Posted on 07/12/2005 7:48:24 AM PDT by watsonfellow
Test Screening
The Hill’s Geoff Earle reports Senator Sam Brownback will hold a personal meeting with Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Brownback, who sits on the Judiciary Committee, was asked if he believes Gonzales would make a good SCOTUS nominee. “I need to talk with him about his view of the Constitution to tell. That’s what I hope to do this week,” Brownback said.
My initial response is that if Brownback is “interviewing” Gonzales as a possible nominee, this must mean the White House is serious about the possibility of nominating him. Brownback is one of the strongest conservative voices in the Senate and a likely 2008 candidate. Getting his stamp of approval for a Gonzales nomination would go a long way toward making that pick a reality.
Great minds think alike, I guess. I can't begin to tell you how sad this all makes me. As I said earlier , it makes me sick to my stomach. I, too hope it doesn't happen.
This could be all be a media created malestorm.
I mean Gonzalez has only been at Justice for 5 months, and only got confirmed with 60 votes.
I still think we'll get someone good, until we don't.
Delusion? sic...
Savage?
Distuptor?
Do you get flux with that?
Your damn RIGHT!
Well Roe will take a lot longer to get overturned with Alberto Gonzalez on the court than with Rogers-Brown, O'Connell, or Garza (sp?).
I wish I was petulant enough to hand the country over to demoncraps over a betrayal like this (as it will be if Bush does it), but I'd certainly keep voting for the evil of two lessers- spineless though they seem to be.
Would the nomination of Gonzales fulfill Bush's campaign pledge to put strict constructionists in the mold of Scalia and Thomas on the SCOTUS?
Is Gonzales the BEST AND BRIGHTEST candidate we have, considering the list of very distinguished and able candidates that Bush has to pick from?
If Bush were to pick a personal friend ahead of a more qualified candidate for a lifetime position that is of paramount importance to conservatives and the future of our nation...would that be grounds for criticism of Bush?
Please elaborate and give a rationale for each answer. Take your time...Ill stop back later to check on your responses.
Could we at least put away the knives until he nominates someone? Are you prepared to make a public apology if/when Bush nominates Michael Luttig, or Emilio Garza, or Janice Rogers Brown? Personally, I just don't see him nominating Gonzales. One thing about this President: he does what he says he'll do, and he said he'd nominate constructionists to the court. Until he proves otherwise, I believe him.
I fear that "the architect" Rove is overly confident to the point of being dangerous.
I'm sure he's advising Dubya of the same - that the Conservatives have "nowhere else to go".
What he's underestimating, and underestimating in a HUGE way is that we DO have somewhere else to go:
STAYING HOME ON ELECTION DAY IN '06 AND '08.
**THAT** is how tired the base is of being repeatedly let down on the "big things" that count - ala Judiciary - and being made promises that are most often never kept.
If Dubya makes the critical mistake of nominating his friend Gonzalez over a "strict constructionist", there will be absolute hell to pay in the conservative base staying home in '06 and '08 - enough that the Senate will likely go into Dem hands, and the Hildabeast getting POTUS in '08.
Rove is dangerous. He may be thought of highly by Bush, but his arrogance and disdain for the base will be the unraveling of the party, IMHO.
I for one, echo what many here have said - let us down on this, and there will be a heavy price to pay in '06/'08 - because we're DONE. And millions echo the senitment.
It's going to be President Hillary in '08 if he gorks this up. But will Rove and company be smart enough to realize JUST. HOW. MUCH. THIS. COUNTS.?
Your math is wrong.
There are tens of millions of conservative Christian voters that put Dubya in office this time for the **SOLE** purpose of fixing the courts - especially SCOTUS.
To toss the conservative Christians by the side of the road to pick up some Hispanics - when there's another option to do that w/o using Gonzalez, would be stupidity at it's worst.
NRO hasn't exactly been shooting well lately. They botched it when they claimed both the Chief Justice and Justice Stevens were going to retire this last week.
Is Gonzales more or less conservative than O'Connor? Yes or no? Maybe even more important, does he appear at this point in the process more or less conservative than O'Connor did at this point in the process when Reagan put her on the USSC?
The comments by Gonzalez that he's "not a candidate AT THIS TIME" is posturing/spin, pure and simple.
He's a candidate. And probably the leading one on the short list, unfortunately.
It's up to us to keep the heat on Dubya and the admin to change this.
Of course you have no proof at all that Gonzales is at the head of the "short list" but why let that get in the way of a good Bush bashing?
I agree with you....bad choice. I pray Pres. Bush doesn't let us down.
Sorry about the pictures that will soon follow for those on dial-up.....:)
Gonzales has announced he isnt a nominee.
""The comments by Gonzalez that he's "not a candidate AT THIS TIME" is posturing/spin, pure and simple.
He's a candidate. And probably the leading one on the short list, unfortunately.
It's up to us to keep the heat on Dubya and the admin to change this.""
Yes, ignore and denounce anything that doesnt fit your GOP/Bush is gonna sell us out
Hey, I, and others, are just commenting on the rumors....something done everyday on FR. There is no bigger supporter of the Republicans than I. Please don't questions my loyalty to the party....I have NEVER voted for a Democrat nor have I EVER missed a vote, been registered since the day I turned 18 as a Republican.
I am trying to be low key as I don't want to attract the flies that will soon show up......:)
I'm usually a Bush supporter, but this has to be said.
It's a lot better to warn him off ahead of time, with honest statements of what a Gonzalez nomination would do to his base than to let him go through with the nomination. Then it would be too late, the damage will be done, Bush's prestige will be at stake, and the base will be permanently disaffected.
I would prefer to do everything I can to avoid that scenario.
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.