Posted on 10/03/2005 7:44:05 PM PDT by Aussie Dasher
Well, NOW and Planned Parenthood (as usual) have shown they're not too pleased with the pick Pete.
Thanks for posting this. How is your spring going?
Very nicely, thank you. We're enjoying a glorious Melbourne day!
If Fr Pavone supports her, Harriet MUST be OK.
Praying for your race :)
Praying for your race :)
Even the demons of Hell believe, and tremble at the sound of His name.
I agree. Priests For Life is a great group and Frank Pavone is the best. If he says get her in there, I think she is a good one.
Thank you gop.com, I hadn't realized that everybody liked Harriet so much.
...but they forgot to put the quotes of Ried, Fienstein, and Schumer in there....they love her too.
VERY interesting. Thanks for posting this.
Thanks Granny. October 23 is the BIG day!
Harriet Miers seems ok to me. At first I was scared, the reports on some past opinion she might have made supporting gay adoption of children … that really scared me, not to say what I was hearing about her academic support for an international criminal court.
The first words out of Laura Ingraham is that, she is very deeply disappointed. She did mention that some (unnamed) conservative know-it-all and I suppose insider of some sorts is assuring her that, to effect, “relax, Harriet is ok”. Nevertheless, Ingraham still feels, the appointment is so important that viz “why even take a chance” and just nominate someone who without question has a strong conservative record.
The conservative know-it-all and probable insider told Laura Ingraham that Harriet is “a Christian” and pro-life.
Well, the most important issue for me isn’t whether the nominee is a Christian or pro-life. Maybe that’s important to President Bush, but not to me, not the most important thing. I mean, Bush is a Christian, but there are a whole lot of things the Prez has done that really pissed me off. So just because someone is a Christian doesn’t mean the person is a good choice – I love Christians and a good Christian is a winner. Today, if the left has it’s way, the Christians will be the next Jews for the gas chamber, you can bank on it. Our forefathers who authored our constitution were Christians in large part. But, being a Christian and pro-life isn’t the deal with me.
Is Bush more committed to his personal friends, that conservative principal? I think so. And, Bush isn't a conservative. So, I really don't care if she's a "Christian". I mean, so was Jim Jones I suppose. And I am not interested in Bush's personal friends. I am a right-winger. And I love history. And my forefathers are the founders of our nation, but also forefathers before them whom I love and respect, going back eons. What’s important to me, the issues in the times we live today, is what is going to be done about stopping the invasion of illegal aliens and balkanization of our country, winning the war on terrorism (e.g. the court’s stand on terrorists taken prisoner et all), overturning recent rulings that take our property rights away, States Rights and the right of a State to define marriage as only between a man and a woman (thus, I could move to that State if things got too crazy in a State I am currently living in).
But then I watched a 4/22/05 address that Harriet Miers gave (shown on CSPAN) to the Republican National Lawyers Association.
Hey, she sounded ok to me.
She sounded conservative to me.
I think there is only one soft spot on this woman, thin skin, and that is I think she truly believes in “diversity”.
And, in that regard, I believe her point of view in that regard is her sympathetic outlook regarding homosexuality.
I could be wrong, but there was something she said at her address in response to a question, and there are some indication regarding such in statements from her past.
Do not take this wrong, but I also believe she is close to the Cheney family.
She is liberal regarding the gay lifestyle?
Obviously, at this time, I have no idea what her stand is regarding illegal aliens, and some would say her opinion in this regard is irrelevant to rulings she would make on the court. But, in that, one would be wrong, it is relevant and she will be making rulings that would impact our nation in that regard.
But, overall, her delivery from 4/22/05 left me feeling very good about her, confident, and for a nominee who is isn’t suppose to be and “ideologue”, she struck me as someone who has memorized her “ideology” and is sticking with it – defined sentences which speak of an ideology about law, and yes politics, and the court. So, in that regard, when questioned by the Democrats I wonder, she will probably give memorized replies and that is ok. I don't think she is as smart as the first nominee, but she will do ok. As far as gay sympathy, I am not going to let that let me down. And what I heard from her in CSPAN sounded good to me, and I’m a realist and actually don’t mind an ideologue as long as the ideologue who supports the meaning and intent of the constitution and has respect for our forefathers who authored our freedoms.
The logic of our freedom, of America’s freedom, sprang directly from her degradation brought about by subjugation, the subjugation of our forefathers, of their religion, of our people, and laid the foundation in the wise written words of the constitution to lay the foundation in natural law for freedom and ongoing freedom for future generations.
I heard that logic of freedom in what she had to say, and it made me feel good.
So, for now, I’m ok with her.
So, for now, good pick Mr. Prez. For now. Because, from what I'm hearing, if you blew it, you've really blown it.
I am never going to vote for anyone named Bush again. I already decided that, before this nomination. So it has nothing to do with that. There are things I like about Bush, and don't like. After he leaves office, I am not going to harp on the negatives of President Bush. I am going to focus on the next leader, who will stand for conservative principle, and, yes, be an ideologue.
I want an ideologue. I want a right-winger. I want a right-wing Supreme Court of the United States. I want a right-wing President, Senate, House, Court, I want it all.
And why not?
Cheney, Cheney, Cheney, then DOBSON.
It's going to be the loyalists and the religious right against everybody else. Don't be fooled by predictions that she'll sail through the confirmation process.
I can't see Lard Ass letting her through without his traditional grab for a headline.
That's "Senator" Lard Ass to you.
My apologies!!! LOL!
"I am never going to vote for anyone named Bush again. I already decided that"... Oh really?
So in 2012, should Hillary be up for re-election, and Jeb is the repub. nominee you'll vote how???
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.