[ConsentofGoverned]

"That is a more compelling argument in opposition, presuming we can determine what he current views are."
.......................................................
Meanwhile, during Miers long affiliation with the American Bar Association, she submitted a 1999 report to the ABA's house of delegates that included recommendations to develop and establish an International Criminal Court and the enactment of laws and public policy providing that the sexual orientation of adults be no bar to adoption of children.

Under the heading Family Law and subheading Adoption, the document states: "Supports the enactment of laws and public policy which provide that sexual orientation shall not be a bar to adoption when the adoption is determined to be in the best interest of the child."

Also included, under the heading International Law and Practice, is a recommendation for "the development and establishment of an International Criminal Court."

Along with the proposed agenda was a memo, dated Oct. 28, 1998, that explained the document.

"The Committee urges all Delegates to review this list for items of interest to their constituencies, and to act as the catalyst for further contact and action so that each entity will have the earliest opportunity for consideration and input."

The memo is signed by Miers as chairwoman of the Select Committee of the House.

Lets hear from the Bushbots on how they spin the above facts on ms miers. This to me does not imply she is a Christian, nor does she hold the constitution as the only law of the land..but seems very much in tune with the
other nations of the world can teach us alot about law group - souter, ginsberg,stevens,

a dark day for conservatives who got Bush elected.

[Stopislamnow]

Source that! It NEEDS to be a headline in itself.

ICC?

This woman needs to go down very, very hard in committee.

[CharlesWayneCT]

We do not know if she supported the view of the committee. We know she chaired a committee, and the committee made recommendations. She didn't resign, but instead signed. But we don't know if she voted for those recommendations. We don't know if she instead managed to soften the recommendations, or opposed them.

If there is a record of a vote in committee, and she voted for the recommendations individually, that would indicate her personal support for the recommendations.

Fortunately, the senators will get chance to ask her whether she personally supported these recommendations.

We just went through the exercise that Roberts should not be held personally responsible for positions he took in support of his clients. So we should all know the drill.

Let's make a list of the questions we want answered, and mail them to our senators. Confirmation IS a meaningful process. The Senate doesn't have to vote to confirm, they should evaluate the nominee and vote accordingly.

It's easy to denounce the democrats for announcing opposition before the hearings, but do the same when it suits us.