Would Kristol,Bennett,Coulter,Savage,Levin,Will,Ingraham,Please,Stop Cryin Over Miers Nomination?

JoeClarke.Net ^ | 10/05/2005 | JoeClarke

[joeclarke]

Would Bill Kristol, Bill Bennett, Ann Coulter, Mike Savage, Mark Levin, And Laura Ingraham, And George Will, Please, Stop Crying Over Miers Nomination?

They Are Starting To Look Anti-Christian.

This Is Her Church For 25 Years - Valley View Christian In Dallas

This Is What They Believe

From http://www.vvcc.org/beliefsgo.asp

Our beliefs are not innovative. Anyone familiar with historical Christian teaching will find these statements fall well within the boundaries of evangelical theology. (Evangelical means theology derived from the evangel , or the Gospel. In other words, it's biblical theology rather than speculative theology or theology rooted in tradition.)
We try not to be dogmatic about matters on which believers hold divergent views. Our core beliefs are centered in Christ and His message as supported by Scripture. More obscure doctrine, as well as controversial issues about which the Bible is silent, are left to believers to sort out on their own. On these issues we take no official/dogmatic position. What follows is a summary of what we believe.
We believe the Bible to be the only infallible, inspired, authoritative Word of God. As such it is our final authority for all matters of faith and Christian practice.( 2 Timothy 3:14-16 )
We believe that there is one God eternally existing in three persons- Father, Son and Holy Spirit. He is the Creator of all things. ( Genesis 1:1; John 1:1; Matthew 3:16-17; 2 Corinthians 13:14)
We believe in Jesus Christ , God in human flesh, who came to this world to die for our sins and who was bodily raised from the dead. ( 1 Corinthians 15:1-8 )
We believe in the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of the Living God, who draws people to Christ and who lives in every person who has received Christ. ( John 16:8-9; Acts 2:38; Ephesians 1:13-14)
We believe that man, created by God, willfully sinned and as a result is lost and without hope apart from receiving Jesus Christ. ( Romans 3:23;6:23; Acts 4:12)
We believe that salvation (forgiveness of sins) is available only by the grace of God through the blood of Jesus Christ. This free gift of forgiveness is offered to all who receive Christ as Lord and Savior. ( Ephesians 2:8-9; Colossians 2:6; John 3:16)
We believe the Bible clearly teaches the pattern to receive Christ is to believe in Jesus as God's Son and Savior of the world, repent of personal sin, confess Christ publicly, and be baptized. ( Romans 10:9; Acts 2: 36-38; Mark 16:16 )
We believe that full immersion under water is the prescribed mode of baptism as indicated by Jesus' own example and command, and best depicts our union in His death, burial, and resurrection. ( Mark 1:9-10; Matthew 28:19; Romans 6:4 )
We believe that the Church is the body and bride of Christ on earth, founded on the day of Pentecost, consisting of all Christians everywhere. ( Matthew 16:13-18 )
We believe that death seals the eternity of each person ( Hebrews 9:27 ). Those who are forgiven will spend eternity with God in heaven, those not forgiven will be eternally separated from God in hell .( John 5:28-29; Daniel 12:2; 2 Corinthians 4:14; Acts 17:31

PS. HARRIET MIERS HAS PUBLICLY SAID THAT SHE WOULD "STRICTLY DEFEND THE LAWS AND CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES." The wording is not coded. I have never heard a lib state the above with conviction - or at all.

[Just mythoughts]

The words-smiths appear to think themselves above ALLLLLLL the rest. Maybe if they actually lived life outside their keyboards they might have a clue they do not know as much as they think they do.

[TSchmereL]

Absolutely. I have supported Bush on all his initiatives over the past 5 years. But Harriet Miers is an abominable choice.

Bush promised RED MEAT! He is serving up CRONY BALONEY!

[theDentist]

It has NOTHING to do with Religion. It has to do with politics. Deal with it.

[Beth528]

I do not listen or read anything these people have to say any more..It seems some are getting like O'Reilly..Getting to sure of themselves and to cocky..I have one question,what do they know about HARRIET MIERS we do not know..The answer is simple,Nothing!!When I see and listen to Ms Miers then I will make up my own mind..It is time people make their own minds up.

[bray]

A Born Again Christian is not the same thing as a Drive Thru Catholic!! To compare the two is rediculous. There are others I would prefer, but she is Pro-Life and we should wait for the hearings before the Execution.

Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters

[wolfcreek]

I agree, this is a lot of misspent energy. Hopefully, after the conformation hearings, most of these pundits will be wiping the egg off their faces.

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

I have one question,what do they know about HARRIET MIERS we do not know..The answer is simple,Nothing!!

That's precisely the point.

They-and you, and I, and everyone else-knows absolutely nothing about this individual.

Someone who is being nominated to be an associate justice on the Supreme Court of the United States of America.

And we know nothing.

[GarySpFc]

I want to apologize for every word being capitalized, but that is how I received this information. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHAT THEY'RE SAYING ABOUT THE NOMINATION OF HARRIET MIERS TO SUPREME COURT

Praise For Miers Nomination To Supreme Court:

Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel, The American Center For Law And Justice: "We Look Forward To A Speedy Confirmation Process And Will Work Aggressively To Ensure That Harriet Miers Gets Full And Fair Consideration Before The Senate. We Call On Members Of The Senate To Reject The Partisan Political Rhetoric And Focus On The Judicial Philosophy Of This Conservative Mainstream Nominee." (American Center For Law And Justice, "CLJ Calls Harriet Miers - President Bush's Supreme Court Nominee - An 'Excellent' Choice Who Embraces The Constitution And The Rule Of Law," Press Release, 10/3/05)

Leonard Leo, President, Federalist Society: "In Nominating Harriet Miers, The President Has Once Again Kept His Commitment To Select Supreme Court Justices Who Are Very Well Qualified And Share His Philosophy Of Interpreting The Law, Not Legislating From The Bench." (Leonard Leo, Memo To Interested Parties Re: Nomination Of Harriet E. Miers, 10/3/05)

Leo: "She Has Also On A Number Of Occasions Demonstrated Her Commitment To Conservative Legal Principles And The Principles Of Judicial Restraint In Fairly Applying The Law, And Not Making Public Policy From The Bench." (Leonard Leo, Memo To Interested Parties Re: Nomination Of Harriet E. Miers, 10/3/05)

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV): "I Like Harriet Miers, As White House Counsel She Has Worked With Me In A Courteous And Professional Manner." (Sen. Harry Reid, Press Release, 10/3/05)

Reid: "I Am Also Impressed With The Fact That [Meirs] Was A Trailblazer For Woman As A Managing Partner Of Major Dallas Law Firm And The First Women President Of The Texas Bar Association." (Sen. Harry Reid, Press Release, 10/3/05)

Reid: "In My View, The Supreme Court Would Benefit From The Addition Of A Justice Who Has Real Experience As A Practicing Lawyer. The Current Justices Have All Been Chosen From Lower Federal Courts, A Nominee With Relevant Non-Judicial Experience Would Bring A Different And Useful Prospective To The Court." (Sen. Harry Reid, Press Release, 10/3/05)

President Of The Dallas Bar Association, Tim Mountz: "I Think Harriet Miers Would Make An Excellent Judge And For A Number Of Reasons. One Is, Although Harriet Was A Very Good Advocate For Her Clients, She Also Tended To Try To Operate By Consensus Whenever Possible. So I Think That She Would Be A Good Supreme Court Justice For That Reason." (MSNBC's "News Live," 10/3/05)

NBC's Tim Russert: "Harry Reid, The Leader Of The Democrats In The Senate Has Said Favorable Things About Ms. Miers In The Past." (NBC's "Today," 10/3/05)

Russert: "It Is Also Interesting, Historically ... Of The 110 People Who Have Sat On The Supreme Court, Only Half Have Been Sitting Judges When Selected ... History Is Filled With People With Backgrounds Similar To Harriet Miers." (NBC's "Today," 10/3/05)

ABC's Manuel Madrano: "[N]ot Only The First Female To Lead A Major Dallas Texas Law Firm But The First Female To Lead The Texas Bar Association. Overall, A Very Interesting Pick." (ABC's "GoodMorning America," 10/3/05)

CNN's Jeff Toobin: "[Miers] Had Been A Top Corporate Lawyer In Texas. She Was -- Was Head Of The Dallas Bar, Head Of The Texas Bar. Those Are Impressive Positions ..." (CNN's "American Morning," 10/3/05)

CNN's Dana Bash: "We're Told By A Senior Official That A Part Of The Reason They Say That Mr. Bush Felt Comfortable At This Point Nominating Harriet Miers Is Because She Was Recommended To Him Not Just By Republicans But Also By Democrats." (CNN's "American Morning," 10/3/05)

Bash: "A Senior Official Said That The President Took Seriously An Admonition By The Chairman Of The Judiciary Committee And The Senate And The Top Democrat He Should Think Outside Of The Appeals Court, Think Outside The Monastery As Senator Pat Leahy Of Vermont Has Put It ..." (CNN's "American Morning," 10/3/05)

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY): "[W]hen I Choose Judges In New York, I Look For Practical Experience. And So The Fact That She Hasn't Been A Judge Before, To Me Is Actually A Positive, Not A Negative." (Sen. Charles Schumer, Press Conference, 10/3/05)

CBS' John Roberts: "The President Conducts A Nationwide Extensive Search For The Best Person For The Job To Be The Nominee To Be Associate Justice To Replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor And Finds Her Down The Hall." (CBS' "The Early Show," 10/3/05)

The Washington Post's Fred Barbash: "[Harriet Miers] Has More Experience, I Think, Than People Are Crediting Her With." (MSNBC's "News Live," 10/3/05)

Previous Praise For Harriet Miers:

Miers Was Awarded The Sandra Day O'Connor Award For Professional Excellence By The Texas Center For Legal Ethics And Professionalism In 2005. (Texas Center For Legal Ethics And Professionalism Website, www.txethics.org , Accessed 10/3/05)

"[In 1997] She Was Named To The [National Law Journal's] List Of 100 Most Powerful Attorneys." ("50 Top Women Lawyers," The National Law Journal, 3/30/98)

"[Miers] Received A Distinguished Alumni Award From The SMU Law School In 1997." (SMU Website, www.smu.edu/newsinfo/releases/00171.html , Accessed 9/29/05)

In 1998, National Law Journal Named Harriet Miers One Of The Fifty Most Influential Women Lawyers In America. ("50 Top Women Lawyers," The National Law Journal, 3/30/98)

In 2000, National Law Journal Named Harriet Miers One Of The One Hundred Most Influential Lawyers In America. ("The Most Influential Lawyers In America," The National Law Journal, 6/12/00)

"Miers Was Given The Women Of Excellence Award By Women's Enterprise Magazine In 1997 ..." (Bush-Cheney, Press Release, 1/5/01)

"The Women And The Law Section Of The State Bar Of Texas Has Awarded Its 1993 Sarah T. Hughes Women Lawyers Of Achievement Award To Louise Raggio And State Bar President Harriet Miers." (Bruce Vincent, "Honors," Texas Lawyer, 3/22/93)

"Harriet Miers, President Of Dallas' Locke Purnell Rain Harrell, Was One Of 20 Other Women Nominated For The [1996 Texas Trailblazer Award]." (Tara Wilkinson, "Newsmakers," Texas Lawyers, 10/28/96)

Antonio Alvarado, Former Director Of The Texas State Bar: 'She Is An Indefatigable Leader, A Lawyer's Lawyer With A Keen Intellect,' Said Antonio Alvarado, Executive Director Of The State Bar. 'She Brings . . . The Highest Ethical Conduct, And We Will Be Well-Served Having Her In This Public Service Role.'" (Gary Susswein, "In Naming Miers As An Aide, Bush Keeps A Trusted Lawyer At His Side," Austin American-Statesman, 1/6/01)

Former Partner R. Bruce Laboon: "Harriet Is Not A Person That Gets Frustrated Easily. She Doesn't Lose Her Temper. She Is Very Cool And Calm In A Storm." (Miriam Rozen, "Bush's Gatekeeper," Texas Lawyer, 3/24/03)

Laboon: "We've All Known For A Long Time What A Talent She Is, And Now The President Knows." ("Inadmissible," Texas Lawyer, 7/14/03)

U.S. District Judge Ed Kinkeade Of Dallas: "She Truly Believes In Doing Right ... No One Can Say She Took The [Texas] Lottery [Commission] Position Because It Was Fun. It Was Something That Was Honorable, And She Did A Great Job." (Miriam Rozen, "Bush's Gatekeeper," Texas Lawyer, 3/24/03)

Former Co-Worker Thomas Connop: "Harriet Is A Hard Worker, Personable, A Client-Oriented Attorney Who Is Extremely Thorough And Not Flamboyant." (T.R. Goldman, "Down To The Last Detail," Legal Times, 12/15/04)

Miers Former Co-Worker Jerry Clements, Of Dallas, TX: "She Just Overcame Any Obstacles With Hard Work And Dedication And Being A Very Good Trial Lawyer." (Michael A. Fletcher, "Quiet But Ambitious White House Counsel Makes Life Of Law," The Washington Post, 6/21/05)

White House Staff Secretary Brett Kavanaugh: "She Is Very Thorough And Very Hard-Working And Very Conscientious And Very Careful, Which Is Why She Was A Good Choice For Staff Secretary And Why She's A Good Choice As Counsel..." (T.R. Goldman, "Down To The Last Detail," Legal Times, 12/15/04)

Texas Supreme Court Justice Nathan Hecht: "Her Clients -- Including Now Maybe The Most Important Client She Ever Had -- Have Implicit Faith In Her Judgments ... She Is Very Sensible." (Gary Susswein, "In Naming Miers As An Aide, Bush Keeps A Trusted Lawyer At His Side," Austin American-Statesman, 1/6/01)

"Miers, 51, Is Well Known As A Tough Commercial Litigator Who Has Juggled An Exhaustive List Of Civic Activities While Racking Up A String Of Professional Firsts, Including First Woman President Of The Dallas Bar In 1985 And First Woman President Of The State Bar In 1992-93." (Susan Hightower, "Harriet Miers Extends String Of Firsts With Locke Purnell Post," Texas Lawyer, 12/16/96)

[rbmillerjr]

All of the above authors are conservatives.

TRUST them.

[David Isaac]

Remember when the term "litmus test" was use quite derogatorally in defining Dem opposition to GOP USSC appointments.

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

TRUST them.

It couldn't hurt.

:)

[TSchmereL]

They are all conservatives. Agree with them, or disagree with them, but explain why. Don't blindly follow anyone, especially George W. Bush.

[Beth528]

And maybe that is a good thing..The democrats don't have anything to spin..

[savedbygrace]

The point is this: President Bush promised to nominate strict constructionists to the Court. He repeated this promise on a number of occasions.

With this pick, we cannot know if she is or if she ain't. "Trust me," is the weak part of the equation. Where is the evidence?

Answer: There is insufficient evidence at this point in time, and apparently there will be no evidence presented from the WH files for the past five years (and I agree with the decision to not produce those documents.) But, since we won't be able to see any evidence of how she thinks RECENTLY, and will have to rely on old evidence of how she acted on behalf of clients years ago, we won't have any reliable evidence to examine.

Therefore, with inadequate evidence to prove she's a strict constructionist, the conclusion I draw is that President Bush has failed to fulfill his solemn promise. If we can't tell for certain she's a strict constructionist, then how can we know he's fulfilled his promise?

As for the testimonials, President Bush has assured us she's a strict constructionist. Well, that testimonial is disappointingly weak because of one fateful event: President Bush told us McCain-Feingold CFR was unconstitutional, yet he signed it, hoping the USSC would void it. So, President Bush is not a good judge of strict constructionism.

So, without reliable evidence, I conclude it's a poor selection.

[Recovering Ex-hippie]

Excellant points. Well articulated.

[wtc911]

Joe, would you please create a mailing list that includes every conservative in America and send us daily messages so that we know exactly to whom we should listen and what we should think. This having to think for ourselves is so hard.

[JesseJane]

Joeclark, you state

First, a lib will say just about anything and second, our Congress is sworn to do the same and we see the pathetic result there, don't we?

Second, and perhaps more importantly, I do not feel GW is living up to that either. The reason for this was mentioned here, and it is brought up frequently, but takes on supreme importance in this case.

GWB has signed CFR (an attack on political free speech).

GWB refuses to close the borders during a time a war knowing full well the danger of terrorists crossing over, and in fact have crossed over. The border issue presents a host of other issues that he is flatly ignoring as 80% of the population have been BEGGING him to address. Taxes, education, healthcare, disease, law enforcement, jobs, the cost of unchecked illegal immigration touches nearly every part of every AMERICANS life. And yet, he wears a bag on his head over this.

GWB was also helpful to Gov. Rick Perry decision to go around the people of Texas and sign a deal on the Trans Texas Corridor, and why that is important is because it involved many things, including eminent domain...the taking of personal private property and giving it to another private individual.. to read more on that type keyword TTC... Why GW did not speak out on this is because of CAFTA.

GW also did NOT speak out about the Kelo v New London decision recently handed down with in fact, now sanctions the taking of personal private property.. thank God some in Congress are addressing this, but HE, GW, did not speak out.

Now there you see 3 constitutional rights that GW has not protected, and some expect conservatives to especially embrace any choice he makes because he 'sees into the hearts' of people??

Did that work out very well with Putin or Vicente Faux?? Did that work out well with trust Teddy Kennedy to write the education bill, knowing full well what a crooked socialist pig he is??

Do I trust GW in the decision to go to war?? I did, but I must now ask myself, what COUNTRY are our soldiers fighting for, and what kind of country will they return to, when their President is not living up to his own sworn duties..

JoeClark, the fact is that GW has been unmasked as a different PRESIDENT than the one that ran for election. He certainly may be Christian, as I do not think it is his religion that does his job for him, it is what gives him strength to do it. But to me GW has given me great concern to trust his judgement about WHO would be strict constitutionalists, when he himself, does not walk the talk.

Thanks JMHO>

[David Isaac]

I am a little confused is this list for or against the nomination? The presence of Senators Reid and Schumer do not really tip my trigger. All the mentions of her being the first female this or that, would only tend to lend credence to George Will's position. Also, the fact that she has praised by those with whom she has worked, may contain more than a little professional courtesy (contrarily it may also be good) and thus may not be conclusive.

[1stFreedom]

>>Anyone familiar with historical Christian teaching will find these statements fall well within the boundaries of evangelical theology. (Evangelical means theology derived from the evangel , or the Gospel. In other words, it's biblical theology rather than speculative theology or theology rooted in tradition.)

Really? Hmm, historical Christian teaching shows belief in the real presence and so forth.

Evangelical theology has several roots based upon the systemic theologies of men (and women). These systems of theologies have taken parts of Scripture to form an incomplete and unhistorical view of Christianity.

In other words, it's not the historic Christian tradition that is believed, but rather a much younger tradition of man which masquerades as being based soley on Scripture. This is why some Evangelical churches believe one must speak in tounges to be saved, while others don't.