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

Skip to comments.

Mark Levin and Dick Morris get into it
WABC radio | October 5, 2005 | Self

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?


TOPICS: Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: dickmorris; hannity; levin; marklevin; morris; talkradio
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 301-308 next last
To: Republican Red

"I read a theory the other day that Tony Snow and Mark Levin are going overboard on their dislike of the Miers nomination because Snow really went to bat for Souter while working for the Bush41 term and got screwed and Levin went to bat for Kennedy and got burned."

Wow. It would explain Levin's vitriol here on FR last night whenever Kennedy was mentioned.


61 posted on 10/05/2005 1:24:21 PM PDT by BeHoldAPaleHorse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Mike Bates
I think someone already took care of that:

With a frying pan, apparently.

62 posted on 10/05/2005 1:24:38 PM PDT by dirtboy (Drool overflowed my buffer...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: jmaroneps37

I have changed my mind on Miers too. I think Miers is going to be a reliable Scalia faction voter. She likely won't be writing a ton of opinions, but she isn't going to pull any Souters or O'Connors either.


63 posted on 10/05/2005 1:24:41 PM PDT by RinaseaofDs
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pcottraux

You have confused blustering to the peanut gallery with actual opposition. Rush and company, as well as many liberals, will end up voting for her. She may do even better than Roberts.


64 posted on 10/05/2005 1:25:07 PM PDT by Captain Kirk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mike Bates
seperated at birth ?


65 posted on 10/05/2005 1:25:55 PM PDT by Mr. K (Some days even my lucky rocketship underpants don't help...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: oceanview

Let's remember how well he vetted Kennedy. Some expert.


66 posted on 10/05/2005 1:26:04 PM PDT by Miss Marple (Lord, please look after Mozart Lover's son and keep him strong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy

Here are some groups supporting her:

Several groups, including National Right to Life, Focus on the Family, and the Christian Coalition, American Center for Law & Justice, have endorsed Miers' nomination after reports surfaced showing she's pro-life.


67 posted on 10/05/2005 1:26:21 PM PDT by conservativepoet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: oceanview

I think the fact that Bush has worked with Miers and personally knows knows her says more than an impersonal vetting process.

Just look at Souter and Kennedy to see that lying to get the job or relying on recommendations from acquaitences is more risky.


68 posted on 10/05/2005 1:26:43 PM PDT by Republican Red (''Van der Sloot" is Dutch for ''Kennedy.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
Unfortunately the bigmouths against the candidate don't care a whit if in their ignorance they weaken the President.

After all, who would think that mild manner, thoughtful, quiet spoken people like Levin would want to fight rather than reason.

69 posted on 10/05/2005 1:26:52 PM PDT by OldFriend (One Man With Courage Makes a Majority ~ Andrew Jackson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: traderrob6

The best evidence I've seen that she would be an originalist is from Hecht the associate justice on the Texas Supreme Court who attends the same church and has dated her off and on. He stated very strongly that she is an originalist. But with no paper trail it's hard to know for certain.


70 posted on 10/05/2005 1:26:56 PM PDT by bereanway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Huck

Yes, and that's going to haunt him next month when he is voting against her for being a whacko evangelical christian extremist.


71 posted on 10/05/2005 1:27:01 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Republican Red

I've worked with many people for 20 years - none of them "know me". its a business relationship that they have - she works for Bush.


72 posted on 10/05/2005 1:28:16 PM PDT by oceanview
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: pcottraux

Plenty of conservatives support the President's choice and have spoken up for her. I certainly do so have Pro-life organizations. If you have been reading many of these threads here you would know better than to make such a statement.


73 posted on 10/05/2005 1:28:41 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (Public Enemy #1, the RATmedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: pcottraux
I can't decide either. I'm hearing those who oppose her, and those who support her...and I just can't figure it out.

I hated the pick at first. But she seems a sensible lady with good values and who will be a realiable vote. Bush could have done better with this whole process, but she'll do. I wish he would have found a 40-year old Harriet, except I think they stopped using that name in the 1950's.

74 posted on 10/05/2005 1:29:23 PM PDT by Always Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: frogjerk

I note that she has pulled ahead of the no votes on the poll, even among members.

This is one poll where I wish people could change their votes once a day, it would be interesting to see how the feelings of the group are changing over time, if at all.


75 posted on 10/05/2005 1:29:27 PM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: jmaroneps37
"I never thought I'd support Morris over Levin."

Kool-aid, get's you everytime. Anyone supporting Morris over Levin on issuing invovling the Supreme Court, is just plain crazy or anti-US Constitution.

76 posted on 10/05/2005 1:30:42 PM PDT by jpsb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BeHoldAPaleHorse
Thanks, looks like that is about it. Here's what I found, summed up in one paragraph -

Rehnquist received a B.A., M.A., and LL.B. from Stanford University and an M.A. from Harvard University. He served as a law clerk for Justice Robert H. Jackson of the Supreme Court of the United States during the 1951 and 1952 terms, and practiced law in Phoenix, Arizona from 1953–1969. He served as Assistant Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel from 1969–1971.

Then in 71 he was nominated by Nixon for the Supreme Court. I wonder if many conservatives objected then on the same grounds as Miers today. Can't say that I blame them either, considering how some recent justices eventually turned out. I'm hoping Miers is just another Bush misunderestimation. And I keep going back to the fact that Cheney was once the one vetting candidates and then became the candidate himself, at Bush's request, and he's been a great VP.

77 posted on 10/05/2005 1:30:55 PM PDT by agrace (Where were you when I founded the earth? Tell me if you know so much. Job 38:4)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: traderrob6

"I have a tremendous ammount of repect from Levin, that being said he was the one responsible for vetting Kennedy."

Are you kidding? Wow! Well, I'm pleased to learn that several groups, including National Right to Life, Focus on the Family, and the Christian Coalition, and American Center for Law and Justice have endorsed Miers' nomination after reports surfaced showing she's pro-life.


78 posted on 10/05/2005 1:31:33 PM PDT by conservativepoet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: section9
The notion that Miers is an "originalist" is pure spin.

It is when unsupported with evidence, but it may be accurate. For example, her advocacy thatthe entire membership of the ABA vote on the pro-choisce resolution instead of having the position asserted by the ABA policy board resembles advocating a legislative policy-making having priority over judicial policy-making.

I'm uneasy with the nomination more because it looks like cronyism (even if she is exactly what conservatives would want in a judge) and it subordinates a dialoge about constitutional principle to a dialogue about "stealth," than because of concern about her likely jurisprudence.

79 posted on 10/05/2005 1:31:47 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: oceanview
No, what I am saying, is that Reagan didn't know O'Connor nor Kennedy at all; President Bush has known Miers for a VERY long time...PERSONALLY.

Reagan nominated O'Connor, so that he would be the first president to place a woman on the SCOTUS.

Kennedy was a pig in a poke, after Bork was "BORKED" and the second nominee, Ginsburg ( yes, another one; this one was a man ) was found to have spent the '70s smoking pot, as a college prof. Kennedy was supposedly a "safe" nomination and you have NO knowledge that he "lied".

80 posted on 10/05/2005 1:32:14 PM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 301-308 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