Big Brother Bush: "Listen, Do You Want To Know A Secret?"

The New York Times reports that President Bush secretly lifted some limits on spying in the United States after 9/11 by secretly authorizing the National Security Agency (NSA) to eavesdrop on Americans and others inside the United States to search for evidence of terrorist activity without the court-approved warrants ordinarily required for domestic spying.

The story appears in the New York Times here

The President apparently signed an order in 2002 allowing the NSA to monitor the international telephone calls and international e-mail messages of people inside the United States without warrants (pesky little things they are)

The reason?

To track possible "dirty numbers" linked to Al Qaeda.

So listen to this! - According to the Times: "Some officials familiar with the continuing operation have questioned whether the surveillance has stretched, if not crossed, constitutional limits on legal searches.

Good question.

And this from the Times: "Nearly a dozen current and former officials, who were granted anonymity because of the classified nature of the program, discussed it with reporters for The New York Times because of their concerns about the operation's legality and oversight."

Water cooler conversation at NSA: "Hey, uh, Bob, you think this stuff's legal, chuckle, chuckle?"

The White House asked The New York Times not to publish this article, because "it could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny."

Here's the funny part of the article - you can read the rest for yourself:

"It is not clear how much the members of Congress were told about the presidential order and the eavesdropping program. Some of them declined to comment about the matter, while others did not return phone calls.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense attorney in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please click the link: http://www.tannebaumweiss.com/our_lawyers.php

Florida Governor Bush Says "Sorry" To Innocent Man

Wilton Dedge, once a convicted felon who served 22 years in prison, is today a millionaire, twice over.

He could give a crap.

He was innocent. The Florida Legislature honored his wrongful conviction by writing him a check for 2 million dollars, and today he received a personal visit from Florida Governor Jeb Bush, with an apology. The story is here

He still wants an apology from the prosecutors who convicted him, and publicly stated that although the Governor apologized, it wasn't his fault.

The Governor knew that, and he also knew he didn't have to apologize personally. in writing, or at all.

But this conservative republican governor who is no fan of criminal defendants, and routinely signs bills making sentences tougher and prosecutors jobs easier, believed he, as the steward of the State of Florida, should personally apologize.

Nice Going Jeb.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense attorney in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please click the link: http://www.tannebaumweiss.com/our_lawyers.php

Pardon Me? - Prosecutors Use DNA To Seek "Absolute Pardon"

It's the same old story. Defendant convicted. Defendant proclaims innocence. Cops say right guy. Prosecutors say right guy. DNA says wrong guy. Prosecutors stammer. Cops say still right guy. Motions filed. Prosecutors seek plea to lesser charge and immediate release. Defendant takes plea to avoid prolonged trial.

Or, what happened in Virginia today.

Prosecutors, in the face of DNA clearing 2 wrongly convicted men of rape, sought an "absolute pardon" of both men according to the story here at cnn.com.

They've already served their time, but I trust their lives will be a bit better with the world knowing they served time for nothing.

I wonder how they were convicted? Probably "rock solid" eyewitness testimony.

I have no knowledge of whether Stanley "Tookie" Williams was actually innocent or guilty, but he did say something just prior to his execution that is pertinent to this story.

When asked why he wouldn't apologize for the crimes which he was convicted, he said that a conviction by a jury does not equal guilt.

But I guess if you believe a conviction means guilt, than you believe an acquittal means innocence.

Right?


Right?

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense attorney in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please click the link: http://www.tannebaumweiss.com/our_lawyers.php

The Terminator "Agonizes" Over Tookie

Stanley "Tookie" Williams will not be granted clemency. He will die for the crimes for which he has been convicted.

On any Vegas sports book, that's where my money goes - all if it, in fact.

According to myway.com Actor and California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger said he is "agonizing" over the decision.

That makes me feel good, really.

No one, not even if a fan of the death penalty, should take lightly the power of deciding whether someone lives or dies.

He could have said nothing, or some legal-ese type statement like that he was "reviewing the case and will make the appropriate decision." Instead, he expressed the raw pain of this decision - that while simple to the "eye-for-an-eye crowd," is of epic proportion.

In the end though, even with a strong liberal base in California, Schwarzenegger will decline to grant clemency.

If he does grant clemency, it will be a bold move for a conservative politician. If he doesn't, well, at least he handled it with great debate, something not left to your average girly man.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense attorney in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please click the link: http://www.tannebaumweiss.com/our_lawyers.php

Tom DeLay's Christmas - "Later On, We'll Conspire"

Right of the right-wing Congressman Tom DeLay......had a criminal defense lawyer get him off on a technicality. Fox News has the story here

The conspiracy statute that DeLay was charged under, didn't cover the criminal activity he is alleged to have committed.

Not that he didn't conspire to violate the Texas election law, that the "Conspiracy to Violate Texas Election Law" Statute covers criminal activity occurring after December 2003, after DeLay's alleged behavior.

The prosecutor argued that the laws against conspiracy were on the books, so it didn't matter that the more specific "Conspiracy to Violate Texas Election Law" Statute wasn't in place.

The judge said, "Bah, Humbug."

The judge was right. Delay got off because the law he was charged under did not prohibit what he did. Therefore, he shouldn't have been charged under that statute, and cannot be convicted under that statute.

It's what the public calls "getting off on a technicality."

It's what I call the correct application of the law.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense attorney in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please click the link: http://www.tannebaumweiss.com/our_lawyers.php

999 Executions, And Counting

CNN.com reports here that the 1,000th execution is scheduled for next week.

Hopefully this news will not knock the Jessica Simpson/Nick Lachey split off the front page.

We've executed one person every 10 days since the moratorium was lifted in 1977.

The 1,000th will be 41 year old Robin Lovitt. He was convicted of stabbing a man with scissors during a pool hall robbery in Virginia.

CNN.com opines that "The focus of the debate on capital punishment was once the question of whether it served as a deterrent to crime. Today, the argument is more on whether the government can be trusted not to execute an innocent person."

Pretty gutsy thing to say for a news organization. Gutsy, meaning "liberal" to many.

In comes Thomas Hill, an attorney for a death row inmate in Ohio who recently won a second stay of execution.

Hill says: "We have a criminal system that makes mistakes. If you accept that proposition, that means you have to be prepared for the inevitability that some are sentenced to death for crimes they didn't commit," Hill said. (Author's note: a post on possibly innocent but executed Ruben Cantu appeared previously on the blog. It can be found here)

Mistakes? Thomas!, you're upsetting the establishment. People don't want to be confused with the facts. We may have, and may again, kill an innocent man.
But again, that's a "liberal" thing to say.

In fact, CNN reports that "advocates of the death penalty argue that its opponents are elitist liberals who are ignoring the real victims."

You're right, an innocent person executed cannot be a victim. They probably did something else anyway......

Caring about or even talking about innocent people being executed is not a staple of the conservative bunch.

Michael Paranzino, president of Throw Away the Key says that "Since 1999, we've had 100,000 innocent people murdered in the U.S., but nobody is planning on commemorating all those people killed."

Who's commemorating anyone?

And speaking about throwing away the key, I don't think anyone on death row who may be innocent is looking for a key- a heartbeat maybe, but not a key.

By the way, since 1973, 122 prisoners have been freed from death row.

Whatever.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense attorney in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please click the link: http://www.tannebaumweiss.com/our_lawyers.php



BREAKING NEWS - Robin Lovitt's sentence was commuted to life in prison today by Virginia Governor Mark Warner. The story is here

The Fear Of Justice Forces Justice

The Fifth Amendment says in part that "No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger;.... nor shall any person.... be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law...."

This pesky little amendment (of course not as important as Amendment 2 that allows you to own and possess a gun) is what kept Jose Padilla behind bars for 3 years without being charged, and it is what required him to be charged yesterday.

The fear of Padilla being brought to justice, forced the hand of the Department of Justice.

Jose Padilla may be a terrorist. Then again, in today's day and age, everyone who walks through airport security may be the shoe bomber, but probably isn't.

Jose Padilla may be innocent.

But there can be no determination of innocence or guilt without the opportunity for a trial. There can be no trial without charges being filed. You think it's ok to keep someone behind bars indefinitely because he may be a terrorist or because we're at war? My question is, for what reason? What has Jose Padilla done in the eyes of the law? Not in the eyes of angry people who believe anyone accused of being a terrorist is in fact, a terrorist.

The day we keep people behind bars just because the government accuses them of being criminals......., well, wait, that day has come.

Yesterday though, the Justice Department, fearing that the US Supreme Court would force the release of Padilla, indicted him here in Miami.

Now "Justice" can commence, whatever that Justice may be.

For a wonderful read on this story, with links to the indictment and other tidbits about the judge, go to Criminal Defense Attorney David Markus' critically acclaimed Southern District of Florida Blog, the best place for information on the ever interesting federal court system in South Florida.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense attorney in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please click the link: http://www.tannebaumweiss.com/our_lawyers.php

Oops! - We Executed An Innocent Guy

CNN.com reports here that we may have executed an innocent man. The original story appeared in the Houston Chronicle on Sunday, November 20, 2005.

Apparently, the sole witness recanted and a co-defendant said he allowed our dead friend to be falsely accused under police pressure, the Houston Chronicle reported Sunday.

The fried former alive and possibly innocent Ruben Cantu was 17 in 1984 when he was charged with capital murder for shooting a man during an attempted robbery in Texas.

According to the Chronicle, the eyewitness Juan Moreno told the Chronicle that it wasn't Cantu who shot him. Moreno said he identified Cantu as the killer during his 1985 trial because he felt pressured and was afraid of authorities.

As comedian Dana Carvey's church lady character from Saturday Night Live used to say: "Well, isn't that special?"

Oh, and the Chronicle also reports that Cantu's co-defendant, David Garza, recently signed a sworn affidavit saying he allowed his friend to be accused, even though Cantu wasn't with him the night of the killing.

Nice friend.

Cantu was executed at age 26, all the while proclaiming his innocence.

Sorry Ruben. Really, we're sorry.

In comes the prosecutor, Sam D. Millsap Jr. He told the Chronicle he never should have sought the death penalty in a case based on testimony from an eyewitness who identified a suspect only after police showed him Cantu's photo three separate times.

Oh well, things happen.

Let's not beat a dead horse, I mean human being.....

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense attorney in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please click the link: http://www.tannebaumweiss.com/our_lawyers.php

Justice"DeLay - ed"

Tom DeLay is in trouble.

I'm not talking about the indictment last month, I'm talking about what will happen Monday, November 21.

The New York Times reports here that Michael Scanlon, former top aide to Congressman DeLay, is cooperating with federal prosecutors and will plead guilty to conspiring to defraud Indian tribes of millions of dollars as part of a lobbying and corruption scheme.

The allegations are that Scanlon and indicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff sought to "corruptly offer and provide things of value, including money, meals, trips and entertainment to federal public officials in return for agreements to perform official acts."

I know, you're shocked, shocked to hear that this goes on.

According to the Times: "The deal reveals a broadening corruption investigation involving top members of Congress." (By the way, every member of Congress is up for election next year. Better start practicing that baby kissing.)

I wonder how many lunch cancellations DeLay has had in the last month. "Uh, can't make it, gotta, uh, got something else Tom, sorry."

Scanlon is a former spokesman for DeLay. I bet he's speaking about DeLay more than he ever has when he was working for him.

According to the Times: "News of his cooperation with law enforcement officials sent a jolt through the Republican majority in Congress."

That's one way to put it.

It will be interesting to see how far this goes.

The conservative right may have to stomach new found relationships with the criminal defense bar, who will attempt to save their careers so they can continue to pummel our clients with bad legislation.

Brian Tannebaum is a criminal defense attorney in Miami, Florida practicing in state and federal court. To learn more about Brian and his firm, Tannebaum Weiss, please click the link: http://www.tannebaumweiss.com/our_lawyers.php

Unindicted Karl Rove Says We Should Execute Kids

Remember Karl Rove? He's President Bush's pit bull - commonly referred to as the "architect" of, well, everything the President has ever done.

Rove recently escaped indictment in the Valerie Plame CIA leak investigation. He's now focused on other important things - executing kids. Rove is determined to help get more conservative judges appointed that are more in the mainstream of America.

In his first public appearance last week post non-indictment, he cited last year's US Supreme Court decision in the case of Roper v. Simmons, which banned the execution of children, as one that is "fundamentally out of touch with our Constitution."

No, I'm not kidding. You can read it here

Must be an interesting way to think: "Wow, I just skated from a career-wrecking criminal indictment, now I can focus on why we don't execute children"

The Founding Fathers must be so proud.

Sentencing In Black And White

A white teacher able to hire one of the best criminal defense attorneys in Florida gets house arrest for leaving the scene of an accident that killed two black kids.

Or:

A young 29 year old girl who panicked after a hit and run accident that killed 2 kids and then came forward and confessed to leaving the scene, receives house arrest.

Pick a headline. Read the story in the Tampa Tribune, or cnn.com

Former dance teacher Jennifer Porter, 29, of Tampa, was sentenced yesterday to 2 years of house arrest, 3 years of probation and 500 hours of community service, for leaving the scene of the accident that left 2 kids dead. She's white, the 2 kids were black.

Racial?

Perception.

Jennifer Porter was not charged with killing these children. She had no prior criminal record, for that matter, either did those kids.

So what am I saying?

First let me say that I think leaving the scene of an accident is a terrible crime. I understand why people panic and leave, but know that Porter also did not come forward immediately, and initially lied about the accident.

But.

Jennifer Porter was offered 3 years in prison by the prosecutor. She took her chances and pled guilty without an agreement, leaving it up to the judge.

He took 12 hours of testimony, until 1:30 in the morning, and felt that jail was not appropriate for whom he saw as a remorseful defendant. Trust me that this will be another instance for politicians to attack the judiciary for, well, making a decision that they don't agree with. Some idiot will argue that this judge has "run amock."

Most wanted Porter to go to jail, because most cannot fathom that any other kind of criminal sentence exists. You think Porter will do this again, you think she doesn't think about those kids every day?

What's sitting in a jail cell going to do, besides make you feel better?

Speed Is Justice For All

A great editorial in the St Petersburg Times viewed here criticizes the sure passage of the Streamlined Procedures Act of 2005.

I know, you're saying, "not the Streamlined Procedures Act of 2005 again?!"

This legislation takes away the right of felons convicted in state court from seeking redress in federal court.

The Times says "this assault on due process should be stopped in its tracks." I agree.

According to the Times, "supporters of the Streamlined Procedures Act of 2005 say that changes are needed to move along executions and make the court system more efficient.

What the legislation does is reduce federal habeas corpus review and prohibit federal courts from addressing whether defendants constitutional rights were violated in state court.

So, as the Times says "the act would expedite executions, but it also would make it nearly impossible for people whose convictions resulted from incompetent counsel, fabricated evidence or a racially stacked jury from seeking redress in the federal courts. It would make claims of actual innocence extremely hard to bring, increasing the risk of error and speeding along the execution of those who didn't do it."

Killing innocent people? Don't bring that up again. That's like talking about your crazy uncle again.

The Times reports that according to the Death Penalty Information Center, more than 100 death row inmates have been exonerated as innocent of their crimes since the mid 1970s. I know, you don't care. They're all guilty.

The Times closes by saying that "these measures are highly destructive to this nation's traditional due process guarantees. They would replace accuracy with speed, and justice with notches on a belt. A bad trade all around."

That's a great new slogan for the idiots supporting this garbage:

Instead of "Liberty, and Justice for All" -

"Speed, is Justice For All.

Conservatives Put Away The Tissues

Looks like a treat on Halloween for the right-wing conservative movement today.

No grim reaper - rather the vote that will overturn Roe v. Wade.

Today, President Bush appointed 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Samuel Alito.

A brief biography from scotusblog.com:

Judge Alito currently serves on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Prior to his nomination to the Third Circuit by President George H.W. Bush, he served as U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey (1987-1990), Deputy Assistant Attorney General (1985-1987), and Assistant to the Solicitor General (1981-1985).

Judge Alito was born in 1950 in Trenton NJ. He attended Princeton University and Yale Law School. He clerked for Judge Leonard I. Garth on the Third Circuit.

He will be overwhelmingly confirmed, even without saying the obvious: "Thank you Mr. President, I will overturn Roe."

Can I just ask the right-wing conservative movement to stop crying and whining like the entitlement-driven liberals they scream about daily? You right-wingers have been whining for months that our, not YOUR President owes you a Supreme Court nomination that will "do what they need to do." You all are such babies. The fact that you think abortion is the biggest problem facing this country is an embarrassment.

He owes YOU nothing. This is not your country, nor your court, regardless of what you listen to on TV or radio.

By the way, Samuel Alito will also be confirmed because he has always been on the side of government, never representing a criminal defendant. What's his position on the death penalty, the Fourth Amendment, and the right to counsel?

None of you really care.

WWWWWWhat Did W Say????????

I know I still do not have power from Hurricane Wilma, but can someone please tell me that I was dreaming when I heard the following comment from President George W. Bush on the indictment of Scooter Libby?

In our system, each individual is presumed innocent and entitled to due process and a fair trial.

NBC singled out this comment in the lead sentence of their on-line report of the President's comments by writing:

President George W. Bush said Friday that individuals are presumed innocent in the American legal system and he hopes people take that view in the case of vice presidential aide Lewis Libby.

I hope he realizes that his base supporters are breaking out in hives right now.

Listen To This Dick

Vice President Dick Cheney said today in response to the federal indictment of his chief of staff "Scooter" Libby, that he was....... entitled to a presumption of innocence in the case.

I trust that comment was meant just for Libby, and not the other guilty criminals charged daily in America.

Wilma Stops The Wheels Of Justice - Upsetting Some

It's not that I've had nothing to say in the last week - it's that Hurricane Wilma knocked me out of my home, and off the internet.

Now I'm back on (not home yet), and have a lot to say.

State and Federal Courts are closed in South Florida. Most saw this as an easy decision - watching the lack of power, lack of gas, food, water, public transportation, and almost everything else that makes life normal and bearable.

I'll tell you what made the decision difficult.

Not the thousands of civil suits, divorce cases, personal injury, medical malpractice, and small claims matters that may be delayed a week or so.

It was the dreaded thought that for a meaningless few days, suspected criminals would not be brought to court. Heavens forbid.

Heavens forbid.

The decision was not as much about letting lawyers clean up their own mess, it was about angry jurors and staff showing up to court (probably walking due to the lack of gas) wondering what was so damn important that they had to step out of line waiting for ice and water.

In the end, the courts did the right thing - not using the "OUR lights are on, so court's in session," but "YOUR lights are off, so take care of your family." Didn't happen immediately though, leaving lawyers, court staff, and EVEN JUDGES to wonder whether they could take their family out of town for some air conditioning and hot food.

I say r-e-l-a-x. One stupid week or even two won't make a difference. Being human does not make the court system less powerful. In fact, I'm willing to sign a document acknowledging the all-mighty power of the courts in exchange for a few more days to get my family settled.

The Florida Supreme Court will suspend or "toll" the Speedy Trial provisions of Florida Law, so countless criminal defendants cannot say they did not receive justice swiftly due to Hurricane Wilma.

And..................Life will go on.

Trust me, I'm a lawyer.

When A Criminal Defense Lawyer Becomes A Crime Victim

While sitting here waiting to see whether Hurricane Wilma will be visiting us here in Miami, I note two recent stories where criminal defense lawyers have themselves become crime victims.

Prominent California Criminal Defense Lawyer Daniel Horowitz' wife was murdered last week. A 16 year old described as "gothic," and "troubled" is now in custody.

Also, the lawyer for one of Saddam Hussein's co-defendants was kidnapped today. The story appears here. UPDATE: The kidnapped lawyer for one of Saddam Hussein's co-defendants has been found murdered. The story appears here

So what does a criminal defense lawyer, who toils daily defending those accused of crime, do when they find themselves victims of crime?

Prosecute.

How do they feel?

Violated.

Why. Because we're human.

(I use the word "human" as a tribute to the moron who called Larry King the other night and said that she "agreed with everything Nancy Grace says, and disagrees with almost everything that Daniel Horowitz (a frequent commentator on her show) says, and therefore found it difficult to digest her new found thoughts on the murder of his wife that he is a "human," just like everyone else. If the caller is reading this, congratulations, you have now said the absolute stupidest thing I've ever heard.

So steal my car or vandalize my mailbox, and I'll probably agree to give you a break as long as you apologize.

Hurt me or my family, and you can join some of my other clients who weren't so lucky at trial.

Another Innocent Guy Gets Released And Disturbs Our "Everyone's Guilty" Theory

CNN.com reports here that a man who spent 19 years in prison was released after it was discovered that he was framed.

The detective who put Barry Gibbs behind bars was arrested himself on charges that in his spare time, he was a mob hit man.

A judge threw out the 1988 murder conviction and released Barry Gibbs based on new evidence that the same detective coerced a witness into identifying him as the killer.

The now arrested detective located a witness who testified he had seen Gibbs dump the body of the strangled victim near a bridge.

He hadn't. It was a lie. But Gibbs was convicted.

Under questioning by the FBI, the witness recanted, claiming the detective bribed and intimidated him into identifying Gibbs.

The Brooklyn district attorney's office sought Gibbs' release after it determined the witness' trial testimony was "suspect," which is a nice legal word to use when you're about to be sued that is interpreted to mean "lied."

A jury convicted this man.

He was innocent.

But who cares? Everybody's guilty, everybody.

Anthony's Dreaming...

Anthony Lorenzo is out of prison, and you all are not making him feel very welcome. He was angry enough to pen a well written editorial to the Miami Herald that can be read here (at least for a while until the link expires)

Anthony was released from prison after serving about 2 and 1/2 years for trafficking in cocaine.

He says he can't get a license to work in many fields, from massage therapy to being a lawyer to cutting hair.

He says that the Department of Corrections mission should change from punishment to rehabilitation, "making it a priority." He says "job training, education and economic opportunity are the biggest reducers of recidivism statistically. Yet Florida makes none of these parameters a priority in our prisons."

Anthony, please stop confusing people with the facts. No one wants to hear that if people in jail were better treated and educated, they would not commit future crimes, saving the taxpayers millions of dollars. Just stop saying things like that.

He "realizes that people think those who commit crimes, even nonviolent victimless crimes, deserve to be punished for our indiscretions. But they should think about this, Anthony says: 'I was treated like an animal for 2 ½ years; I worked at gunpoint on a chain gang because authorities refused to send me to work release. I was sent home with only $100 cash. I'm not allowed to work, am denied financial aid to go to college and may not even be able to get licensed in the field that I have gone to school to learn -- acupuncture.'"

"Is it any wonder that ex-convicts end up back in prison," he asks?
Funny, I ask the same question also.

"Working at a dead-end, minimum wage job is not a life he says. "Even Pizza Hut said that it couldn't promote me, no matter how great an employee I was."

I'm sorry about this Anthony, but our society has no compassion for you, even though you've done your time and are looking to better yourself. We want you to think about this indiscretion, this crime you've committed, for the rest of your life. None of us out here have ever made any mistakes, we are perfect.

We want you to suffer everyday and continue to pay this un-owed debt to society. Most people could care less about what you do and you're lack of success in trying to better yourself. They are saying "you should have thought of that before you dealt cocaine." They are wondering why you are out of prison.

They are angry when I continue to ask "you know, most people who go to jail, get out, so what are we to do with them while they're in to make them better citizens?

They hate that, and they hate you, Anthony.

Don't Mess With "Texas Cronyism"

Ah - the sound of raging conservatives and cheering liberals. What could it be?

The anxiously awaited nomination of President Bush's nominee to the United States Supreme Court to replace the retiring Sandra Day O' Connor.

Today President Bush nominated White House counsel (i.e. "his" lawyer and the person he consults with on nominations like these) Harriet Miers. "She will strictly interpret our Constitution and laws. She will not legislate from the bench," Bush said. Authors note: A post on "legislating from the bench" appeared on this blog back in July, and can can be viewed here

Miers has never been a judge, and said she was grateful and humbled by the nomination.

I'll bet. I've never been a judge. I'd be "grateful," and "humbled" to be nominated to the highest court in the land based on my job as counsel to the nominator.

Is she qualified? Who knows. What does it mean to be qualified? To conservatives, she's qualified if she stands on the top of the capitol today and says "Down with Roe v. Wade!" To them, she is now not qualified, solely because they do not know the answer to that question.

To liberals, she's a bit more qualified solely because she has not had any decisions that would indicate her position, therefore, hell, maybe she's not so conservative.

Hey liberals - SHE'S THE PRESIDENT'S LAWYER. ARE YOU AWAKE AND BREATHING?

Both sides today are showing their shallowness. The Supreme Court is only about abortion to those making the most public statements on both sides.

Mind you, the Supreme Court recently held that private property could be taken for commercial purposes, sending everyone into a tailspin. "Hey, I thought the Supreme Court only handled abortion cases," you could hear them saying.

These are the people who represent the old phrase: "While you're watching the mice, the elephant walks out of the room."

This one will be fun.