Daily Kos

judge owen recieves "poor" rating from houston bar

by djesno

Sat May 21, 2005 at 04:56:33 PM PDT

the houston bar association released the results of it's poll of texas judges today.  judge owen was rated "poor" by nearly fifty percent of respondents, all of whom had worked with her directly.  she was awarded by houston attorneys the LOWEST rating of any judge on the texas supreme court.

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/3191921

Houston Bar Association Judicial Evaluation Poll: overall ratings
Percentages of HBA members who rated judges outstanding, acceptable or poor in the overall rating category, with the number of poll responses in parentheses following the names. Judges who were on the bench for less than six months before Dec. 31, 2004, were not included in the poll. The full report is online at hba.org.

Supreme Court of Texas

Supreme Court of Texas

Judge  Outstanding  Acceptable  Poor  

Scott A. Brister (422)  36.9  20.7  42.4  
Nathan L. Hecht (327)  40.3  17.4  42.3  
Wallace B. Jefferson (270)  53.4  29.7  16.9  
Harriet O'Neill (334)  55  30.5  14.5  
Priscilla R. Owen (350)  39.5  15.2  45.3  
Dale Wainwright (316)  48.7  25.7  25.7  

 

Tags: (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 98 comments

  •  recommended! (4.00 / 3)

    Let's make sure that this information is spread far and wide.

    "They blamed it on the Islamic fanatics, at the time. [...] That was when they suspended the Constitution. They said it would be temporary."-Handmaid's Tale

    by JLFinch on Sat May 21, 2005 at 04:54:35 PM PDT

    •  Be sure to include the media, too (none / 1)

      They need to take on the jerks who spread the manure about her "high ratings" from the Bar Assn.  

      Here are some sources for media e-mail addresses:

      National: Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR)

      Local: Democratic Underground - Local Media Blaster

      If knowledge is power, what is ignorance?

      by Juno on Sat May 21, 2005 at 08:00:39 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Important (none / 0)

      Point out the RATINGS are found below the article past the reporter's byline. You'll have to scroll down to find the section where Owen and others are tabulated.

      by joan reports on Sun May 22, 2005 at 05:54:04 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The ratings as posted.... Ah hah! (none / 0)

      Houston Bar Association Judicial Evaluation Poll: overall ratings

      Percentages of HBA members who rated judges outstanding, acceptable or poor in the overall rating category, with the number of poll responses in parentheses following the names. Judges who were on the bench for less than six months before Dec. 31, 2004, were not included in the poll. The full report is online at hba.org.

      Supreme Court of Texas

      Judge         Outstanding  Acceptable  Poor  

      Brister (422)       36.9    20.7       42.4  
      Hecht (327)         40.3    17.4       42.3  
      Jefferson (270)    53.4    29.7       16.9  
      Neill (334)           55      30.5        14.5  
      Owen (350)       39.5   15.2      45.3  
      Wainwright (316)  48.7    25.7       25.7

      So, not only did Owen rate highest in "poor", she rated lowest in "acceptable" and second lowest in "outstanding."

      So there!

      by Juno on Sun May 22, 2005 at 01:22:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  sent to the (4.00 / 5)

    swing senators, for better or worse....

    by Silverleaf on Sat May 21, 2005 at 05:06:15 PM PDT

  •  Can anyone tell us (4.00 / 2)

    where these judges stand on the ideological spectrum?
    If the most liberal judge is rated highest, then this poll might mean one thing, but if some of the most conservative rank high, while Owens ranks low, then it's a lot more powerful evidence of her lack of competance.

    by pecos on Sat May 21, 2005 at 05:32:11 PM PDT

    •  The Are All Republicans (4.00 / 9)

      There is not a keeper in the bunch.

      Read and weap:

      http://www.supreme.courts.state.tx.us/about/justices.asp

      To finish dead last in this pile of turds, one has to really stink.

      by freepress4all on Sat May 21, 2005 at 05:44:11 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  And don't forget... (4.00 / 3)

        that the Texas Supreme Court only deals in Civil Law, never in Criminal Law, which is the province of the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.

        So, unlike in the U.S. Supreme Court, and many state Supreme Courts (I think), a stint on the Texas Supreme Court is not as impressive as it sounds...

        by PKinTexas on Sat May 21, 2005 at 09:41:43 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Chief Justice Jefferson (4.00 / 2)

      It looks like the Chief Justice received the highest rating.  He is fairly new to the Court and may be more moderate than most of the Associate Justices.  He is well respected by the bar in general, as is shown by his rank in the Harris County poll.  He is the first African-American Chief Justice in Texas, appointed by Governor Perry apparently after Justice Owen declined the position.

      Texans, be sure to check out the poll regarding the abysmal performance of several members of the Court of Criminal Appeals, our "duplicate" Supreme Court for criminal matters.  You can also read more about the poll at OfftheKuff:

      http://offthekuff.com/mt/

      God and ego are not equivalent expressions of reality.

      by Othniel on Sat May 21, 2005 at 06:39:01 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  What are the chances W will pull Owens... (none / 1)

        ...after this revelation? Or will he and his attack dogs go after the Bar Assn? That seems to be their M.O.

        Let's all write Prez Pretzel and ask him to nominate Jefferson.  Cuz, you know, he reads his own mail and stuff and REALLY cares what we think.

        The best way to a Republican's heart is to saw his chest open.

        by Juno on Sat May 21, 2005 at 08:10:50 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Boy, worse than Brister and Hecht! (none / 0)

          "Last turd in a pile of shit" about covers it.

          No further comment.

          Spread this around.

          Torture is Wrong!

          by tom 47 on Sat May 21, 2005 at 09:18:53 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Slim and Nunn... (none / 0)

          ...and Slim left town...

          it seems to me you'd be hard-pressed to find two worse appointees than Priscilla Owens and Janice Rogers Brown.  Hideous!

          "Sell 'crazy' someplace else, we're all stocked up here." -Melvin Udall

          by hoof32 on Sun May 22, 2005 at 10:46:48 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Pryor in Alabama... (none / 0)

            is amoung the worst of the worst..Check out his past..he is an awful excuse for a human being, not to mention he was co-chair of Bush/Cheney '00 Camp in Alabama.

            It's Obamazing!!!!!!!!!!!!

            by Chamonix on Sun May 22, 2005 at 01:37:11 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  isn't that a disqualifier..? (none / 0)

              Co-chair of a political campaign seems a pretty blatant indication of compromised objectivity.  

              Wouldn't that be an automatic disqualifier on the basis of "political favors", or at least something that could be used to make the case that an individual is not qualified by way of political bias?  

              by G2geek on Sun May 22, 2005 at 04:52:07 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  Anybody know (none / 0)

    any specifics on any of her rulings?

    "People die. Strategies fail. Blame is laid. And we, as a nation, are made to look like assholes." - Brandon Friedman

    by Militarytracy on Sat May 21, 2005 at 05:34:16 PM PDT

    •  If a CEO dropped an anvil on your head (4.00 / 8)

      she would overturn his conviction.

      (-2.38, -3.28) Independent thinker

      by TrueBlueDem on Sat May 21, 2005 at 05:46:47 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Here are a few (4.00 / 4)

      http://www.tpj.org/page_view.jsp?pageid=344

      War is not an adventure. It is a disease. It is like typhus. - Antoine De Saint-Exupery

      by Margot on Sat May 21, 2005 at 05:57:33 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Thank you much! (none / 0)

        "People die. Strategies fail. Blame is laid. And we, as a nation, are made to look like assholes." - Brandon Friedman

        by Militarytracy on Sat May 21, 2005 at 06:06:47 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Provided by that link (4.00 / 2)

        was info that she wipes out civil jury rulings and substitutes her own authority when it suits her with very flimsy reasoning.  Also that she raised a whole big huge bunch of money for her Supreme Court campaign and Enron and Dow Chemical and Farmer's Insurance were big time contributors who had also enjoyed a few of her rulings in the past.  All these people frickin reek anymore, if we negotiate at all on any of this stuff just someone shoot me so I can't feel the pain anymore!

        "People die. Strategies fail. Blame is laid. And we, as a nation, are made to look like assholes." - Brandon Friedman

        by Militarytracy on Sat May 21, 2005 at 06:15:12 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I have no idea where I found that (none / 0)

          But I've got it bookmarked now.  In fact it may have been in a comment on Atrios or some other blog, I'm not sure.  I knew she was not highly thought of but this sure pointed out why. Yeah, she reeks, the whole bunch does.

          War is not an adventure. It is a disease. It is like typhus. - Antoine De Saint-Exupery

          by Margot on Sat May 21, 2005 at 08:07:55 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Also (4.00 / 2)

          Here's a few links about some decisions of hers. The first link discusses an especially egregious decision in which she took away a verdict from a crippled man on an unbriefed venue issue.

          The second link contains lots more background.

          Read it and weep.

          "Unseen, in the background, Fate was quietly slipping the lead into the boxing glove." P.G. Wodehouse

          by gsbadj on Sat May 21, 2005 at 08:36:16 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  "Unbriefed venue issue"? (none / 0)

            God, that is horrid.  Under California law, venue objections are waived if not raised up front.

            .

            by MKS on Sun May 22, 2005 at 12:01:54 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  It's Worse Than That (none / 0)

              To reach the result she did on venue, Justice Owen had to overturn existing lower appellate court precedents to reach an issue that was not one of the issues certified to the Texas Supreme Court.  

              Justice Owen also then proceeded to give a variety of advice on jury instructions for the case on remand.  

              The case was retried in Dallas County on remand, the jury verdict appealed, and, as a result, ten years after the accident, Willie Searcy (who died while the case was pending) and his family still do not have justice.  

              And all Justice Owen can say is that Willie Searcy did not die while the case was pending before her.

              by eafredel on Sun May 22, 2005 at 03:35:47 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

          •  It would seem to me to be (none / 0)

            Quite important to know how many State Supreme Court rulings in all 50 states had a similiar result as this court ruling. How many times have other State Supreme Courts made rulings in civil cases before them that addressed a venue issue that was not before the Court on appeal?

            I would venture to guess that this is quite unusual ... and should I dare say "an extreme example of judicial intervention from the bench" that is unprecedented in judicial history.

            Judge Owen is an extreme judicial activist with egregious conflicts of interest.

            I wish a Senator would list her opinions along with her campaign contributors that benefited from those decisions.

            Once the light has been shown on Judge Owen's judicial history ... it will become clear that she is not fit to serve on the Circuit Court of Appeals .. nor any other Court.

            by Jon B Good on Sun May 22, 2005 at 01:22:01 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  One more point (none / 0)

              Isn't the fact that Judge Owen had to go outside of the issues on appeal in the case to find a reason to achieve the desired outcome analogous to the position of the Republican leadership in the Senate breaking the rules to achieve the desired outcome of using majority status to pack the Courts with nominees that most likely could not survive a filibuster?

              In both situations, "extraordinary" means are required to achieve the desired outcomes.

               

              by Jon B Good on Sun May 22, 2005 at 02:20:16 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  A lot of the money (none / 0)

          raised for her election to the court came courtesy of Karl Rove.

          by CrawfordMan on Sun May 22, 2005 at 10:48:10 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  please recommend this diary (4.00 / 2)

    they held the release for saturday to try to bury the story by monday. let's keep it alive.

    by heterodoxy on Sat May 21, 2005 at 05:49:15 PM PDT

  •  Send this (none / 0)


    to your Senators----if they get 400 copies of it, no problem.   Frist and Santorum should get about 4,000, please.

    Take a minute to send a nice Thank You to the people who have been working this whole mess so hard.

    I didn't think we had a chance with Senator Reid at first.  Major apologies, Senator Reid.  Thank you again!

    Remember- when the Republicans start accusing others of doing something they consider awful, it is because they are doing it and trying to cover it.

    by maybeeso in michigan on Sat May 21, 2005 at 06:05:02 PM PDT

  •  Well this can't be right (4.00 / 7)

    because MY SENATOR, Kay Bailey Hutchinson, wrote me a letter in response to my letter to her about the fillibuster and she said that ALL of Bu$h nominees had "the higest integrity" and "highly qualified."

    Now, do you really think that KayBee would lie to me?

    Blood 4 Oil War 2

    by TXsharon on Sat May 21, 2005 at 06:09:31 PM PDT

    •  Not only that (none / 1)

      but does anybody seriously think the President of the United States would try to appoint someone who wasn't the absolute best person for the job?

      </snicker>

      by speranza on Sat May 21, 2005 at 06:26:59 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The best he can get (4.00 / 2)

        Would you work for Bush if you had integrity and honor, even if you were an unwavering Republican? Bush has to get the people who will put up with the fact that they will be working in the most corrupt administration since [Harding|Nixon|Reagan|ever] many Republicans are still honorable and know that they will be painted with the corruption, but be unable to accomplish anything that isn't commanded by the true believers.

        Single payer universal healthcare coverage saves money and saves lives.

        by freelunch on Sat May 21, 2005 at 06:32:45 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  I just wrote (4.00 / 4)

        that ignorant bitch another letter and gave her a link to the article.  I said that I knew it wouldn't make any difference because she is a rubber stamp senator and doesn't have enough integrity to do the right thing.

        I am so pissed off today that TX has been hijacked by all these coyotes!

        Blood 4 Oil War 2

        by TXsharon on Sat May 21, 2005 at 06:42:15 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Sad Thing Is That She Never Sees The Mail (4.00 / 2)

          That dingly cheerleader never sees her mail.  She has staff dispose of all of it for her, including drafting those idiotic replies she sends AT THE TAXPAYERS' EXPENSE.  

          I finally had to stop writing or emailing the bitch -- all I did was get more and more pissed off every time one of her stupid letters arrived.

          Texas has much to be ashamed of, and she is right up near the top of the list -- she and the chimp.

          by freepress4all on Sat May 21, 2005 at 06:58:26 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I know I should quit writing (4.00 / 4)

            but I can't help myself.

            One time recently, I got a LTE about her printed in the paper and one of her "top aids" called me.  He gave me his direct line and said to call him anytime with my comments or if I needed anything.  Heh!  I gave his number out to everyone on the TexasKos list.  :-)  

            Blood 4 Oil War 2

            by TXsharon on Sat May 21, 2005 at 07:03:01 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Kay for Guv!!! (none / 1)

            I'm sure you know that she plans to run for governor in the next election.  It might be an interesting primary, with Goodhair Perry, Carole (about 50 former names) Strayhorn, and Hutchison all smearing each other as loudly as possible.  The stench will cover several states, I predict.

            by RSG on Sat May 21, 2005 at 07:05:08 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Repugnant Dog Fight -- Just What Kinky Wants (none / 0)

              That is exactly what Kinky Freedman is betting on -- he is dying to see a hair pulling match between all those you listed, as he flies quiety below the radar and then comes out fighting at MACH speed.  

              For a state where the governor is little more than a cerimonial ribbon cutter, we could do worse.  

              http://www.kinkyfriedman.com/

              by freepress4all on Sat May 21, 2005 at 07:40:56 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  We could do worse (none / 0)

                Talk about damning with faint praise.

                Kinky is the latest in a disturbing trend of ego-centric celebrities who run for governor.

                How egocentric is he? He writes crime novels in which HE stars.

                Would he be worse than the current Texas governor? No. That would take an effective Republican.

                Does even Kinky believe he can win? No, but more importantly, he doesn't care.

                Is he doing this soley for the attention it brings him? Yes.

                Is it all a big joke? Yes.

                Am I in a joking mood these days? Obviously not.

                Why am I writing this in question and answer form? Good question. I have no answer.

                "Mr. President, I'm not saying we wouldn't get our hair mussed." General Buck Turgidson

                by muledriver on Sun May 22, 2005 at 02:27:42 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  Do they really have to smear each other? (none / 0)

              Don't they just have to tell the truth about the other candidates?

              John McCain is so (Ned) Divine!!

              by Glinda on Sat May 21, 2005 at 08:45:27 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Of course. (none / 0)

                They can just tell the truth about their opponents.  But why would they start doing that now?  They've all lied so often that it's second nature, and I don't think they could stop if they wanted to.  It's going to be an interesting primary, I hope.

                by RSG on Sun May 22, 2005 at 04:24:33 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

            •  "Governor Goodhair" Perry (none / 0)

              is Molly Ivins' name for him.  I always give her credit when I use that moniker for him.

              Torture is Wrong!

              by tom 47 on Sat May 21, 2005 at 09:26:09 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  Sorry to say (none / 0)

          But they Texas was hijacked years ago, they have now completed the hijacking the US and by this time next year will have hijacked the world.

          The world is soon going to be controlled by the most hellish bunch of social climbers on the planet.

          John McCain is anti-choice

          by stevej on Sun May 22, 2005 at 05:24:16 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  I myself would prefer (none / 0)

          a coyote replace her as Senator.

          It does not take many words to tell the truth. - Chief Joseph - Nez Perce

          by Gabriele Droz on Sun May 22, 2005 at 08:52:13 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  The Best For The Job (4.00 / 4)

        The Bushes always nominate the best person for the job. (Remember Clarence Thomas?)  They just never tell you what the job is.

        Blog: "Patterns That Connect" Current Dkos Diary: here

        by Paul Rosenberg on Sat May 21, 2005 at 06:42:28 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  RoveCo doesn't care about bar recommendations (4.00 / 2)

    Only the Federalist Society recommendation, which bases its qualified/not qualified rating on how wingnutty you are.

    Politics is like driving. To go backward, put it in R. To go forward, put it in D.

    by TrueBlueMajority on Sat May 21, 2005 at 06:30:38 PM PDT

  •  Let's remember (none / 0)

    that the main office of Baker Botts (as in Sec. James Baker) is in Houston.  Certainly many BB lawyers must have dissed Owen.

    "They blamed it on the Islamic fanatics, at the time. [...] That was when they suspended the Constitution. They said it would be temporary."-Handmaid's Tale

    by JLFinch on Sat May 21, 2005 at 06:48:10 PM PDT

  •  sent to (4.00 / 2)

    Chafee using his online form.  haha.  Just cut and pasted the link and table from the article.
    http://chafee.senate.gov/webform.htm

    I guess he was on my mind from the Bolton hearings.  

    Am faxing to my Senator (Allard) and to Boxer to make sure she knows about it.  I wonder if staff would actually tell her about a fax she received.

    Help end world hunger by providing rice to hungry people for free.

    by OLinda on Sat May 21, 2005 at 06:51:21 PM PDT

  •  The full report (4.00 / 4)

    a PDF file.

    Check out the last question about Owen:

    Is impartial and open-minded with respect to determining the legal issues?

    Poor - 48.8%

    by MaxKelly on Sat May 21, 2005 at 07:05:32 PM PDT

  •  Pathetic (none / 0)

    Owen indeed was the lowest-rated justice.  She was rated far lower than the three justices who were highly rated.

    Using "Outstanding" percentage minus "Poor" percentage, Owen is at -5.8%, i.e. 5.8% more rated Owen "Poor" than rated her "Outstanding." Owen's rating is a hair worse than Brister (-5.5%); a little worse than Hecht (-2%); and much worse than O'Neill (+40.5%), Jefferson (+36.5%), and Wainwright (+23%).

    Alternatively, if you assign 2 points for an "Outstanding" rating, 1 point for an "Acceptable" rating, and 0 points for a "Poor" rating, the average scores of each justice are:  O'Neill 1.405, Jefferson 1.365, Wainwright 1.231, Hecht .980, Brister .945, Owen .942.

    Why is Bush renominating such a poorly regarded judge? Could it possibly be because she's a Karl Rove-anointed corporate whore?

    When we talk about war, we're really talking about peace. George W. Bush

    by Frederick on Sat May 21, 2005 at 07:08:41 PM PDT

  •  Low number of "Acceptables" (none / 1)

    I would read into those numbers that a low number of Acceptable ratings, combined with higher Outstanding and Poor ratings, indicates a divisive figure.  I wonder how their rankings as right-wing activist judges correlates with their incompetence.  Let's see...

    Higher Outstanding and Poor than Acceptable:
    1- Owen (15.2)
    2- Hecht (17.4)
    3- Brister (20.7)

    Higher Outstanding only than Acceptable:
    4- Wainwright (25.7)
    5- Jefferson (29.7)
    6- O'Neill (30.5)

    Is someone who knows this pack of rapscallions able to confirm this?

    Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. -Albert Einstein

    by Primordial Ooze on Sat May 21, 2005 at 07:21:38 PM PDT

  •  This will not be as hard for the right wing (none / 0)

    to spin away as we think.  They will turn it around by saying that she was rated by other judges, who didn't like her because they are "activist" liberal judges, and voted against her because she strictly upholds the constitution as opposed to their methods and beliefs.

    If this poll is used as part of the attempt to block Owen, then we or the Democrats in the Senate, also have to have their homework done as far as what kind of judges were represented by the negative votes.    It is hard to imagine anything close to a liberal judge in Texas, but that is how they will spin it.  

    Buchanan was on CNN or one of the cable channels today, talking about how all of the judges Bush put forward are highly " qualified".  They knowingly are using this word, I have heard it several times.  The public has a hard time seperating qualified from fit for the position. It should be pointed out that all kinds of people have the right qualifications.  That does not mean that they hold views that won't destroy the country.

    by hopscotch1997 on Sat May 21, 2005 at 07:50:53 PM PDT

    •  the Houston Bar (none / 1)

      of lawyers and judges is NOT liberal.

      Not. Liberal.

      Also - I believe this poll includes rankings of the judges by attorneys only.

      "They blamed it on the Islamic fanatics, at the time. [...] That was when they suspended the Constitution. They said it would be temporary."-Handmaid's Tale

      by JLFinch on Sat May 21, 2005 at 09:01:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Liberal judges? In Texas?? (none / 0)

      You must be joking.  Texas Liberal is an oxymoron, at least when you're talking about judges.  The only question is how far right are they, and how much money have they taken.  There are no liberal judges in Texas, at any level.  None.

      by RSG on Sun May 22, 2005 at 04:30:40 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Great concrete evidence (none / 0)

    Particularly since stupid Daniel Shore on NPR was talking this morning about how Democrats didn't liek her because she had ruled a lot against abortion rights and aside from that was just a typical conservative.

    reduce polarization -- hug a republican

    by golightly21 on Sat May 21, 2005 at 07:51:37 PM PDT

  •  C students (4.00 / 3)

    Bush told us how a "c" student can be president. I'm sure a poor rating for a judge is not a problem. Damn those elitest Democratic who want competence <snark>

    fact does not require fiction for balance

    by mollyd on Sat May 21, 2005 at 08:07:39 PM PDT

    •  But she's not a C Student! (4.00 / 2)

      She gets an F - amongst fellow Republican peers.  Anyone want to guess how our Repub Senators are going to explain that one away? I'm sure they will find a way, but I'd love to hear "ahead of time" ideas on how they'll pull this one off.

      It does not take many words to tell the truth. - Chief Joseph - Nez Perce

      by Gabriele Droz on Sat May 21, 2005 at 09:28:50 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Gaaugh! So which of my senators is worse? (none / 0)

    Which will this information have the least affect on - - Kay Bailey Hutchison, or John Cornyn?

    Really, someone tell me why I should waste the electricity and photons on e-mails to them.

    Torture is Wrong!

    by tom 47 on Sat May 21, 2005 at 09:29:45 PM PDT

  •  Freep this poll: (4.00 / 2)

    Should the Senate minority be able to block confirmation of a judicial nomination on philosophical grounds?

    Votes: 83

    Results:  Yes 78%
              No 22%

    Ironically, I found this link on FreeRepublic.  It's even more interesting when you read the article they linked to:

    The scope of the Endangered Species Act and the rights of marijuana smokers to avoid federal prosecution, of computer users to download music, of doctors to prescribe lethal drugs to terminally ill patients, of states to limit auto emissions, and of schoolchildren to say the Pledge of Allegiance are among the many matters decided by federal judges.

    ...

    Conservatives have long complained that liberal "activist'' judges use creative interpretations of the Constitution to impose measures, such as same-sex marriage, they cannot enact in the legislature. A broad interpretation of the Constitution's interstate commerce clause is the foundation of much of the government regulation that conservatives so strongly oppose.

    And that comment is most interesting in light of this comment, further down:

    "What we have right now is a very conservative court system -- because it is overwhelmingly comprised of Republican judges,'' said Donald Songer, a professor of political science at the University of South Carolina, who has written extensively about the federal judiciary.

    And just some interesting info:

    The imprint of presidents
    The number of sitting federal judges, by president:

    George W. Bush...205

    Bill Clinton...350

    George H.W. Bush...167

    Ronald Reagan...273

    Jimmy Carter...142

    Gerald Ford...25

    Richard Nixon...71

    Lyndon Johnson...28

    John F. Kennedy...6

    Knowing others is intelligence; knowing yourself is true wisdom.... Tao de Ching

    by MyName on Sat May 21, 2005 at 09:30:36 PM PDT

    •  Reading FreeRepublic keeps me sane... (none / 1)

      When I see how hollow all of their arguments are, even amongst themselves, I know that their house of cards will crumble soon.  Wish I could post this diary there!

      Knowing others is intelligence; knowing yourself is true wisdom.... Tao de Ching

      by MyName on Sat May 21, 2005 at 10:03:10 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Irrelevant (none / 1)

    The true believers will just whine that the Houston bar is dominated by a bunch of liberal trial lawyers so of course they hate Owen for making their job harder...

    Let us face it: There is no evidence, there is no argument, there is nothing that will force the true believers to see anything that they do not wish to see, other than complete and utter personal disaster caused by the neo-con's looting of the nation in order to fuel their mad schemes overseas, and even *then* they will blame it all on "liberals" for not joining in whole-heartedly in the looting.

    I would discuss this more, but I've already done so in the past and it's too damned depressing. What we have is an administratin that is speaking to the worst in all of us, the petty hatreds and envy and parochialisms that are built into every human animal but that some of us overcome via education and exposure to a lot of loving and caring people. The Busheviks tell the lies that their base wants to hear, want to believe in that animal heart of theirs, and there is nothing we can do that will ever convince that base that the Busheviks are lying to them. The only thing we can do is come up with bigger, better, bolder, more optimistic lies called dreams, but alas we seem to have a shortage of dreamers capable of dreaming big nowdays...

    -- Badtux the "Where have all the dreamers gone?" Penguin

    Religious conservatives are motivated by the suspicion that someone, somewhere, is having fun.

    by badtux on Sat May 21, 2005 at 11:37:19 PM PDT

  •  My LTE (4.00 / 5)

    Today the St Petersburg Times ran a story on Owens and Brown. Here's my response:

    Priscilla Owens may have received the American Bar Association's ubiquitous rating of "well-qualified", but apparently members of the Houston Bar Association don't agree. In a poll published May 21 in the Houston Chronicle, nearly 50% gave her an overall rating of "Poor", worse than any other Texas State Supreme Court Justice.

    Curiously, the Time's May 22 two-reporter story about Owens missed this information, which the HBA released on May 17. (Why don't reporters do their homework?)

    46% said that her opinions FAILED "to demonstrate well reasoned, clearly-written disposition of the case based on proper application of the law to the record"

    49% said Owens is NOT "impartial and open-minded with respect to determining the legal issues."

    How in the world would this incompetent, rigid, activist judge be a good choice for federal court?

    (http://www.hba.org/ (Houston Bar Association) contains the detailed poll results; http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/3191921 contains the story.)

    by TampaProgressive on Sun May 22, 2005 at 05:33:02 AM PDT

  •  Is there a rating from the full state bar? (none / 0)

    It would be interesting to compare the Houston association's ratings against the full state bar's.

    All snark is dedicated to station wagon.

    by Eddie Haskell on Sun May 22, 2005 at 07:54:20 AM PDT

  •  off topic question (none / 0)

    My sister, not too articulate, but with her heart in the right place, has in-laws visiting her today.  They are on an anti-undocumented residents/workers rant.  She called me for "talking points" but I am too busy to compose.

    I remember seeing a blog once that listed succinct "talking points" for most issues - for progressives in a dialogue with conservatives.  Also, for non-lawyers/intellectuals who just won't get into the deepest issues.

    After searching for it for the last 20 minutes, I must move on.  Hoping that the incredible resources of the kossack community can help.

    Sorry for taking up space, but I don't want my sweet sister to get crushed - she needs talking points!  Thanks so much.

    by i love san fran on Sun May 22, 2005 at 09:01:11 AM PDT

  •  Just emailed... (none / 0)

    both Santorum and Specter re: this. I asked them both if they can explain to me why the Bush administration is so keen to award such mediocrity, and why it is necessary to change the rules of the Senate to do so. On Santorum's, I added the further dig... "Does Congress really hate America that much?"

    by modchick65 on Sun May 22, 2005 at 10:02:22 AM PDT

  •  Owen Did Not Rape a Baby (4.00 / 2)

    What more can we ask for in a judge?

    The moral arc of the universe is long, but it bends towards justice. - Martin Luther King, Jr.

    by easong on Sun May 22, 2005 at 10:34:04 AM PDT

  •  The attempt to eliminate the filibuster (none / 0)

    Is now a massive act of desperation on the part of republicans. If democrats can get their act together, and they are begining to, the Republican majority in both houses can be eliminated.

    The last mid-term election was a disaster for democrats, primarily because they did not handle the situation in Iraq properly.

    If you go back to every war in the 20th century, every single party that was in power lost control of the Congress after a war was started by the president except this one.

    Eleven months after Pearl Harbor, the democrats lost both the House and Senate in with very large Republican gains. Same thing happened in 1950 after Trumen went into Korea. The elections of 1996, in the middle of Vietnam gave Republicans and even larger gain than occured in the 1950 elections.

    Congressional Republican know that the only thing that won them the 2002 and 2004 elections was a democratic party largely divided over how to handle Iraq. However, it was Republican whho acted as loyal opposition, not attacking the president, but his supporters in congress and the cabinet, that won them Congressional majorities.

    All Republican have left is the attempt to place judges before they are unseated in 2006 and probably 2008.

    by Uncle Ho on Sun May 22, 2005 at 01:17:14 PM PDT

Permalink | 98 comments