July 19, 2005
SCOTUS ALERT! Is it Edith Brown Clements or Edith H. Jones?
by Liza Sabater
So this is the buzz over at RedState.org
Something has happened in the past ten minutes. I've had three five (they keep IM'ing) people from the media and conservative think tanks IM to say we're on a wild goose chase -- the conservative think tank people say its an intentional one. According to them, we should not be looking at Edith Clement, but at her cohort on the Fifth Circuit, Edith H. Jones a/k/a the Female Scalia.My money is on Clement still, but it is interesting how, by the time I've finished writing this post seven people have IM'ed to say it is Jones, not Clement.
THE FEMALE SCALIA?!?!?
I have to go and pick up the kids at camp. At DailyKos they're looking at Clement, can someone here look at Jones?
Posted by Liza Sabater in Conservatism, Government, Republicans, SCOTUS, Supreme Court
Permalink |
Comments (2)
| TrackBack (0) | Technorati Cosmos
Trackbacks
Trackback for this post:http://www.culturekitchen.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/3105
The following blogs make reference to this post :
Say it loud, say it proud!
i hope your IM friends are wrong, but just in case:
Edith "Mullah" Jones
Year of birth: 1949
Previous Jobs: bankruptcy lawyer; United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Good news for Big Business: doesn't think people should be able to sue companies for discrimination, doesn't like lawsuits.
Good news for people who hate freedom:
-ruled to put to death a man whose lawyer slept through his trial ("In sum, on this record, we cannot determine whether Cannon slept during a 'critical stage' of Burdine's trial.")
-against affirmative action
-this little Taliban ditty:
The integrity of law, its religious roots, its transcendent quality are disappearing. The first 100 years of American lawyers were trained on Blackstone, who wrote that: 'The law of nature, dictated by God himself, is binding in all counties and at all times; no human laws are of any validity if contrary to this; and such of them as are valid derive all force and all their authority, from this original.' The Framers created a government of limited power with this understanding of the rule of law - that it was dependent on transcendent religious obligation...
It is my fervent hope that this new century will experience a revival of the original [Biblical] understanding of the rule of law and its roots...
Note that she's not bright enough to come up with her own theocratic bullshit. She also cited the movie "Chicago."
She called it "unchristian" to win at any cost (fine), but was citing Kenneth Starr of all people. $10 million to get a guy for lying about a b.j.
She said judicial nominees should be above the law, scoffing that they would be asked if the people working for them a legal residents of this country.
When Jones says "the rule of law," she means the Fourth Branch of Government in the Sky, the All Powerful One.
Good news for normal people: there is none.
2
Comment by: liza at July 19, 2005 06:47 PM
This is awesome, thanks Jami. I just got back from picking up the kids and running errands. I have to do dinner now but will look snoop around more too. I wish I had Lexis-Nexis!


1
Comment by: jami at July 19, 2005 06:38 PM