Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Harriet Miers the pick AP

Posted on 10/03/2005 4:06:25 AM PDT by johnmecainrino

Harriet Miers


TOPICS: Breaking News
KEYWORDS: affirmativeaction; evangelical; harrietmiers; prolife; putin; rino; scotus; winwin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 661-680681-700701-720 ... 2,941-2,944 next last
To: ohioWfan

"And frankly, I trust his character, because in 5 years he has given me no reason not to."

I believe he picked her because she has the same views as as he does about illegal immigration and will probably vote to let any and everyone who wants to stroll across the border be welcomed as a citizen.


681 posted on 10/03/2005 5:56:32 AM PDT by antisocial (Texas SCV - Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 522 | View Replies]

To: NittanyLion

Sarah Hughes swore in LBJ on AirForce One.


682 posted on 10/03/2005 5:56:35 AM PDT by Don'tMessWithTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 610 | View Replies]

To: jennyjenny
Yes, let's hope if she does get confirmed, she is better at waiting for all the facts to be presented to her before making a decision, unlike many on this board.

Oh please. Conservatives are more patient than anyone gives them credit for. We wait, we vote, we hope. They we keep getting our teeth kicked in by Country Club Republicans. Enough. Maybe RINO is not a good term any longer. After all, Republicans seem to just be acting like themselves these days. Maybe it should now be CINO, Conservative In Name Only.
683 posted on 10/03/2005 5:56:41 AM PDT by safisoft (Give me Torah!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 499 | View Replies]

To: HostileTerritory
Some people are unhappy with Bush's choice for the Supreme Court and they're willing to throw away Iraqi democracy, Afghan democracy, freedom for Afghan women, a secure nation because Miers isn't on their special list of ok nominees. I'm sick of it.

I am quite happy with GWB's foreign policy, but nonplussed with his domestic agenda. Miers isn't on my special list of SCOTUS nominees. I'm disappointed in the pick.

Now the burden is on Miers and GWB to sell the pick to the public. But he's got an uphill sell of this nomination, with me.

684 posted on 10/03/2005 5:56:42 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 617 | View Replies]

To: cantfindagoodscreenname

well, that would be a point for her.


685 posted on 10/03/2005 5:56:47 AM PDT by johnb838 (Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue. -- AuH2O)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 674 | View Replies]

To: Jim_Curtis

Total speculation. I mean TOTAL.


686 posted on 10/03/2005 5:56:49 AM PDT by txrangerette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 615 | View Replies]

To: handy

Check Gore's record at that time. He was pro-life.


687 posted on 10/03/2005 5:56:53 AM PDT by Blogger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 678 | View Replies]

To: Romish_Papist
There is no way this woman fits the "Scalia/Thomas mold" that Bush PROMISED us.

When was this alleged promise made? I can only recall President Bush stating that Scalia and Thomas were his favorite Justices when asked which Justices he had a preference for.

688 posted on 10/03/2005 5:57:03 AM PDT by blinachka (Vechnaya Pamyat Daddy... xoxo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 635 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

well we could have predicted it, bet a large sum of cash on it, couldn't we? i am EXTREMELY disappointed, but i am not going to flounce around pronouncing myself DONE etc. FR is full of drama queens. always was, always will be.


689 posted on 10/03/2005 5:57:03 AM PDT by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 663 | View Replies]

To: NittanyLion

At my age, I believe I have put a lot of careful thought into my beliefs and have a strong foundation for such thought.

Of course, I probably thought the same 15 years ago! I can promise you, I have changed!

Many experiences can bring about profound changes in one's thinking, and a lot can happen in then next 20 years.

As I have a foundation that doesn't change, the Bible, my fundamental beliefs and underlying principles aren't likely to change. But the circumstances around me are constantly changing, so how I apply those principles in my life may very well change in the next 20 years.

Look at all the FReepers threatening to change party affiliation at this one "last straw" event.

I'm not saying her background is irrelevant. I'm simply saying that to insist that opinions should be stable by age 40 is a bit arbitrary. The words senator and senile both have the latin root senex, meaning old man or elder, as it was deemed that older people have the wisdom to govern. By the 60s or 70s, yes, the concrete has probably set. In the 40s, the concrete may not be soupy, but it's not dry, either!

In addition to one's background and the decisions one made in youth (or middle age), you should look at the direction of the person's life as a whole. Can you see a pattern of growth or maturity? Is the direction acceptable? Are we looking at someone who flip-flops constantly with no direction, blown by the winds, or someone making a steady progression in a good direction? What is the foundation on which they stand?

Having said all this, I'm STILL not thrilled by this appointment. I guess we'll all see.







690 posted on 10/03/2005 5:57:11 AM PDT by Chanticleer (Education without values, as useful as it is, seems rather to make man a more clever devil. Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 391 | View Replies]

To: handy

The top one but not the bottom. She's never been married.


691 posted on 10/03/2005 5:57:17 AM PDT by ConservativeMan55 (DON'T FIRE UNTIL YOU SEE THE WHITES OF THE CURTAINS THEY ARE WEARING ON THEIR HEADS !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 678 | View Replies]

To: dubyaismypresident
To be fair, she was White House counsel. Which is a very demanding job. And she obviously has a solid legal background and involvement in community activities back in Texas. Its the absence of a judicial philosophy that concerns me. What does she believe is the proper role of a judge and our courts? We're just left to wonder and that accounts for much of the negative reaction we're seeing this morning. There's nothing in her background that hints at involvement in conservative causes. If there is someone can bring it to our attention.

(Denny Crane: "Sometimes you can only look for answers from God and failing that... and Fox News".)
692 posted on 10/03/2005 5:57:17 AM PDT by goldstategop (In Memory Of A Dearly Beloved Friend Who Lives On In My Heart Forever)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 631 | View Replies]

To: handy

no idea that is why I posted them all


693 posted on 10/03/2005 5:57:23 AM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 678 | View Replies]

To: txrangerette
So was Ronald Reagan. So now if a nominee ever clerked for a Democrat, even at a time and place where almost all Texas public officials were Democrats, they are automatically suspect? Totally clueless and ridiculous. There was Congressman Ralph Hall, who converted to Republican after he was 80 yrs. old. He had the most conservative voting record in the House.

The other poster asked what we know about Hughes, and I supplied the answer.

Since you engaged me, here's my take on her former donations to Dems. By the time a person is in their 40's, I'd expect they would've clarified their political views based on decades of contemplation about the issue. That she had not done so leads me to question the steadfastness of her beliefs. I think that alone should give one cause for concern.

694 posted on 10/03/2005 5:57:27 AM PDT by NittanyLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 657 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan

We shall see ohio. For our country's sake, I hope she doesn't turn out to be another Souter or Sandra Day, though.


695 posted on 10/03/2005 5:57:28 AM PDT by nicmarlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 675 | View Replies]

To: johnmecainrino

During the 2000 presidential campaign, Gov. George W. Bush repeated a number of times that, if elected and if a Supreme Court slot opened up, he would nominate a judge that held the same judicial philosophy as Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia.

On "Meet the Press" in 1999, the future President Bush said that the justices he most admired were Scalia and Thomas. Bush referred to Scalia during one of the nationally-televised debates as his favorite Supreme Court judge, and the kind he would nominate during his presidential tenure.

During a campaign speech, candidate Bush was very clear on the type of judge he would nominate if given the chance: "I'm going to name strict constructionists." Speaking with reporters after the speech, Bush defined a strict constructionist as a judge who "doesn't use the opportunity of the Constitution to pass legislation or legislate from the bench."

"That's going to be a big difference between my opponent and me," he said in a debate against Gore. "I don't believe in liberal, activist judges."

Once elected, President Bush didn't get a chance to fulfill his campaign promise during his first term. But in his second nomination acceptance speech at the Republican national convention, he clearly stated, "I will continue to appoint federal judges who know the difference between personal opinion and the strict interpretation of the law."

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/003657.html


696 posted on 10/03/2005 5:57:38 AM PDT by Incorrigible (If I lead, follow me; If I pause, push me; If I retreat, kill me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: handy

Back in 88, I might have done the same thing, if I'd had the money...but that's a lot of water under the bridge...by 95, I was a member of the local Republican Women's group.


697 posted on 10/03/2005 5:57:50 AM PDT by Knitting A Conundrum (Act Justly, Love Mercy, and Walk Humbly With God Micah 6:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 678 | View Replies]

To: SittinYonder

It's true that back then he was Al Gore, Senator from Tennessee, not the Algore of today. But he was still a dangerous and ambitious young man.


698 posted on 10/03/2005 5:57:52 AM PDT by johnb838 (Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue. -- AuH2O)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 677 | View Replies]

To: notes2005

Oh yes, and we all know how reliable CNN is these days. They would never spread unsubstantiated rumors to smear the Right or Administration. Noooo.

Has FR been hijacked by a bunch of DU trolls? I don't get this instant damning of Miers. She's not the best pick of the litter, but maybe the most politically viable at the moment. (Yes, politics does enter into the equation sadly).

Bottom line though: I don't know if Miers is worthy of support or not. I do get a "she's a female Souter" gut feeling. But the pick is made. I think the INTELLIGENT thing to do is to not go on gut feelings and wait to let the facts fall into place and hearing from her before making a judgment and running around like a crazed DUer who just lost an election.

Just as the anti-US protests by the left embolden the terrorists in Iraq and elsewhere, the backbiting here emboldens the left. Just STOP for a second and take it all in. There will be plenty of time to judge the justice-to-be.


699 posted on 10/03/2005 5:58:02 AM PDT by The Hound Passer (I'm One of 59,054,087 Dumb, Ignorant, Bush Supporters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: section9
Section:

Your are absolutely on point, but I don't think many on this board appreciate the subtle implication. For you folks from Loma Linda, a lawyer who spends five of her peak earning years on the Texas Lottery Commission is no legal star. A big fish in a small pond, perhaps, but no one of the caliber one would expect for the supreme court.

This resume screams feisty corporate lawyer who used political connections and loyalty to people in power to advance above junior partner at a connected fixer law firm in Austin. Constitutional issues? Who cares? How is that going to add to billable hours and get our candidate for County Commissioner elected?

My lord, this is Bush's jump the shark moment. The scene in which he goes completely over the top in a fit of pique just to demonstrate that he is sick of Washington and wants to go home to Crawford. It is an understandable emotion, but he owes the country something. He owes his (formerly) loyal supporters something. He has disappointed us all. I'm devastated.
700 posted on 10/03/2005 5:58:27 AM PDT by irish_links
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 528 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 661-680681-700701-720 ... 2,941-2,944 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson