Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush: Miers Shares Constructionist Views
Associated Press ^ | October 4, 2005 | TOM RAUM

Posted on 10/04/2005 5:47:16 PM PDT by RWR8189

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-32 last
To: RWR8189
Bush said: "I picked the best person I could find."

I just peed my pants!

21 posted on 10/04/2005 6:59:48 PM PDT by Kjobs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theresawithanh

I would suspect we will start to know quite a lot by June.

There are many important cases pending in 2005-2006 term.


22 posted on 10/04/2005 7:05:16 PM PDT by RWR8189 (George Allen 2008.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Don'tMessWithTexas

Surely you aren't saying that is a valid analogy. You and I don't agree on this issue, but you have at least been helpful in expressing a coherent argument. The analogy in post 5 is below your standard. There is no comparison between the skilled manual dexterity required for brain surgery and the skilled mental dexterity of interpreting Constitutional law. And Bush did not choose Miers for her bedside manner. He chose her because he believes she fits the mold of the conservative judges he promised to nominate. Miers is not going to be standing over an operating table making rapid, life and death decisions. She is going to be contemplating arguments concerning whether or not lower court decisions meet Constitutional standards. She doesn't need the skill of a brain surgeon. She needs strict devotion to the principles outlined in a document that already exists. Bush sees that in her. He knows her better than anyone else mouthing off on TV (or FreeRepublic). He selected her over all those other candidates that keep popping up from jilted Conservative pundits. Like his father before him, he will be judged in part by the performance of the judges he appoints to the court. His devotion to this country and what it stands for is at least as deep as anyone on this website. If you sincerely believe he picked someone to sit on the Supreme Court merely because he considered them a good friend, than you join a long line of people who have underestimated this President for decades. And he has proven them wrong time and time again.


23 posted on 10/04/2005 7:25:38 PM PDT by Rokke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

In the coming days, it will become known that she is extremely pro-life. I am getting this information from decent sources. She has been actively involved in church, including working as a Sunday School teacher and doing missions work. She is very conservative. I opposed this nomination strongly yesterday, but am willing to give it a chance. It could turn out to be one of the best in the past 30 years.


24 posted on 10/04/2005 7:26:29 PM PDT by toddp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Theresawithanh; Don'tMessWithTexas
IIRC, there have been a few on the SC w/o a strong background in constitutional law, and also who have never served as jurists.
-----
How many of them were able to consistently understand and apply the original intent of the framers of the constitution?  How many of them were able to apply a major correction to the direction of the court?   How many of them look to international courts to see which way the wind is blowing today?

If you are going to be activist and legislate from the bench, a strong background in constitutional law will merely get in your way.

If you are going to be an originalist, a strong background in constitutional law is necessary.

So which do you believe?
  1. Harriet Miers is the most qualified candidate for Supreme Court Justice.
  2. Harriet Miers is the most qualified female candidate for Supreme Court Justice. or
  3. Harriet Miers is the best compromise candidate that the President is willing to invest in at this time.

25 posted on 10/04/2005 7:37:29 PM PDT by Brass (A parable for our time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Brass

So then you see Ms. Miers as someone who, because she doesn't have a strong background in constititional law, would not be able to apply the "original intent of the framers of the constitution"? OK then. Didja get that crystal ball at WalMart, half-price?

I accept neither #1, #2, or #3 of your "which do you believe" BS. I trust President Bush on this one. You don't. End of discussion.


26 posted on 10/04/2005 7:53:57 PM PDT by Theresawithanh (I support President Bush, the war on terror, and our brave men & women in the military!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189
She is qualified!!

RNC reports Harriet sleeps at Holiday Inn Express!!

27 posted on 10/04/2005 8:04:59 PM PDT by LowNslow (Retired CWO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Porterville; Rodney King
If he wanted to choose an "anti-establishment" nominee, then why didn't he select Ed Koch?

Let me tell ya, that would have been way outside of the box.

This contorted, illogical reasoning is driving me up a wall.

Why can't the advocates for Harriet Miers come up with even a single reasonable rationale to support her nomination?

Why do they feel compelled to create the most ludicrous justifications in her defense?

Why?

28 posted on 10/05/2005 1:59:46 AM PDT by Do not dub me shapka broham ("I'm okay with being unimpressive. It helps me sleep better.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: inquest

I don't know when I changed my registration. Didn't change my votes, though.


29 posted on 10/05/2005 4:31:05 AM PDT by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of news)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: LowNslow

{{{"She is qualified! RNC reports that Harriet sleeps at Holiday Inn Express."}}}

Get back to us when you can deal with this:

She was the first woman to be hired at her big, well-known Dallas law firm. By big I mean, it had 400 partners.

She became the manager of the firm.

She was elected President of the Texas Bar Association, the first woman to be so elected.

She is a known, successful litigator for many years.

She was consistently named as one of the top 50 female attorneys in America.

She was consistently named as one of the top 100 attorneys in America.

She was the President's paper Secretary, that is, no paper from anyone, not Rove or Hughes or anyone, got through to the President without first getting past HER. They called her the President's Gatekeeper.

She was the President's Deputy Chief of Staff.

She is the President's White House Counsel.


30 posted on 10/05/2005 4:48:38 AM PDT by txrangerette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: LS
I don't know when I changed my registration. Didn't change my votes, though.

Did it change whom you donated to? Miers donated to the Dems up till 1988.

31 posted on 10/05/2005 1:56:24 PM PDT by inquest (FTAA delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: inquest

I never donated to anyone prior to Bush. But I can tell you that if I had, I probably would have donated to people like Scoop Jackson or Sam Nunn.


32 posted on 10/05/2005 6:23:33 PM PDT by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of news)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-32 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson