Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What is it about Mier's Nomination that Weaken's Bush
10/16/2005 | Westpole

Posted on 10/16/2005 10:47:24 AM PDT by Westpole

President Bush has blundered badly with the nomination of Harriet Miers. It isn't just the profound split within the Republican Party that is damaging. The presidency itself is weaken because his judgement is now doubted within his own camp. The Democrats always doubted his judgement indeed his intellect. Now the same doubts are being expressed on the right. What is it about this nomination that can so undermine the presidency. The main problem with Ms. Miers' nomination can be summed up simply, she is a "weak sister". People respect bold action even when they don't agree with it. The Democrats mostly voted for the war in Iraq even though they opposed it. A bold move by a President will usually be deferred to. But there is nothing bold in this nomination. The very character of the nominee that is emerging is that of a follower not a leader. Some may believe the strength of the oppostion to Miers comes from people with misgivings about her views on Roe or her clandistine leanings on any number of other issues. But that is not what is giving the Bush presidency problems. Mr. Bush could have gone in one of two other directions. If he nominated a conservative intellectual leader the right would have cheered and the left would have played the same cards they have over other conservative judicial nominees. Their opposition would only have made the President look stronger not weaker. Had Mr. Bush nominated say a leader with centerists or even liberal views the right may have objected but he could claim that "balance" on the court is a an important principal for American stability and his willings to put stability over his party's wishes would have made him look bold and certainly in the media wise. In either case the president would be a bold thoughtful leader. But Mr. Bush did neither. He nominated a camp follower..a weak sister who's best quality is her loyalty to him. If confirmed the Democrats would hope the loyalty was binding as long as it was convinient, whereas the right would hope she would just follow Justices Scalia and Thomas. So what Mr. Bush has done is force both sides to wonder which leader this follower will follow. No one is comfortable with making that speculation for a justice of the Supreme Court. And everyone senses a missed opportunity to increase the intellectual heft of decision-making in the country's only forum for which there is no appeal.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: anotheruselessvanity; bush; miers; movedtochat; scotus; supremecourt
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-87 next last
To: BCrago66

This isn't about duty to country. It's about a bunch of pundits whining because the nominee isn't ELITE enough. It's pure classism.


41 posted on 10/16/2005 1:10:01 PM PDT by jess35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Jim_Curtis
Do you think that Bush will be forced to settle for someone less qualified than Miers if she isn't confirmed? Will he be forced to tap some skid row bag lady for the job? Are you saying if the Gore supporter is rejected Bush will be forced to replace her with a Kerry supporter?

I AM saying that a defeat on Miers will weaken President Bush. Not only will he have a weaker hand with his next appointment, but he will have a weaker hand in everything else he does as well. That defeat will have been inflicted by "conservatives", something the dems could not do.

It could be much worse than just a weakened President in the middle of a war. People like you are threatening to sit out the next election. That could even give Congress back to the Dems next year and the White House to Hillary in 2008.

If Miers manages to make SCOTUS, the victory will be all theirs ( Democrats ). Not only will they have another O'Connor ( at best ) but there will be no motivation for conservatives to vote in '06.

Do you REALLY think President Bush, who knows Harriet Miers very well, has chosen to nominate someone equally as bad, or even worse, than O'Connor?

If you REALLY think that, then you must think his judgement is extremely flawed. If you think his judgement is that flawed, how you possibly support him on ANYTHING?

Personally, I trust President Bush and respect his beliefs (not something I would say about his father, by the way). I think he is swinging for the fences on this, nominating the most conservative person he thinks has a chance of confirmation. That's his job, and I am willing to trust him on it.

42 posted on 10/16/2005 1:13:07 PM PDT by EternalHope (Boycott everything French forever. Including their vassal nations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: EternalHope

"Sadly, in this case, conservatives are once again eating our own. The dems could not have stopped this nomination, but conservatives spoiling for a fight, regardless of the outcome, just might hand them a huge victory anyway."
___________________________________________________________

Quite the contrary, It MAY end up being the DEMOCRATS who carry this nomination across the goal line. Will you still blame some of us who object to her nomination when the democrats unite in support of her and carry her across.


43 posted on 10/16/2005 1:14:46 PM PDT by tennmountainman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: EternalHope

I AM saying that a defeat on Miers will weaken President Bush. Not only will he have a weaker hand with his next appointment, but he will have a weaker hand in everything else he does as well. That defeat will have been inflicted by "conservatives", something the dems could not do"
___________________________________________________________

If push comes to shove, I would prefer a weak president for 3 more years than a "weak sister" Supreme Court Justice for 30 more years. We already have enough of those.


44 posted on 10/16/2005 1:17:56 PM PDT by tennmountainman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: jveritas
Yes stay home or vote for a third party. There were thousands of these threats last year by some freepers and none were correct.

It's not a threat, it's just a fact that you can't demoralize the base and then expect them all to be cheerleaders for a cause when it is no longer clear what that cause is.

I hope that doesn't happen but I predict that it will. Third Party conservative candidates will gain a lot of support and they will have a lot of ammunition to use against Republicans in their campaigns. I won't obediently cast a vote for a known RINO ever again because I believe the Republicans are better off without them.

45 posted on 10/16/2005 1:19:26 PM PDT by Jim_Curtis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: tennmountainman
Quite the contrary, It MAY end up being the DEMOCRATS who carry this nomination across the goal line. Will you still blame some of us who object to her nomination when the democrats unite in support of her and carry her across.

I have a hard time imagining the dems voluntarily giving President Bush a drink of water in the desert, much less handing him a victory on a Supreme Court nomination.

However, if they do, it will mean we actually get a chance to see if "Stealth Miers" is really as conservative as President Bush has assured us she is.

Personally, I think we have a better shot at a true conservative with an unknown like Harriet Miers than with most well vetted and carefully ambiguous high profile candidates. The disastrous but well vetted and highly recommended David Souter comes to mind...

46 posted on 10/16/2005 1:25:50 PM PDT by EternalHope (Boycott everything French forever. Including their vassal nations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Westpole
What is it about Mier's Nomination that Weaken's Bush

Nice try however poor implementation.

If you go to the DU implementation will not be a concern and you will be held with high honors.

47 posted on 10/16/2005 1:30:10 PM PDT by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wardaddy
we elected him in 2000 for these potential SCOTUS nominations as much as anything else

WTF were YOU thinking?

Thought before keyboard action would be prudent in your reply.

48 posted on 10/16/2005 1:33:59 PM PDT by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: EternalHope
I AM saying that a defeat on Miers will weaken President Bush. Not only will he have a weaker hand with his next appointment, but he will have a weaker hand in everything else he does as well.

The Miers people keep saying that but it's untrue and they can't explain how it would make Bush weaker but I've explained in detail how a Miers confirmation will harm Bush and the Republican Party.

It could be much worse than just a weakened President in the middle of a war. People like you are threatening to sit out the next election. That could even give Congress back to the Dems next year and the White House to Hillary in 2008.

I won't be sitting at home but you can't expect a motivated turnout for an unknown cause.

Do you REALLY think President Bush, who knows Harriet Miers very well, has chosen to nominate someone equally as bad, or even worse, than O'Connor?

I'd say there is a 45% chance of that and that's a conservative estimate. Russian Roulette gives you better odds.

If you REALLY think that, then you must think his judgement is extremely flawed. If you think his judgement is that flawed, how you possibly support him on ANYTHING?

I've never known Republicans to make illogical arguments like this one before this nomination. It is a borderline retarded argument that assumes a President must always be right or always be wrong. It would be just as illogical to suggest that it is impossible to support Bush on the war if opposed to his immigration policies.

49 posted on 10/16/2005 1:49:58 PM PDT by Jim_Curtis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Westpole
The presidency itself is weakened because his judgement is now doubted within his own camp.

Well to be precise by some in his own camp.

50 posted on 10/16/2005 2:01:03 PM PDT by GeorgeBerryman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jim_Curtis
The Miers people keep saying that but it's untrue and they can't explain how it would make Bush weaker but I've explained in detail how a Miers confirmation will harm Bush and the Republican Party.

Washington DC is a strange place. The perception of weakness translates into actual weakness.

I've never known Republicans to make illogical arguments like this one before this nomination. It is a borderline retarded argument that assumes a President must always be right or always be wrong. It would be just as illogical to suggest that it is impossible to support Bush on the war if opposed to his immigration policies.

This nomination was unique. It was based primarily on the President's personal assessment of the person, someone he has known for a long time. That means this nomination is more dependent on his ability to assess people he knows than the vast majority of other decisions he has made.

The best comparison I know of is his choice of Dick Cheney for VP. He caught a lot of flack for that, but it proved to be an excellent choice. On the other end of the scale, he chose someone he did not know personally, Colin Powell, for Sec. of State because "everyone knew" General Powell would be great for the job. THAT decision was not so good...

Personally, I think President Bush is quite capable of assessing someone he has known well for a long time. And I cannot imagine him choosing a "stealth" candidate in order to sneak a closet liberal onto the Supreme Court.

51 posted on 10/16/2005 2:07:17 PM PDT by EternalHope (Boycott everything French forever. Including their vassal nations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: ValerieUSA
Back to apostrophe school with you. Both of them are wrong.

I can't believe you said that. LOL!! I've made a few apostrophe mistakes and this is what another FReeper sent to me. I will have to show him your post. He will get a kick out of it. :o)

52 posted on 10/16/2005 2:07:18 PM PDT by NRA2BFree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: jveritas; NewRomeTacitus; bourbon; WKB; dixiechick2000; onyx; Squantos; Travis McGee

You are such a foolio .

There are threads here with my pic on them supporting George Bush

and I will ping a number of freepers who can vouch for that

the fact that I strongly disagree with him on immigration and Harriet do not detract from that.


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1102144/posts

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1143226/posts

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1202799/posts

and then you can check my homepage Gomer.

Bourbon and NRT have both been in my home and seen the George and Laura pics addressed to every member of my family too

Do you reckon they mail those out just for shites and giggles.

Let's see your cred now girlyman....all i ever see outta you is RINO...especially on borders


53 posted on 10/16/2005 2:27:43 PM PDT by wardaddy (Peace and love and warm hugs to everyone...sandalwood and patchouli too)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: deport

that's odd...considering that W is thought of as an evangelical and he sure more culturally conservative and Christian appearing than McCainiac was


54 posted on 10/16/2005 2:29:03 PM PDT by wardaddy (Peace and love and warm hugs to everyone...sandalwood and patchouli too)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS

Excuse me.....the primary mantra of many conservatives including one rather prominant one here on this very forum


has always been to load the courts

if you missed that back in 2000, then try some books or googling


55 posted on 10/16/2005 2:31:00 PM PDT by wardaddy (Peace and love and warm hugs to everyone...sandalwood and patchouli too)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: wardaddy
...has always been to load the courts

Now on to objective thinking....

56 posted on 10/16/2005 2:35:29 PM PDT by EGPWS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: EternalHope
Washington DC is a strange place. The perception of weakness translates into actual weakness.

You haven't explained how this voodoo works. In what tangible ways would this weakness manifest itself. Will the Republican congress start making liberal laws if Miers doesn't make SCOTUS? Is there a rule that the President looses his veto power if his liberal nominee isn't confirmed?

57 posted on 10/16/2005 2:40:19 PM PDT by Jim_Curtis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: wardaddy; jveritas

Yes, indeed, wardaddy supports POTUS!

Like me, wardaddy wants our porous borders closed and enforced with federal troops.

As for Harriet Miers... I support her --- I like the nomination ---
and find it truly odd that POTUS'S judgement is being questioned regarding Ms. Miers, because ALL of the names being tossed around by the anti-Miers crowd, ARE BUSH APPOINTEES. ALL of them.


58 posted on 10/16/2005 2:42:19 PM PDT by onyx ((Vicksburg, MS) North is a direction. South is a way of life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Westpole
Stories and posts that begin with, "President Bush has blundered badly with the nomination of Harriet Miers" have weakened Bush.
59 posted on 10/16/2005 2:47:35 PM PDT by Mike Darancette (Mesocons for Rice '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NRA2BFree

That is a fabulous reference page. I have bookmarked it for future direction.


60 posted on 10/16/2005 2:55:09 PM PDT by ValerieUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-87 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
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson