of probably appointing a pro-choice justice.

Related video

Hola wonkerados.

To improve site performance, we did a thing. It could be up to three minutes before your comment appears. DON'T KEEP RETRYING, OKAY?

Also, if you are a new commenter, your comment may never appear. This is probably because we hate you.


bitchincamaro April 21, 2010 at 11:09 am

Gentlemen, start your filibuster engines.

Redhead April 21, 2010 at 11:09 am

oh em gee, a candidate for justice who supports the constitution and current laws? Whatever will this traitor think of next??!!!

Mild Midwesterner April 21, 2010 at 11:12 am

I’m in favor of using a real litmus test and appointing a chemist.

weejee April 21, 2010 at 11:12 am

Does this mean that Orrin Hatch is off the short list?

JMP April 21, 2010 at 11:13 am


Of course, Republicans appointing only woman-hating anti-choicers is just a desire for a “principled” conservative.

Texan Bulldoggette April 21, 2010 at 11:14 am

[re=561084]bitchincamaro[/re]: Yes, they are going to be dicks no matter whom he picks so I think he should go with Ayers or Rev. Wright. Hey, W nominated his cleaning lady, so why not?

Troubledog April 21, 2010 at 11:14 am

Reg: All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us?

Attendee: Brought peace?

Reg: Oh, peace – shut up! There is not one of us who would not gladly suffer death to rid this country of the Romans once and for all.

freakishlystrong April 21, 2010 at 11:17 am

[re=561084]bitchincamaro[/re]: Shit, bitchin’, he could nominate Raygun’s reanimated corpse and it would still be; vrrroommmm, vrrrrooommmm!

Joshua Norton April 21, 2010 at 11:23 am

So, are the ‘baggers really expecting a Dem. president to move the court further to the right? Okey dokie.

Naked Bunny with a Whip April 21, 2010 at 11:26 am

Isn’t a “pro-choice judge” just a judge who won’t overturn long-established legal precedent for purely personal reasons?

Katydid April 21, 2010 at 11:28 am

If he nominated himself, the GOP wouldn’t realize the implications.

norbizness April 21, 2010 at 11:29 am

I don’t trust judges who believe that Marbury v. Madison and the principle of judicial review is good and/or settled law. That sort of Enlightenment-era judicial activism cannot be countenanced by musket-wielding Articles of Confederation fanatics.

mumblyjoe April 21, 2010 at 11:29 am

Remember, judges only count as “activist judges” if they aren’t willing to go against decades of jurispurdence to overturn landmark cases. That’s the definition. Activist== unwilling to overturn existing the law of the land.

People either need to come up with a new fucking word for that, or actually come clean and rename themselves the Orwell party.

Spike April 21, 2010 at 11:30 am

If Obama loves abortions so much, why doesn’t he marry one?

JMP April 21, 2010 at 11:33 am

[re=561104]norbizness[/re]: My problem is all those activist judges who somehow have gotten the crazy idea that the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

geminisunmars April 21, 2010 at 11:34 am

[re=561085]Redhead[/re]: “a candidate for justice who supports the constitution and current laws?” = activist judge

llibra April 21, 2010 at 11:35 am

I think we should start calling it “pro-freedom” instead of “pro-choice.”

anonymousryan April 21, 2010 at 11:39 am

[re=561107]Spike[/re]: He got elected President of one.

Katamaran April 21, 2010 at 11:42 am

So does this help Robert Bork?

Baldar T Flagass April 21, 2010 at 11:42 am

[re=561093]Troubledog[/re]: Um, well, one…

Cicada April 21, 2010 at 11:46 am

[re=561114]llibra[/re]: Free the fetuses from the oppressive nanny-womb state!

SayItWithWookies April 21, 2010 at 11:48 am

On a related note, I think it would be a great and historic step towards the legitimizing of slavery if it were to be reinstituted by an African-American. Sort of a Nixon-to-China thing. If our president isn’t even considering such daring ideas, it shows he’s willing to let ideology take precedence over innovative solutions to this nation’s economic problems.

Yes You Can Own A Piece of History April 21, 2010 at 11:48 am

[re=561120]Baldar T Flagass[/re]: Reg: Oh, yeah, yeah, there’s one. But otherwise, we’re solid.

Gumboz1953 April 21, 2010 at 11:55 am

So, how about this: I think we should stick litmus paper in the nominee’s rectum and see if it turns pink or blue. Blue is okay. Pink is — well, gay.

germansteel April 21, 2010 at 11:58 am

A bumper sticker suggestion for my fave candidate: “Give SCOTUS Wood.”

HipHopOpotamus April 21, 2010 at 12:00 pm

Next Headline on Politico:

President takes his time deciding on a SCOTUS candidate: Is Obama’s confidence shaken after the Tea Party rolled into Washington less than a week ago?

A source wishing to remain anonymous has informed Politico’s top writing staff that this may indeed be the present state of the union. President Obama in the past week has been prone to escaping from meetings and at least on one occasion, been overheard crying in the bathroom.

Roger Williams hates your ways April 21, 2010 at 12:02 pm

[re=561098]Joshua Norton[/re]: Sorry, but it looks like Obama WILL move the court further to the right. That doesn’t mean he’s going to be appointing a wingnut, but it looks like his nominee will definitely be further to the right than Stevens. You know Obama, “Mr. Centrist.” Can’t go about pleasing the progressives even once, no no no!

WhatTheHeck April 21, 2010 at 12:04 pm

God will heap ash upon our heads for this because he is for only some parts of the constitution.
See, that volcano in Iceland is the abortion-busting volcano. God has spoken by venting.

gurukalehuru April 21, 2010 at 12:06 pm

[re=561132]HipHopOpotamus[/re]: Hey, there’s got to be a time limit here. I mean, look how long he took just to get the little girls a dog.

Accordion-o-rama April 21, 2010 at 12:07 pm

God, with Scalia, Thomas and Alito there are enough abortions on the court already.

rafflesinc April 21, 2010 at 12:10 pm

Time to break out the siren bar. Crist is going rogue

Reliable sources informed me today that embattled Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, whose early lead in his US Senate Republican primary race against former Florida House Speaker Marco Rubio has essentially reversed itself in the polls, is preparing to announce sooner rather than later that he will leave the GOP and continue his run for Senate as an independent. Sources add that the speech Crist will use in his announcement is now being drafted.

Snarkalicious April 21, 2010 at 12:33 pm

[re=561095]freakishlystrong[/re]: Y’know, I brought this up over at Kos, and the reception was not so warm, so I’ll bring it here and give it a shot. How about Zombie Strom Thurmond? Now amongst the undead, the changed nature of his fondness for the flesh of the common negress would allow him to skate past an Eric Cantor challenge with a wink and a nod.

El Pinche April 21, 2010 at 12:33 pm

Oh yeah, well I overrule your siren and Ken’s gay ass siren with the premiere opening of Obama-themed sex club in Shanghai.. This should be a 20 ft siren with lights bright enough to melt lead and human souls.

Back to Crist, this should be interesting. The new wave conservatives (“tea party”) will surely now pick Crist since they’re all independenty n stuff, right?

bitchincamaro April 21, 2010 at 12:48 pm

[re=561114]llibra[/re]: “Hoo-ha friendly”?

Jim89048 April 21, 2010 at 12:51 pm

[re=561146]rafflesinc[/re]: Oooh, that’s gonna give McCain sadness, since he says he’ll only support republicans. Unless it’s Lieberman, he’ll make an exception for Lieberman.

El Pinche April 21, 2010 at 12:56 pm

[re=561192]Jim89048[/re]: Wait, no way. Walnutz is a Maverick.

GOPCrusher April 21, 2010 at 1:30 pm

Obviously the only logical selection, must be Hugo Chavez.

Lionel Hutz Esq. April 21, 2010 at 1:38 pm

IF he isn’t going to appoint an activist, right-wing judge, why the hell did he become president in the first place?

TakingAmes April 21, 2010 at 1:48 pm

[re=561098]Joshua Norton[/re]: Why not, everybody else has.

Mr Blifil April 21, 2010 at 2:16 pm

[re=561171]Snarkalicious[/re]: I’ve brought this up here before too, perhaps in response to you. I would love to see Strom Thurmond’s half-black daughter-out-of-wedlock nominated. It would fulfill so many functions all at once, with the possible exception of the whole “upholding the Constitution” thing.

Extemporanus April 21, 2010 at 2:30 pm

[re=561142]gurukalehuru[/re]: The brouhaha or Bo’s “wise cachorro” comment nearly cost him the nomination.

gossipgirl April 22, 2010 at 10:34 am

[re=561146]rafflesinc[/re]: I can’t wait to see this nonsense play out. I really hope Crist bitchslaps Rubio back to the Hell that he came from, which really may happen given that Rubio wants to eliminate Social Security and Medicare. In FLORIDA.

gossipgirl April 22, 2010 at 10:38 am

[re=561135]Roger Williams hates your ways[/re]: Well, Stevens was more liberal then like, anybody, now, except maybe Nancy Pelosi and Dennis Kucinich. The fact that he didn’t give a crap what any of these morons thought helped a lot too. I’m guessing for a center left nominee, but it could be a true centrist. But, not like it matters, unless he nominates Rick Santorum, the GOP will fillbuster it anyway.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: