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 previous 1-2021-4041-6061-66 next last
To: Lando Lincoln
I am not not yet "happy" with this nominee, but then again I DID elect him primarily to make this "pick", all by himself,using his own judgment, as POTUS.
I am not quite ready to claim "buyers remorse", but I reserve my right to do so, without furthor notice, at any time!

I am concerned that many knowledgeable individuals, talking heads, and FReepers, whose opinions I highly value on this subject, are "not happy".

I am willing to wait a bit before I vent my own "considered opinion" rant, since it is unusual to see so much internal discord among those who claim to have the same goals.

It is an interesting and slightly disturbing thing to observe.

BTW, off topic, I assume everyone is following the official "MSM non-event" of the suicide bomber outside the OU stadium last Saturday?
41 posted on 10/04/2005 5:26:42 PM PDT by sarasmom (What is the legal daily bag limit for RINOs in the USA?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sarasmom
I think many of the objectors were just looking for a fight over an "in your face" nominee. (Ann Coulter is upset she didn't go to a more prestigious law school)

From what I have seen from Bush, the in your facer will be the one to replace a Lib (I know Elvis is dead, but a couple of those justices aren't looking so good these days) and he may just get that chance.

42 posted on 10/04/2005 5:43:47 PM PDT by gov_bean_ counter (Bush to Blanco to "tighten up", so she called her plastic surgeon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur

Absolutely GREAT point!!!!!


43 posted on 10/04/2005 5:46:26 PM PDT by Chickenhawk Warmonger ("A Quagmire of Hate" coming soon to a bookstore near you)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: samadams2000

No, I don't think you do... One of Miers biggest qualifications is that she helped vetted all those conservative justices and candidates. She, along with the Pres., introduced us to conservatives such as Owen, Brown, Estrada, Luttig and many more.


44 posted on 10/04/2005 6:02:29 PM PDT by Killborn (Pres. Bush isn't Pres. Reagan. Then again, Pres. Regan isn't Pres. Washington. God bless them all.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Lando Lincoln
Thank you again Lando!

It's hard to admit...but when I said bad words yesterday morning to my somewhat shocked husband about this nomination I had a nagging feeling I might have to take it back, sooner, rather than later.

I did. Today. They got me. Leftist outsmarted me and I don't like it.
45 posted on 10/04/2005 6:07:35 PM PDT by pollyannaish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ladyinred
Hey there my crimson FRiend.....glad to hear you are pushing back!! Everyone needs that from time to time.

Lando

46 posted on 10/04/2005 6:48:21 PM PDT by Lando Lincoln (The general public doesn't pay attention enough........to care enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: pollyannaish
Thanks polly......I wrote another FReeper today who was deeply troubled and made a parallel with GWHB saying, "Read my lips....no more taxes". Here is what I wrote:

I fail to make the link that you do. GWHB made that statement and then double-backed on it, clearly. Yet, if we are to judge today's politicians by the promises of yesterday's, then I am afraid the rubric is too complex for me to comprehend. GWB nominated a known entity - known to him - and I along with many other Americans entrusted him with that responsibility in November. Me? I'll bide my time and see how it turns out. For now, I trust my President's judgment. And certainly, I'm grateful the alternative universe is not at play here.....a Kerry nomination.

I must say, I feel a lot better today.

Lando

47 posted on 10/04/2005 6:54:14 PM PDT by Lando Lincoln (The general public doesn't pay attention enough........to care enough.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Lando Lincoln
I along with many other Americans entrusted him with that responsibility in November.

Amen. I think we are going to be very happy. I feel pretty bullish on this today, actually!

48 posted on 10/04/2005 6:59:47 PM PDT by pollyannaish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: sphinx
What in the world is a conservative evangelical church? I know plenty of libs who attend church and profess to be Christians, but when the light of day is allowed to shine upon them, they are exposed for what they are: hypocrites, deceivers, and liars -- just like their counterparts in the media and in the political arena.
49 posted on 10/04/2005 7:00:15 PM PDT by Dust2Dust
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

Order more Prozac, Injectable Thorazine and straight jackets for the haters of GW.


Info slowly is coming forward that supports the President's decision.... we'll see during the hearings in the next month or so.

.....
"A lot of my fellow conservatives are concerned, but they don't know her as I do," said Hatch, a former chairman of the Judiciary Committee. "She's going to basically do what the president thinks she should and that is be a strict constructionist."

The term refers to justices who believe their role is to decide cases based on a close reading of the Constitution rather than ranging more widely in interpretation.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051004/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_scotus;_ylt=AjvpI3CUZLtLvc5XUSioUCus0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--


50 posted on 10/04/2005 7:08:14 PM PDT by deport (Miers = Souter....... A red herring which they know but can't help themselves from using)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: MikeA
I disagree. I don't think anyone here is, or has been declaring or considering defeat. Yes, many of us are frustrated. Intially this was directed at the President and his appointment. Hindsight, and a few beers, reveals that in reality its due to the weak-kneed Senate Republicans. The Pres. is at their mercy. I honestly don't believe this is defeatism. This is a problem to be solved.

I worry for the future appointments. I don’t think it’s good to have to put up stealth candidates.
-It’s demoralizing.
-It's a lost opportunity to preach the merits of the constitution (which always needs to be done)
-And,it adds to a perception that conservatives have something to hide. Too many Pubbie Senators already act like they are afraid to be conservative.
-Most importantly, the many fine conservative justices (HEROS in all of our books) that have carried the fight in our hyper-liberal court systems for years should be rewarded with SCOTUS appts.

I suggest we focus on the need to get out there and push for the many fine conservative candidates, such as Michael Steele of Maryland, who need our help and support. Let's de-emphasize the importance of these RINOs. Let’s stop preaching and being frustrated, and kick some liberal butt.

51 posted on 10/04/2005 7:34:23 PM PDT by ottersnot (Kill a commie for your mommie....Johnnie Ramone. American Rocker and patriot)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: sphinx
However, Bush's record on judicial picks has been pretty good...

And remember who helped him pick the other judges.

52 posted on 10/04/2005 8:14:21 PM PDT by supercat (Don't fix blame--FIX THE PROBLEM.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: pollyannaish
I did. Today. They got me. Leftist outsmarted me and I don't like it.

That's OK. Even the best of us fall for the occasional MSM Jedi mind trick. But the smart ones realize these are the droids we are looking for after all.

53 posted on 10/04/2005 8:19:38 PM PDT by dirtboy (Drool overflowed my buffer...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
And the best of us learn from our mistakes. It will only make me more cautious in the future.

That, I hope, is one of the things that separates us from our left leaning counterparts. ; )
54 posted on 10/04/2005 8:26:25 PM PDT by pollyannaish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: pollyannaish
That, I hope, is one of the things that separates us from our left leaning counterparts. ; )

Well, last I checked, they are still using the internet to spread conspiracy theories instead of fact-based debate. They still are debating about how Bush used Diebold to steal Ohio, even though there were no Diebold machines in Ohio.

So I'd say that is a safe observation. :^)

55 posted on 10/04/2005 8:29:26 PM PDT by dirtboy (Drool overflowed my buffer...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

Like taking candy from a baby. ; )


56 posted on 10/04/2005 8:32:27 PM PDT by pollyannaish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: pollyannaish
Like taking candy from a baby. ; )

I post on a left wing MSM blog in my spare time. I don't call in other freepers in the faint hope that little ol' me against all of them will be a fair fight.

So far, it hasn't been. Gawd, some days I think they all have strings protruding from their backs that spews the same nonsense once someone pulls the string.

57 posted on 10/04/2005 8:34:42 PM PDT by dirtboy (Drool overflowed my buffer...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
I think they all have strings protruding from their backs that spews the same nonsense once someone pulls the string.

It sure works that way with the ones I know in real life. A real dearth of common sense.

Good for you out there taking on the battle. I used to love it, but these days I'd rather argue with friends. At least we all have basically the same ideas and it's just a matter of degrees most of the time.

58 posted on 10/04/2005 8:43:46 PM PDT by pollyannaish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Reagan put Kennedy and O'Connor on the Court. Roberts and Meirs will be much better than those two.

Not even close to a comparison. Reagan had to get O'Connor through a heavy Dem Senate. If Bush won't stand up with 55 Senators then when.

59 posted on 10/04/2005 9:07:06 PM PDT by ALWAYSWELDING
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ALWAYSWELDING
Reagan had to get O'Connor through a heavy Dem Senate. If Bush won't stand up with 55 Senators then when.

You mean the same 55 Senators who wouldn't support him on John Bolton? Those 55 Senators?

60 posted on 10/04/2005 9:15:04 PM PDT by sinkspur (Breed every trace of the American Staffordshire Terrier out of existence!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 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