Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Read His Lips - Bush Keeps His Promise
Pipeline News ^ | 04 October 2005

Posted on 10/04/2005 4:07:12 PM PDT by Lando Lincoln

October 4, 2005 - Washington, DC - PipeLineNews.org - In the spirit of full disclosure, this is not the piece written and then discarded early yesterday afternoon.

Over the now six years that I have been running this right-wing asylum I have learned a few tricks, one of which is that even 12 hours of perspective is sometimes helpful in sorting things out.

Ok, suck it up, we got an almost grandmotherly Harriet Miers instead of Attilla Scalia and some of us...many of us are still fuming.

We were upset - and I was personally far more than merely upset, but it got better - because we had visions of pools of liberal blood in the streets. Since the fading days of the Reagan Administration we have sought that "ultimate showdown" in which the leftward drift forced by the culture war is halted, then reversed via a national debate held over a momentous event, such as a SCOTUS nomination fight.

Looking back over things it was a silly concept, we all should know that glacial drift is not halted in a single afternoon by an isolated event no matter how epochal in nature it might seem in rough outline at the outset.

No, the Miers nomination is exactly what Mr. Bush promised us, assuming he is an honest and decent man which I do.

She will not lead us into ideological battle ala Patton; there will be no order to "fix bayonets boys we are going over the top." On the other hand she will most likely in an unobtrusive - unless a prowling intellectually audacious conservative lurks somewhere in her - and tidy manner deliver votes indistinguishable from those penned by Thomas and Scalia.

Under the conservative George Bush, revolution was never an option and nothing in his background should have ever indicated that.

Bush is a true conservative in the definitional sense, straight out of a political science 101 text - probably not as conservative as many of would order up off a menu - but of course this isn't diner at the Escofier Room and political tactics are not the soup de jour.

Of primary concern remains to what degree Meirs honors the concept of stare decisis - the rule of precedent - in cases like Roe v Wade remains to be seen, but in grand form she will in no way be a squishy moderate like Sandra Day O'Connor around which pacts better left unmade get forged around ridiculous constructions invoked over homage to foreign jurisprudence. Her obeisance to that important legalism might be further revealed in the upcoming hearings, or it may not if the Ginzberg precedent remains in force.

As we have written here previously, what many of us want is not technically a conservative at all but a reactionary, someone who is willing by force of will to reverse the course of contemporary history. That sentiment may be the correct prescription but Bush was never the one to deliver that. In a larger sense one might consider that in its wisdom our form of government was designed in large part to limit the possibility of such boldness, such revolutionary ardor in the first place, since it can cut in all directions and history harbors many examples of such rampaging out of control in disorderly and messy ways.

It’s not often that we can gather enlightenment from the left, but in literally hours of reading their take on this nomination I came upon the following bit of wisdom.

“I wish people would wake and smell the coffee here. Bush clearly stated that he expects Miers to interrupt the law as our founding father intended!! ORIGINAL INTENT is nothing more than CODE for rightwing judge!! Call her to the carpet!!"

If Meirs does indeed – as I believe she will “interrupt the law as our founding father intended" – then I am a happy camper, next case…Mr. President can we chat a bit about government spending?


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: harrietmiers; miers
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last
Bush is a true conservative in the definitional sense, straight out of a political science 101 text ...

I'm sure many will be pathologically unable to read beyond this point...

Lando

1 posted on 10/04/2005 4:07:14 PM PDT by Lando Lincoln
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Lando Lincoln
"She will not lead us into ideological battle ala Patton; there will be no order to "fix bayonets boys we are going over the top." On the other hand she will most likely in an unobtrusive - unless a prowling intellectually audacious conservative lurks somewhere in her - and tidy manner deliver votes indistinguishable from those penned by Thomas and Scalia."

We don't know that! We dont know how she will vote, because she is a complete unknown judicially - because she hasn't been on the bench. How can you know she won't be another Kennedy, O'Connor, or Souter?

2 posted on 10/04/2005 4:12:36 PM PDT by WOSG (http://freedomstruth.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lando Lincoln
we have sought that "ultimate showdown" in which the leftward drift forced by the culture war is halted, then reversed via a national debate held over a momentous event

I believe that this captures the problem on FR today. Many are disappointed they have been denied their showdown. Tsk, tsk.

3 posted on 10/04/2005 4:13:03 PM PDT by Siena Dreaming
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lando Lincoln
I'm sure many will be pathologically unable to read beyond this point...

Stop it! I can't take anymore!


If you want a Google GMail account, FReepmail me.
They're going fast!

4 posted on 10/04/2005 4:14:13 PM PDT by rdb3 (NON-conservative, American exceptionalist here.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lando Lincoln

This is a good article and it recognizes the reality within which we have to operate. Although the country is not going to be nearly as conservative as I would like it to be, it is going to be less liberal than those in the Rat party would like to see. Half a loaf is better than none.

Neither one of the Bush's are as conservative as was Reagan, but at least Bush the younger is more conservative than was Poppy. We should be pragmatic and take advantage of our opportunities and look at the bright side.

I do wish, however, that Bush had nominated a younger woman, so that she could hold down the spot for a longer time.


5 posted on 10/04/2005 4:14:44 PM PDT by Ninian Dryhope
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WOSG
How do you know she won't be another Rehnquist? His first judicial opinion was written from the US Supreme Court.

Bush knows her well. He knows her better than he could possibly know any other potential candidate.

And he describes her as a pitbull in size 6 shoes.

6 posted on 10/04/2005 4:15:49 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: WOSG
Anybody who would certainly have voted as Scalia does would have never gotten out of committee, especially if they opposed Roe v. Wade.

Politics is the art of the possible.

7 posted on 10/04/2005 4:16:33 PM PDT by sinkspur (Breed every trace of the American Staffordshire Terrier out of existence!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: WOSG
We dont know how she will vote, because she is a complete unknown judicially - because she hasn't been on the bench. How can you know she won't be another Kennedy, O'Connor, or Souter?

How do you know she wont be another Rehnquist because he was never on the bench either?

8 posted on 10/04/2005 4:17:14 PM PDT by frogjerk (LIBERALISM - Being miserable for no good reason)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ninian Dryhope
Neither one of the Bush's are as conservative as was Reagan,

Reagan put Kennedy and O'Connor on the Court.

Roberts and Meirs will be much better than those two.

9 posted on 10/04/2005 4:18:11 PM PDT by sinkspur (Breed every trace of the American Staffordshire Terrier out of existence!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Siena Dreaming

"I believe that this captures the problem on FR today. Many are disappointed they have been denied their showdown. Tsk, tsk"

Its the political version of bluballs....:)


10 posted on 10/04/2005 4:19:23 PM PDT by fizziwig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Dog Gone

How about the conservative base and the American people being presented a candidate that is the top of their field,with known ideology, someone with known head banging conservative credentials, someone we could be proud of. This pick and process reeks.


11 posted on 10/04/2005 4:20:53 PM PDT by samadams2000 (Nothing fills the void of a passing hurricane better than government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: WOSG
We dont know how she will vote, because she is a complete unknown judicially - because she hasn't been on the bench. How can you know she won't be another Kennedy, O'Connor, or Souter?

We don't. However, Bush's record on judicial picks has been pretty good, and he's known her for a long time and in a context in which he is likely to have had open conversations. I suspect he knows what he's doing. That said, I hope we get more reassurance in the coming days. Unlike some who have already panicked, I am prepared to listen.

The most hopeful thing I've heard about her so far is that she attends a conservative, evangelical church. That's not a place pro-aborts usually hang out. I'll be watching for more background.

12 posted on 10/04/2005 4:21:01 PM PDT by sphinx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Lando Lincoln

Good piece. Conservatives need to stop being so quick to declare defeat. And we need to stop the hysterical pre-judgments of Miers based on who she's not. Just because she's not Priscella Owen or Janice Rogers Brown doesn't mean she'll be a quietly conservative voice on the court as this piece points out. Bush knows her and he knows what he's doing. He's not replacing a moderate for a moderate. Bush knows he's getting a conservative judge. Maybe not a Scalia, but she's at least a Roberts. This may prove to be a brilliantly sly move by Bush who's going to slide one past the Democratic hard-hitters. So relax everyone. Bush knows what he's doing. Let's not get worked up by the rantings of Ann Coulter (who I normally like but is making a complete ass of herself with her pre-judgements of Roberts, which proved all wrong and left her with egg on her face, and now Miers.)


13 posted on 10/04/2005 4:24:31 PM PDT by MikeA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur

Excellent point! Thanks for pointing that out to me.


14 posted on 10/04/2005 4:24:40 PM PDT by Ninian Dryhope
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: MikeA

"doesn't mean she'll be a quietly conservative voice on the court as this piece points out."

Correction to my own post: Doesn't mean she won't be I meant.


15 posted on 10/04/2005 4:25:54 PM PDT by MikeA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: WOSG; Rodney King
We don't know that! We dont know how she will vote, because she is a complete unknown judicially - because she hasn't been on the bench. How can you know she won't be another Kennedy, O'Connor, or Souter

How are all you so certain she WILL be????? Maybe we should can the panic and wait and see what comes out about her? She is just getting into the process, she is NOT the next SC Justice yet.

16 posted on 10/04/2005 4:28:16 PM PDT by MNJohnnie (Why is so much of the "Conservative" media punditry stuck on stupid?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: WOSG

We also don't know how Luttig or Janice Rogers Brown would vote once on the SCOTUS. Many conserv atives doubted Clarence Thomas also


17 posted on 10/04/2005 4:29:28 PM PDT by MJY1288 (Whenever a Liberal is Speaking on the Senate Floor, Al-Jazeera Breaks in and Covers it LIVE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur

You can say that again.


18 posted on 10/04/2005 4:30:26 PM PDT by ncpatriot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: samadams2000

"...A candidate that is the top of their field,with known ideology, someone with known head banging conservative credentials, someone we could be proud of."

We have tons of those. And guess who vetted them for the job?


19 posted on 10/04/2005 4:30:28 PM PDT by Killborn (President Bush isn't President Reagan. Then again, President Reagan isn't President Washington. :D)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Killborn

I hear you...


20 posted on 10/04/2005 4:31:33 PM PDT by samadams2000 (Nothing fills the void of a passing hurricane better than government)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson