Subscribe via RSS Feed

Making It Easy

[ 10 ] July 30, 2010 | Scott Lemieux

Obama’s glacial pace in making federal court nominations is not, strictly speaking, an example of the kind of thing Krugman is talking about today. Making a couple dozen more nominations to the lower federal courts would not be a base-energizing move (nominating someone like Pam Karlan to the Supreme Court, maybe.) But allowing a lot of vacant seats on federal courts as the GOP is poised to make huge gains in the Senate is still bad on the merits — bad for the functioning and fairness of the criminal justice system, and bad for the application of federal law. And while this is an area in which Obama’s power is shared with an institution in which Republicans have a de facto veto, it’s still true that 1)he could make it harder for them, and 2)even with the Republican obstructionism he almost certainly could have gotten more nominees confirmed if he had made more nominations.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Twitter

Comments (10)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Incontinentia Buttocks says:

    Among those of us on the left who haven’t been very happy with the Obama administration, there’s been a substantial amount of difference about how surprised we are by its inadequacies.

    I’m usually in the “not very surprised” camp. I voted for Obama (who was clearly the lesser evil), but I expected the kind of toothless centrism that led me to leave the Democratic Party and become a registered independent in the mid-1990s.

    But I am truly surprised at stuff like his mishandling of judicial appointments. Whatever Obama’s legal agenda is, it isn’t served by allowing vacancies to linger.

    Back in 2008, two of the things I liked about Obama and his team were that they were: 1) very managerially competent (Rahm is an asshole and a “New Democrat,” but he had a reputation for getting things done); 2) brilliant at political messaging. One of the main reasons I was glad that Obama beat Clinton in the primary is that his campaign seemed to excel at these things.

    I’ve come to the painful conclusion that I was wrong about this.

    • DrDick says:

      Agreed.

      • Oscar Leroy says:

        It would be one thing if he were just a centrist. But too much of what he does is just stupid. Firing Shirley Sharrod, escalating in Afghanistan, and this are just plain stupid.

        Don’t we need federal judges? They aren’t a luxury. I assume they perform a vital function. And that’s to say nothing of the political aspects. Just stupid.

    • Anderson says:

      Exactly right. What did Obama *think* was going to happen at the midterm election?

      In my area, nominations of judges and U.S. attorneys have been glacially slow. And they’re not confirmed yet.

      – And exactly right on mgmt. and message, too.

  2. DrDick says:

    I do really wish that someone would point out to Obama rather forcefully that constantly shitting on and dismissing the people who actually voted for you while pandering to people who would not vote for you if you were the second coming of christ is a bad political move.

  3. Joe says:

    The Dems got stuff done, stuff that we should hear more about, but Obama has failed in various areas as Krugman notes.

    The treatment of Dawn Johnsen pissed me off. He’s right — where’s the strong labor voice? In fact, where is ANY strong left voice, just ONE, in his Cabinet that is out there continuously to remind progressives why they should be glad? The courts thing is also simply moronic.

    I realize he thinks the courts should have a smaller role, but his use of ideology when voting against Alito and Roberts (which Republicans love to throw in his face, including Mr. “Let’s Amend the Constitution” Graham) suggests he realizes their importance. So why in the hell doesn’t he pick some underlining to be in control of making sure more slots are filled?

    It’s like some Mad TV “Lower Expectations” bit.

  4. mattH says:

    Read in my local paper that the candidate that Jim Matheson put up for US Attorney of Utah, and now they’ve been discussing a Republican candidate with Sen. Hatch. I don’t think they learned a single thing from the Clinton administration’s dealings with Hatch.

  5. [...] M&#1072k&#1110&#1495&#609 It Easy : Lawyers, Guns & Money [...]

  6. Redkite Money Moves to Welcom Software?s Financier Managed Hosting Solution…

    I found your entry interesting thus I’ve added a Trackback to it on my weblog :)…

Leave a Reply




If you want a picture to show with your comment, go get a Gravatar.

  • Tags

    2008 campaign 2008 democratic primary 2008 elections 2008 republican primary afghanistan air force barack obama baseball books cats china civil liberties confrontation in the caucasus constitutional interpretation delusional wingnuttery foreign policy free dahlia lithwick gay and lesbian rights georgia hacktacular health care hillary clinton human rights iran Iraq war i see dead people israel kentucky military procurement movies nonsense nukes Obama's Supreme Court nominations presidential statement of the day reproductive freedom russia Sarah Palin soccer Straight-Talkin' Maverick John McCain Supreme Court the alaskan clown show the arbitrary executive wingnut butchery of history wingnuttery Yuck the Fankees
  • Subscribe

    Enter your email address below to receive updates each time we publish new content..

    Privacy guaranteed. We'll never share your info.
  • Meta