Posted on 07/16/2005 8:53:44 AM PDT by advance_copy
WASHINGTON - President Bush gave the nation several clues Saturday about the person he will nominate for a seat on the Supreme Court, except for the most important one — a name.
In his weekly radio address, Bush said his eventual nominee will be a "fair-minded individual who represents the mainstream of American law and American values."
His candidate also "will meet the highest standards of intellect, character and ability and will pledge to faithfully interpret the Constitution and laws of our country," the president said.
"Our nation deserves, and I will select, a Supreme Court justice that Americans can be proud of," he said, without revealing the name that many are anxious to hear.
Bush also discussed his recent meeting with Senate leaders of both parties to discuss the nomination and confirmation process for a replacement for Sandra Day O'Connor. The first woman to serve on the high court, O'Connor announced July 1 that she is stepping down after 24 years.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Danamco...
Disregard the post of mine to you..... I click on the the wrong post when hitting the reply button.... sorry.
You being a constitution party voter is a clear indication of your utter stupidity.
The fact that you really believe this is a clear indication of YOUR utter stupidity. You've been drinking too much of that Kool-Aid again.
Wow. I don't see the linkage between 1st responders and the border, but if nothing is done we will need about another 100,00 1st responders after the next attack.
Schummer is a fine represenative of his constituents. /s
Great post.
Schumer got up on the floor and spewed that to vote for more border patrol agents would take 24% away from first responders, therefore this wasn't going to pass if he could help it!
"Licking" for future D-votes!!!
I don't think that being unsatisfied with a president is being bitter. Especially one that I vote for twice. If one isn't allowed to express displeasure with a president's decisions it would seem that one is dealing with liberals.
I do think that Buchannan reflects far more of President Reagan's world view than does "W". I think that "W" reflects the upper east coast, liberal wing of the Republician party. He appears to be a Rockefeller Republican in most of his ways.
I don't deny that I yearn for the Reagan years and the steady course he set the country on. In comparison to Reagan "W" is truly a disappointment beyond description.
Pray for W and Our Troops
Well, that leaves out a Constitutionalist.
I don't think so. I used to think it would be Garza but now I'm convinced that W will right the mistake his Dad made with Souter and nominate Edith Jones from the 5th Circuit for O'Connors seat.
President Ronald Reagan would not have hooked arms with the likes of Lenora Fulani, on that you can bet your last dollar. Nor would he argue for a fortress America that sits back and waits to get smacked again.
"like Scalia or Thomas" not Scalia or Thomas. Bush said during his two election campaigns, that this was the kind of Judge he would appoint to the Supreme Court. The answer was not limited to the Chief Justice.
I didn't say that one perfectly reflected the other.
janet, how can you argue against the fact that the republicans hold majorities in both houses and hold the presidency? go back to your less than 1% party and lick your wounds. The CP will not be a majority party in the near or even far future....deal with it. Hell, they won't even get ONE seat in the congress.
Chuck, I never claimed that the CP WOULD be a majority party, although I think it should and hope it will. I simply said that I preferred to vote principle over party, and that don't agree with the current policies of either of the "two parties".
Well, the principle of the so-called leader of the CP regarding Iraq is enough to keep me out, but you keep at it.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1444489/posts?page=42
I don't think you're acknowledging the facts about Bolton. Contrary to the impression that's been cultivated about him, he's pro-UN. He has repeatedly stated (including to the Senate after being nominated for the post) that he wants to strengthen the UN and make it more "effective".
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.