Posted on 10/03/2005 4:06:25 AM PDT by johnmecainrino
Harriet Miers
Of course, Bush is a huge disappointment to many when he does not do exactly what they would do. They make that determination of what he should do without any of the hard investigation, counsel from hired expert aides, and without looking at any of the possibilities, obstacles, consequences of the decisions. They just read, ponder, and form a conclusion based on WHAT THEY WANT IN A DREAM WORLD.
Yet, we always pick very educated men who understand politics for the highest office in the land. Not, pie in the sky dreamers.
And - do you really think any here care that you threw out your Bush stuff?
Maybe you would be happier picking your next candidate and getting to work for the perfect specimen.
I think you confused me with someone else. In my #43 I was quoting someone else who wrote I've just looked her up on Open Secrets and she has never donated to anyone but Republicans. and then providing them with a link to the site that shows she donoted to Dems.
The fact that she gave money to Bush Sr.'s demonrat opponent, and the fact that it was Slick Willie, should scare the daylights out of any Republican.
Think about it. She gave money to Klintoon, to defeat a President from her home state.
You do make a good point about the RINOs. Sad but true. However, the fight would be worth it regardless of whether the person is confirmed. It would challenge the precedent that is quickly becoming set in stone, i.e. that it is acceptable for liberals to turn the confirmation process into a results oriented policy-making device.
This is like leaving Barry Bonds in the minors because he can really get the job done down there.
Harriet Miers
Boy, there is so much to make us worry when we read about Harriet Miers. She attends church, she is a Christian, she believes in the bible. She is loyal to President Bush and he to her. She never married, she cares for her aging mom, is close to her family. Goes to her nephews games.
Oh dear, this has to be a women with a grudge. I don't see how in the world W could have picked someone as terrible as this. I forgot she was a Dim in the 80's. It just freaks me out, how scarry this lady appears. Plus the fat Planned Parenthood is against her.
That was when he was still a conservative Democrat.
(Audible Groan.)
If Pres. Bush wanted to nominate an ancient Texan he could have just as easily gone with Rep. Ralph Hall.
I know I would have been pleased.
I think many of the folks who are up in arms over this pick, were up in arms from day one about *anything* Bush said, did, intended or thought. Meaning, they were most likely never supportive of President Bush and this just gives them fuel for their personal fires in Bush bashing and jumping to conclusions w/o full disclosure. Disgusts me but doesn't surprise me.
I can't believe Bush has fumbled this badly....I guess the plan is to have her bounced out of the Senate hearings and the real selection will come forward.
Slick Willie was never pro life.
Planned Parenthood was also against Justices Souter, Kennedy and Stevens.
You're being generous. This feels like more betrayal.
For conservatives, choosing between Democrats and Republicans is simply a choice between being stabbed in the chest or being stabbed in the back.
If prescription drugs and campaign finance were seen as political necessities, then Rove and Bush are not only not geniuses with inside knowledge and the kiss of the heavenly muse, they are utter fools.
No one except McCain cares about CFR. IF these guys think that was a political necessity, they are idiots. And even if it was political necessity, their oath is to the constitution...not to political necessity.
As for prescription drugs. The only people that want a new entitlement are people alread in the other party. And as we have seen (and all of us except the Bush bots pointed out time and again) the cost is already tens of billions over the original projections. This entitlement alone could come close to bankrupting the country. It is enormous. It was a horrible idea, socialism at its worst. And to boot, it didn't earn the GOP any votes. It never does. These political geniuses can't figure that out.
So...perhaps in their mind, this IS the same situation. Which just goes to show what a lot of us are saying. Quit putting in those stuck in calculation mode. And just put in conservatives.
More likely it's because this choice is perceived as a middle of the road nominee who will leave no lasting legacy. It's the Rehnquists, Scalias and Thomases of the world who leave legacies - not the O'Connors.
I agree with this. Business itself (as opposed to school) is very educational. I have admired GWB's leadership up until now...but this nomination really gives me pause.
I think your analysis is wrong. Specter would have come around on Luttig. McCain would have been required to in order to preserve his 2008 run for president. Dewine took a lot of heat in Ohio so he would have fallen also.
Chafee, you're right about; however, we would have picked up at least one of the Maine sens. So we would have lost two Republican votes but would have picked up several Democratic votes.
Judiciary committee vote: 10-8, Senate vote 60-40 to confirm, maybe a little bit less.
This choice is horrible.
And no, I thought Cheney was a great pick and Roberts too.
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.