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 ...
I have no idea, but you certainly didn't post anything that proved he was a liberal.
There is nothing contradictory about the fact that somebody doesn't like her because they know nothing about her. And it's not as if information will surface that we should be waiting for before we form an opinion - no information will change the fact that she has no sustained judicial record of conservatism like the many circuit court judges Bush could have nominated. She may turn out to be acceptible. But we want the BEST choice and we did not get that.
You just proved my point.
No I did not (Sorry, I'm lazy at 11 pm). I don't think you would disagree with me if you read his opinions. My only point was that Bush isn't 100% on his judicial nominations at the circuit court level, although he has been very good.
Especially with a bunch of girlie men as soldiers.
Conservatives are eagerly jumping into the Democrats' strategy of triangulation.
They don't need to stand for anything, they just need to keep us fighting among ourselves and on the defensive to create enough of a perception of incompetence and corruption that they can win the battle easily...even though everyone not terminally infected with the liberal disease knows they're a bunch of shameless scum.
Ignoring the particular comment in question, Tom Bell is an extremely smart and insightful individual; he is one of those people that when you find yourself disagreeing with him, you should immediately re-examine your assumptions. He is well-known in circles that are less than mainstream, as his area of expertise and writing is usually the market dynamics of legal and political systems (while dabbling in writings in surprisingly diverse areas). I am almost surprised to see him quoted here, and when he bothers to offer opinions on political matters it is not a bad idea to pay attention; while he generally avoids political commentary, his political analysis is frequently as deeply incisive as Rush's and far, far better than pundits like Coulter or Hannity. Just an FYI on this guy since I suspect most Freepers haven't heard of him; he has a low profile but he is extremely reputable to those familiar with his work and indisputably brilliant.
While I had not heard this particular theory, now that I think about it, I find Bell's hypothesis fairly compelling and it makes sense from a political calculus perspective. Just because conservatives have bloodlust does not make it a good idea to go to war. Going to war is short-sighted and foolish if one can avoid it.
I never said I was going to bed...I never said I was tired... I said I found your line of reasoning exhausting...
Thanks for the link.
ND: Who cares if you do or do not? You do not get to vote on this nomination. She is in, with or without your support.
I think you hit the nail on the head with your reply. Much more revealing than you probably intended.
I feel Bush will have at least one Supreme Court nominee, Justice Stevens is 85 or older and he can't last too much longer on the court. SO the odds are that Bush will get one more in the next 2 to 3 years.
I agree
That's because he knows Billy wants to be Secretary of the World.
LOL.
OR, on the other hand they support the nominee, but they can't qualify it. They are mad that some won’t support the choice, but they are just as unable to provide evidence in the form of speeches, written decisions, etc.
Sorry folks, but if the strategy is to slip someone in without a record, I don't see any more convincing evidence coming out for us to base a decision on. You are going to have to take this entirely on faith.
Feeling better about it now?
I hope she works out, I really hope so. As NINIAN DENDEH (sp?)vividly points out, I have no say in this. So, it could be years before we get any kind of feeling for the temperament of this judge. Sorry, but that does make me queasy.
I agree with what many here are saying that the perception given by this pick is that there was no will, or ability to fight for a strong conservative originalist. Thus, we are left to take it as faith that she is a strong conservative originalist that can be slipped in the back door.
Seems like they are going pretty far to avoid admitting they are conservatives, or earning a well deserved victory on principle.
A popular theory for avoiding a fight in support of Meir is that we are unable to fight this out in the Senate. We don’t have the political capital because Pubbie Senators won’t/ don't fight the litany of liberal lies about Iraq, Katrina etc. We have just taken too many shots. The President’s ratings are too low (who cares) and we cannot afford to fight for a conservative appointment.
So basically we can’t fight, because we won’t fight. Their lack of willingness to fight has left them unable to fight. I can’t discount this, but it’s just sad.
No wonder all the knee jerking and depression over this. The fight for a conservative POTUS and Congress results not in the ability to appoint conservatives to SCOTUS, but in impotence due to a lack of will to stand up. That is the perception.
I really hope my "analysis" is wrong. I hope W and Karl have nominated someone we will be proud of. I just hate waiting ten years to find out, knowing there would have been no doubt with many others.
I feel that some things are worth fighting for. If this isn't one of those things, then what is?
Yes, your guy Bell sounds like just the sort of fellow you should look to for your thinking.
Shoulda, coulda, woulda This one is here and now.
Those guys can hold on a long time. They'll have to drag Ginsburg & Stevens out by their Oxygen & IV tubes.
Do you realize the ages of some of those justices?
Bush may well get a third pick to the court before his term ends, IMO.
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.