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

Skip to comments.

Miers is the wrong pick (George Will)
Townhall ^ | October 4, 2005 | George Will

Posted on 10/04/2005 7:33:33 PM PDT by jdm

Edited on 10/04/2005 7:41:50 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 961-979 next last
To: sinkspur
I support Bush to piss you off. Looks like it's working.

LOL! Good answer! At least you're a good sport!

121 posted on 10/04/2005 8:14:56 PM PDT by Texas Federalist (Republican senators please Bork Harriet Myers!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: Don'tMessWithTexas

This nomination says that judicial nominations - including Supreme Court nominations - shouldn't be the sole preserve of academic Federalist Society groupies. There's nothing wrong with being a corporate lawyer. They help make our commercial world go 'round.


122 posted on 10/04/2005 8:14:56 PM PDT by freedomdefender
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
A very undistinguished Circuit Court Judge, it must be said.

It's not like Thomas had much time on the bench to demonstrate otherwise.

Frankly, Thomas was a marginally qualified pick who was selected for other reasons. We ended up getting lucky with him. Even so it took several years for him to get his bearings.

He also went to a top ten law school. I don't think that's a prerequisite for the Court. The differences between top ten and a top fifty law school are fairly small save for networking opportunities. But Southern Methodist University?

It's a decent law school now. 40 years ago it wasn't quite that.

123 posted on 10/04/2005 8:15:28 PM PDT by The Iguana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: gondramB

It's not the disagreeing, it's the personal attacks. You have to admit it sounds more like the Rats commentary than a disagreement among FRiends.


124 posted on 10/04/2005 8:15:50 PM PDT by TheDon (The Democratic Party is the party of TREASON!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: JCEccles
You are correct. A justice does not merely cast a vote. They are not legislators. He/She is expected to write opinions. That requires skill and intellect.

It is difficult enough to articulate a coherent opinion in a First Amendment case. Try articulating an opinion on an anti-trust case or one involving the applicability of provisions of ERISA or a trade agreement.

Skill as a managing partner of a law firm does not translate into skill as a jurist who is expected to circulate an opinion that gets the approval of four other justices.

125 posted on 10/04/2005 8:16:10 PM PDT by Don'tMessWithTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
"Thomas' Circuit Court career was as dull as bondo."

Bologna.
126 posted on 10/04/2005 8:16:30 PM PDT by jdm
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Chena; wardaddy; Black Tooth; dixiechick2000
Furthermore, there is no reason to believe that Miers' nomination resulted from the president's careful consultation with people capable of such judgments. If 100 such people had been asked to list 100 individuals who have given evidence of the reflectiveness and excellence requisite in a justice, Miers' name probably would not have appeared in any of the 10,000 places on those lists.

Excellent point, Mr. Will. But are you mining my posts on FR for material for your columns AGAIN? :-)

To: Chena

This is not jumping the gun. Movement conservatives in the legal world know who would and would not make a good SCOTUS justice. Just ask your friendly local member of the Federalist Society. So, it's not necessarily Ms. Miers that we're down on, it's just the fact that Bush skipped over at least two or three dozen known conservatives with stellar credentials to pick her.

I bet (no, I know) you could have polled a hundred local conservative lawyers wherever you live and not heard a single one of them recommend Ms. Miers. You know this and President Bush knows this, and neither one of you seem to care very much about it. President Bush's lack of interest in qualifications, judicial experience, or the opinions of the conservative legal community is foolish in the extreme.

509 posted on 10/03/2005 10:55:16 PM CDT by bourbon (It's the target that decides whether terror wins.) [ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 498 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]


127 posted on 10/04/2005 8:17:15 PM PDT by bourbon (It's the target that decides whether terror wins.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The Iguana

I know a guy who went to SMU. He was also accepted at Thomas Cooley, but didn't get in to Tulsa. I'm just sayin'...


128 posted on 10/04/2005 8:18:04 PM PDT by July 4th (A vacant lot cancelled out my vote for Bush.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: flashbunny; All
...And if you fight and lose, it fires up your base for the 2006 election cycle, which can help you gain more seats.

a bird in the hand

129 posted on 10/04/2005 8:18:17 PM PDT by olde north church (Here's to wishing Harry Harlow is roasting in Hell and his progeny are being tortured.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: jdm

I luv watching it, as Mr Peterman would too, I'm sure! The Bushbots are trying to stop Hurricane Harriett with their sweaty fingers that more often than not can't differentiate between "you're" and "your", "its" and "it's", and "there", "their" and "they're".


130 posted on 10/04/2005 8:18:21 PM PDT by Revolting cat! ("In the end, nothing explains anything!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Drago
"Wait and see" is a bad strategy for lifetime appointments.

Can we at least wait and see what comes out in the hearings before we all lose our minds? Isn't the President of the United States entitled to at least that much consideration?

131 posted on 10/04/2005 8:18:44 PM PDT by Not A Snowbird (Official RKBA Landscaper and Arborist, Duchess of Green Leafy Things)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: freedomdefender

Let's not lower the bar for the SCOTUS because of some grand design that average lawyers will somehow be more conservative than academics. The Senate and House are full of average lawyers and 97% of them wouldn't know the freakin' constitution if it hit them in the head.


132 posted on 10/04/2005 8:18:52 PM PDT by Texas Federalist (Republican senators please Bork Harriet Myers!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: The Iguana
Frankly, Thomas was a marginally qualified pick who was selected for other reasons.

And Miers is a marginally qualified pick who has been selected for other reasons. But, as long as she votes with Scalia and Thomas, I could care less what her "scholarship" produces. I'm sick to death of the American bar lecturing to me for my own good.

133 posted on 10/04/2005 8:19:13 PM PDT by sinkspur (Breed every trace of the American Staffordshire Terrier out of existence!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: bourbon

damn ...not George Will...another of those Paleo Bush Haters dangit


134 posted on 10/04/2005 8:19:41 PM PDT by wardaddy (Yo brother, can you loan me some "bot "???.......I'm fresh out.....Karl help me out here!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: TheDon

"It's not the disagreeing, it's the personal attacks. You have to admit it sounds more like the Rats commentary than a disagreement among FRiends."

You have a point that is different. But sometimes its just disagreeing that starts the name calling. And it is divisive.


135 posted on 10/04/2005 8:20:27 PM PDT by gondramB (Conservatism is a positive doctrine. Reactionaryism is a negative doctrine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: GB

I think once the initial knee jerk reaction has subsided and people learn more about Miers, the backlash will dissipate. Miers is an originalist, but she did not meet some people's expectations in regards to other attributes. She does however meet the most important quality: she is an originalist.


136 posted on 10/04/2005 8:21:06 PM PDT by TheDon (The Democratic Party is the party of TREASON!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ordinaryguy

Oh it's not about qualifications. It's about leanings. Her owning a gun suggests a proper perspective on 2nd amendment issues.


137 posted on 10/04/2005 8:21:25 PM PDT by Owen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: SandyInSeattle
Can we at least wait and see what comes out in the hearings before we all lose our minds? Isn't the President of the United States entitled to at least that much consideration?

The hearings are for show. Nothing will come out that will somehow make her more qualified or create new and undiscovered constitutional writings out of thin air.

138 posted on 10/04/2005 8:21:31 PM PDT by Texas Federalist (Republican senators please Bork Harriet Myers!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 131 | View Replies]

To: Don'tMessWithTexas
He/She is expected to write opinions

Clarence Thomas has written two or three opinions in 14 years. Not very distinguished, huh?

It is difficult enough to articulate a coherent opinion in a First Amendment case. Try articulating an opinion on an anti-trust case or one involving the applicability of provisions of ERISA or a trade agreement.

I suspect a corporate lawyer like Miers is imminently more qualified to write these business opinions than some ivory tower nerd like Stephen Breyer or Anthony Kennedy.

139 posted on 10/04/2005 8:22:29 PM PDT by sinkspur (Breed every trace of the American Staffordshire Terrier out of existence!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: flashbunny
Bork's "borking" deflated the base; or don't you remember that far back?

Yes, it made them very angry, but it did NOT bring us together. It demoralized a whole lot of people; though not me. I'm still VERY angry about that.

Okay, let's take your scenario. Instead of Miers, let's pretend that the president sent in Luttig. He's VERY Conservative and is one of Chief Justice Roberts' best and oldest friends. He hets roast for all of that, plus that fact that he isn't a woman. This drags on for almost a year.

O'Connor wants out and wants OUT now.

They finally Bork Luttig, his name and reputation are ruined.

So the president then sends up ....who? Brown?

Repeat performance.

By this time, O'Connor has had it and leaves. The court is now 1 shy a Justice.

By this time, it's time for the '08 race, so no matter WHO the president sends in, that person is DOA, so that the DEMS assume the next president, whom they think will be a DEM, gets to select the replacement.

Ergo, we lose quite a lot; actually. And what if Ginsberg and/or Stevens decide to leave or die in the meantime? Both ARE possibilities.

And if you don't think that this scenario is probable, then you are mistaken.

140 posted on 10/04/2005 8:22:36 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 961-979 next 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