No more tiresome than those who refuse to give a reason (Constitutionally) why she is unfit for the Nomination. And please don't quote the opinions of the talking heads, just list the reasons why she should bow out because the laws of our land say she should
No one is constitutionally unfit for this job, except say, a convicted felon, an illegal immigrant, or a previously impeached SC justice. That leaves 300 Million people to pick from. The constitution does not forbid, for instance, Hillary, or Jesse or even me. I would like to believe that the Senate feels it within it power to assure itself that someone possesses the intellectual horsepower not to make the place a laughing stock.
MJY1288 wrote:
"No more tiresome than those who refuse to give a reason (Constitutionally) why she is unfit for the Nomination. And please don't quote the opinions of the talking heads, just list the reasons why she should bow out because the laws of our land say she should"
With all due respect, the debate is not about whether Miers should withdraw for “Constitutional” reasons or “because the laws of our land say she should”. Of course she has every right to be nominated (and possibly serve) for SCOTUS. This debate is about Mier’s judicial philosophy and her capability to be a reliable judicial conservative if she were to be confirmed.
If you want another Justice in the mold of Scalia and Thomas and if you have read any of the mainstream and conservative articles and blogs regarding Mier’s background and qualifications, you, as a conservative, should have sufficient reason to be very concerned about Harriet Miers. If, after reviewing all the arguments and facts, you still think she can defend her history and convince Senators and the conservative base during the hearings that she is a judicial conservative, then I would argue that you have set the bar too low. Dangerously low.