Posted on 04/19/2007 11:49:23 AM PDT by Rick Vassar
‘The 5-4 decision written by Justice Anthony Kennedy said the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act that Congress passed and Bush signed into law in 2003 does not violate a woman’s constitutional right to an abortion…’ -Associated Press April 19, 2007
“It's ready for a retarded president, why wouldn't it be ready for an African American president?’ -Chris Rock, Life Magazine 2007
President Bush’s management strategy is a thing of beauty.
Walk around, act sort of absent-minded, mix up your words here and there, and people begin to lower their expectations – and their defenses. In an unguarded moment, something slips out, and allows you the opportunity to make decisions with much more information on what the other side is thinking.
Some people say he’s not too smart. Some say much worse. Many of those who say such things have strong egos and truly believe that they can clearly express their thoughts, but the president is too vacant to understand them.
That’s a big mistake.
There are many markers on President Bush’ tenure that will define his presidency. The 2000 election, 9/11, and Iraq are just a few. However, the day that should be remembered as the defining moment of Mr. Bush’ presidency is October 3, 2005, when he nominated Harriet Miers for the United States Supreme Court.
First, some history:
July 19, 2005 - Mr. Bush nominates John Roberts to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O’Connor September 3, 2005 – Chief Justice William Rehnquist dies. Mr. Bush moves Roberts’ nomination over to replace Rehnquist as Chief Justice September 29, 2005 – Roberts confirmed as Chief Justice and sworn in October 3, 2005 – Mr. Bush nominates Harriet Miers for the Justice O’Connor vacancy October 28, 2005 – Miers, under a firestorm of criticism, withdraws her nomination October 31, 2005 – Mr. Bush nominates Samuel Alito January 31, 2006 – Alito is confirmed
Everyone assumed after Mr. Bush was re-elected in 2004 that he would have at least one Supreme Court nomination in his second term, and perhaps as many as three or four, depending on the health of the members of the Court.
The first good move was the nomination of John Roberts to replace the retiring Justice O’Connor. Roberts was a judge for the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia since 2003. He had been nominated in 2001, but the nomination was held up by Democrats in the Senate Judiciary Committee and never came to a vote. In 2003, he was confirmed by voice vote.
The significance of this is clear – had the Democrats not held up Roberts’ confirmation, they would have had two years of judicial review that may have lent credence to his conservative leanings. Since he had been approved for the appeals court, the Senate really had only the two previous years in which to attack his record.
Now, with the Court split 4-4 on ideological grounds, the left knew that the real fight would have to be with this next vacancy. If the Bush administration got the conservative voice it desired for the Court, it could radically alter the social agenda for years to come. The stakes were high, and the left came loaded for bear.
So, on October 3, 2005, President Bush gave them Harriet Miers.
I can just imagine the conversation at the White House: Harriet, we need to send you out there as the nominee. You’re going to get skewered for a month or so, and then you’ll withdraw, and we’ll send in Sam Alito before the opposition can reload. Then you just come back over here to the White House.
Besides, think how good it will look on your resume…
And that’s exactly what happened. Both sides of the aisle voiced vehement opposition to the nomination, and many indicated that Mr. Bush had finally lost it. When Justice Alito was nominated, the left was depleted and done. They had attacked Mrs. Miers primarily on qualification and not ideology. When Justice Alito was nominated, he was clearly qualified, and the opposition could not overcome its own arguments. Mr. Bush now had the conservative Court he so desired.
Genius, I tell you. Mr. Bush set a political trap, and the opposition fell for it hook, line and sinker.
And they know it, too.
Yesterday, the Court upheld the ban on partial birth abortion. The left is outraged. It has always felt that the right to choose was a constitutional right, and any restriction erodes that right. Let’s face it, any right that involves the sacrifice of another life is no right at all, and should not be protected.
The left also says that this does not take into consideration the life of the mother in critical circumstances. It appears that this court disagrees. If you are concerned the blanket "right to choose" is going away, your concerns are valid.
This Court seems to be leaning towards a full ban on abortion, which will then allow the debate to center around exceptions, especially in the area of the protection of the life of the mother. The left, since 1973, believe that this is an all or nothing fight. In their minds, the right to an abortion is and should remain constitutionally guaranteed.
Remember, the conversation does not have to be all or nothing.
It just has to be 5-4.
I do think it was an intentional ploy.
John Roberts was the President’s first man. Obviously, while he was vetting Roberts, he was keeping in mind other candidates to be the next nominee.
That said, how do you go from Roberts to Miers?
7-2 would make me happier.
Same here.
The first part of the decision describes the procedure. I am unable to read it.
Rehnquist was put on the Court by Nixon in 1972 as an associate justice. Reagan appointed him to Chief Justice in 1976.
bump for later reading. I’ve often admired GWB’s strategic approaches.
Ann Coulter should be ashamed of herself for her vicious attacks on the Roberts nomination in light of recent SCOTUS decisions.
As far as Miers is concerned, I think that was intended to be the real pick and it was made for the exact reason Reagan selected Sandra Dee O’Connor — because it was, to quote Dirty Harry in “The Enforcer”, stylish.
I was eventually glad to see Miers replaced after all of the information came out, but I was disgusted by the horrible, vicious attacks on the President over the Miers nomination. He deserved to catch flak for that awful pick — but some went way too far.
Amen.
That's true, but that's only part of the story.
President Bush has a history of successes from ousting Governor Ann Richards to beating VP Al Gore to defeating Senator Kerry to passing tax cuts and deploying our national missile defenses to winning the *first* federal ban on abortion.
...and he's so successful because he acts 3 dimensionally instead of 2 dimensionally.
You see, in the case of Harriet Miers, President Bush *did* want her on the Court, but he also knew that he could put another conservative onto the bench who he wanted if things didn't work out for Miers.
Which is to say, GWB was happy either way, whether Miers made it to the bench or not.
The article for this thread, in contrast, illustrates two-dimensional thinking. The author has recognized that GWB set up the Left with Miers in order to win Alito's confirmation...but the author doesn't recognize the more savvy point of GWB's strategy: that Miers would have worked, too.
So it's not that Miers was a headfake, it's that Miers was *both* a serious nominee *and* a headfake.
President Bush was going to win either way.
You can see the same effect on war funding, on voting to go to war against Iraq, on national missile defense, on partial birth abortion (think: Congress had to *pass* that ban before it even got near the Supreme Court).
In all of those cases above, and in many, many more instances, President Bush would win if the issue passed Congress or was voted down by Congress.
Democrats are only now beginning to grasp the most rudimentary aspects of this grand strategy on their effort to cut off President Bush's emergency spending bill for our troops in Iraq...that GWB wins if they pass it and that GWB wins if they don't.
He wins either way because he's properly framed the debate and fight.
You said — “It was God’s plan - no more, no less”
Well, that’s not always comforting *on the surface* — although I know that God is in control of *all things* (basically because the Bible makes that very clear).
Let me put it another way — it was God’s plan that those students at VT be massacred. That would be true, too — as He allowed that to happened, and thus, it was God’s plan (I’m not being critical of the Bible here, or to God, mind you). I’m just pointing out that not all that we see is very comforting, on the surface — even when it’s *always* God’s plan...
Regards,
Star Traveler
P.S. — How anxious are you to announce to the world that it was God’s plan for those students to be massacred? If you say that about this situation (above, in this thread), then you should say it equally for those students...
You are absolutely right. Unfortunately, there are too many on this board who don’t understand that, and far too many who have left this board that do.
I’m quite surprised at how many appointments Reagan managed to get through but that was back in more civil times with respect to judges. It wasn’t until Bork and then Thomas where things got nasty.
What is this? We haven't had a "right to choose" anything for a long time!
You may have the right to have a child, but you don't have the right to raise that child any way you see fit. If social services (agents of the State) decides that you are an unfit parent, they'll give your kid to somebody else.
You may have a right to buy a gun, but you don't have the right to choose to carry that gun anywhere you want. You don't have a right to carry it in a concealed fashion unless you have a 'permit' from the government. That's a right? No, more like a privilege....and you can't carry anywhere near a school either.
The right to choose is an illusion.
God has a reason for everything and we can't even come close to understanding His ways as the sinners that we are.
some of the strongest believers I know have had the roughest of times.
You said — “Read the book of Job again.”
I know it well. I think you’re taking my comments the wrong way. I was approaching this aspect of God’s control from another angle. I agree that God is in control of all things and fully so, in that nothing escapes His attention or control. The Bible makes it clear. And I realize that God’s plan is being worked out, even in evil situations, one in which people cannot figure out what is going on.
SO, in order to make the point — that this is what I understand — I point out that it is also in God’s sovereign control and His plan that these students were massacred at VT the other day.
We don’t *only* say that God is in control when we see *only* good things happening, no... We *must* (if we believe this) say God is in control even when so many students get massacred by a crazed shooter, with no rational thinking motivating him.
.
Yoou said — “some of the strongest believers I know have had the roughest of times.”
And so it will be for the relatives of all these slain students. They’re either going to blame God, say that there is no God, or say that God is powerless to do anything about these things, or God doesn’t know these things ahead of time. All of which would be untrue.
The true believers are going to realize — even when it’s one of their own (a close relative, or a son or daugther) that yes, indeed, God is in control and He was in control, when that shooter went through those buildings...
Regards,
Star Traveler
Reagan only put 3 people on the Court - only one GWB.
And Reagan’s times weren’t necessarily more civil; Bork was appointed by the Gipper.
Typo, sorry - Reagan only put 3 people on the Court - only one MORE than GWB (and who knows, GWB could still get another).
“Also I think it will be revealed in future years that there was a far more complex plan afoot with Iraq in regards to Iran. I think he will be proven right on the War on Terror, even if its after he is dead.”
I agree. Our NOT seeing a nuclear 911 can be very much credited to President Bush. After all, one nuke here ends our way of life as we know it and therefore must be the first priority. His failings are really on the border issue and serving the constituents first above the will of the American people on this issue. Second, his foreign policy is wishy-washy. Either be Reaganesque all the time or be Carter all the time (ugg). Being compassionate in Iraq and listening to his advisors about Al Sadr and Al Malaki cost him and all of us Congress, stonewalling his ability to do anything tangible about Iran. That will bite us hard some day, but he did keep the country going after the worst domestic attack in US history.
“Read the book of Job again.
God has a reason for everything and we can’t even come close to understanding His ways as the sinners that we are.
some of the strongest believers I know have had the roughest of times.”
Job is indeed an inspiring book and the lesson I take from it is that God will replace and add to it in what we have lost in this life or the other. I read the entire bible and the plan for mankind is a slow, measured progress in maturity. We are caught in the cross fire of a war of the spiritual realm we didn’t create. This time period of this war will end. Man will become energy as God Himself is. Look at scriptures of prophecy about the last days in increased intelligence and wisdom. A 100 years or less from now we will be able to copy our conciencness onto a machine and convert it into energy. Being energy has many distinct advantages over being matter. Man will be truly immortal. Most Christian religion teaches the dark age and renessiance version of Christianity where an omnipotent God points His finger and zaps things back in place. If I were a pastor or priest, I would teach people at my congregation to read the bible for themselves, then the big picture is easy to figure out. It’s not that we can’t understand God’s ways, it’s that our culture is too lazy to read the bible for themselves or to pray to get to know God and His ways.
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.