Image Hosted by

Saturday, July 02, 2005

O'Connor Retires From U.S. Supreme Court

Sandra Day O'Connor announced Friday that she would be retiring from her position on the highest court in the land. President Reagan nominated her as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court, and she took her seat September 25, 1981. O'Connor is the first female to ever sit as a U.S. Supreme Court Justice. It was quite an event. She was a pioneer, truly. And, now, there are no more women on the U.S. Supreme Court

"But what about Ruth Bader Gins—"

Yep. Not a single woman among them.

Replacing retired Supreme Court Justices has been an issue since President Bush took office. The group, as it stood (pre-O'Connor retirement), was fairly balanced politically, so one judge was usually the tiebreaker when it came to voting. That judge was often Sandra Day O'Connor, or "Judgment Day" as she was called by her associates. They also called her Sandra "I'm looking for Sarah" O'Connor. Oh, I could go all night, folks.

Did you know the favorite movie of the U.S. Supreme Court (voted 5 to 4) is Terminator 2: Judgment Day? The other choices were Philadelphia, starring Tom Hanks, and My Cousin Vinnie, starring Joe Pesci. But the majority of the group hates when Justice Clarence Thomas annoyingly critiques the law aspects of films, so they chose a film that contains judgment, but no courtroom scenes.

"Heh-heh, that will never fly, heh-heh, in a lower appellate court, buddy, but really, good luck with that!" Justice Thomas says, chuckling. He lays on his stomach on the floor of the Justices' movie room. His hands support his head and occasionally shuffle popcorn into his mouth. His feet flop around in the air behind him. The other Justices look at one another, rolling their eyes and hating.

O'Connor was a voice of "middle-of-the-road" reason when compared to other Supreme Court Justices, like say — oh I don't know — Justice Antonin Scalia, who is consider by most to be a far-right-wing-leaning judge. Here he is...

Image Hosted by

Replacing O'Connor is a big deal. Choosing a judge too far left or right could easily sway many rulings and alter key decisions of the past. It's President Bush's job to nominate the Justice who will take O'Connor's place. And I think, given the track record of this administration, that he will only be looking out for the best "folks" for the job.

Because of my many connections working in the government and whatnot, I was able to attain pictures and names of President Bush's top choices for this prestigious position. These are straight from a White House meeting on the subject. Let's have a look...

Image Hosted by
Clarence Van Hoffenpuffle III
This guy could be okay, but, for some strange reason — I can't quite put my finger on it — he looks menacing.

Image Hosted by
Antonia Goldstein
My vote is for this person. It might be a good idea to replace O'Connor with another woman. Keep the female presence. Plus, look at the blonde hair. She's fucking hot.

Image Hosted by
Gene Browkowski
I think this guy is a highway patrolman who lives near me. Well, he must be qualified in some way if Bush is considering him for the job.

Anyway, it's sad to see O'Connor go, but I'm almost certain that one of these three possible nominees will take over her role as a middle-of-the-road thinker. I only hope that none of them turn out to be as right-leaning as, say, an Antonin Scalia. Heh, that wouldn't be very good.

Heh-heh... what?


At 7:21 AM, Blogger Ripsy said...

Day-o, me say Day-o baby retire and she don't come home....

At 9:11 AM, Blogger LoriLoo310 said...

Look at me I'm Sandra D!

At 9:33 AM, Blogger Carrie said...

It's a sad "Day". There goes all our rights. *sigh* God I can't believe how many idiots in this country thought it would be a splendid idea to re-elect this dumbass.

At 10:49 AM, Blogger Charlton said...

A good point, well made.

At 11:12 AM, Blogger Katie said...

Oh... did I just see abortion rights fly out the window? I certainly did! I love where this nation is heading!

At 3:49 PM, Blogger jazz said...

i nearly cried when i heard the news. i really thought she might have it in her to hold out for a couple more years. fuck!

btw, i laughed out loud for this one but was NOT in the library. thank goodness.

At 4:57 PM, Blogger sasfdasfdljkfksdjkfjsd said...

I'm putting my vote in for that hot blonde, she seems to be just right for the job.

She looks good enough to woo the press and general populace, but tough enough to not take any sh#$

At 10:34 PM, Blogger Gloria Glo said...

Very well done. It will be quite a fight for the position...I've voting for the sexy blonde, because society has taught me not to respect anything sold to me by anyone except a sexy blonde.

At 10:10 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey Andy, I've loved your writing for a long long time now, and I would really like to know you a li'l better. Is there any other way we can talk?

At 1:56 PM, Blogger Former Intern Andy said...

Hmm... well, you can email me, I'll send you my screenname, and you can chat me up via AOL instant messenger or Windows Messenger.

(psst, email address in profile)

At 6:59 PM, Blogger omar said...

I think the sexy blonde would be distracting, I vote for Gene Browkowski. That guy looks hardcore.

At 7:06 PM, Blogger Syar said...

Heh-heh... what?

seeing as i'm pretty much ignorant about the business of supreme courts and american politics, your last line summed up my feelings about the whole post.

gene browkowski looks like burt reynolds. i think.

At 6:02 AM, Blogger Chronic_Roll said...

Wow, pinning Scalia down as a conservative, hopefully you have done some research on some of his notable court cases. Wait, I am betting you have maybe looked at one or two of his written opinions and then read some opinions written by some people on things he says or does, found a picture on the internet of him and then began using photoshop. (Quite well done with the photoshop though).
Let me see, Scalia was one of the justices that voted against the majority in the landmark case ruling made last week about letting local governments take land away from individuals if economic gain was taken into account.
Oh wait but that doesn't matter really. What does matter is that Scalia doesn't want to make any decisions on taking same sex marriage cases to the Supreme Court. Oh my God, what a hick! A Justice that doesn't believe in judicail activism and believes that the states should vote on cultural issues on their own. Man, if that doesn't make him a right-wing red neck I don't know what does.
Maybe some people recognize that the Court's active involvement in certain issues is both good and bad. Even the Court's involvement in Brown v Board and Roe v Wade carries negative implications toward individual rights that carry on beyond the cases they were intended to be bound to. Maybe you should look into the negative impacts of judicial activism before you judge Scalia.

At 8:17 AM, Blogger scribe called steff said...

Dude, maybe you should check as to whether your funny bone's still connected.

Andy, you need to get out more. :)

When are you moving back to New York, anyhow? Huh?

At 10:47 AM, Blogger spinsterwitch said...

Are you insinuating that our beloved president would find a right-wing replacement for Justice O'Connor? Surely, not?!

At 2:05 PM, Blogger jazz said...

umm...that anonymous creeps me out. "is there any way we can talk?" i think he/she is going to try to seduce you.

don't let them get too close, my dear fiance. that's just weird.

At 2:44 PM, Blogger piu piu said...

hey andy- did u help mimi out with her blog heading? any chance u can spare some time for her sister? if so can u leave a message at i already have an image, its my html thats shoddy

cheers! great blog

piu piu

At 3:28 PM, Blogger Former Intern Andy said...

Wow, pinning Scalia down as a conservative, hopefully you have done some research on some of his notable court cases. Wait, I am betting you have maybe looked at one or two of his written opinions and then read some opinions written by some people on things he says or does, found a picture on the internet of him and then began using photoshop.

Oh, Christ. This is the part of the job I hate. Explaining my posts to people who love to read into everything and believe they have everyone figured out. Let me spell out my reasoning.

See, Justice Scalia, aside from being moderately right wing to dedicated right wing (and he IS... we're not imagining it), is also one of the more recognizable figures of the group. Clarence Thomas might have worked too, but his image doesn't lend itself to so many hilarious makeover possibilities.

When I do anything with this post or nearly any post I've ever done, the main goal is to convey a joke. Now, with humor, comedy, satire, you're not working in truths, you're working in stereotypes and public perceptions. Humor isn't based on what IS, it's based on what people perceive.

Do all Black people play sports or dance better than all White people? Of course not. But that doesn't mean a joke implying such a thing couldn't be found funny.

I should really teach a class.

At 3:31 PM, Blogger Former Intern Andy said...

And using the phrase "judicial activism" and applying it only to left-leaning judges is downright hilarious.

At 3:48 PM, Blogger jazz said...

as a person with a juris doctor degree, i can pretty much assure chronic roll that i've read circles around him when it comes to supreme court cases and i can firmly say that, yet again, he doesn't really know what he's talking about.

it seems to me that roll happened to read the takings clause case and maybe read opinions of his other cases but decides he's an authority, the non-lawyer that he is.

and lets discuss how brown v. board took away my right to not have to go to school with black people. and how roe took away my right to keep other people from making decisions about their bodies! where are those rights, huh?! he's right! they're taking away my rights!

At 4:17 PM, Blogger The Everglades said...

Al Franken isn't writing a book about this yet--but you can bet your sweet ass he is talking about it on Air America.

Like you, Al Franken is one of my favorite commentators out there. I read and listen to anything he writes/says. So when he eventually gets around to penning a masterpiece at the conclusion of the Bush presidency, I will be the first in lie.

I'm going to Bob Jones University for graduate school,


At 9:43 PM, Blogger Katie said...

Jasmine, you're my hero. And Chronic Roll, this is not the place to be for political debate. E-mail Andy, you can duke it out there. But then again, I come back over and over again to the same posts just to see the fireworks.

Thank you

At 7:49 AM, Blogger Chronic_Roll said...

Let's see. Katie, I think you are right about not creating political debates on this comment post, and I think I will just start e-mailing whatever criticism I do have straight to the man.
Anyways Jasmine, and this is my last criticism, Brown v Board did stop segregation in schools, which I am all for. But what it also did was allow for a precedent to be set in cases such as Verdona where it was judged that schools could conduct anonymous drug testing on students in athletics. What I was trying to say about Brown and Roe was that the fact that the court decided to even hear cases like Roe and Brown allowed for those cases to have unintended consequences later on. Brown was intended to stop segregation but later, the court used it as the basis for deciding Verdona, something that has very negative implications on privacy. Roe was intended to allow abortion for women, but now it is used as the basis for letting the court decide on other women's rights issues. I am beginning to realize that "liberals" and "conservatives" are equally closeminded, making it impossible for anyone to see beyond policy. If all you want to read is the part where I say Roe had negative implications for individual rights and not think about why, then maybe you never really did read court opinions correctly.
Oh yeah, and when did I only apply judicial activism to left-leaning judges? Just because I mentioned two cases that are identified as leftist, I labeled judicial activism as leftist. That's ridiculous. And you are right Andy, Clearance Thomas would have been a better choice for your satire. The bast satire is based on reality.

At 12:58 PM, Blogger Seventeen Syllables said...

Gene Browkowski needs a bratwurst...and a beer.

At 1:35 PM, Blogger jazz said...

chronic, i see where you're coming from, but when the states won't make these changes themselves, the federal government has to step in sometimes. it takes a bite out of state autonomy, but there is a weighing of interests here. the SC can't stay away from something just because it might have some undesired consequences. there's always a trade-off. you think roe enabled the court to take away rights? i think you're missing the bigger picture yourself. you can't see the forest for the trees.

i'm pretty certain that a degree from one of the best law schools in the country would suggest that i do know how to read a court case correctly. i think it's interesting that you think you're so much smarter than everyone here for no apparent reason whatsoever.

and also, you're an asshole for coming onto my blog to leave me nasty comments and taking a crack at my friend who had committed suicide.

At 3:00 PM, Blogger Former Intern Andy said...

No, Clarence Thomas wouldn't have looked as good in a blonde wig, or the mustache. That's why I went with Scalia. And the best satire is based on PERCEIVED reality.

At 6:57 AM, Blogger Lia said...

I'm backing up Steff - surely there's got to be something better to write about. You're losing your touch! Or is this supposed to be a political humor blog? Or is it just that your interests have changed?

At 9:12 AM, Blogger Johnny Menace said...

Why not just hire a celeb actor that could played a judge?

At 3:43 PM, Blogger Former Intern Andy said...

I know I do a lot of politics stuff, but I'll switch it up just for you guys. :)


Post a Comment

<< Home