Posted on 10/03/2005 4:35:19 PM PDT by quidnunc
Rush Limbaugh has found the information that Harriet Miers is an evangelical Christian, a member of a church in Dallas that most would describe as "fundamentalist." I believe that this vindicates my earlier analysis based on mistaken information about a Ministry supported by Ms. Miers.
Blue state fundamentalists tend to hate evangelicals the way that Islamists hate Jews: viscerally. It will take enormous willpower for many of them to avoid saying that one who believes in the literal word of the Bible should not be allowed a place on the Supreme Court. They played footsie with the position that a devout Catholic would be disqaualified.
To partially quote my earlier post: this is a battle the Democrat left can't win with a majority of the American public, which sees religious faith as a good thing. As far as I am concerned about the coming attacks, Dirty Harry summed up my feelings: "Go ahead — make my day."
-snip-
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
"Let's see...she's a member of the Christian Church, she's a nice lady, she pushed for a vote on the ABA statement on abortion. Oh yea, the POTUS likes her. Guess that's good enough for me!"
I think you summed up the facts in her favor very nicely except that my understanding is that she only served on a committee that suggested the ABA stay out of abortion politics. But I guess that is as good as personal advocacy for some. If she were running for grandmother, I'd be all for her, but for SCOTUS, I don't think she qualifies. And she's 59 to boot, so she's one of those young conservatives we hope will be on the court for a long time.
You are always Right In Virginia!
Ok. I'm with you on this.
There are a couple of wonderful reads here in the forum that give the nomination 2 thumbs up!
President Bush is the smartest man she's ever known...according to her. Of course she's never been married.
Awww geez, Leno, Letterman and the boyz are going to have a lot of material there. ;^)
After all, it was Harry Reid who put her name forward. Maybe he made a mistake.
But I didn't support Bush for president in 2002 and 2004 just so he could delegate the job of selecting a SCOTUS justice to Harry Reid: "You know George, I'm going to filibuster just about all of your nominees. I'm going to give you one name, and you better listen carefully, and I'm not stuttering. I want you to nominate your personal lawyer."
On the other hand, I guess I should be happy Reid didn't suggest Bush's chauffeur for the job.
I agree w you. I think the fact that she's been in the 'real world' for a while, may be to our benefit (e.g., she may appreciate the right of eminent domain, better than some of the snobs in the social circles of DC).
In addition, I also think that the fact that she's been in the WH, she's gained a better understanding of and appreciation for the roles of each of the 3 branches (e.g., judges should not legislate from the bench - -and, as I recall she voiced that in her statement this a.m.). Another plus for her as I see it is the fact she's been the President's attorney during the WOT. Since, unfortunately, the WOT isn't going away any time soon, I suspect that they'll be cases regarding same that will eventually come before the SC. It will be good to have someone w her experience in that respect on there.
I agree w other posts here: I trust the Pres, there's RINOs on the Senate that may have not approved someone like JRB or Luttig, and I'll wait to see how she does during the hearings before I make up my mind about her.
Ditto. Miers would not have been my first choice. She wouldn't have been in the top 10.
But our problem is not the Democrats. It is the RINOs. I do not believe that a strong conservative judge with a history of published opinions on the right side of every issue would have a chance in hell of getting past the RINOs in a confirmation fight.
So what.
A wise President recognizes that no single Senator can claim 60+ million citizens nationwide put him/her in office. And, no single Senator (excepting the Swimmer) has a lock on reelection.
A President uses the power he's been given by a nation...or he loses it.
Please read my posts again. I believe I have identified 10 Republicans who could not be counted on to support a published, in-your-face conservative.
Noble efforts are not much use in politics. Why would you want a nominee to go through all of the misery of the hearings and then be shot down in the Senate? The end result would be a blow to the conservative movement, a weakened presidency, and the possible losses of one or both houses of Congress.
Whenever you think you can count on Republican Senators for their votes, remember Crying George Voinovich, who just couldn't bring himself to vote for John Bolton.
"On the other hand, I guess I should be happy Reid didn't suggest Bush's chauffeur for the job."
I read somewhere else today that Miers only got the job because George Tenant and Norm Mineta turned it down first.
I'm going to take that as a compliment ;-)
You'll excuse me if I don't answer your post. I try not to argue with idiots... they usually beat me with experience.
SHE IS NOT QUAILIFIED. What else is there to argue about?
If it's so tiring, then go to bed....please.
Please do... I am a historian of the Army of Northern Virginia...
LOL! Good one!
Sure.
Another voice of reason heard from. Thank you for that, quidnunc.
Uh that you give unqualified opinions.
As for idiots, if you've got one to recommmend for the next SCOTUS vacancy, get your request in to Harry Reid early.
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.