Hannity Flashback: "Elections mean something," "shouldn't the Democrats go along with" Bush's nominee?


From the July 19, 2005 edition of Fox News' Hannity and Colmes (accessed from Nexis):

HANNITY: Well, let's go back to the Ruth Bader Ginsburg example, if we can, for a minute. Because I think elections mean something, and I know you do, Senator. And if a president wins an election, and he has a particular judicial philosophy -- in the case Bill Clinton picked two very left of center people for this position. Ruth Bader Ginsburg was a former general counsel with the ACLU. She was approved 96-3.

George W. Bush is conservative. So if he has somebody with more of an originalist mainstream philosophy that he picks for the court, shouldn't the Democrats go along with that nominee, based on the fact that the Republican won this election?

Posted In
Government, Nominations & Appointments, The Judiciary
Supreme Court Nominations, Elena Kagan
We've changed our commenting system to Disqus.
Instructions for signing up and claiming your comment history are located here.
Updated rules for commenting are here.