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

Skip to comments.

Under the Radar (Great editorial about Harriet Miers)
The Illinois Leader ^ | 10/6/05 | Connie Lynne Carrillo

Posted on 10/06/2005 6:25:16 PM PDT by wagglebee

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-160 next last
To: Betaille
So after a week of wrangling we have come full circle. "Trust Bush" is still the only justification that the pro-Miers side has.

I disagree. We now know more about Harriet Miers than we did in the beginning, and what we've learned about her has been positive and has justified her nomination. Those who insist that the nominee should have been required to have judicial experience, or at the very least, a lengthy paper-trail, refuse to acknowledge the fact that some of the greatest judges began their honorable service without them.

41 posted on 10/06/2005 6:52:20 PM PDT by Chena (I'm not young enough to know everything)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Betaille
I agree. I amazed that so many Republicans and FR's are rationalizing this embarrassing selection. No conservative would have chosen her if they had her bio next to all of the other outstanding choices. I feel she should be embarrassed to be selected by her "friend and client" over such long toiling, exemplary conservative jurists.

What a poor message this sends to these conservative judges who have fought the intellectual battles against the liberals all of these years. This selection is not based on merit. She should resign her nomination to the S.C.

42 posted on 10/06/2005 6:52:36 PM PDT by RandDisciple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Treader
Treader wrote: So, by your post, I could reason, that Miers has agreed to President Bush's full-on-court-press of OUR border/port issues? Correct?

What on earth are you talking about?

43 posted on 10/06/2005 6:52:47 PM PDT by quidnunc (Omnis Gaul delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Thanks for the transcript links,

Sounds like Rush is supporting the President. That makes the writer of this article full of bovine fecal material.


44 posted on 10/06/2005 6:52:54 PM PDT by D Rider
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
The only beatitude that I am looking for in a Supreme Court Justice is:

"Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled."

45 posted on 10/06/2005 6:53:14 PM PDT by shempy (EABOF)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend
At least Sandra Day O'Connor was a committed federalist, regardless of her other failings.

We don't even know that much about Ms. Miers, which is yet another mark in the debit column, in my estimation.

46 posted on 10/06/2005 6:53:21 PM PDT by Do not dub me shapka broham ("I'm okay with being unimpressive. It helps me sleep better.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: D Rider

No, Rush was clearly miffed about Miers. He is doing his best to support Bush, but he is being very hesitant.


47 posted on 10/06/2005 6:54:37 PM PDT by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: OldFriend

GWB was clearly not in opposition to the Kelo decision. There was no statement from the White House on it at all, and apparently Gonzales was to file an amicus brief on behalf of New London, but it was never submitted.

How would Miers have ruled on Kelo, since GWB knows her so well and has confidence in her fidelity to his principles?


48 posted on 10/06/2005 6:54:47 PM PDT by oblomov
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: dawn53
But they sure do act as if they are sometimes, don't they?

They're still accountable to the American public, regardless.

49 posted on 10/06/2005 6:54:56 PM PDT by Do not dub me shapka broham ("I'm okay with being unimpressive. It helps me sleep better.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers

One of the things that President Bush has said about why he chose her, was that he believes, no doubt, that she will be faithful to be a strict Constitutionalist. Just because she is a born-again Christian doesn't mean she is going to vote on her emotional feelings. To even suggest that is, IMHO, is a terrible insult that she does not deserve and certainly has not earned.


50 posted on 10/06/2005 6:55:32 PM PDT by Chena (I'm not young enough to know everything)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Politicalities

Good post! Baahhh baahhh, indeed...


51 posted on 10/06/2005 6:55:57 PM PDT by Treader (Hillary's dark smile is reminiscent of Stalin's inhuman grin...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Bush nominated someone who #1 passes the pro-life litmus test many on FR seem to hold dear; and #2 can be confirmed for reasons mentioned here and on other threads. Bush has delivered on a dream if you want a group on the SCOTUS that is inclined to overturn Roe v. Wade.


52 posted on 10/06/2005 6:56:00 PM PDT by sefarkas (why vote Democrat-lite???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Thank you! I am sending this to all my Republican friends in the Great Northwest!


53 posted on 10/06/2005 6:58:30 PM PDT by jonrick46
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Betaille

Anytime a group of lawyers, "legal experts", liberals and politicians come out against something, don't you begin to wonder if perhaps that "something" may be a good thing? LOL


54 posted on 10/06/2005 6:58:37 PM PDT by Chena (I'm not young enough to know everything)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Lancey Howard

what a comforting choice after a 20 year wait

a wait and see if she is a real conservative...hopefully...oh great

trust the preisdent....be a good little bot

how dare you question the man, you ingrate fringer you


55 posted on 10/06/2005 6:58:41 PM PDT by wardaddy (i'm all outta bot i can't live without you,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AlaskaErik
AlaskaEric, Let me please kindly differ. I am always a bit suspicious when preached to by pedigreed conservatives who have never heard the whine a bullet destined their way, in the service of their country!

The fact that Kristol, Will, Buchanan (a real washed-up has-been), Rush and "Legs" Coulter all have their collective noses out of joint tells me that "W" might be doing something right.

Please remember that his daddy sent George to fire Sununu -- and it took W" about 30 seconds to do so, in 1991. And, the Prez keeps his word -- which is something that is a true novelty in Washington.

So, to use a hackneyed phrase: "Limbaugh and Company -- Get Over It." And, another truism is in play here:

Where do the Limousine Conservatives have to go in this one? Answer: Nowhere !!! This steel magnolia will make Dolly and the girls look like wet sponges by comparison, before it is over.

There is nothing like having to meet a real-life payroll in a competitive operating environment to make Washington feel like kindergarten.

Just my rambling opinion, of course. *S*
56 posted on 10/06/2005 6:59:31 PM PDT by dk/coro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Can you please answer some questions for me...

Was Roberts a strong conservative candidate?

If so....how did he get through the nomination process without a filibuster?

Is Ms Miers the best possible candidate of all strong conservative candidates we have ready to go, or is she the best we can get through...as the WH has told Levin?

Why cant we get another candidate like Roberts through...dont we have any others like him?


57 posted on 10/06/2005 6:59:44 PM PDT by Dat Mon (still lookin for a good one....tagline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: loveliberty2
'Constitutional convictions'!!! What a strange term in today's vernacular. The pundits may not understand it, but "we, the People" know that whatever she lacks in artificial "credentials" can be made up by the conviction that the United States Constitution is and was, as someone observed a long time ago, the most miraculous document ever invented by the mind and purpose of man. Her fidelity to that document and its provisions (including the process required for its own amendment) is what will distinguish her service.

Excellent comment! Well done, loveliberty2

58 posted on 10/06/2005 7:00:15 PM PDT by Chena (I'm not young enough to know everything)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: shempy

I disagree.

Speak softly and carry a stick of dynamite.


59 posted on 10/06/2005 7:01:19 PM PDT by OKIEDOC (There's nothing like hearing someone say thank you for your help.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

**A quiet public servant, who has toiled for years in veritable obscurity, immediately calls her pastor and asks him to pray for her.**

I'm on my way to getting enough information on her right there! Wow!!!


60 posted on 10/06/2005 7:01:22 PM PDT by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-160 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