Posted on 10/06/2005 6:44:13 PM PDT by aft_lizard
After a few days of arguing over the Miers nomination for the Supreme Court I am rather sick of it. I have been arguing for her even though I know little about her. I think she is a fine individual and probably a good Christian , and I think her qualifications are just fine. After all 35 of 55 Founding Fathers were lawyers, does that mean the other 20 werent qualified?But I digress to write this because I am moving into the No category.
I decided this not because I dont like her, I personally feel that she would make a fine Justice, but her simple nomination has torn the base apart. I think it would do us and the RNC good if we all united against her, because as it stands right now we are becoming laughing stocks to the otherside, and if there is one thing I hate ,and thats to be laughed at by commies. We all need to stop the name calling, the troll insults and the Bush-bot insults and well all of them, and yes I am guilty of it too. I wont be a vociferous voice against her, you will probably still hear me defend her and the President, like I have been doing.
I urge a consensus from the base to emerge over this.The poll on FR is showing the Yes crowd with 30.3% the nos with 24.4% and the need more info at 41.8%(the hillarys dont count), and this is the member poll results.I dont think it would be to unfair to reason that if you were to poll the base outside of FR the results would be the same, and that is dangerous for any party. Sure it shows that we arent a lockstep party, or a lockstep ideology, with the powers that be. But if a movement is to survive it has to have a secure foundation, and right now I see the foundation rumbling as if to fracture.
I really adore Ann, but she does epitomize the term "reactionary" at times. Personally, the big Law Schools have produced enough screw ups. I am not interested in them. Heck was Lincoln a graduate of one of the elite Law Schools?. She missed the mark this week on this matter IMHO!
I don't think it is a good idea to support those who would deny President Bush a hearing and vote on the person he has chosen as his nominee for Supreme Court Justice. If the RATS are laughing now, they'd split wide open at what they would see as a win for them. Something I had not considered before the pundits came out against Harriet Miers, is that I would not want them making a SC selection instead of the President. The articles they have written have been mostly personal attacks on either President Bush or Miers. I see most of them as self serving and self important. Their elitist bias has been hung out for all to see and question. Why should we trust these writers more than we trust the President we voted for? I can appreciate your desire for unity but it isn't going to happen even if Miers goes down. The argument will then be over the newest nominee and the equally perfect candidate that was not nominated. I am sticking with the President because I believe he has made a choice that will give us a Justice he can trust to follow the constitution and not legislate from the bench. For those who wanted a bloody fight that would have kept the country in an uproar for months I would remind them that a bird in hand is worth more than one that isn't.
I hear that he didn't even consult groups such as Eagle Forum, Family Research Council, and Weyrich's group. These groups have been in the trenches for years helping to build a conservative majority. And when the time came to choose a justice, he snubbed them and his aides accused them of elitism.
Now they want me to "trust?" LOL...As my grandma used to say these guys got alot of 'splainin' to do.
So you are a yes or a no? I am a no.
I agree with you there! He is a perfect example of a "market imperfection". The beltway is so insular, that the media has no idea that the guy is widely reviled around the country, and nobody wants to see or hear from him.
Go ahead and trash them, heck I spent half my night last night trashing Annes lates columns, and trashing Krauthammers latest column this morning.
"The only acceptable nominee to that faction is an abortion-clinic protesting, shotgun-toting, Southern Baptist."
Isn't that funny? It's exactly what they got in Miers but they're to busy whining to notice. Ironic.
Precisely! (And there are a host of other, similar candidates as well.)
Look, I happen to have a gut feeling that Miers will turn out to be a strict constructionist, and an improvement over O'Connor. But I didn't want to have to depend on a "gut feeling" - - I wanted to go to bed KNOWING FOR SURE. That is what my beef is. There is no reason that we needed to have the slightest apprehension about this nomination, but here we are.
Kristol was sure he was going to get a call in January of 2001 from the West Wing.
When he wasn't offered anything, he's been on Bush's case since then.
I tell you, I've been edgy about the press for years, but after the fools they made of themselves during Katrina -- and now this -- I have NO use for ANY of them -- with the exception of Brit Hume, Michael Barone, and Mark Steyn!
And if I EVER see Joe Scarborough, you all better have bail money.
All President Bush wants on this court is just what he said...no judicial legislation from the bench...enforce and protect the Constitution.
She's a homegrown active Christian from a Red State that will never repeal the 2nd Amendment and is personally pro-life.
She's more than smart enough to smell BS when it comes in front of her. She will cancel out Ruth Bader Ginsburg vote.
Hopefully, President Bush will get yet another opportunity to nominate a SCOTUS before his term expires.
I dont necessary wish to deny her a hearing, if she goes to commitee and impresses me and says what we all want to hear than that would be great.
I know my position right now puts me in with the same "we would never vote for the GOP because in the 1950's Ike put Warren in the court crowd and since then we have never been satisfied with anything the republicans do, but we hate democrats". I think they are a small minority of the naysayers, the others are legitimate dissenters who do belong to the base.
I saw Senator Brownback here in Iowa two weeks ago. He is working at building an organization in Iowa for '08. He is apparently passionately and publicly pro-life and very concerned about this nomination. I am going to get ahold of his organization and urge them to vote no one Miers unless she is extremely forthcoming about her views.
If she pulls a Roberts in the hearings, I think Sam will vote no. If the Reps fall lockstep behind Harriet, I will have to reevaluate my continued role in the party.
I am a county chair and I was anticipating running for office in my county. I may have to rethink that.
Why is it everyone hates Scarborough so much? I don't really pay attention to him. As I understand, he was a really good congressman. Is it that he's been playing the O'Reilly game and losing principle in order to look fair?
You win a prize for catching the irony in that statement.
Obviously, it makes a difference to them whether or not she is just like that on her own time or if she does it while writing about it in legal opinions of some court somewhere.
IMHO, these people really want an activist judge that agrees with them.
I have never really liked Kristol.
He has been horrible since Katrina; before that, he bashed Bush in the line of MSNBC, Chris Matthews. Just complete and utter lies -- not misinformatin -- LIES!
Well, he has gone completely over to their side, and drug that sissy boy Tucker Carlson with him.
I mean he was SPITTING in his vitrol for Bush. If he ever runs again, I will donate money to his opponent, regardless of their party; and I have a LONG memory.
Hot damn! Let's call in the Masons, the Catholics, and the Holy-Rollers. Then we'll really have a three ring circus!
I love those threads. Cyber-blood is all over the place. They make this little kerfluffle over the Supreme Court seem like a trifle.
For the record: I'm disappointed in this choice, but I am keeping an open mind till the Hearings.
You should have watched him during Katrina he was simply a disgrace to TV, the Republican brand,uggh Scarborough just turns my stomache.
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.