Skip to comments.Whining about Miers.
Posted on 10/08/2005 9:52:18 AM PDT by Allen H
Since Im sure there are still many conservatives out there who are still upset and whining about Bush not nominating who they wanted, Im wondering. Do you wish Bush had nominated who you wanted, even if it meant them not being confirmed and Bush being forced to pick a milk toast? I dont think anyone can argue about the fact that the Republican majority in the Senate havent exactly acted with a spine or any kind of united strong conservative voice the four years theyve been a majority. And it seems the larger their majority gets, the more its spine gets watered down.
This is a reality lesson in life. There are two ways to stand strong to your convictions and beliefs and not waiver. You can go about your life, putting your beliefs into practice, never bending, never breaking, never compromising, and whenever anyone asks what you believe, you tell them, politely, civilly, like how Miers has done it. OR, you can do it another way. You can be all those same things above, and you can also be very vocal, very "in your face", very confrontational, outspoken, and be very well known as to what you believe and stand for, so that if you come up for a position like Supreme Court Justice, its known immediately which side of the court you will always come down on. The Scalia / Thomas side, or the Ginsburg / Stevens side. The latter is the kind of person that Michael Luddig, Pricilla Owens, Edith Jones, or David Pryor, who I would sure support. Frankly thats the kind of person I am, and I was hoping they'd of gotten this nomination. Im not quite "in your face" with liberals unless confronted, but I also will not sit like a wall flower while people say stupid liberal things in the face of reality. I wouldnt expect to be nominated for the SCOTUS either. Being that way is not bad in any way, but it is a problem. Its guaranteeing a nasty, long, drawn out, ugly fight that would not even guarantee ALL the Republicans standing with the President. If Bush thought that the Republican majority in the Senate actually had a spine and would stand up to a fight, I think he would have likely put up someone like Juddig or Jones. I think this pick is an indictment on the complete and total lack of conservative will in the Senate majority. Heck, this woman he did pick stands as a solid conservative nominee with all those who have endorsed her, and not all Republicans are backing her. The bottom line is, Harriet Miers WILL be confirmed, and she much more likely than not, will prove to be a conservative, indications show she will be much like Scalia and Thomas. And if you voted for President Bush both times, like I did, or just one time, then you have to trust that he will keep his promise on Judges, like he has so faithfully kept it to this point. There hasnt been one single Judge on the district, appellate or federal court level that Bush has nominated that hasnt been a strong unbending conservative. And this is one fact I STILL cant get around that frustrates me with those opposing Miers. Miers was pivotal in choosing ALL the Judges that Bush has nominated to all the courts the past five years, all of which have proven to be good solid conservatives that all the conservative voters have liked so much. Yet somehow the person who found, supported, and brought all those good conservative judges to the President, somehow isnt good enough to be a judge herself when shes accomplished all the things shes done in her life? That is simply the stupidest thing Ive ever heard. Especially after its been proven she said now she was worried that perhaps John Roberts might not be conservative enough. And some conservatives are still not supporting her? ARE YOU FRIKKEN KIDDING ME??? THAT is just simply elitism and nothing else.
I was worried initially, because I desperately wanted an Owens, or Luiddig, or someone just like them, someone that was nose to the wind, finger pointing and shaking to the left, well known vocal hard conservative, BUT, if the person put up instead of them is just like that, with the same conservative ideological beliefs, just isnt a well known confrontational person who will unite all liberals and democrats and milk-toast weak RHINO Republicans against them, then I will choose the Miers over the Owens or Luddig EVERY TIME, because frankly I have NO FAITH in the Republican Senate majority, and while I am more like the judicial Luddigs and Joness, Ive still seen nothing that yet shows shes any less conservative than they are. When she gave money to algore, he was pro-life and hadnt taken the pink liberal without reason pill yet, and since then she has been nothing but a conservative loyalist on all levels, professionally, personally, and religiously. She voted for Reagan in 84, she voted for the first Bush in 88. Once she became a registered Republican she stayed Republican and voted and worked and donated that way even when clinton was President, even in 91 and 92 when the democrats controlled both Houses of Congress. Not one person who really knows her has come out against her nomination. Frum is the only one Ive heard of who has worked with her and doesnt support her, and that was years ago and its not as though Frum doesnt have his own agenda. None of Bushs judges has disappointed. Theyve all been proven to be very conservative constructionist judges, and there is no reason to believe Miers will be any different. The arguments is stale and smacks of elitism at this point. I prefer someone who hasnt been indoctrinated by the snobbery of Yale and Harvard liberalism, and has lived most all of her life in very conservative Texas. Even when Texas was majority Democrat, it was conservative and had nothing in common with the radical New England and left coast liberal bases of operation. Instead of being a judge shes been actually arguing law from the conservative perspective, not sitting on high on a bench disconnected from reality. What is so wrong with that? She will be confirmed, and more and more, I believe she will prove herself to be a dedicated defender of the Constitution and what it REALLY says, not what stevens and souter and ginsburg wish or think it says. Her votes I believe will consistently fall right with Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas and John Roberts, and when that time comes, I hope all here who eviscerated her just because shes not some elitist insider snob, or a speak first think second hothead that would inflame all democrats and RINOs in the Senate, will remember just how vacuous the opposition to her really was, and just how wrong it has proven to be. Given the past 20 years of her life, I cant see any rational way she will betray all she has proven to stand for the past two decades. And if you voted for and supported W. Bush last year and in 2000, then for Petes sake, show just a little faith and trust in the guy and believe that he would have gotten to know this woman the past 10 years hes had a close relationship with her. Have a little faith. With faith as small as a mustard seed, a mountain can be moved. I choose to have faith and pray that Harriet Miers will be the conservative strict-constructionist Justice that this nation desperately needs right now, and pray that she will have the strength and wisdom to adjudicate in that way, and continue to display and enforce the beliefs and convictions on the bench, that she has so strongly lived in her life.
If the nomination of Miers is what it takes for some so called "conservatives" to stop voting Republican, then their values don't mean much to them in the first place. Bush isn't even running for re-election, and even though she wouldn't have been my first choice, I sure as HELL am NOT going to check my conservative beliefs and convictions at the door next election day. It's stupid to even say that real conservatives will stop voting Republican because Bush nominated Miers instead of a spoiled harvard graduated up on high holier than thou judicial veteran elitist snob who is a favorite on the party citcuit. Any conservatives that stop voting Republican because of that are way too narrow minded and self important to be voting in ANY ELECTION! You are SUPPOSED to believe what you believe because you know it's right, not because it's convenient and not because the people in charge always do what you yourself would have done the exact way you would have done it. I can't even believe the assinine nature of that kind of premise. It's the kind of silly childish thing I'd expect from liberals!!! "FINE! You won't play the way I want to! Well!!! I'LL SHOW YOU! I'll take MY toys (vote) and go HOME! HMPH! That will teach you!" God that's stupid!!! Are there ANY adults who've actually been living in the real world who are opposed to Miers for real factual provable reasons, and not just because you think you could have thrown the ball further more accurately and completed the game winning touchdown pass???
HA! Nuff said.
Miers is a member of a nondenomiational, independent Christian church in Dallas.
Hey butt head get some stripes and maybe contribute a few bucks to FR before you start mouthing off in this forum. You, my friend, are a total f***ing dork.
I am the most conservatively Christian person you'll ever meet-- let's talk social issues-- and I do not support Miers.
Much has been said about her "pro-life activism," but I have yet to see any evidence of this. If she remains our nominee, I am going to pray and pray that this is true, but I believe we should have someone whose judicial philosophy is a bit more clear. Stealth nominations tend not to work well for conservatives.
I'm not trying to attack Bush or be overly critical, and I am not an elitist- my inclination is always to support our President- but I feel like he has dropped the ball on a number of crucial issues. For this reason, I can't just sit back and relax when he says to trust him on this one.
You don't really believe that anyone is going to allow Miers to actually answer questions in the hearings, do you? The last nominee to do that was Judge Bork, how did that go for him?
If the ultimate arbitor of the Constitution is not the war, rather than a battle, please show me the larger strategic picture.
I'd of preferred those also, as I've said many times. But Bush didn't pick them so tough marbles. He did pick someone he's known for many years with a history of being a strong conservative Christian Pro-Life loyal Republican. Even when she was a democrat she was a conservative at odds with the left of the party. I like that kind of strength of character and there's no factual evidence that she will not be another Thomas or Scalia on the court. She thought Roberts wasn't conservative enough, and conservatives are all goo-goo over Roberts now. How do you explain that?
Here's another example of one of the "base" who just wants a big-ass fight. Win, lose, it doesn't matter. They want a nasty, drawn-out brawl that wears out the rest of the country and is just as likely to blow back on the Republicans and Bush as to work in our favor.
The judicial nominee is a tool to be used to beat Joe Biden and Ted Kennedy over the head.
Never mind that this kind of warfare never works. We MUST have it!
I do what I can, but then there are guys like you who shill for the RINO's.
Confirmation requires 51 votes, not 60. But you know what? Miers was picked exactly because the president is seeking 60 votes. He has ratified the unconstitutional practice of cloture abuse.
Yeah, because now and narwal are sure behind her 100%. Whatever. Wait till the confirmation hearings and we'll see how much all the democrats like her. The democrats on the Judiciary Committee said so many nice things about Roberts before the hearing, and then during it they did nothing but try to fillet him ALL THE TIME! Do you not remember that?
Because his educational and, yes, career credentials were excellent -- but without anything the Dems could pin the too conservative, anti-Roe label on. He got away with a lot because the most conservative stuff they had on him was done for a Republican administration -- no way to prove it reflected his own views. (Like conservatives, they inferred conservativism, but they couldn't prove it.)
An excellent observation.
As Bush's legal counsel, she lives in Washington, DC, where she attends Episcopal churches.
AllenH- I am not going to take my toys and go home-- I will fight for electoral victories for more conservative republicans, and I *do* oppose Miers for "real reasons."
Go shill yourself. I've heard both sides, read the evidence, listened to people that actually know her, and have decided that all the anti-Miers stuff is opininated elities snobbery by people who think they could always do better than anyone else. It's just that simple. If the fact that I'm not willing to eviscerate someone I don't know when the evidence and first hand personal endorsements from many good well known conservative people means I'm "shilling" for her, then sobeit. I'd rather be doing that then opposing someone without a basis in fact and stanging on ground that has no foundation in reality.
I think they would prefer that Bush lose.
Im have gone along with Bush on most of his agenda. I see no reason to quit now. Im in a wait and see mode. I do acknowledge the angst this pick has caused, though. But a word of caution: the Left has tried to divide us over much since 2000. We have made it too far, IMHO, to let this be their victory. For all we know, she [Miers]could be just what the doctor ordered..
Brilliantly spoken my FRiend! And spot on TRUE!
Well, I posted it because it's what I believe, and because I'm fed up with all the whining from people who are on the outside looking in, thinking they know better. "vanity" cetainly had nothing to do with my posting of it. This is a conservative forum, I'm very conservative, and frustrated with the whole thin, so, there you go.
Is she supposed to commute to Dallas and back each Sunday?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.