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

Skip to comments.

Miers, Miers on the Wall -- Harriet Miers as the human Rorschach test
Slate ^ | October 7, 2005 | Dahlia Lithwick

Posted on 10/07/2005 2:27:14 PM PDT by DallasMike

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-50 next last
I still see the Miers nomination as a battle between social conservatives and neo-conservatives.

Stingray: Conservative blog       

 

 

        Stingray blogsite: Conservative Christian Commentary

1 posted on 10/07/2005 2:27:21 PM PDT by DallasMike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: DallasMike
Is this .gif overhead or from the ground level? Your answer will decide whether you're a social conservative or neo-con.


2 posted on 10/07/2005 2:32:54 PM PDT by w_over_w (Go ASTROS!!! Make it to the big one . . . this time?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DallasMike

Does anyone know if hearings on the Miers nomination have been scheduled? I haven't heard of any, and it strikes me as a bit odd. If I recall correctly, within a couple of days of the Roberts nomination Specter gave a general target date for the start of hearings for the Roberts hearings. So far, there seems to be nothing scheduled for Miers.


3 posted on 10/07/2005 2:34:00 PM PDT by Parmenio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DallasMike

As Bush's personal friend and personal lawyer, not to mention holding the same position in the Bush White House that John Dean held in the Nixon White House, Miers is just the person Kennedy, Durbin, Biden, Leahy, and Schumer will love to interrogate for hours on end.

By the time its all over, the public won't be able to tell if they just watched a confirmation hearing or an impeachment trial. What did Bush know and when did he know it? We're about to find out.


4 posted on 10/07/2005 2:36:00 PM PDT by counterpunch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: counterpunch

Do you have to post this same comment over and over again?


5 posted on 10/07/2005 2:39:08 PM PDT by Siena Dreaming
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: w_over_w

Overhead...looks like someone falling backwards.


6 posted on 10/07/2005 2:45:54 PM PDT by loboinok (Gun Control is hitting what you aim at!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DallasMike

"we know she's a serious born-again Christian;"

Emphasis on 'serious' and thats really all I need to know about her!


7 posted on 10/07/2005 2:49:37 PM PDT by loboinok (Gun Control is hitting what you aim at!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: loboinok

I also see a swivel chair..

Ok, what's our result? :o)


8 posted on 10/07/2005 2:53:29 PM PDT by k2blader (Hic sunt dracones..)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: loboinok
Overhead...looks like someone falling backwards.

Fascinating . . . obviously you want your cake and eat it too.


9 posted on 10/07/2005 2:54:15 PM PDT by w_over_w (Go ASTROS!!! Make it to the big one . . . this time?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: k2blader

Nope... its a midget falling backwards with bells around his waist!


10 posted on 10/07/2005 2:57:48 PM PDT by loboinok (Gun Control is hitting what you aim at!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: w_over_w

Thats not logical!


11 posted on 10/07/2005 2:59:32 PM PDT by loboinok (Gun Control is hitting what you aim at!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: DallasMike
I still see the Miers nomination as a battle between social conservatives and neo-conservatives.

I disagree. "Neo-conservative" typically refers to either those people that have converted from being liberal or to people that adhere to a new view or trend within conservatism. While Kristol and some others are neo-conservative, Laura Ingraham, Rush, Mark Levin, etc. are not at all neo-conservatives.

I do agree that it is a battle between different conservative factions, I just disagree with your labels.

12 posted on 10/07/2005 3:05:44 PM PDT by shempy (EABOF)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Siena Dreaming
Yes, until appropriate warning is heard.
Everyone is talking about her qualifications, her philosophy, her temperament, her ideology, her religion, is she confirmable, is she not confirmable...

Meanwhile they're completely missing what the Democrats are planning to do with this. In the end its going to have nothing to do with her on the court. People are going to forget that she was even nominated for anything. They're going to think she and the Bush administration are on trial.
13 posted on 10/07/2005 3:08:24 PM PDT by counterpunch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: w_over_w

I don't know, but I bet Bill Clinton would hit it either way.


14 posted on 10/07/2005 3:10:00 PM PDT by RichInOC ("The coffee is strong at Cafe du Monde, the doughnuts are too hot to touch..." Save the Big Greasy!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: counterpunch
Hogwash. They don't have free reign to question her about intimate conversations with the President. I think you know this.
15 posted on 10/07/2005 3:15:18 PM PDT by Siena Dreaming
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Siena Dreaming
They can ask her about anything they want.
They can make speeches about anything they want.
Ted Kennedy made a speech about how John Roberts was a racist.

Then Sam Brownback gave a speech about fetuses being aborted because of birth defects -- complete with a Down's Syndrome girl as a prop, right there in the committee room.

They can and do say and ask anything they want -- they're senators.
Oh, and it gets better still: Arlen Spector is going to be running the show. What are the chances that he'll even try to keep it under control?
16 posted on 10/07/2005 3:21:57 PM PDT by counterpunch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: counterpunch
Yes, they will give speeches...they always do.

But they will not ask Miers unrelated questions about intimate conversations she had with the President a la John Dean.

Get real.

17 posted on 10/07/2005 3:25:27 PM PDT by Siena Dreaming
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Siena Dreaming

How is it unrelated?
These will be questions related to her view of the law... thing like if she knew the president was committing a crime when he (fill in the blank)...


18 posted on 10/07/2005 3:31:05 PM PDT by counterpunch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: w_over_w

It's a woman in a swivel chair goofing off when she should be working.
Why can't she just xerox her fanny like everybody else?


19 posted on 10/07/2005 3:32:21 PM PDT by Graymatter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: counterpunch
The reason John Dean was such a star was that he was willing to say there was a cancer on the Presidency.

Far from the case with Miers. You have the wrong idea.

20 posted on 10/07/2005 3:37:08 PM PDT by Siena Dreaming
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-50 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