(2009-05-01) — As speculation runs rampant about who President Barack Obama will pick to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice David Souter, two long-time associates of the president have downplayed rumors that their names might be on the president’s short list.
William Ayers, a Chicago educator and Jeremiah Wright, Mr. Obama’s former pastor, each denied they had been in recent contact with the White House.
“While I have been a vocal advocate of justice for years,” said Rev. Wright, “I’m enjoying my retirement, traveling around, and spreading the good news of God’s condemnation of America. I’m certainly qualified for the high court, and I already have the wardrobe, but these rumors are premature.”
Meanwhile, Mr. Ayers, who exploded onto the national scene in the 1960s and 70s, and has intimate knowledge of the legal system, said he’s “too busy preparing youth to live in the new America to mull a court appointment at this time.”
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said it’s unlikely that the president would appoint either Mr. Ayers or Rev. Wright, “since he knows many other similarly-qualified candidates with less name recognition.”
57 responses so far ↓
1 FM - VRWC (founding member - vast right wing conspiracy) // May 1, 2009 at 9:08 am
“exploded onto the national scene…” You kill me!
2 camojack // May 1, 2009 at 9:14 am
They should go to court all right…as defendants.
3 Pseudo-Polymath » Blog Archive » Friday Highlights // May 1, 2009 at 9:18 am
[...] Heh. [...]
4 woodnwheel // May 1, 2009 at 9:18 am
Another excellent post, Scott!
Interesting WV: public’s scholars
5 Stones Cry Out - If they keep silent… » Things Heard: e65v5 // May 1, 2009 at 9:19 am
[...] Heh. [...]
6 boberinyetagain // May 1, 2009 at 9:46 am
“exploded on the scene”…funny guy Scott
7 boberinyetagain // May 1, 2009 at 9:48 am
Souter should have sold that seat…what a fool!
8 Hawkeye // May 1, 2009 at 11:29 am
spreading the good news of God’s condemnation of America.
Too funny Scott.
9 woodnwheel // May 1, 2009 at 11:34 am
boberinyetagain re. #7: LOL!
10 Fred Sinclair // May 1, 2009 at 11:47 am
Into everyone’s life a little humor must fall (or we’d all be even nuttier than we already are)
Thank you Mr. Ott for this satire it’s too close to reality as I’m sure these wiseacres are on his short list.
One list they probably are NOT on would be God’s “Book of Life”, of course Saul wasn’t either until he met Jesus in the road to Damascus. A similar experience by the B.O./William Ayers/Jeremiah Wright triumvirate would rock the world!
Additional funny by Mikey: “I played a totally blank audio tape last night at full blast! The mime living next door went berserk.”
11 Hawkeye // May 1, 2009 at 1:02 pm
Great article HERE about the wishful thinking of Dems.
12 boberinyetagain // May 1, 2009 at 2:35 pm
At least they’re thinking…
13 boberinyetagain // May 1, 2009 at 2:36 pm
Sorry, couldn’t resist…
14 boberinyetagain // May 1, 2009 at 2:40 pm
Seriously though, present evidence that he said something meaningful that led to the thwarting of something meaningful and we’ll have another look at the situation…vague references to something or other that may or may not have been an actual plan won’t cut it. And, even with concrete examples it’ll still be a “we’ll see” situation…was this learned on the first, the third..the 180th waterboarding session? One does wonder why that one was the charm…could it be that he made something up hoping to stop the abuse? Yes, that does seem possible…were bad people arrested…tried…convicted of something?
15 boberinyetagain // May 1, 2009 at 2:41 pm
Oh, that’s right…we don’t do “tried” of “convicted”…we just hold em…forever…
16 R.A.M. // May 1, 2009 at 3:53 pm
Didn’t they take Souter’s house through eminate domain? Maybe Ayres is getting him a deal on a retirement home in Chicago?
I hear he has “connections”!
17 onlineanalyst // May 1, 2009 at 6:11 pm
We would probably get more Constitutionally sound jurisprudence from Judge Judy than from any grievance-mongering candidate that Ackbar would nominate. Justice is supposed to be blind, but the Dems insist that it be determined by special interests.
Good article, Hawkeye.
18 onlineanalyst // May 1, 2009 at 6:23 pm
One of the finest legal minds on counterterrorism, Andy McCarthy respectfully declines a blatant window-dressing invitation from Ackbar.
As Ed Morrissey observes, Obama and Holder are better candidates for disbarment, given their politicization and innuendoes of criminality in attorneys offering legal counsel which simply reflects policy positions. Obama and Holder are playing a dangerous game in perverting the law.
19 Laughing@You // May 1, 2009 at 7:00 pm
OLA,
Is that the National Review’s Andrew McCarthy?
Still, it was nice that they asked him (if they did).
“As Ed Morrissey observes, Obama and Holder are better candidates for disbarment, given their politicization and innuendoes of criminality in attorneys offering legal counsel which simply reflects policy positions.”
Really, well tell that legendary “Legal Eagle” it’s innuendos, not “innuendoes”, will yuh?
Everthink?
20 mindknumbed kid // May 1, 2009 at 7:48 pm
When we gwt where they are taking us, will anybody want to be there? Ah yes, it’s SCOTUS appointing time in DC. I wonder who they will pick to aid in the decline of our nation? It really doesn’t matter, once all of the spending and inflation hits in about 18 months, the “Great Depression” will look like good times.
21 onlineanalyst // May 1, 2009 at 7:51 pm
Darlin’,
That was my own spelling error because, even though the word didn’t look correct to me, I was too lazy to look it up. ( I guess that you could call it my “potato” gaffe.) Sometimes I just don’t have my glasses on, and the typos appear (magically). The Captchas then become even more troublesome. You wouldn’t think that I would be so vain and all, being clad in my pajamas for witty posting. BTW You might want to proofread your last post on the prior thread for accurate spelling. (You’re welcome.)
And speaking of gaffes that prevent a person from winning the Vice Presidency: What in the world do you call the collection of bloopers of Biden’s. Even the inept Gibbs has to explain what Biden meant. Man, this administration is spreading the Biden so thickly that a citizen has to watch where he steps.
22 onlineanalyst // May 1, 2009 at 8:06 pm
What an eye-opening radio interview between Judge Napolitano and Major Garrett: http://homepage.mac.com/mkoldys/blog/bpb262887037.html
WV: Energy mortar
This is what Waxman and Markey are using to cement a stagnant economy.
23 Darthmeister // May 1, 2009 at 11:32 pm
SCOTUS Justice David Souter is retiring? GOOD RIDDANCE!
This man betrayed founding original intent numerous times … and was quite proud of it. Typical judicial activist and liberal oligarch pressing for outcome-based “justice”.
24 Maggie // May 2, 2009 at 9:23 am
Online,
What really frightens me is the thought that if OB is unable to proceed as President, Biden would be next in line.
What terrorizes me then is that Pelosi would be VP and next in line……and you know Biden would suddenly be diagnosed with Alz.or a form of dementia.
25 Left Coast-Right Mind // May 2, 2009 at 12:55 pm
Why can’t President Government appoint himself to the Supreme Court? He already knows how to run the banks, health care and the auto industry…why not give the judicial system a whirl? Just set up a teleprompter in front of his seat on the bench, and he’d be set for life (literally). Maybe Michelle could arm-wrestle John Roberts for the Chief Justice spot.
Of course with this added responsibility, he might have to shave a couple hours off his weekly [White] House party schedule…but he did say that sacrifices would need to be made.
26 Newsman // May 2, 2009 at 2:39 pm
You guys conveniently forget that your buddy Bush appointed this guy.
So, no President can say for sure what he is really going to get from anybody he gets in the Court !
27 RedPepper // May 2, 2009 at 2:40 pm
I’d like to mention someone who IMHO is an obvious candidate for this nomination - someone who deserves a spot on any Democratic president’s short list - former Secretary of Labor Robert B. Reich.
28 Left Coast-Right Mind // May 2, 2009 at 2:55 pm
RedPepper
Re #27
I was thinking more along the lines of Sandy Berger. Of course this would mean that the other justices would need to make sure that he wasn’t stuffing their briefs down his briefs.
29 Newsman // May 2, 2009 at 4:14 pm
Now that is a good one red Pepper
!
30 debass // May 2, 2009 at 5:26 pm
White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said it’s unlikely that the president would appoint either Mr. Ayers or Rev. Wright, “since he knows many other similarly-qualified candidates with less name recognition.”-who haven’t paid their taxes.
31 Darthmeister // May 3, 2009 at 10:29 am
Ayers or Wright would make great Supreme Court Justices with their views of “outcome justice”. They’d clean America up in five years by proving the constitutionality of liberal-run re-education camps that would be effective in convincing the rest of us rebels that Obama is indeed Messiah and socialism is good for America.
32 Darthmeister // May 3, 2009 at 10:35 am
BTW, PJTV does an excellent job of fisking the kool-aid swilling Jon Stewart who actually believes President Truman was a “war criminal” for dropping the A-bomb (not to mention all the firebombing by LeMay’s B-29s that killed ten times more Japanese) on Japan.
Of course, like the good leftist that he is, Stewart is an historically ignorant knave who vomits the leftard mantra which attempts to blame America for defending itself againt the real tyrants and terrorists.
33 Darthmeister // May 3, 2009 at 10:38 am
Newsman, did you bother to read the link I posted about Souter the stealth liberal? Sheesh, it undercuts your ignorant snarkiness completely about Bush appointing this judicial chameleon.
34 Laughing@You // May 3, 2009 at 2:39 pm
A few hackneyed old barbs over and over, and over again.
They didn’t work for you before the election, and they only work now among those who have nothing else to laugh about.
Give Berger a break will you, he did his time!
I know you only bring him up, because, like children, you hope to deflect attention from the Scooter, and Dumbyah’s commutation of his just sentence.
That’s ok, before it’s over, Scooter will still drop a dime on ol’ shoot ‘em in the face, “Gravy Boat Dick”.
Darthmeister, is the attendant between rounds, or what?
Everthink?
35 Laughing@You // May 3, 2009 at 2:50 pm
Congrats D’meister,
That was the 1000th time you have used the phrase “kool-aid swilling”.
I know, “if you have a good horse ride it” and all that, but that swayback old nag shouldn’t have been ridden in the first place, you cruel “buzzard”!
Everthink?
36 Laughing@You // May 3, 2009 at 3:19 pm
“SCOTUS Justice David Souter is retiring? GOOD RIDDANCE!”
Just a word of caution, try not to get all hung up on that “GOOD RIDDANCE!” thing as well. I can see where you could wind up using it more than “kool-aid swilling”.
Everthink?
37 mindknumbed kid // May 3, 2009 at 4:10 pm
re#27 - RDR arrr!
38 mindknumbed kid // May 3, 2009 at 4:12 pm
re#34 - It’s a good thing we had a Bush administration, wouldn’t be anyone to investigate or prosecute in the whole wide world otherwise!
39 Newsman // May 3, 2009 at 4:24 pm
Darthman - what kills your arguments is your constant need to use of one or more insults in your presentation of a point. In this instance it’s “ignorant snarkiness” ! You are apparently incapable of making your case with an opponent without first insulting that person !
Try letting your arguments stand on their own two feet for a change !
And what is going to kill your beloved republican party is this transformation from “Reagan’s big tent” philosophy to exclusive hard boiled conservatism, as pointed out by the recent republican/democratic convert.
There are simply too few extreme conservatives about to support a national party of significance.
40 mindknumbed kid // May 3, 2009 at 4:30 pm
If we want an “anything goes” as long as we can keep our party (fun times, not political) going, we could just choose to join the “D” party.
41 Darthmeister // May 4, 2009 at 8:58 am
Nice out, Newsman, won’t work. The argument stands. You’ve demonstrated yourself to be time and time again a person of ignorance and your comment was an attempt at snarkiness. Truth hurts, doesn’t it? In essence your own “argument” is insulting because it paints me as a liar and you haven’t the guts to call me that to my
facekeyboard. If the ad hominem fits, embrace it Newsman.It’s no longer a laughing matter. Obamamessiah and his Obamabots are a threat to this free republic.
42 boberinyetagain // May 4, 2009 at 11:32 am
Are the concentration camps ready yet? Have you registered?
Have they collected your guns yet? Have you registered?
Have they converted to world currency yet? Have you locked in your exchange rate yet?
Has a 3% proposed tax rate increase been officially declared socialism yet?
Has any sort of reality returned to the minds of Glen Beck/El-Rushbo et al…yet…?
We’ll keep smiling and saying time and again…”good doggy”…whilst looking for the stick…cause you see, arguments based on some semblance of reality are more convicing than “everything has gone straight to heck and there’s no way we’ll ever recover”…because that’s just not true so…when you begin and base your entire argument on things that A) aren’t happening and B) will never happen…well, the sane among us just have to wonder…but not for long…
43 boberinyetagain // May 4, 2009 at 11:41 am
Hank, that article proves my point perfectly. “Arguments” such as those are lunacy, completely transparent/biased/utter nonsense that more than 60% of Americans don’t agree with even a little and I’m betting the % is far higher because 60+% approve of what Pres is up to but I’ll be 30% more somewhat or completely disagree with that article you cite on one or (almost surely) all points for the reasons I just pointed out. They either didn’t/won’t happen or were/are so very different in fact than in fantasy (that article) as to be rendered idiotic/laughable
44 boberinyetagain // May 4, 2009 at 12:14 pm
Hank and company…might as well begin the list of why this heralds certain doom for the republic…we know it’s coming so save us the suspense and just spit “it” out…please finish this sentence…
“we’re doomed if this comes to pass because…”
President Obama calls for changes to the tax code, eliminating rules that allow businesses and wealthy individuals to defer paying taxes on overseas profits.
45 boberinyetagain // May 4, 2009 at 12:27 pm
No wonder you “believe” these idiotic notions…your “team” actually thought these were good ideas…holy cow…
Rest easy, this President seems a fair bit more sane than the guy that dreamed this stuff up…
For those who may have difficulty believing the government would actually suspend the Constitution, impose martial law, and round-up citizens, consider Bush era memos issued by the Justice Department. “The Justice Department secretly authorized President George Bush to use the military inside the United States to snoop on, raid and even kill citizens in order to fight terrorism without regard to the Fourth or Fifth Amendment, according to a Oct 23, 2001 memo released by the Obama Administration Monday,” reports Ryan Singel for Wired News. The memo was written in part by John Yoo, a deputy assistant attorney general best known for penning a memo authorizing government agents to torture suspected terrorists, including crushing the genitals of children in order to get suspected terrorists to confess.
Your collective paranoia makes FAR more sense now…
46 boberinyetagain // May 4, 2009 at 12:50 pm
Not unlike your intmate knowledge of the WMD’s way back when…since we provided them to begin with they MUST be there somewhere…or not
47 Laughing@You // May 4, 2009 at 4:27 pm
Where are y’all?
Did Halle Bop come back for yuh?
Hellooo out there …, don’t forget to swing by Crawford and The Crypt. Don’t let Darthmeister near the Death Ray Gun, and try to keep MNK away from the other space aliens, and, of course, don’t let Jameson handle any matches!
If we never see another Neo-Con, you can assume the world will be prosperous, and at peace!
Everthink?
48 mindknumbed kid // May 4, 2009 at 6:53 pm
Me thinks the world’s quest for peace begins with, and ends with, throwing aside Christ. They don’t mind a good measure of religion, just so long as it is Christ-less.
Christianity is repressive to them, it has absolutes in its morality. The world is clamoring for morality of their own design. That is where this is all heading, and the blind are led by the blind in the media.
John 3:19
And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
They just want the light turned off.
49 Newsman // May 4, 2009 at 7:52 pm
Nice try Darth but it doesn’t take any guts to call you a liar, but, why should I? That is not the point.
The point, as you well know is that you use insults as a means to cover up the frailities of your argument.
You are incapable of an argument or discussion without the use of insults and derisive remarks.
Too bad !
I take great satisfaction in having put one over on you anyway. I am the Saddam from long ago - ha ha !
Goodby scrappleface !
50 Laughing@You // May 5, 2009 at 12:03 am
“They just want the light turned off.”
And then came Ronald Reagan. WingNuts everywhere beheld the light of his continence. He told them greed was good, need was bad.
He made the rich to steal even more, and to ignore the needy because the way of the world was based on “the survival of the fittest”, and the weak were unrighteous, and morally unequal to conservatives.
He taught us “Trees pollute” and “Catchup is a vegetable”, and he taught us about “Trickle Down”, and “Voodoo Economics”. He that it was alright to violate the law and lie about it if you are a Republican.
Where would we be today if it weren’t for the great leader, the god of all Republicans.
Would our economy be in shambles? Would Saddam have even come to power without him?
How Reagan Armed Saddam with Chemical Weapons
http://www.counterpunch.org/dixon06172004.html
Everthink?
51 onlineanalyst // May 5, 2009 at 12:38 am
FWIW The results are hardly surprising. People who don’t have a vested stake in their government via taxation don’t care how that money is spent.
52 Laughing@You // May 5, 2009 at 1:16 am
“People who don’t have a vested stake in their government via taxation don’t care how that money is spent.”
Every American has a vested stake in their government, regardless of taxes.
You are not an investor, you are a citizen!
But, you are no greater a citizen than the poorest among us!
I certainly did not like the way the Bush Administration spent my money; but worse, I hate the way they tarnished The United States!
You got your way through eight years of waste and mismanagement! Much of today’s spending is required by the debts and obligations you helped create!
Now, bring your money back from the Cayman Islands, and pay your taxes, or move there! If you prefer, the IRS will be happy to make you wish you had.
Everthink?
53 onlineanalyst // May 5, 2009 at 10:03 am
Pitch your taxation diatribe to Rangel, Geithner, Daschle etal, L@Y.
Even that VP clown Biden says that it is “patriotic” to pay taxes. Thus, the “poor” should demonstrate their love of country with perhaps a sliding scale of monetary committment, not a payoff for being nonproductive. (And I am not talking about the disabled or the aged here.) Everyone benefits from the services that taxes provide. Unfortunately, those who pay none demand the most in support. Perhaps if they paid some of the freight, they would think twice about asking the government to for them what they could do for themselves or do for others..
Take a cue from California, which has taxed and regulated its most productive citizens and businesses out of the state, which has bankrupted its treasury with a welfare system that rewards non-citizens, which has imposed such absurd standards of eco-evangelism that development of energy sources has denied its citizens affordable, dependable heat and light.
I certainly do not like Obama’s cuts in defense, which are a primary responsibility of the federal government.
The waste and mismanagement of the current adminstration in three months, as well as its voracious grasp into economic sectors by imposing debt that will never be absolved into the future, cannot be tolerated.
The United States was never tarnished except in the eyes of those who resented her power, her prosperity, and her good will. Unfortunatelyfor out country, Obama is doubling down on snubbing our allies and raising up our enemies.
54 boberinyetagain // May 5, 2009 at 11:39 am
An increase in defense spending does not qualify as a “cut”.
Yet another argument that makes no point whatever but gets bandied about nearly as much as the 3% tax hike amounting to socialism.
Again I urge you to ground your “arguments” in some semblance of fact…then we’ll have a looky see
55 boberinyetagain // May 5, 2009 at 11:41 am
As is this…”Take a cue from California, which has taxed and regulated its most productive citizens and businesses out of the state”
No, no they haven’t so again…try basing an argument in reality…I recall when that was your entire approach…where did that go?
56 boberinyetagain // May 5, 2009 at 11:45 am
In fact Silicon Valley is no longer allowed to import the best and brightest from around the world, too few visas to go around.
Approx 1/3 of all high tech workers there are immigrants…
California has approx the 7th largest economy in the WORLD…not quite deserted yet…
57 Laughing@You // May 5, 2009 at 1:08 pm
OLA,
“Pitch your taxation diatribe to Rangel, Geithner, Daschle etal,”
Don’t you think there should be a trial before you condemn? Crimes will be punished according to law, not your pleasure!
How many Repugs are now in jail? How many are headed there, and how many will be hanged as war criminals? It is not my place to decide, but it will be decided!
“The waste and mismanagement of the current adminstration in three months, as well as its voracious grasp into economic sectors by imposing debt that will never be absolved into the future, cannot be tolerated.”
This statement is completely without basis. What does “will not be tolerated” mean? If it means hostile action against the duly elected government of The United States. “Bring it!” Bring your army of Timothy McVieghs. You can sneak up and destroy somethings, for a while, but you cannot impose your will by force, or coercion.
“The United States was never tarnished except in the eyes of those who resented her power, her prosperity, and her good will. Unfortunately for out country, Obama is doubling down on snubbing our allies and raising up our enemies.”
Come out of your cellar. It may be true you don’t think so, but the world celebrated the end of Bush, as much as the beginning of Obama!
“I certainly do not like Obama’s cuts in defense, which are a primary responsibility of the federal government.”
Actually, that is not true! Gates does not disapprove of the military budget, so why should you “General”?
Everthink?
You must log in to post a comment.