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

To: Eaker

Look, I think I understand your anger. I just don't see this situation the same way you do. One of the reasons I was in line at my precinct at 5:00 AM on Election Day, after having worked all the previous day and night, was because I wanted to vote for President Bush and Johnny Isakson, because I knew that Supreme Court vacancies would probably be coming during this term. I wanted someone who would appoint and vote for judges who are strict constructionists who will not legislate from the bench and who will not consider international law as part of their decisions. I trusted President Bush to make such appointments, and I still trust him.

When you consider this appointment, you also need to consider who his "warriors" in the Senate are. He needs to play this very shrewdly. There are too many weak-spined Republicans in the Senate who will buckle under pressure, at this point. I think the President has taken all of these things under consideration. His judicial choices, so far, have been excellent. We were skeptical of Roberts, but see how that turned out? I think we may end up being pleasantly surprised with Miers, so I'm taking a wait-and-see attitude. I really don't think the President has sold us out.


2,694 posted on 10/03/2005 4:17:04 PM PDT by Purrcival (Let's give Miers a chance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2676 | View Replies ]


To: Purrcival
I'm taking a wait-and-see attitude.

This is not the way I live my life. Don't take this the wrong way, but this is what a heroin addict does when they inject their latest acquisition in between their toes.

They have to wait-and-see. I prefer a more proactive approach like only taking legal, Doctor prescribed medicine.

I would prefer a real Constitutional constructionist not a shot in the dark. Especially when it was made clear that it had to be a woman which cut about 70% of the qualified applicants from the herd.

Finally, after researching our new Attorney General I really do find the President’s judgment suspect.

2,700 posted on 10/03/2005 4:32:13 PM PDT by Eaker (My Wife Rocks! - I will never take Dix off of my ping list as I have been asked to do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2694 | View Replies ]

To: Purrcival
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?

2,730 posted on 10/03/2005 5:33:08 PM PDT by mississippi red-neck (You will never win the war on terrorism by fighting it in Iraq and funding it in the West Bank.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2694 | View Replies ]

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

We have no clue how that turned out. He's been in the SCOTUS for exactly one day. Bush promised 2 Scalia's and we have one confirmed "trust me" and another nominated "trust me". There were plenty of sure things available, but he did not choose them.

2,784 posted on 10/03/2005 7:20:26 PM PDT by handy (Forgive me this day, my daily typos...The Truth is not a Smear!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2694 | View Replies ]

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