article about justice stevens in the sunday nyt magazine.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

you all should go to nytimes.com  and read it.

i thought it was interesting.  he is one of my favorite justices on the court.

(i still bet he voted bush in 2000)

I feel confident that the 9 justices voted the exact same way in both of the Bush V. Gore elections that year.

Obviously the 5 partisan Republican hacks on the court voted for Bush.

Souter is definitely not a liberal, who knows who he voted for. Stevens is only the most liberal member of the court because of the total lack of liberals on the court.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I don't see how someone could vote for Bush and then rule against him in the decision.

Stevens and Souter might be an old school basically extinct kind of Republican where you do the right thing, not what helps your horse the most. Only 5 of the 7 Republicans on the court cared more about appointing Bush President than counting the votes to see who actually won. Of course now that Weicker, Jeffords, Chafee and so on are no longer Republicans, maybe it stops making sense to call them Republicans.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

BTW, could someone post the text of the article here, for those of us without a NYTimes log-in?

You don't need logins in more at the NY Times. That would be great if they were actually as liberal as people think. However, they charge you a liberal ad surcharge if you criticize the Bush administration (MoveOn got charged over twice as much as Giuliani for the same exact type of ad). Here's the link.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/23/magazine/23stevens-t.html


As for Giuliani, appearantly the really pro troop thing to do is never serve and blame the troops for the missing HMX explosives.