Posted on 10/03/2005 8:18:18 PM PDT by RebelTex
Why Harriet Miers? Why now? JMHO
2 scenarios to consider: 1. filibuster of a judicial nominee and 2. outright rejection by the Senate.
A filibuster on a judicial nominee probably can not be broken. There are at least 6 RINOs in the Senate who, from their track records, very likely would not support breaking the filibuster on any judge with a strict constructionist record on the Constitution or with a pro-life record. Neither would they be likely to vote to confirm if the filibuster were broken.
Either way, this would be a major defeat for the Republican party with profound consequences in the 2006 elections. The outrage that would come forth would target those RINOs for defeat, even if it meant losing to the Dems. The very real possibility is that Republicans could lose the Senate and possibly the House, which of course, would be a disaster from which we might not be able to recover.
If the filibuster could not be broken, then the nominee would ultimately be withdrawn and replaced either with someone unacceptable to conservatives and therefore not confirmable, or with the same type of candidate causing another unbreakable filibuster.
The prolonged fighting over such a nominee would so pre-occupy the Senate that it would severely damage if not destroy efforts to enact other conservative policies and might lead to pre-mature withdrawals from Iraq and Afghanistan or other setbacks in the WOT.
Considering that there are 2 abortion type cases on the SC docket, having the right nominee be confirmed quickly would definitely be very useful. After all, we already know how Justice O'Conner will vote.
Having no judicial track record makes it very hard for the Dems to filibuster against Harriet Miers nomination and just as hard for RINO's to oppose her.
Some of the latest comments that I have seen here on FR and elsewhere, state that Harriet Miers is a Christian and very active in her church, which church has actively supported pro-life causes. Other statements have indicated her strong belief in a strict constructionist view of the Constitution. My recommendation is for all to calm down a bit, do more accurate research and pay attention to the hearings that follow.
I'm realy hoping she turns out to be the anti-Souter, but after voting mostly for the Republicans for 25 years (over these appointments) I am a bit confused with Bush's choice. Bush say's "trust", but Reagan said Trust but verify ... go figure ...
Thank you so much for your post! I missed the news conference, but hopefully it will be showing again later.
"I'm realy hoping she turns out to be the anti-Souter..."
Aren't we all, LOL.
"...Bush say's "trust", but Reagan said Trust but verify ... go figure ..."
President Bush must have nerves of steel. I'd really enjoy playing poker with him, but I couldn't afford the losses, LOL.
Ah, but if the "Religious Right" protests Miers loudly enough, that alone will provide cover for waffling Demonrat senators to *guarantee* enough Demonrat votes to confirm her.
Why shoudln't we engage in exactly that sort of strategic deception against the Demonrats? It's exactly what they deserve.
I have wondered that, and it is a good thing you point out. If this bad-mouthing by conservatives is part of a strategy to provide her cover with the Demoncrats, then I can only salute the strategist....
I've never seen so much opinion based on so little fact as opined on the Miers nomination.
It is laughable that people who spend hours everyday on the Internet think they are well informed--yet they have nothing better to do than spend hours on the Internet everyday.
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.