Harriet Miers the pick AP

[johnmecainrino]

Harriet Miers

[MJY1288]

True, since none of us know for sure, why condemn.

Although after watching the Roberts hearings, I'm pretty confident that he is an originalist

[lainie]

Am told that anchovies are as common in Asian versions of pizza as pepperoni is over here.

That wouldn't surprise me. The use of fish sauce in Thai food is common, and it's made from processed anchovies too, I think. Ever since I had puttanesca sauce over linguine years ago, I've been an anchovy fan. It's a great way to add salt and a little flavor to your cooking. ...I'm a "less is more" person though. :-)

Knowing how well anchovy goes with hot peppers, I'd like to try that combo on pizza.

[Gary Drumm Jr]

Watson fellow wrote:
"I am not happy about the pick, but you sir are a liar.

I've just looked her up on Open Secrets and she has never donated to anyone but Republicans."

Gary's Response:

According to Drudge, she did donate to Algore in 1988. OpenSecrets only goes back to 1990, so it wouldn't show the donation. Although, to be fair, she has donated to only republicans from 1990 forward, including Phil Gramm and Kay Baily Hutchison, whom we all know are relatively staunch conservatives.

[Ramius]

It's not nice to make fun of people that are not in their right minds. :-) Not sporting.

[InsureAmerica]

""Bush is a liar (she's not in the Scalia/Thomas mold) and a failure.""

I hear you think Bush is a liar and a failure. Is this true? I won't believe it until you post it hear at least 35 times more....

[lainie]

This is true. Back then, Algore passed himself off as a good conservative democrat southern boy, in the tradition of a Zell Miller, let's say.

[dirtboy]

you are right about Gore in '88.

Recall that Gore positioned himself as a conservative Southern pro-life Democrat for quite some time. That could have been why Miers donated to him - she appears to be quite pro-life to me.

[white_wolf]

This issue is not whether Ms. Miers will turn out to be conservative. The issue is that Bush could have, and should have, nominated one of the good, powerful, intellectually brilliant candidates rather than an unknown.

That is the real issue.

He also should have nominated someone younger who could serve longer.

[finnigan2]

"Why do we, as Conservatives, have to guess what kind of judge we get for our re-election efforts."

- I guess it's just one of the downsides of supporting an incumbent who has outsmarted the Dems and the MSM once again - but his maneuver has one downside. It's going to take until Meirs writes her first few opinions before the left realizes they've been sucker punched and you get the answer to your question.
In the meantime, I'll trust Dubya not to appoint someone who would completely betray his Christian beliefs and the core values that he must feel she shares.
At the very least, she will not be an activist judge - of that I'm certain.

[dirtboy]

It is fine that she is pro-life, evangelical, and all that. She is NOT SC justice material, because she is unqualified; and otherwise socially liberal.

How is she socially liberal?

And folks said Clarence Thomas wasn't the best qualified judge. He turned out to be the best Supreme Court justice in recent history, IMO.

[Republic of Texas]

On an SR-71

Only if one of the captured alien craft wasn't available. Contrail Alert!

[SONbrad]

I just finished reading it. If I have a typo here it's because I am wiping the tears of laughter from my eyes as I type.

Truly memorable idiotic post! lol

[dirtboy]

The issue is that Bush could have, and should have, nominated one of the good, powerful, intellectually brilliant candidates rather than an unknown.

Yeah, we all know what happened the last time a president named Bush nominated a relatively unknown judge that folks said wasn't the best-qualified - and who wasn't all that brilliant.

We got Clarence Thomas.

[Republic of Texas]

I haven't condemned this pick yet, I said that I wish he had made a bolder pick. The lack of information on Meirs is causing this confusion, and illustrates the President's percieved (in his own mind) weakness.

[Cboldt]

well, Mr. Vice President, she was suggested by Harry Reid ...

I think the nature of the suggestion was "she not on the 'filibuster list'". And I might add, he couldn't very well say "...yet" because that would show his hand. ;-)

The show and tell with Reid and Miers was interesting. He said she was a good nomination because she was a woman, because she was not a judge, because 3 SCOTUS judges told Reid that the Court could use a member who didn't come from the ranks of Judges, because she is personable, and because she returns calls promptly. Ms. Miers didn't speak. Reid was aksed also what he thought of the fact that Ms. Miers had donated to Al Gore's political campaign. He said that made the selection even better, in his book.

Basically, Reid is saying that DEMs will stifle the "must filibuster" rhetoric for this nominee. He will let the confirmation process run its course.

[ARealMothersSonForever]

A lot of us in Texas knew who she was, and did a little more research as soon as her name came up. The Lottery commission gig is not a glimmering feather in her cap. The Texas lottery has been a debacle since its inception. As to Harriet's performance with the City of Dallas, why are none of the cheerleaders posting about her performance? Even one or two examples of staunch conservatism would be nice.

[Major_Risktaker]

If you are an evangelical, she is one of us.

Evangelicals and Politics

[steveegg]

Yeah, we all know what happened the last time a president named Bush nominated a relatively unknown judge that folks said wasn't the best-qualified - and who wasn't all that brilliant.

We got Clarence Thomas.

And we know what happened the time before; we got David Souter.

History isn't on the conservatives' side. Going back to President Eisenhower, Republican Presidents have nominated Justices that turned out to be conservatives something less than half the time, while they have nominated Justices that have turned out to be liberals a quarter of the time.

[Steelerfan]

And we fought him through over considerable opposition because we had some idea how he would rule. There were originalists out there with proven track records as originalists on the bench. We have no basis to know how Miers would rule because she has never ruled on anything. We do not even know how she would address the constitutional issues because she has never practiced in that area. All we have to on is Bush's trust in her, which is just not enough to make me feel comfortable given the other canidates that were out there. Again, I hope I am wrong.

[ohioWfan]

No argument from me on that.