Posted on 10/08/2005 3:40:47 PM PDT by quidnunc
They object to the nomination on grounds other than performance and qualifications.
The fact we are discussing this means everything is -NOT- hunky-dory.
I've been popping into all the Miers threads the last few days. Arguments are coalesceing and that means invitably they are getting repetitive.
Let's try some new stuff.
1) What is a political spectrum? It is a range of attitudes about the issues of the day and those attitudes strive to find some consistency based in an underlying ideology -- for example advocating low taxes derives from a preference for the private sector to have prominence over government.
2) There is no guarantee that all attitudes on all issues will fall in one category or the other, i.e., conservative vs liberal. It is popular for FR folks to call themselves social conservatives -- presumably to absolve themselves from any responsibility for being "conservative" in matters not . . . social.
3) This kind of delineation doesn't work well for politicians. A candidate will find his or her fundraising potential reduced by being pro Choice and pro Gun. The 2nd Amendment advocates may tend to be Pro Life and won't write checks. In other words, it's hard for candidates to pick and choose issues.
4) Non candidates can do this. No reason they can't. And so, Miers: what we've seen the last few days is evidence she is pro Life, pro Gun and pro Gay. She was chosen explicitly to avoid the Stevens Precedent of Justices who change once on the court and also, simultaneously, because she is known by the chooser to be a strict constructionist.
5) The result of this is, for a Justice it is possible to be conservative "in aggregate" and maybe not come up an FR darling on every vote cast. In fact, it is inevitable that this will be so. I know Ginsberg has cast some surprisingly conservative votes and I know Scalia last year cast a surprisingly liberal vote.
6) Maybe we should evaluate this nominee via scorekeeping. Try to quantify where on the spectrum she is. After doing that, the only real criterion of significance is where that evaluation puts her wrt O'Connor. Any move to the right of O'Connor, in an environment of leftwing hatred and 7 RINOs, is an enormous victory for conservatism.
I have been shocked and demoralized by those Republicans who have turned on Bush because of this nomination. Shame! Shame! Shame!
"LOL, the RNC can adopt the leftist chants!!"
Well, they've adopted most of the rest. Why not the chants, too?
Great post but I disagree with the "pro-gay" description. Mr. World Net Daily misrepresented what Miers said on the questionnaire (surprise, surprise). She opposed repealing the Texas sodomy law and specifically answered "no" to the question about seeking an endorsement from the Lesbian/Gay Group. I bet that most people would have answered the civil rights question "yes" because of the way it was worded.
The real damage has already been done. Even if Miers turns out to be a conservative.
Bush has successfully given notice to the conservative constructionists that have been outspoken in the past 40 years that they can serve on any court....except the Supreme one. In order to qualify for the Supreme court you cannot have made bold lectures, bold rulings, bold writings, or belonged to anything with "Federalist" in it's name. To have done these things makes you to "unstealthy". The message is clear. If you believe these things you better keep your mouth shut because those who haven't are now the leper nominees.
This damage has ALREADY been done. This is despite her being a drifting Sandra Day clone or a solid conservative.
The organizations commited to the outspoken principles of our founders and have farm raised nominees for this moment have been slapped in the face. Shut up or forget about it. Closet constructionists are now the order of the day from here on out.
"And....I've posted this several times and no one has an answer"
Possibly because it is only your opinion and not based on facts.
Well said FRiend. Heck, short of another Souter or Ginsburg, ANY pick is better than O'Conner.......this internal conservative squabbling is silly, counterproductive and political suicide......and Miers hasn't even expressed her views yet.
I rest my case. Weak reply
Maybe not so pro Gay then, though I did see a Gay group in Dallas endorse her.
Point is, those of us who are willing to support this nomination may feel compelled to assert she has positions (or there is evidence of a position) that is conservative just to hold the objections down -- even if there is no such evidence.
I was trying to be a bit bold and state that she has that one relatively minor liberal credential.
Now we may have
miered
Great post.
Thanks. Obvious isn't it.
Some wouldnt know obvious if it hit them square in the face.
All that's left are the idiotic name calling, charges of Bush hating, and so on.
You didn't even make a case....You gave your opinion...I rejected it and moved on.
Well we will have three years of Roberts and Meirs on the bench to get us base Conservatives worked up into a full screeching throttle. And God forbid it scares me that should even Ruth "buzzy" Ginsberg retire or die now, Bush might nominate some real liberal assclown like an Alan Ginsberg or Lawrence Tribe as yet another appeasment bone to Demorats and Rinos.
You said it's not based on fact. If you can't observe the fact that Bush will not appoint any nominee with a paper trail (White house people have already touted this themselves) Then I don't know what it would take for you to see one.
You answered your own question. You don't have the slightest clue of Miers qualifications, yet assume she isn't conservative. President Bush can't get a candidate past YOU (a supposed conservative), how the hell is he supposed to get a nominee by the gang of 14 and every spineless RINO republican and then, gasp, the democrats? Stealth? You can bet your potatoes on that.....
I don't believe that for a second. I have a life outside of the Freep and everyone I know who is upset about the nomination are all Bush supporters. In fact I don't know of one person I have spoken with or posted with that was not a Bush supporter.
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.