Embarrassingly for your baldly stated assertion: there is, in fact, no substantive "debunking" of any of Farrah's points anywhere in the thread cited. Oopsie.
You guys must be desperate when you repost retread articles.
Didn't show up on Search. If the Mods feel it should be removed: I have no hey problema with that.
"Desperate," however, is a term better reserved, I feel, for those so slavish in their need to prove their undying devotion to a political party (rather than conservative political principal, per se), that they ardently champion -- and even lie on behalf of! -- a pro-ICC quota queen for the United States Supreme Court. YMMV, however.
Yeah right, just put in the term "mystery woman" and do the search through the date, and voila this know nothing farah hit piece, but you already knew that.
LOL! Then why is she working for an administartion that effectively neutered the ICC.
Oh BTW, she is more pro-2nd amendment than Bork.
"The same liberties that ensure a free society make the innocent vulnerable to those who prevent rights and privileges and commit senseless and cruel acts," Miers wrote in Texas Lawyer when she was president of the state bar. "Those precious liberties include free speech, freedom to assemble ... access to public places, the right to bear arms and freedom from constant surveillance. "We are not willing to sacrifice these rights because of the acts of maniacs," she concluded.
Harriet Miers, 1992
Yeh, the only 'debunking' I saw were 'stealth' remarks about the 'stealth' candidate.
We are still only getting repackaging; we are still not getting any substance about Miers, except that she is 'accomplished'. Still just vague adjectives.
"Desperate," however, is a term better reserved, I feel, for those so slavish in their need to prove their undying devotion to a political party (rather than conservative political principal, per se), that they ardently champion -- and even lie on behalf of! -- a pro-ICC quota queen for the United States Supreme Court. YMMV, however.