Posted on 07/12/2005 6:04:01 PM PDT by NeoCaveman
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
There was a breakfast meeting at the White House today, and the president came out and discussed it. His meeting was with -- Let's see, who did he meet? -- Arlen Specter, Harry Reid, Patrick Leahy and Bill Frist. Yeah. So he met with Specter, Leahy, Frist and Senator Harry Reid about the current vacancy and what might be an up-coming one.
Just to set this up: last week, the president sort of smacked down some conservatives for daring to suggest that the attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, would be an unacceptable Supreme Court nominee because of substantive issues. One was an opinion he wrote in a Texas parental-notification case when he was on the Texas Supreme Court, and the other was his role as White House counsel in watering down the administration's brief against reverse discrimination in admissions policies at the University of Michigan.
Now, the conservatives didn't attack Gonzales personally; they were very respectful, but they nevertheless said publicly they had problems with him, and the president slapped them down -- and today has a meeting with his enemies, along with Frist and Specter. I don't even know that you'd call Specter a friend in this fight, and it just seems that on occasion the administration here is far more friendly to its enemies than it is to its friends. It does appear that way. I don't know why he's meeting with these people. It's not going to change what the Democrats say about him. It's not going to change how they act in the Senate. It's not going to change a thing -- unless, of course, they gave him a list of names and he names one of them, in which case, you know... I can't imagine that. So we'll just have to wait and see, but we do have these audio sound bites. There's some public opinion out there that does not look good for the Democrats, and you'd think the administration could capitalize on it.
And then there are the illegals "doing the jobs Americans don't want to do."
At least in 2004, he needed to keep the right united to win. Now, he doesn't have to worry about it.
Judges (and John Kerry himself) were the reason I voted for him. I wasn't enthused about it, but I did vote for him.
He broke his original promise on Campaign Finance when he signed McCain's bill.
And the Mr. Nice Guy strategy has really pacified the Left (/sarcasm
It hasn't pacified the left, but it could be responsible for helping the Republicans to win and the Democrats to lose. The are some centrists in the country who admire the way Bush doesn't let the left get him down or define him. Let the left keep calling him an idiot and worse, then when he "turns the other cheek" he looks much better by comparison to many in "middle America". As long as he doesn't listen to them, it can't hurt!!
I get the RNC stuff in the mail. I haven't got a call since I told the caller to tell his bosses to get some guts and quit being fiscal liberals.
Can anyone say "Third Party", little boys and girls?
Can You say President Hillary Stone Giant?
"Worse yet, Ol' Sparky, what will happen to the WOT? Bush has done so much to contradict his stand on that, most notably his open borders advocacy."
Yep, how can you fight a WOT with open borders? Doesn't make sense.
Also, how can you fight a WOT when you give 50 mil to abbas, a POS scumbag terrorist who helped plan the 1972 munich massacre?
you want the Pres to behave like Michael Savage, it aint gonna happen
Thank God!!!
I agree with your criticisms. Here are mine from another thread:
1. You call 50% more federal funding than clinton towards education "conservative"?
2. You call a prescription drug entitlement "conservative"?
3. You call a man who gives 50 million dollars to Abbas, an organizer of the 1972 munic massacre "conservative"?
4. You call a man who forgave BILLIONS and BILLIONS of dollars of Africa's debt "conservative"? [and gave another BILLION dollars to help fight "malaria", when he could have just requested lifting the DDT ban...]
5. You call a man who ignores the border problem after the worst attack in our nation's history "conservative"? (and calls the Minutemen "vigilantes")
6. You call a man who signs CFR, an attack on the first amendment "conservative"?
Aside from tax cuts and the WOT, I can't really think of too many other things that Bush has done which I could call conservative. That's the dangerous thing though...Bush and these republicans are labeled as "right wing extremists" when they are nothing of the sort. Today's Republican party is socialist lite in my view, there are very few conservatives left. If the founding fathers were alive today and had their own political party, the republicans would be to the far left of these great men. I've used this analogy before, but voting democrat is like pressing the fast forward button to socialism, while voting republican applies a small yet ineffective brake on socialism.
I agree with the lack of comment on eminent domain. The thing that complicates all is if he really goes through with nominating gonzales.
I noticed that too....but I think a lot of it had to do with FR being down for a couple days. Even so, FR isn't to blame for the leftward shift of the republican party.
A silly word invented by Buckminster Fuller..
Silly then, silly now..
Bucky was not just a moonbat but lying stealin idea parasite..
Thats stole his ideas from his "groupies"..
Bush could be on that level..
I will not waste time in this battle decrying the way things are, because right now, they can not be changed. I believe the President is prepared for this fight and will nominate someone the majority of conservatives will be happy with. I will not hedge the potential to be disappointed, by whining and wailing in a way that loses this battle before it has even begun.
If the president pics a centrist/liberal, I will eat my words and apologize to one and all—with one exception: there is a small group of "true conservatives" that have never been satisfied with anything short of their self-defined idea of perfection. I won't apologize to them, because quite frankly, it just wouldn't ever be apology enough.
Until then...I stand with the President, so flame away.
If the libs convince Bush to put another O'Conner and Souter on the bench, they win the whole shooting match.
The President may be prepared for this fight, but are the Republican Senators?
Also, I wonder why suddenly he has to study dossiers on prospective jurists ... shouldn't he have been preparing all along?
Rush has joined the gang. I have BEEN FRUSTRATED with the RINOcrat controlled Congress and Bush for months now. The border issue leads the long parade.
Everything they've been doing so far has led up to this. That is NOT to say they are in complete control and manipulating everybody, or that everything that goes wrong is "strategery." It just means that they will control what they can, and then use what they've learned to adapt and use it to their advantage. (A great way to live in real life too, imo. )
"Studying dossiers" is a great example of this. It doesn't mean he doesn't have a firm grip on the next step or even that he doesn't know who it will be. He's just not going to play his hand yet. It is about timing—something he can control. He wants to time announcements in such a way that there is pressure to get it done quickly. IE, close to a long recess or something like that.
Conventional wisdom is the less time the opposition has to stir up and solidify their case against a nominee, the better it will go. It takes a while for dems and the msm to get their talking together—especially since they have to hide their true agenda and don't have any particular moral frame of reference other than "disagrees with us" to hang their arguments on.
BTW...if it's a man, mark my words—the headlines will be "Bush defies wife in shocking SCOTUS pick." Idjits.
I hope you're right. I like your theme song, too. It would be perfect for Alfred E. Neuman: "I should worry, not for nothing, Everybody loves me (not), yes they do. And I love everybody, etc., etc..." I'll stop before everyone gags. Heehee.
Nice. We shall see.
To put it plain-YOU DON'T HOBNOB WITH THE DEVIL! These people are wicked. The blood of babies drips from their hands. They promote every wickedness including homosexuality. They are enemies to our Constitution. They have communistic ideals. They hate America. What fellowship does light have with darkness? The answer is none.
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.