General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDid anyone watch SAndra Day OConnor on Rachel Maddow's Show ?
it's coming on now but i wasn't able to pay attention to the whole thing. did she ask about Bush v Gore ? is it worth watching ?
msongs
(67,129 posts)Jack Sprat
(2,500 posts)but that doesn't go for the rest of us.
gort
(687 posts)Turned out to be two burning towers, thousands of Americans dead and untold millions killed as a result of her and the other four fuckers thoughtless betrayal of the constitution. Fuck her to hell.
UTUSN
(70,435 posts)She was scarfing at a buffet and that was her reaction when the news said it (later to go back and forth).
jaysunb
(11,856 posts)I'm dumbstruck.
2naSalit
(85,639 posts)It was interesting and Rachel did ask about that and showed a picture that may have had implications of a couple of disgruntled justices waiting prior to the inauguration ceremony but SDO quashed that notion and claimed that they were simply bored and the image did not reflect their reflecting on the decision that made W resident. She also said that they had no emotive investment in the case itself even after seeing how many people were protesting at the parade and ceremony. I was kind of surprised by that part, given it was that group who decided the presidency, and wrongly, and knew that there was a vast majority who opposed the decision. One would have thought that a player in that instance might have, in hindsight, had some remorse after all that has happened.
In fact, the fmr justice was rather unimpressive and seemed to be dispassionate about all of her decisions, or so she claimed. She seemed to be throwing a wet blanket on the idea that any of the justices pay attention to public opinion or "drama" over any case they agree to resolve. I was kind of surprised by her stance but perhaps she sees it that way and was not willing to opine about her fmr colleagues. Rachel seemed disappointed by the end of it. SDO seemed to be averse to getting into that conversation even if it was not what she really feels is the reality of our currently activist SC. I have seen her make more interesting comments about such things in the past (don't ask me to cite them as I can't recall exactly what and when but it seems that I had seen her speak out, as it were, in the past).
That's my take on it... you might still want to watch it though.
Samantha
(9,314 posts)Not too long after that SC decision, she was asked about it at a dinner party in Washington. She called that decision a "no brainer" meaning the decision was clear from the beginning and she didn't even have to think about it.
What I have never understood is why the Supreme Court thought it could constitutionally take that case on appeal. The Constitution delegates the right to decide Presidential elections to the individual states. The highest authority on this dispute should have been The Florida Supreme Court, which when handing down its decision started with the words "The right to vote is paramount."
The United States Supreme Court in taking this case and rendering a 5-4 decision handing the Presidency to George W. Bush* negated the votes of 51 million Americans. So I guess in a way it was a no-brainer (for 5 judges) but not in the sense O'Connor meant it....
Sam
2naSalit
(85,639 posts)Knowing how she handled that case and her personal investment in the outcome really takes her down several notches as a justice who deserves a credible amount of respect. But then, look who appointed her, must've been why it was a "no brainer" for her. Loyalties and all that...
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)aquart
(69,014 posts)DURHAM D
(32,580 posts)2naSalit
(85,639 posts)different impression of her... until now.
Lint Head
(15,064 posts)Zoeisright
(8,339 posts)Who trashed democracy. I will never forgive her for that.
BTW, apologies to pigs.
Greybnk48
(10,144 posts)I was appalled at how flippant and matter of fact she pretended to be about Bush v Gore, the lying pig. They knew exactly what they did at the time.
Raine
(30,520 posts)bullwinkle428
(20,626 posts)HughBeaumont
(24,461 posts)The Failure Fuhrer and his war crime economy-fisting administration are her eternal legacy and disgrace. "Nothing" to Mrs. 5-4 resulted in almost-beyond-repair ruin and needless death for the rest of us. Hope they paid you well . . . Mrs. 5-4.
lame54
(35,044 posts)she must have written a book
malaise
(267,455 posts)I will not buy her book - I will not put money in the coffers of any of those RW judges.
warrior1
(12,325 posts)Sorry if that offends.
Javaman
(62,394 posts)I can neither watch nor listen to her.
It was her decision to override over 200 years of constitutional law and install that fucking war criminal*.
She will never ever be able to cleanse her soul of that filth.
Everything that is wrong with this nation today can be traced directly to her and her illegality.
I have nothing but contempt for her.
COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)uncommunicative. Kudos to Rachel for having her on but for Rachel to expect a former Supreme Court Justice to publicly say anything (much less on a liberal TV show) about 1) the impact of public opinion on the Court, 2) politization of USSCT Justices and 3) Bush v Gore was a bit naive. She got what anyone could have told her she would have gotten - nothing, wrapped up in a tone and facial gestures more suggestive of a root canal than a T.V. interview. Ten minutes of dead air space would have been more instructive.
Sheldon Cooper
(3,724 posts)Ass.
Sekhmets Daughter
(7,515 posts)unless it was, perhaps, her public execution. She could have stopped so much of the hijacking of democracy, had she voted to allow FL to continue with the recount. She empowered the thieves, instead. I despise her more than any of the goons presently sitting on the court.
ladjf
(17,320 posts)The rest is a sad ,tragedy the we will never forget. nt
madamesilverspurs
(15,774 posts)She could have prevented the Bush residency and all of its attendant horrors. She now acts as though the bloody consequences of that court's actions don't matter. Seriously, at some point she must have simply switched off her conscience.