Harriet Miers the pick AP

[johnmecainrino]

Harriet Miers

[redfish53]

Time will tell, but it's kinda like batting against a knuckleballer...

[redfish53]

It is...but something is cooking here...maybe it's just my wishful thinking...

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

Perhaps so.

Then again, someone's religious convictions don't necessarily serve as the best indication of their political beliefs.

As I mentioned earlier, Robert Bork was a brilliant legal mind when he led a more or less secular lifestyle, and his legal reasoning did not become less-or more-incisive when he decided to come into the fold of the Church.

He may now be a Roman Catholic, but above and beyond that he has an astoundingly penetrating judicial intellect.

Personally, I don't know whether Justices Luttig, Jones, Rogers-Brown, Batchelder, et. al., are skeptical Unitarians or bible-thumping Pentecostals, and to be perfectly honest, I could care less.

What I do know is that they are brilliant jurists, any one of whom would have made a superb Supreme Court justice.

For me, that should be the sole determinant of who gets to sit on the bench.

[Eaker]

That was what I first gathered; but I thought maybe some reasonable consensus had developed by now. I guess I'm wrong!

ARMSF has hit the nail on the head. This has boiled down to a bush-bot vs Conservative thread.

The bush-bots are not fairing well either.

[redfish53]

She isn't married? Wow...

[evangmlw]

And let's not forget Jimmy "DA PEANUT" Carter.

[BigSkyFreeper]

I just heard this on the radio on my way home from the gym and I thought to myself, "Isn't that the group that....?" I couldn't believe that was what I was hearing, but it's true! I imagine this is going to make BIG news when everyone figures it out. :-)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1495585/posts?page=708#708

[alnick]

Instead, he picked this childless non-entity who is his personal lawyer.

Nonentity, huh?

What a strange choice of words. It's interesting that you chose that word before 7 am, and this afternoon Savage used the same odd term to describe Meirs.

[Republic]

I beg to differ, no one gets to the top of the most pretigious law firm in his or her state, not mention being the first female to do so, without being a savvy pitbull. Oh, and she headed up as the first female, the Texas Bar Assc. as well.

Our President will not betray his nation, bill clinton...sure..he would betray us for a an extra piece of silver or a fast one nighter, but President Bush has demonstrated time and again his ability to surround himself and our nation with people of immensely good character.

He will not betray us, he would NEVER betray the future of our nation into the hands of a paritisan, liberal judge and he has probably made one perfect choice.

I trust him.

And he has EARNED this trust over and over and over a thousand times in my book.

[mississippi red-neck]

We were skeptical of Roberts, but see how that turned out?

That's the second time i have seen this type of statement about Roberts in this thread.

I have been out of the political loop mostly since the storm. Have I missed something?

Has Roberts done something on the court to prove he was a good choice and the type of judge we were hoping for?

[ARealMothersSonForever]

... The hearings also underscored that the lack of resources in some areas of the state not only has a dramatic impact on the courts' performance of all of their obligations, but also unduly burdens the ability of lawyers to maintain a private practice. Lawyers must, in the interest of the administration of justice, be aggressive advocates for increasing the resources available for the representation of indigent defendants. Additionally, we are reminded that success in fighting crime in our nation is more than treating symptoms. We will be successful in solving our massive crime problems only when we attack the root causes. All of us, men and women, young and old, must pledge ourselves to address the ills that surround us in our communities. We all can be active in some way to address the social issues that foster criminal behavior, such as: lack of self-esteem or hope in some segments of our society, poverty, lack of health care (particularly mental health care), lack of education, and family dysfunction. -- "

As more information comes to light, there are some liberal buzzwords like self-esteem that surface. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1496027/posts

[Corin Stormhands]

I'm still trying to figure out how to apply all this to the tantrums on the forum ;~D

Basically it's the same application. The adults are the ones who are embarrassed.

And the child will likely do it again.

[Purrcival]

"Has Roberts done something on the court to prove he was a good choice and the type of judge we were hoping for?"

Well, since today was his first day, he really hasn't had a chance to do anything on the court yet. However, he gave several very telling answers during his hearing. Here's one that I particularly liked:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_100305/content/truth_detector.guest.html

Title is "Roberts destroys the Left in 44 seconds". Great sound bite.

[floriduh voter]

On PBS tonight, a woman from George Washington University named Susan Karamanian was saying nice things about Miers. So was everyone else on PBS.

On Fox News, I had the sound muted and was watching the closed captionining. President Bush's closed captioning had a mishap. "She's this, blah, blah, blah,... she's a liberal." That was a hilarious blooper by the closed captioner.

[Eaker]

he would NEVER betray the future of our nation into the hands of a paritisan.

He said that he would renew Clinton's AWB.

I assume that you have read it. It is clear that he had not. To boil it down with other terms he was agreeing to ban Chevy trucks but not GMC trucks. Clearly stating the one is "bad" and the other isn't when they are the same.

To play the shell game may be great for politics, but not great for people.

[Purrcival]

"And the Rah-Rah crowd continues to think there is some strategy to selecting a SC justice based SOLELY on gender. Fill the quota, and screw the conservative base."

I guess I must be part of the "Rah-Rah" crowd.

I'm a woman, and I don't give a rip whether the President nominates a woman or a minority. I want him to nominate the best person for the job, and if that person happened to be another white male, that would be perfectly fine with me. There is nothing in the Constitution that says the SC has to have a particular makeup or distribution.

At this point, based on Bush's previous judicial nominations, I choose to trust what he has done here and see how this plays out.

[Don_Ret_USAF]

The way I see it GW talked w/Dem. Reid throw out the name first. So now Reid is in a corner. As leader of the dems if he votes No. The Prez can knock them down on asking them about who to send for nomination. Also there is the possibility that maybe 2 more appointments may becoming forth in a year or two. Bush has two more years in office. LETS SEE WHAT HAPPENS WITH IS NOMINATION. I am sure Bush has done a very through background check on this Fine Lady. If there was any reason of concern by Bush than he would have picked some one else. A personal Lawyer - bet they talked about many things that we would not even think about. So Chicken Little is running around - THE SKY IS FALLING BUSH DIDN'T DO IT RIGHT (WRONG - BUSH DID IT RIGHT.) Bet If you have a list from the yes verses the no votes for each of BUSHES nominations for judges - You will see it is the same who vote yes and who vote no. True there are some changes (that is very small number). But it is the same ones almost all time that say NO. This tells you that some senators do not care what the people want but were the next buck will come from for re-election. Sure am glad that I moved out of New York back in the 50's. Even then they taxed the hell out of you.

[firewalk]

.

[gpapa]

A few comments regarding nominee Harriet Mier.

1. She has no experience on the bench as an acting judge.
2. From what I can tell she has limited credentials.
3. Many other potential nominees have much more experience and proven conservative credentials.
4. We have no idea how she would rule on matters of critical importance to the country, and conservatives in particular.
5. Assuming nominee Mier is confirmed, IMHO it looks like the Supreme Court makeup is going to be pretty close to the same with respect to judicial philosophy.

Color me disappointed at this point.

[jocon307]

"HI. I just got off work and have been dying to know a general consensus on FR of what the take is on Miers is."

Well, if this helps, I actually surfed to this thread from a link on the new American Spectator blog which describes Freepers as "apocolyptic".

I'm very, very disappointed. The woman may be a reliable conservative but there is NOTHING, NOTHING in her backround that shows her as anything but a small town politcal player, at best. I find it very hard to believe she is one of the nine (9) best legal minds in the country.

Bush gets tired, that's the problem with our beloved W. He gets tired. He did what he felt was heavy lifting on Roberts and then he just got tired. I think, if this was the choice, he should have just nominated Gonzalez.

And as for Cheney telling Rush that they've never backed away from a fight with congress, that was just pathetic in addition to being inaccurate. As for him saying we'd be pleased with her in 10 years, that was just condescending, who ever says stuff like that "in ten years you'll know I was right" who says that?

My two cents. At least she's an old nonentity, and that's rude and I'm sorry to say that, I really am. Bush has probably doomed any presidential ambitions for his brother and any other person named Bush.