Posted on 10/09/2005 5:13:45 AM PDT by Alas Babylon!
The Talk Shows
Sunday, October 9th, 2005
Guests to be interviewed today on major television talk shows:
FOX NEWS SUNDAY (Fox Network): Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.; former House Speaker Newt Gingrich; Texas Supreme Court Judge Nathan Hecht; Gary Bauer, president of the American Values Coalition; Dr. Steven Rosenberg, chief surgeon with the National Institutes of Health.
MEET THE PRESS (NBC): Pat Buchanan, former presidential candidate; Richard Land, president, Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention.
FACE THE NATION (CBS): Sens. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., and Charles Schumer, D-N.Y.
THIS WEEK (ABC): Sens. Arlen Specter, R-Pa., chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., ranking Democrat of the committee; Mike Leavitt, secretary, Health and Human Services.
LATE EDITION (CNN) : Sens. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., and Richard Durbin, D-Ill.; Mowaffak al-Rubaie, Iraqi national security adviser; the Rev. Pat Robertson, founder of the Christian Coalition; Dr. David Nabarro, U.N. bird flu envoy.
Wow you really hung tough. Do you usually let it run this late?
I remember I had a job early in life at a factory. I came from a fairly shelter family. I asked a fellow what he did over the weekend. He went on to tell me how horrible it was cause he went to the bar and no one would fight him. Now when I go to a bar, I try to find one that's safe. I want to enjoy a good time, have some chat, shoot some pool and have a few brews and safely go home. He goes to the rough ones looking for a fight.
Some media folks and many on this board below to that crowd.
There is another factor however. Supposedly there is a group of folks that have been selected, groomed and taugh to do all the right things by the Ed Meese's and other behind the scenes conservative movers and shakers to move through the court system ultimately to take their seat on the High Court when a vacancy occurs. Supposedly, the folks that have been touted were from that group. The word from the WH during Roberts early days and before Rehnquist passed was wait until next time. Next time is here. And it didn't happen. I don't think anyone told the groomers that one of the groomed was not going to be selected. In addition, one poster on this forum "Pukin Dog" now has posted that his sources close to action say that only Miers would make it through. Opposition research has found skeletons....well let me cut and paste his remarks so I don't say something out of context...... Information was shared with me on Saturday, which described in no uncertain terms that Harriet Miers stands as the only nominee on Bush’s list which has any chance of confirmation by the Senate Judiciary Committee. The reasons for this are numerous, and would be embarrassing to the Conservative movement should one or many of the ‘stars’ who we hoped Bush would select be shot down in Committee, which again, if true, would be a certainty.
More than one of the persons we might have wanted made it clear to the President that they would not accept his nomination if selected. You can draw your own conclusions as to why, but the only hint I will provide is that data mining works too damn well these days. What we saw back when Clarence Thomas was nominated would seem like a walk in the park, compared to what would be done to some of our most popular jurists.
Our Democrat opponents have been quite busy, especially after John Roberts embarrassed them, searching for any information that would allow an open personal attack on a nominee. Sadly, many of the folks we wanted badly would have had their lives destroyed had they attempted confirmation to the bench, and wisely declined. There is no one among us who has not done (or had a family member do) things that we either regret, or would rather keep to ourselves. Because none of us are perfect, it is possible that had one of our choices been selected, we might have lived to regret that day for a very long time.
Factual? Who knows.
Well....Miers is pro-life, as is McCain, but pro Second Amendment, which MCain is not. Spector is pro-choice and pro Second Amendment at times, but he's a useless political hucster who can be swayed if goven the correct incentives.
I personally doubt Spector will run for another term and believe McCain is a bypolar egomaniac with a serious case of Stockholm syndrome regarding the VC. In addition, a pet issue of the left, abortion, is out of Miers' record as far as her legal practice, as her more well known cases involved administrative law, while the Second Amendment, a right wing pet issue, is also off the table during verifiable arguments for any confirmation. No arguments on the LEGAL PRECEDENT record, though she HAS made public statements on both issues. Thus, two of the more popular "kitchen table issues" are ruined for both sides of the PUNDITRY aisle. These are a few of the reasons I fully expect the compost to be flung through the fan blades and all over the political spectrum once the confirmation circus begins.
One note: Miers is known, like Roberts, to be pretty much impossible to rattle under intense pressure. Like I said, she's a tough broad and President Bush would NEVER have picked her if he didn't want a fight.
We should all pay close attention. THIS one trick dog and pony show is going to become interesting. They'll have to add a heavy duty, verbal trapeze act in order to get in the standard Roe Inquisition. That trapeze act HAS to spill over onto FR if Miers' seminar detractors want to retain any credibility at all.
Actually, the verbal maneuvering has already gotten as interesting and educating as the Security Council circus during the run up to military action in Iraq. It'll get even more so.
Just my humble political analysis.
I'll say.
Now, I have posted quotes that Miers supporters were in fact bashing Bork. If that's not bashing, then what do you call it?
If people are in attack mode in a way you've never seen around here, you somehow managed to miss the Trent Lott, total border sealing and California recall threads in the past couple of years ;-)
Best post on the thread so far, five nominations.
Rush is not a Miers critic. He has unequivocally stated over and over that he doesn't know enough about her to form an opinion. That's a position ANY rational person should take. Withhold an opinion until you have the FACTS.
On that we can agree.
Do you understand what you read or are you just posting to see your words in print?
I was more of a "mindless idiot" when I was a voting and supportive member of the Democrat party. I voted the party line in every election no matter who they ran and I argued the party line no matter how stupid it was.
The final events that woke me up was the birth of my son and Clinton becoming the candidate of choice for the Democrats.
The process of changing your entire political view takes a while. It's like having your sight restored over a period of time, so I moved to the Reform party and supported their candidate.
As I read more and more on FR (at that time it was not the Republican pep rally that it is today) I was able to realize that I was more of a Conservative than anything else.
I moved from the Reform party to the Independent party before Pat took over and when I listened to what President Bush was saying I believed him and have supported him and every Republican on the ticket.
So, now I'm a "mindless idiot" for supporting Bush?
Your logic escapes me?
Further proof that you do not understand what you read?
I came from the Democrat party to vote for Perot so I would not have backed your guy any way.
In reality if the Republican party had a message and a candidate worth voting for Republicans would not have lost their "base" and would have easily won the election.
Obviously your "base" saw something they liked better and it was a nutjob, how does that make you feel that a large enough percentage of your "base" would prefer Perot over the ideas your party expressed?
Keep calling people that support your guy "mindless idiots" and you will get the opportunity to relive that experience.
I tire of your name calling and your inability to think through simple conversation.
I know your ego will demand that you respond to this post, after that, please do not further burden me with more of your asinine remarks. I can assure you I will not reply to any of your posts.
LOL...I'm in PA and have given legal advice and acted as counsel in VA, where I lived and studied law (business law, actually) and PA where I'm a native and moved back to a decade ago.
NO Joe. You made the statement that we all were. NO were are not. In fact, as I pointed out on this thread the only point we were making about Bork was how Meirs is actually more Bork then Bork on the 2nd Amendment. Comparing what they said over there to here is unfair to us. To claim that what half a dozen said applys to all is NOT at all fair. I apologies, I accused you of misrepresentation. That was unfair. What I DO object to is the constant EXAGERATION. Bringing up someone bashing Bork in an out of context way to try and claim a point about Meirs defenders here is an attempt at deflection. It infuriates me. It is a logically indefensible argument.
Not really.
Funny you say "in fact" when my criticism towards the pundit class of whining maroons is because they have NO FACTS.
IMHO we should have the hearings before the hanging, catch my drift?
BTW GWB has not given these ankle-biters a single thing to bitch about when it comes to judicial nominations. Quite the contrary, IN FACT.
Can you give me one good reason why Ms Miers should be asked to step down by some pundits when they haven't even had the hearings? If they were over and these talking heads have objections it might make more sense to me anyway.
If you say free speech, don't bother answering, I already know about that.
When you cannot win the debate, go for the name calling. Sorry you just outed yourself. You lose.
Exactly.
How about ex-Senators? Say, Fred Thompson? I'm sure there are others. And of active senators, you have to admit that George Allen has yet to wimp out... emphasize yet.
However, I basically agree. Though not a governor, Rudy is clearly at the top of most lists. I'd vote for him over virtually any of the Democrats.
I'm sorry, I do not type fast enough to reply to all of your misstatements of my points because the mods are going to close the thread at 900 posts.
special award time coming up for the cardinal for this post.
I believe you, 100 percent. I haven't been to FR in a few weeks, and can't tell you how disappointed I am with the dissembling "arguments" against Miers. Then again, I was almost as disappointed with the reaction to Roberts even after I posted multiple times that he was mentored BY REHNQUIST and Beltway scuttlebut has it that he was names, BY REHNQUIST, as his successor.
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.