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

Skip to comments.

ROBERT BORK CALLS MIERS NOMINATION "A DISASTER"
Tucker Carlson ^ | October 5, 2005 | Press Release

Posted on 10/07/2005 3:50:01 PM PDT by Sam Hill

ROBERT BORK CALLS THE HARRIET MIERS NOMINATION "A DISASTER" ON TONIGHT'S "THE SITUATION WITH TUCKER CARLSON"

SECAUCUS, NJ - October 7, 2005 - Tonight on MSNBC's "The Situation with Tucker Carlson," former judge and Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork tells Tucker Carlson the Harriet Miers' nomination is "a disaster on every level," that Miers has "no experience with constitutional law whatever" and that the nomination is a "slap in the face" to conservatives.

Following is a transcript of the conversation, which will telecast tonight at 11 p.m. (ET). A full transcript of the show will be available later tonight at www.tv.msnbc.com. "The Situation with Tucker Carlson" telecasts Monday through Friday at 11 p.m. (ET).

(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bork; miers; noproof; robertbork; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 621-640641-660661-680 ... 941-943 next last
To: Congressman Billybob
I'm afraid we diverge here. Sitting judges of eminent qualifications have been doing well already at the same job and are far better qualified. The Supreme Court is essentially an appeals court, so if you want someone trained for the job, the people to look to are appellate judges. If you want someone outside the system that's fine - but Bush choosing his own lawyer for the job, as well as Miers accepting the nomination when her role was to find a candidate, raises concerns about conflicts of interest and separation of power.

Her judicial philosophy is a complete unknown and her life shows ideological inconsistency. There is so little information out there about her that our primary objective source for knowledge of her belief is the record of campaign donations. The White House line is "trust me" (a completely subjective appeal) and it provides no information even though the timing and the selection were chosen there.

There are a raft of issues and previous nominees with which "trust me" got us screwed. Given the importance of the post, that's not good enough.

641 posted on 10/07/2005 8:55:44 PM PDT by thoughtomator (Corporatism is not conservatism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 600 | View Replies]

To: Map Kernow
The standards everyone else has to live by in America: be qualified for the job, try to match your credentials against others, start at the entry level and work your way up---judging's no different than any other job.

When I look in the Constitution for requirements for Supreme Court Justice, I don't see any of those things you list. Could you point them out to me? I am, after all, a legal dope.

I was under the ridiculous impression (silly me) that the President could pick the person HE thought was most qualified, and the Senate could accept or reject his pick.

642 posted on 10/07/2005 8:56:14 PM PDT by sinkspur (American Staffordshire Terriers should be bred out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 618 | View Replies]

To: bray
With all due respect, that does not make your opinion any more valid than mine.

Nor does the fact that I voted for George W. Bush three consecutive times mean that my statements carry any more-or less-weight than someone hasn't voted for him once.

We're all American citizens, and we're all entitled to express our opinions to OUR United States Senate.

A legislative body whose members serve at our pleasure.

643 posted on 10/07/2005 8:56:39 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 636 | View Replies]

To: Torie
If you husband's experience in any way comports with mine, lawyers tend to be more honest than their clients as a generality. Ask him.

Torie, he comes home almost every night with stories of some perfidious client or another, so I would guess his experience mirrors yours. His biggest gripes are the bankruptcy clients--they run up huge credit card debts, buying all kinds of stuff they don't really need--and then complain if they make too much money for a Chapter 7 and have to pay some, some, as little as 25 cents on the dollar, back over a few years in a Chap 13. And a great deal of the time they lie to him about their assets--one of the stupidest things to do is lie to your lawyer!

Whew! I think I've internalized some of his indignation! Thanks again for the ranting opportunity.

644 posted on 10/07/2005 8:56:40 PM PDT by ariamne (Proud shieldmaiden of the infidel--never forget, never forgive 9/11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 555 | View Replies]

To: Yossarian
Campaign Finance "Reform" is one of my issues. So, here's my 2 cents on that subject, and Harriet Miers. She undoubtedly worked on the issue, and based on Bush's endorsement of her judicial views, she agreed with his conclusion that the Act was probably unconstitutional.

We won't get to see her internal memos to him as his counsel, because those documents are obviously privileged to the Executive Branch, and privileged as lawyer-client communications. And we can be equally confident that Senators Schumer and Kennedy will cry crocodile tears over the lack of access to that (and other) memos.

Now, the results show that Bush and Miers were both DEAD WRONG in concluding that the SC would obey the First Amendment and strike that law down. (I was also DEAD WRONG in asserting the same thing, here on FR, repeatedly.)

But that does mean that Miers as a Justice would vote against CFR, not for it, when (not if) that issue reaches the Court again.

BTW, I was so disgusted with the Court's 5-4 decision upholding the CFR that I resigned my membership in the Court's bar, and then wrote an article attacking the Court for violating the First Amendment and their oaths of office. "To the Supreme Court: I Quit!" posted here on FR.

So, on this particular issue, Miers will obviously be better than O'Connor, etc.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column: "Harriet Miers and the 'Pigpen' Press"

645 posted on 10/07/2005 8:57:02 PM PDT by Congressman Billybob (Bush plays chess, while his opponents are playing checkers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 169 | View Replies]

To: Clock King

Can we cut it with this conversation-stopping "Bushbot" epithet? There are good points raised on both sides of the Miers divide among conservatives. Can we discuss these rationally without the smug name-calling and ad hominem attacks?


646 posted on 10/07/2005 8:58:19 PM PDT by Unam Sanctam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Rokke

You could instead interpret the poll results that the majority of freepers (nearly 62%) who responded to the poll either do not support the Miers nomination, or are waiting for more info - rather than the more positive way you chose to interpret it. That's a lot of freepers not quite towing the party line at this point.


647 posted on 10/07/2005 8:58:22 PM PDT by nerdgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 525 | View Replies]

To: higgmeister

I don't care what school he went to. The quality of his judgement has few peers.


648 posted on 10/07/2005 8:59:30 PM PDT by thoughtomator (Corporatism is not conservatism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 637 | View Replies]

To: Do not dub me shapka broham
How exactly is Harriet Miers competent to serve in this capacity again?

Bush picked her for the job. We will see how she comports herself in the hearings. She at least deserves a shot in the hearings, would you not agree?

If she bombs, I will join you in calling for her to be defeated.

649 posted on 10/07/2005 8:59:33 PM PDT by sinkspur (American Staffordshire Terriers should be bred out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 631 | View Replies]

To: Torie
"Well when Roberts was nominated, I didn't need to wait for any more information. His record was clear, that he was totally qualified."

Careful now. You are describing a man widely regarded as a stealth candidate. A man immediately dismissed by some conservative pundits as a poor choice and an unknown entity.

"Miers is doubt city, but of course, she deserves a fair hearing, and a chance to show she is up to the job."

Well God bless you. Seriously. If more people shared your wise approach we'd have far fewer people insisting the conservative movement is dead.

650 posted on 10/07/2005 9:00:58 PM PDT by Rokke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 614 | View Replies]

To: nerdgirl
And they shouldn't.

The disparity between the poll numbers for Roberts-in the immediate aftermath of his nomination to the Court-and those for Miers is very telling.

651 posted on 10/07/2005 9:01:29 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 647 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
This the criterion of the awarding law journal?

652 posted on 10/07/2005 9:02:59 PM PDT by William Terrell (Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 571 | View Replies]

To: Bahbah
how many people discuss your position on abortion with associates or coworkers?

I know how one of my co-workers feels because I saw her use a NARAL writing utensil!
653 posted on 10/07/2005 9:03:35 PM PDT by RushingWater
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Do not dub me shapka broham
Save some of that respect for Miers. You were the one who was ripping into her Law background as if she was some cheap lawyer. Fact is she was the Head of a very large firm. Fact is many of us trust W and her Faith while you guys are ripping them to shreds while all you did was vote a couple times. Big Deal.

Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters

654 posted on 10/07/2005 9:04:02 PM PDT by bray (Pray for the Freedom of the Iraqis from Islam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 643 | View Replies]

To: Rokke

Selected by exactly who? A magazine/journal comprised of who? To me, it says that she was very well connected, not a hell of a lot more. And it certainly tells us nothing about her judicial philosophy.


655 posted on 10/07/2005 9:04:05 PM PDT by nerdgirl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 545 | View Replies]

To: putupjob

Who decides what a constitutional scholar is? And why should a constitutional scholar sit on the Supreme Court?

Is that a qualification for the court? I think not.


656 posted on 10/07/2005 9:04:31 PM PDT by eleni121 ('Thou hast conquered, O Galilean!' (Julian the Apostate))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Petronski

LOL, I am sure the "brave" Senators on the right will destroy her fairly!


657 posted on 10/07/2005 9:04:44 PM PDT by roses of sharon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 559 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Why should we even be asked to take that risk?

Whether or not you feel that Rogers-Brown, or Alito, or Batchelder, or any of the other individuals that could potentially have been chosen by President Bush was confirmable-and we'll have to agree to disagree on this point-I don't think anyone here would have seriously suggested that these jurists would not acquit themselves well in any theoretical Senate confirmation hearings.

658 posted on 10/07/2005 9:05:12 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 649 | View Replies]

To: eleni121
If your name happens to be Robert Bork, then yes, it is.
659 posted on 10/07/2005 9:06:32 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 656 | View Replies]

To: DevSix
The brilliance of our Founding Fathers is that all can understand the Constitution ...it is only those of elitism that suggest only a certain class is capable of this -

Yes. The law is complicated. But the Constitution is simple.

660 posted on 10/07/2005 9:06:40 PM PDT by FreeReign
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 605 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 621-640641-660661-680 ... 941-943 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