Dobson Welcomes Miers' Nomination

Focus on the Family Action Press Release ^ | 3 October 2005 | Christopher Norfleet

[Racehorse]

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo., Oct. 3 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Focus on the Family Action Chairman James C. Dobson, Ph.D., issued the following statement today regarding President Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the United States Supreme Court:

"We welcome the president's nomination of Harriet Miers to the U.S. Supreme Court. He pledged emphatically during his campaign to appoint judges who will interpret the law rather than create it. He also promised to select competent judges who will 'not use the bench to write social policy.'(1) To this point, President Bush's appointments to the federal bench appear to have been remarkably consistent with that stated philosophy. Based on the information known generally about Harriet Miers, and President Bush's personal knowledge of her, we believe that she will not prove to be a lone exception.

"On the other hand, one cannot know absolutely about matters of integrity and philosophy until a jurist is given the tremendous power and influence of their position. As Lord Acton said: 'Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.' Sadly, that seems to have happened to Justices Souter and Kennedy. All we can say now is that Harriet Miers appears to be an outstanding nominee for the Supreme Court.

"We look forward to learning more about her at the confirmation hearings."

[Racehorse]

Something positive about the appointment.

Yesterday, apprearing on Brit Hume's show, Dobson said the more they learned about Miers, the more they liked her.

One of the bits of information Dobson passed on to the audience is Miers is an Evangelical Christian. According to Dobson, she will be the first to sit on the high court.

[GarySpFc]

This lady already has been endorsed by Leo Lenoard of The Federalist Society, James Dobson, Fr. Pavone, and Jay Sekulow. Those are four of the MAJOR players in the conservative and pro-life community. However, FAR MORE IMPORTANT is the fact that this lady is a Bible believing Christian, and is highly unlikely to change once she is on the bench. I talked to a close Christian friend in Dallas and he said Valley View Christian in Dallas is a wonderful church, and probably the strongest pro-life church in the city. Furthermore, his dad knows Harriet Miers, and said even when she was on the city council she often remarked that the courts were out of control, and had left the original intent of the Framers. That said, we can go by faith or sight. I would rather have a strongly committed Christian as a sitting judge than someone with a conservative record who likely might change once they are on the court. You can have your judges with fine records, but give me a committed Christian who loves the Lord any day over a blind judge. “The whole earth is in the hands of the wicked, and God blinds the eyes of the judges and lets them be unfair. If God not He, then who?” Job 9:24

[bboop]

I heard a caller yesterday on Michael Medved who had attended church with Miers, and was SO supportive of this nomination. Said it was a solid Evangelical church, spirit-filled, and that HM had been involved in teaching Sunday School, etc., for a long time. A well-respected church, a well-respected member. I think she'll be ok. Hugh Hewitt mentioned that she, as Bush's counsel, will have inside understanding on the War of Terror that not many have.

[stopem]

Dobson should be clearer about what he likes about her as no one else appears to see what he does.

So far it's been said she is prochoice, supported gay marriage, and was(?) a Democrat.

[montag813]

I would rather have a strongly committed Christian as a sitting judge than someone with a conservative record who likely might change once they are on the court.

Who is like that? I don't know of any sitting judge who fits that description.

[dawn53]

It's going to be fun, fun, fun to watch the Democrats with this one.

First they're all positive, Schumer saying it could be worse, Harry Reid saying he likes her and that she was on the Dems list of choices they could support.

Now the news is leaking out that she is strongly anti-abortion and an evangelical "born again" Christian.

How are they going to spin that to their looney left supporters, if they intend to support her nomination.

And if they decide to oppose her and she gets borked, then Bush just puts in another conservative. Win, win for Bush...he's playing chess, the Dems are still playing checkers.

[Racehorse]

So far, two posters report others, some heavy weights, do see what Dobson sees.

As far as once being a Democrat. Once upon a time in Texas, not so very long ago, you just about had to be a Democrat to get elected dog catcher. Being a Democrat didn't much hurt Reagan, now did it?

As far the rest, abortion and gay rights, so far I've not seen anything credible enough to believe.

What I am coming to believe is she is not an "open book" to be easily browsed as light reading.

[truthandlife]

This just shows you how brilliant this pick is and how desperate the lefties have become. I think this is their strategy. The lefties know Bush's numbers are down and they are trying to siphon off his conservative base by throwing some of these thoughts on the Miers pick.

When I first heard about this yesterday, I was disappointed but as I went through the day and heard about the pick, I think it is brilliant. She has no track record as a judge so the Dems will have a dificult time putting her on the hot seat, she is an insider (so Bush knows her better than a lot of other President's picks) and Reid and company have basically endorsed her. The only thing the lefties can say is the conservatives are disappointed with the pick.

I trust this President because he has done exactly what he says. Bush has said he wants more Justices in the Scalia/Thomas mold and I believe him. I have heard she is a Christian and she is pro-life. I truly believe this pick will show how great of a man Bush is and the legacy is leaving behind. He understands the stakes and the opportunity he has to make an impact on this Supreme Court and this country.

I was thinking back in 1997 when 1 million men got together in Washington DC to pray and intercede for this country. I remember Clinton flying over with Marine One to see all the men and he couldn't believe how many evangelical Christians were there. A year later President Clinton is impeached and a presidency starts to unravel.

We elect President Bush (an answered prayer in D.C.) who is not the savior of this country but an evangelical Christian who does what he says he will do and searches after God's heart. I believe we will say Miers is one of the best justices for this country and conservative Christian will be thanking God for Bush's pick in a few years.

[Brilliant]

Although Dobson has written a book about judicial tyranny, I'm not sure he really has a good understanding about what must be done to stop it.

On the other hand, I think we're just going to have to trust Bush on this one, so Dobson's comments are what is needed.

[AmericaUnited]

That said, we can go by faith or sight. I would rather have a strongly committed Christian as a sitting judge than someone with a conservative record who likely might change once they are on the court. You can have your judges with fine records, but give me a committed Christian who loves the Lord any day over a blind judge

Dead on!

Our founding Fathers always thought that character was the single most important qualification to serve in any high office. Do I want some self-confessed "legal genius", or a person who will ask the Almighty for wisdom? I, like the Founders, will always choose the later!

[loreldan]

I was disappointed yesterday, but I'm feeling a little better about Miers today. My way of thinking is that Bush has not chosen any judges that I disagree with to the federal bench yet. I don't think he would start now.

P.S. Dr Dobson, you sir, are a SLOW driver!!

[G.Mason]

"It's going to be fun, fun, fun to watch the Democrats with this one. "

Not to mention the "conservative" Republicans [?].

"Harriet Miers? Who the hell is that? I never heard of her." Like that is important?

"Miers donated money to the Democrats in the '80's." Those spouting this drivel have no idea of what a Texas Democrat was in the '80's.

Harriet Miers is a "croney" of President Bush." How utterly boring and predictable.

The best is yet to come, when Harriet Miers is not confirmed because she is a Christian religious fanatic, an anti abortionist, and an originalist.

This one truly hopes for the filibuster fight of a life time over this nominee.

[mtntop3]

Well said.

[InterceptPoint]

OK but what I want to know is:

Where is Ozzie Miers?

Inquiring minds want to know. Where is the Ozzie in Harriet Miers' life?

[Jedidah]

"Harriet Miers? Who the hell is that? I never heard of her." Like that is important?


Absolutely.

You have brought up a point that I have been thinking about for the last 24 hours. Roberts and Miers are the first nominees of the internet era. NEVER before has the public been so informed, so involved, so able to naysay.

And, speaking of strict constructionism, I'm not sure that all this input is what the framers had in mind!

Frankly, aren't we being a bit arrogant in all the second-guessing and attempt to micromanage a federal process?

The nominee is to be chosen by the President, who should have thorough knowledge of the person he picks. The Senate gets to examine (and nitpick) the nominee. The rest of us? We get to vote for our senators and tell them how we feel.

The representative system that our constitution describes demands that we, the people, choose our leaders wisely and let them do their mandated jobs.

All the blogosphere/cyberspace hammering is fun and interesting, but a truly new phenomenon. Time will tell whether it is healthy.

[G.Mason]

" ... Frankly, aren't we being a bit arrogant in all the second-guessing and attempt to micromanage a federal process? "

A resounding ... Yes! We most certainly are.

The President nominates. Whether he does so wisely is a matter of opinion, which only really matters to the Senate. We, the voters place that responsibility squarely on the President and Senate.

Electing our Representatives wisely is the most difficult of all because of self interests and the money equation.

As far as the information processes via the internet. I would caution you that : 1) there can never be too much information, and 2) Our Founding Fathers never contemplated radio or television, as we today do not comprehend what unthinkable inventions lie ahead.

The screams and moans coming from the "Conservative" peanut gallery over this nomination prove one of two things to me.

The Conservatives want a democracy and not a representative government. Which if true, means they are not the Constitutionalists they claim to be, or they have suddenly become undone over the fact that Harriet Miers is a unmarried female, a Bible believing Christian, an anti-abortionist, and a believer in the Constitution as written.