Let's Argue Over Judges - Divide - Never Unite

I find it interesting to visit some of my oldbeen able to label him a liar. He would also have lost
newsletters and see if there are some commonface in the Arab world. Moreover, because Saddam's
threads to what is going on today.A huge showdownego led him to believe he was the leader of a
is brewing in the Senate over President Bush's judicialGreater Mesopotamia, he had to maintain an illusion of
appointments. Senatorial tensions over this processstrength. He believed he needed to maintain a strong
are especially pronounced since it is very likely thatarmy with nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons
later in the summer at least one member of theand to make sure the West as well as all of Islam
Supreme Court will be stepping down. This type ofunderstood this. If Saddam had admitted that he did
thing happens almost weekly in the House, but thehave weapons of mass destruction, the Bush
100-person Senate has always been more collegial.administration would have had grounds to do what
Compromise has been the hallmark of the Senate forthey did anyway: label him a threat to national and
over two hundred years. Now, it is looking as thoughinternational security and take aggressive action.
High Noon is approaching.Part of the problem lies inPresident Bush successfully maneuvered Saddam into
how President Bush has been handling his judiciala position that made his invasion of Iraq palatable to
agenda. Historically, presidents float judicial candidatesthe West and at least somewhat defensible to the
through the Senate before they are formallyMuslim world.When I think about this new
nominated, and they also share their short lists withreport-which, by the way, is six hundred pages long-I
the ABA (American Bar Association). This givesam infuriated about the way it evades the issue of
Democrats, Republicans, and America's legalresponsibility. The report suggests that no one was
profession an opportunity to weigh in on theto blame personally. Institutions were to blame. The
candidates before names are announced or publicsystems and structures of institutions were to blame.
hearings begin. This process helps to removeIn his new book, Winning, eight traits to be a good
extremist judges (liberal or conservative) fromleader, the legendary CEO of General Electric, Jack
consideration, which in turn helps to make a difficultWelch, claims that "Leaders probe and push with a
and trying process more harmonious than it might becuriosity that borders on skepticism, making sure
if the ABA's judicial ratings and/ or senators' concernstheir questions are answered with action." Where
and objections were aired for the first time in publicwas President Bush's curiosity before the invasion of
hearings.Unfortunately, this well-tested system wasIraq? Just how hard do you think he probed and
thrown out by President Bush early in his first term.pushed his advisors and intelligence agencies to make
He now simply hands the Senate a list of judges whosure he was acting in America's best interest by
have been vetted by the White House and hisinvading Iraq and overthrowing Saddam? A real
advisor Karl Rove, who is not even an electedleader's conversations about decisions, must be filled
official, much less a lawyer. Clearly, the Presidentwith hard questions: "What if?" and "Why not?" and
wants who he wants on the nation's judges' benches"How come?" As Welch goes on to say,
and is unwilling to listen to dissenting voices. This has"Questioning, however, is never enough. You have to
led us to where we are today, with an angry Senatemake sure your questions unleash debate and raise
ready to turn to filibusters to outflank the President.issues that get action." Our administration did not
Is this any way to run a government or to secureeven come close to this standard.* * * * *RECENT
the best judges in the land? We should all stand upNEWS:$ Tom DeLay is the powerful representative
and shout from the treetops, "Be reasonable!!" Whyfrom Texas who has made the news on a daily basis
can't we sit down and agree on a list of judges thatfor the last several weeks. He continues to raise
will serve American interests and not the ideologiesmoney by the truck loads. DeLay also has an
of either the right or left wing? Let's re-involve thoseinteresting habit of brow-beating lobbies to hire
who have the most intimate knowledge of thepeople whom he favors in exchange for access to
quality of our judges-the ABA-and those whoHouse Republicans. While DeLay's practice is not
represent citizens-our senators--and let's let thetechnically illegal, it is-quite simply--wrong. This is not
democratic system work.When I consider the kind ofhow democratic leaders should behave. It is how the
judge I would most appreciate, here's what I thinkmafia would act if it were running the House of
of: a judge who will stand up for my rights as anRepresentatives.$ Acting in their time-honored spirit
American; a judge who understands that choosing toof partisanship, The House recently changed their
have an abortion must be a woman's right (This isethic rules in order to prevent Tom DeLay from
the law. Not just my opinion but the law); a judgegetting his fourth reprimand in two years. While the
who understands that affirmative action is anHouse was changing its rules to protect DeLay,
important part of making the American playing fieldSpeaker Dennis Hastert removed several Republicans,
level for all Americans. Additionally, I want a judgeincluding the ethics committee chairman, Joel Hefley
who knows that business has to grow, but not at(R) from Colorado and appointed Republicans who
the expense of workers' safety, workers' wages, orwere close to Mr. DeLay. The committee has been
the environment. Finally, I want a judge who is freelocked in a partisan battle over investigating DeLay's
to interpret the Constitution without feeling that helatest ethical charges ever since the rules change.
she is beholden to a single group or individual.When IIronically, because of this stalemate, Mr. Delay has
consider the kind of President I want in the midst ofhad no forum for clearing his name; so the press has
our present debate over the judiciary, here's what Ihad a field day, acting as ethics investigators on page
think of: the national equivalent to the grade schoolone of newspapers around the country. Now, it
teacher we all remember who broke up fights in theappears that the Republicans are reconsidering their
middle of recess. She's the one who sat both partiesrule changes. I'm sure there is a lesson in here
down and said: we are not leaving until we resolvesomewhere. $ While the Republicans are
this problem. Ironically, this talent is one for whichself-destructing, I am disappointed by how lazy the
George Bush was once famous. We need Mr. Bush toDemocrats are these days. They seem to be sitting
remember that we have to work together in orderon the side-line watching the Republican implosion,
to fight the real problems our nation faces, such asmore like second stringers, the scrubs, on the bench
stagnant wages, terrorism, the conflict in Iraq, raisingwaiting for the real players, the starters, to fail. The
budget deficits, and an increasingly undereducatedDemocrats are doing nothing proactively. They do
population. He should be a "uniter and not a divider."not seem to have any plans or ideas to move the
At the very least, Mr. Bush should return to thecountry forward. Where is an alternative tax plan, a
nation's traditional method of nominating judges. Heviable social security fix, a new energy plan or
should withdraw all of the names of controversialsomething? We need more. We expect more.$ Isn't
judges, no matter how much he favors themit time to reconsider the twenty-four hour news
personally. President Bush should also share thechannels? In an effort to out scoop or snoop each
names of possible nominees with the ABA. And thenother, simple little local stories are blown out of
he should pay attention to the ABA's ratings as wellproportion and trumpeted as "national news." Please!?!
as to Karl Rove's advice. The Democrats shouldRecently, a bride in a small town in Georgia got cold
agree to consider seriously any nominee thefeet before her wedding day and took off. She was
President sends them who also has earned a superiorphotogenic, which probably helped to push the story;
rating from the ABA. The Republicans should agreeand she tried to cover herself by leaving clues that
to support judges with superior ratings as well. If thesuggested she might have been abducted. Soon this
President and both parties were to agree to thesewoman's domestic problems became national news.
procedures, friendly compromises can be made andThere were searches. A mysterious couple and a van
America wins. This is the way a democracy shouldwere investigated. The finger pointing started. "The
work.* * * * *We have now received a third reporthusband-to-be has a guilty look. He won't take a
from our government stating that our intelligence onpolice lie detector test." But the bride turned up,
Iraq prior to our invasion was completely wrong.unharmed. The nation heaved a sigh of relief. Then
Unfortunately, this comes as no surprise to anyonewe were told she just ran away. Eyebrows cocked,
who has followed this administration. The Presidentthe Julia Roberts Runaway Bride movie was invoked,
and his advisors seem to operate upon their own setand the nation snickered. My question is: why was
of beliefs, and facts are---well--not necessarily thatthis national news? The fact that neither the House
important. Despite the fact that we have enormousnor the Senate has proposed a balanced budget in
and generally competent intelligence-gatheringthe face of a $400 billion deficit this year is national
capacities, it would seem that our President has notnews. But Americans are bored by a story of such
been as inquisitive as, I believe, a good leader shouldimportance, preferring ones about a runaway bride in
be. He and his advisors have not convinced me thatGeorgia. I'm reminded of lines from a Don Henley
they ask enough thoughtful, probing questions aboutsong: "Dirty little secrets. Dirty little lies. We got our
issues before hurrying into action. Now, if we lookdirty little fingers in everybody's pie. We love to cut
back on the ultimatum that our President gaveyou down to size. We love dirty laundry."Errington C.
Saddam Hussein in 2002, I am outraged. Mr. BushThompson, MD, is a surgeon, scholar, fulltime sports
asked for a full and complete accounting of Saddam'sfan and part-time political activist. He is active in a
weapons of mass destruction. The way he did thisnumber of community projects and initiatives.
reminds me of the old trick question that has noThrough medicine, he strives to improve the physical
acceptable answer: "Have you stopped beating yourhealth of all he treats. Through this book, he hopes
wife?"Because the administration "knew"-despiteto share his thoughts and reflections on the current
intelligence to the contrary-- that Saddam Husseinpolitical landscape.Dr. Thompson was educated at
had weapons of mass destruction, no answer thatEmory University and Southwestern Medical School
Saddam could have given would have avoidedand currently resides in the mountains of Western
confrontation. If the Iraqi leader said that he did notNorth Carolina.
have any weapons, the administration would have