Posted on 10/05/2005 12:57:14 PM PDT by jmaroneps37
Mark Levin and Dick morris have just debated the nomination on Sean hannity's show. After listening to Levin, I am more convinced that Miers is the one I want. Levin talks a good game about not wanting judges who will re write the Constitution. We we have a person that all indications show will be an orginalist. I think Levin is more interested in a fight than actually getting the judical "No" machine we need in the Suprems Court. I think Miers will be a solid money in the bank conservative vote. Since Supreme Court Judges only get one vote, how much more could Miers do? Maybe smack Ginsberg in the chops?
Interesting quote. Thanks.
I realize a lot of conservatives wanted to have another Borkian slugfest and have it come out the just way. I think that is the root of conservatives disappointment with the Roberts and Miers nominations. But every new thing I hear about her tells me she would be as much a conservative voice on the court as Bork. Maybe more. And for the same reasons.
A win is a win. Accept it and save your fights for a day when you need them.
It is possible to win a battle and lose the war. A big fight that ended with the Republicans stripping the (for now) theoretical right to filibuster judicial nominations would satisfy Conservatives but it would also energize Democrats in the upcoming mid-term election. What's the point? Let's take our win and be happy.
I'm in the camp of "Reid didn't necessarily support her, but suggested she has the qualities that DEMs would find agreeable, in general. To wit, not on the 'must filibuster/known conservative jurist' list, accomplished, female."
Reid has had professional contact with Miers during the selection process that resulted in Roberts andin Miers, and in matters other than selection of nominees. I believe he at least informally indicated that she would not trigger DEM conniptions on the day of announcement ;-)
Reid's speech when he stood with Miers on Monday was toally non-substantive. He reiterated her career and said she was personable, and she answers telephone messages promptly. Mostly, Reid talked about the confirmation process, which he was looking forward to, and noted would be conducted in a civil and respectful manner.
and your plan? I am open to suggestions.
I agree with you, OldFriend. I don't get the valuation around here on celebrity, and as far as Levin goes he seems a little thin-skinned (as do the others in his clique), and I found myself wincing as he congratulated someone for using the old "put down the bong" insult. How unoriginal.
Better DeLay as House porker in chief than Bella Pulosi!
She probably does not have the video rental background that Bork had either, but I'm sure by now they are digging into it and we will know soon enough.
I'll take a "stealth win" any day. He's going to need that political capital for a hhost of othere matters.
Other than that, there's Reid's statement, which sounded very supportive:
“I like Harriet Miers. As White House Counsel, she has worked with me in a courteous and professional manner. I am also impressed with the fact that she was a trailblazer for women as managing partner of a major Dallas law firm and as the first woman president of the Texas Bar Association. “In my view, the Supreme Court would benefit from the addition of a justice who has real experience as a practicing lawyer. The current justices have all been chosen from the lower federal courts. A nominee with relevant non-judicial experience would bring a different and useful perspective to the Court.“I look forward to the Judiciary Committee process which will help the American people learn more about Harriet Miers, and help the Senate determine whether she deserves a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court.”
Like longtermmemmory said here (quoting Sun Tzu):
"Never fight a battle when you can take the field without one."
Why? A whore is a whore, regardless of the (R) or (D) after their name.
Ok, number of my Freeper buddies alerted me to this thread, which is a continuation of last night. Why you and few others here insist on lying about me and what I said, I don't know. I didn't approve Kennedy. I reviewed his resume to ensure it was accurate. He was interviewed by scores of people, including Ronald Reagan. He lied about his pro-life position. Why do you harp on this? This should be a lesson to all of us to do a better job, not a lesser job. I will not return here, but the lies and venom by certain of the Miers supporters is truly pathetic. You might want to go to Moveon.org, because you make no points here.
Remarkably, I think Reid was looking to avoid a fight that might end in Democrats being backed into a filibuster by their base resulting in a "nuclear option".
People say that Bush made this selection out of weakness. I think Reid might have recommended her (if he did) out of the same motivation.
I think he might know a little bit more about the Court than you. He would probably suggest, based on his experience with Kennedy, that we need a more thorough examination of nominees.
Which makes sense when your party is the minority. The filibuster has been an excellent strategy. Instead of moaning like a bunch of wimps about it, the GOP should be kicking themselves for not using it. They hold up their consent of Bader Ginsburg as the new standard, when in fact they should have fought like hell to shoot her down. The GOP are a bunch of lightweights. They have no clue how to fight.
True....but the point that many are making including me is that vetting is not an exact science, that paper trails and pedigree are a guarantees of absolutely nothing. Even seasoned professionals make mistakes.
Bushs 14 years of first hand experience with Mier's gives him an insight into her judicial philosophy that may never be discerned through traditional paper trail analysis and vetting.
Your advice is absurd. It is our duty as conservatives and Republicans to point out how unqualified this lady is. The powers that be need to know that they are accountable to the ones that put them there. There will plenty of time for the party to heal.
If that was really Mark Levins, he needs to develop a thicker skin. Two or three posters harped on this point I think.
Since he's made this question so enticing, I'll pick it up.
The salient point about Levin's vetting of Justice Kennedy is that one never knows when reviewing a resume. Anyone who has interview job candidates can tell you that.
With Miers, Dubya has worked with her for a decade. He doesn't have figure out what she believes about the constitution (and IMO abortion), he knows. So Miers is not likely, I think, to be a Souter or Kennedy.
That was about 20 years ago--Levin was less than 30 years old! Cut him a little slack.
I know, I know "Levins" was a typo.
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.