Harriet Miers the pick AP

[johnmecainrino]

Harriet Miers

[counterpunch]

What I object to here is the presumption of failure based on speculation only, when........as I have said previously.........as the facts come in, they are supporting her conservatism and pro-life positions.

That is fair, and I agree with you.
It's not about her judicial philosophy for me, especially on any one clause or reading of the law or narrow issue.
I would prefer non-activist constructionists. If they overturn Roe on the grounds that it was wrongly decided, then great, that is what they ought to do. I'm no activist and I wouldn't want a judge who is either.

My issue is quite simply that Bush picked a crony who just doesn't rise to the level of the court to which she has been selected. She's just not ready for prime time, she's just not qualified enough. Of course to my mind, the only sitting Justices who are are Roberts and Scalia.
I also tend to agree Bush should have picked someone 5 to 10 years younger.

[faithincowboys]

I'm a woman and guess what I din't need a woman on the supreme court. I would've been just fine with Luttig. Bush and Rove really fumbled the ball on this one. IMHO, there's very little time and few opportunities to salvage this Presidency.

[hummingbird]

He and I have big disagreements on other issues....but nothing like I'd have had with a democrat president & congress.

Same here and keeping powder dry for the time being.

[deport]

duhhhhhhhhhhh

---

LOL.... Yep a single donation will doom the nominee. Yep I see it now. The hearings will center around that and the democrats will not let a vote come on her. Filibusters galore will be her fate.

I will trust the man who has seen her up close and personal for that past 10+ years rather than the fact that she may have donated to a democrat at some point in the past. In fact many have donated to democrats in the past especially those that are members of major law firms, etc as they play both sides the political fence.

[Diddle E. Squat]

Preachin':

I guarantee that the church will stay home in 2006, and Hillary will win the POTUS in 2008. The church is the GOP base, and Bush just stuck it to us. I won't be voting GOP anymore.

TitansAFC:

I'm with ya, brother. I'm done with the GOP for a while. This was it, the last straw. Hillary will win in 2008; and after the Miers picks, I actually don't care anymore. I really don't. Isn't that sad?

No problem. It has been quite clear for awhile that no matter what, the self-appointed 'voices of the pro-life movement' would find a reason to shout "Betrayal!" and rend your clothing and gnash your teeth. Ya'll do it every month. And when RVW is overturned you'll claim that it happened despite the GOP (though it wasn't Dems who nominated the justices who will vote against it.)

So ya'll have proven, time and again, that the self-appointed 'voices of pro-life' are reliable only in your poison, defeatism, and that you'll bail every election for a Keyes or a sit-at-home-thumbsuckingfest. So why on earth should the GOP continue to woo and try to count on ya'll? Since you've established such a track record, they'll go with a winner who can bring in votes from the middle, a Giuliani. What other choice do they have? No one will ever pass ya'll's test, you'll just keep raising the bar until you can get back to your default pessimism and cry of "Betrayal!" The cry is your pacifier, you can't sleep without it.

I'm a pro-life social conservative, but I'll withhold judgement until getting more info. Knee-jerk drama queening does our side no good (and you DON'T speak for the church, you speak for yourself.) You guys are like the girlfriend who is constantly threatening suicide if you don't win every little argument. Might work the first couple of times, but only a fool will go to the alter with her.

Go ahead, form your own party. We'll then have an elephant, a donkey, and an Eyeore.

[ConservativeDude]

"So far the condemnations for the pick are that she supported a pro-life Al Gore in '88 and she must be a lesbian if she's not married. Oh, and she worked for a Democrat once."

Absolutely wrong.

The condemnations are that she is a weak intellect who has no conservative bf's. We would be in no position to moan, except for the campaign promise of Scalia/Thomas. Both of whom are conservative powerhouses.

And the bulk of the condemnation is not at the nominee, but at the President.

Friends, you only win in politics if you are willing to fight. But you are only going to fight for things you really believe.

That is why we need to quit trying to be cute and tricky, which Rove does so well, and just be conservative.

[Howlin]

I heard what they reported he said; and I saw Schumer talking about her; are you new to the "news cycle" business?

[counterpunch]

Blackwell's doing well in the OH Gov polls. There are a lot of small victories that have been made.

Don't forget Forrester in the NJ polls.

[Toidylop]

Someone has principle!!! What a crock... Call me simple and stupid but this is beyond stupidity from Dubya. Can someone tell me if this pick is in the same category as Scalia and Thomas!!!

[JRochelle]

Ginsburg isn't going to last much longer.

How do you know that?

[longtermmemmory]

IOW generic woman lawyer.

Does not walk the walk.

[kellynla]

So you have no problem with someone who donated to Al Gore for president?...and Lloyd Bentsen...

And did you donate to Al Gore for president?

I can't wait to hear your justification for Ms. Miers donating to Al Gore??? LMAO

[ohioWfan]

I don't see a pro-life Christian Constitutionalist as a 'crappy choice.'

Sorry ray, but the facts don't support your 'outrage.'

I'm a grown up. I can disagree with certain elements of a choice, or have a preference in a choice (like JR Brown), and not go off the deep end and become an emotional wreck when I don't get my way.

Sorry. But I thought that conservatives WERE the people who thought first before they blew a gasket.

Wrong in your case?

[Artemis Webb]

"No. But I am a Christian and they quit speaking up for me.

Payback will be hell for the GOP."

oooooooo...I'm sure the Christian Coalition and Focus on the Family will:

A. Encourage their members to sit out all future elections

B. Encourage all their members to vote Democrat

C. Form a 3rd party (Rolling on the floor laughing at this idea)

D. Show that as an organization neither of them are as prone to "shooting from the hip" as certain unnamed (Preachin') Christians on FR and support the nominee of the GOP.

Gee...I choose D.

[kabar]

If I had the choice between a RINO and Al Gore in 88, I would have gone for Gore too considering his VOTEs to that point were pro-life.

You mean against Bush 41? It was a forgone conclusion that he would be the GOP nominee in 1988.

[EllaMinnow]

I hate to say this, but I am going to urge Grassley to sand bag Miers. We cannot gamble on her and Bush blew it.

I doubt if you'll be successful. Grassley was on FOX prior to the official announcement this morning and was very pleased with the selection of Miers.

[safisoft]

Bush will have at least one more such opportunity -- Ginsburg isn't going to last much longer.

So we should hope for ONE LAST CHANCE for Bush to reward those who elected him? Isn't that just another opportunity for being stabbed in the back?

All of the Bush-bots on this board were saying that we should trust Bush, he won't give us a Gonzales... they were wrong. Trusting a Bush is a mistake.

[Doohickey]

This whole thread is insane.

[floriduh voter]

Fox News: A lot of conservatives are expressing concerns about this nominee.

Sandra Day O' Connor used international law as a tool. That's just wrong. I hope she's not another SDO.

[Rebelbase]

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/report/1997/Wendell.htm