Posted on 09/28/2005 5:49:04 PM PDT by KStorm
I appreciate the list of figureheads at the top.
Just dig a little bit deeper- down into the deputy, assistant, or sub-cabinet level for the people who actually make the day-today decisions.
There are about 3000 jobs in the "plum book".
Still, I applaud you effort here.
I guess Drudge knows someone in the White House.
You mean... hydration-challenged?
Yikes. Anyone who gave a dime to Al Gore is unfit to serve on the court .... and I'm not kidding. She also contributed to Lloyd Bentsen and appears to have "turned" Republican when in suited her.
As you know, all nominees refuse to state their position to abortion. However, an ariticle in CNN states her former pastor as saying "When pastor Ron Key was asked about Miers' views on abortion, he said, "her personal views are consistent with that of evangelical Christians... You can tell a lot about her from her decade of service in a conservative church."
This leads me to believe is Pro Life and would also indicate she is against gay marriage.
I think that we will see cases that deal with the abortion issue come up that don't actually decide whether abortion is right or wrong. For example, a parent's right to be notified before their minor child gets an abortion. The issue in that case would deal with a parents right to make decisions for their children and not necessarily abortion rights. The result of the decision, however, would directly affect the "right" to abortion. Cases like this would slowly chip away at the "right" to abortion until it becomes almost impossible to get one.
How is this a threat to the poor? No one HAS to have an abortion. If you don't have sex, you won't need an abortion. If you MUST have sex, you can use birth control. If you get pregnant anyway, you will have a baby that you can give up for adoption.
This is where we disagree, my liberal friend. You assume that people are too ignorant to understand consequences, I assume that people are basically intelligent and know exactly what the consequences of their actions are. You believe that people should not have to take responsibility for their actions, I, on the other hand, believe the opposite. You believe that we should have no standards of morality because some may break these standards. I believe that standards must be set or there will be anarchy. You believe that you must throw money (i.e. taxpayers $$$) at a problem and I believe that people must be accountable for their choices. And since I am on a rant here...we have FREE education in this country. People who don't take advantage of this opportunity to improve their lot in life get no sympathy from me if they find themselves uneducated, with a low paying job or unemployed. And another thing..If a person chooses to make several children with no means to pay for their care or if they CHOOSE to break the law and have a criminal record and find it hard to get a job because of it. Again, no sympathy from me. By the way. Why did you sign up today and direct your post at me???
Don't worry about the cat.
I haven't said a thing to you. So I'm not sure whose "rant" you speak of.
Did you get that from Al Franken, Randi Rhodes?
Miers has two problems:
She is too old and she is too moderate.
There are 7 justices on the USSC who were selected by Republican presidents. 1 who was sleceted by a Rep Presidentand Senate.
The problem is with the COuntry Club Republicans in the Senate. They usually side with the Democrats or at least lean that way.
The only good thing I can say about Bush's USSC choices is that they are better than Kerry's would have been.
BUMP
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.