Posted on 10/03/2005 4:06:25 AM PDT by johnmecainrino
Harriet Miers
"Miers is O'Connor lite, but Reagan put the original on the court."
Great point! We voted for President Reagan thinking he was "Mr. Right" and when he turned out to be "Mr. Reasonably Close" we didn't hold his few mis-steps against him!
Come on, everyone on this board knows the dems will oppose anything the president tries to do. How does saying that constitute "cutting off my nose"? Everyone has become so hysterical, they are responding to the wrong posts. Chill out, People!
"I'm coming to the realization that Bush makes noises about abortion to get us Pro-lifers on board at election time"
This is worth repeating....
That's very encouraging. Are you familiar with Einstein's political views?
Maybe she's smarter than Molly Ivins? Maybe she's more conservative than Molly Ivins? Is it a prerequisite for female Supreme Court nominees to be pretty and married?
I'm not going as far as you are, but I am unhappy with this. Really unhappy with this and I ain't even a 'Jesus Nut'. I'm a lapsed catholic-- no evangelical by any means- and I think this pick is crap.
I believe in delivering for your base. This nomination is simultaneously politically craven and politically moronic.
Exactly my first thought when hearing this.
And it's only been two hours since the President nominated her. Imagine that.........
"Legal Beat: Bar Association Votes to Back Abortion Rights" August 12, 1992
SAN FRANCISCO -- After a contentious debate, the policy-making body of the American Bar Association voted to take a pro-abortion rights position at the organization's annual meeting.
The decision by the ABA, which followed Monday's vote by convention attendees to endorse the proposal, was a victory for abortion-rights advocates. At its annual meeting two years ago, the ABA adopted a neutral position.
Before the 276-168 vote yesterday, the ABA's new president, Michael McWilliams of Baltimore, told reporters that the ABA could no longer remain neutral.
"You can't dodge an issue just because it's tough," said Mr. McWilliams, a Baltimore lawyer, in remarks to reporters. "And you can't call abortion a non-legal issue."
The ABA's perceived alliance with one side or the other in the abortion debate was a matter of concern to lawyers attending the annual meeting here this week. Both the National Abortion Rights Action League and the National Right-to-Life Committee have been closely monitoring the ABA action, spokeswomen for the groups said.
"People who support this abortion rights resolution want the prestige of the ABA behind the pro-choice movement," Texas bar President Harriet Miers said Monday, arguing against adoption of the resolution supporting abortion rights."
" She led by example. She put in long hours of pro bono work. Harriet Miers has given generously of her time and talent by serving as a leader with more than a dozen community groups and charities, including the Young Women's Christian Association, Child Care Dallas, Goodwill Industries, Exodus Ministries, Meals on Wheels and the Legal Aid Society."
--->
From the White House web site... quote from President Bush's introduction.
I guess you must have heard wrong (or he said it wrong, but corrected it in the transcript)
Be honest with yourself and us. All you care about is what Harriet thinks of Terri Schiavo. You wouldn't have brought it up for the 50,000th time if it wasn't. Which is cool-- for Schiavo threads.
We genuinely don't know her positions on most things. The hearings will give us a better sense of it. No need to say she is wonderful, or awful yet. It's just political masturbation to pretend any of us know otherwise.
According to your own posting history, you're a Brit.
Just how often do you vote in our elections?
I voted for Dubya because I trust him to make decisions for me, not seek my 100% approval. There a over a dozen picks, and no matter which one he picked, many here would be outraged on the basis of one issue or another.
I just realized you were talking about the dems and not me. Sorry about thaat. I guess I am becoming a bit hysterical myself. Got to go beat my head into a brick wall for awhile. LOL
I don't call this brilliant. This president makes good appointments, so until I see evidence to the contrary, I will, for now, assume that she is a good, solid conservative. But I will follow the nomination process very closely. I know for certain that she must be very competent because this man cannot stand incompetence and she's worked with him in a number of roles. That said, this sends out a lot of harmful signals, IMHO. It means that this president may have lost his will for a fight. The dems will sense this and begin to circle him like sharks circle blood in the water. It also gives the signal that if you are a conservative, never, ever make it known if you have judicial career aspirations. We need to have conservative judges on the bench who can speak and aspire to continue to get ahead in their career. This was not the nomination he should have made, even if she turns out to be good. Plus, if the dems had fought against it a JRB, it would have hurt them in the polls in 2006.
Quite frankly I could careless if she is proChoice as long as she does not subscribe to that unconstitutional fiction - the "Right to Privacy" - that imposed Roe v Wade on our Republic.
I'd like to be wrong, but if Bush seriously wanted to get rid of abortion, he had the chance to pick two solid conservatives for the SCOTUS. I'm happy with Roberts (but he's a straight swap for Renquist (zero-sum)), but he should have appointed Luttig to overturn Roe v Wade.
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.