I'm busy today and can't chat, but no, I don't. There's a diff, which is why I talk about good guys and bad guys. It's not a decisive enough diff to make me a partisan Democrat like yourself, just as the diff that I acknowledge between Dems and Gopsters isn't enough to make me one either. Apparently your view is that if I am not a partisan Dem (or Gopster), then I don't REALLY acknowledge that there is a diff. As for Burger, we would be lucky to get a Dem to nominate someone that far left today. Gore wouldn't have done it. Back to work, sorry. Hope your job search is going well and my contacts helped.
jks
>
> >After all, two of the good
> >guys are Gopsters (Stevens and Souter). I clerked for a great Gopster
>judge
> >on the 7C, Ilana Diamond Rovner. And, btw, the other two "good guys,"
>Breyer
> >and Ginsberg, aren't that good--certainly compared (say) to Blackmun, a
> >Gopster, or even the other Minn Twin, Burger. No Dem would dare appoint
> >anyone as far left as Burger today.
>
>I don't buy it, even with Blackmun who was a classic "mistake", voting
>increasingly different from what was expected, as with Souter. But Burger
>gutted desegregation and promoted exactly the line of states rights cases
>that we are seeing the endpoint of. Blackmun and Burger both supported the
>original Rehnquist decision back in 1976 that argued state governments were
>immune to minimum wage laws. This NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES decision was
>overturned in 1985, largely because Blackmun changed his mind as he moved
>into greater liberalism as he aged, but Burger maintained his same states
>rights politics. And note that when Blackmun was nominated, the goal was
>his original conservative views, which Nixon hoped would be like Burgers
>and
>Rehnquists.
>
>Justin, your defense of Burger, like the defense of Nixon, is obscene.
>Both
>men's goals were to move policy as far right as they could; they were often
>strategic in moving slowly, but to compare their politics of racism and
>states rights to the liberalism, however moderate at times, of Breyer and
>Ginsburg, is just ridiculous.
>
>To restate the question again, name one progressive federal law that either
>Breyer or Ginsburg has voted to overturn on constitutional grounds? You
>can't name them because they don't exist. The rightwing on the Court, on
>the other hand, dating from the 1970s, have been trying to overturn a slew
>of federal laws to enforce justice on the states and on private
>corporations.
>
>That is a radical difference and neither Blackmun nor Burger are even close
>to Breyer and Ginsburg on that point. (And by the way, while I like
>Stevens, he has been quite anti-union in some decisions and rather weak on
>progressive first amendment issues at points).
>
>-- Nathan Newman
>
_________________________________________________________________ MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx