Replies

No, I'm not a bit unhappy with Alito and Roberts, but I wasn't even a bit pleased with Sandra Day O'Connor. Remember who appointed her?

I'm perfectly willing to fight for a conservative in the primary, once I determin for MYSELF who that conservative is.

The thing about Harriet Meirs is I never got to hear ONE WORD out of her own mouth, no one. I was TOLD by pundits what she believed and how she would have voted. Sounds just like the liberal press doesn't it? Telling me who is good and who is bad so I don't have to bother my little head making those decisions all on my own?

Well sorry, I'm not going to be told who is and who is not conservative. I'll do my own investigating and make my own decisions, and if this site is no longer a place where we get to discuss, but has become a place where things are decided for us and we're supposed to be good little soldiers and fall in behind the current fancy, then I'd like to know about that now.

The point is she was completely unknown. Why settle for an unknown commodity for such an important nomination?

In Rudy's case, "unknown" is not the problem. He has a solid track record of being pro choice, anti family values, anti gun. He's a "known" admitted and proud of it social liberal. Just exactly opposite of what we're looking for.

The thing about Harriet Meirs is I never got to hear ONE WORD out of her own mouth, no one. I was TOLD by pundits what she believed and how she would have voted.

What difference would it have made? We had the choice between someone who has demonstrated conservative values his entire life and someone who only came to them recently. Why would we take a chance on someone who has already wavered once?