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 ...
Then again, we shouldn't be surprised.
After all, what aspect of her judicial philosophy-if she even has a discernible philosophy-has been revealed for public consumption?
Having said that, I am disappointed in the choice, unless Miers really surprises me in the hearings. I want folks who have demonstrated excellence, intellectual excellence, and intellectual integrity. But then I am a lawyer, and for my guild SCOTUS is the ultimate prize. So some of this, might be a guild thingie. I admit it.
Believe it or not, Sean Hannity has nearly as many listeners as Rush. Somewhere around 13 to 14 million daily for each, if the article I read is correct.
the truth is that Miers might vote to overturn Roe v Wade and thus abortion will be a question for the individual states, if Kennedy goes along. But she will be pro racial and sexual preferences--she took that position in the White House on the Michigan Grutter case.
Well, I was offering up an olive branch to you.
I happen to think Miers will shine in the hearings, so there is no "risk" for me.
If you are not willing to take the risk, fine. Continue to post against Miers, and try to take her down.
But she will get her hearing and will not bow out before those hearings. Nor will Bush back down.
True, but my post was in response to someone who said the conservative party is fractured. The Freep poll does not bear that out. The most common answer chosen is "waiting for more info". As McLaughlin would say...that is the correct answer. Miers is not well known to anyone outside her friends and coworkers. Those who know her say she is a solid conservative. The rest of us will have to wait until we actually listen to her hearings in the Senate. Nothing wrong with that. That is what the hearings are for. But for some reason, people have the view that if her anti-abortion stance isn't tattooed to her forehead, she must be an abortionist. And if her record doesn't merit inclusion on the lists of people like Ann Coulter, then she must be a nobody. What arrogance.
Philistinism is...
Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters
What about the American Citizens who come before the Court while a Justice is "learning on the job?" Maybe they should learn the traditions of the court and the rhythms of the conference "on the job" but they should not be learning jurisprudence or Constitutional law on the fly.
Do you approve of President Bush's nomination of John Roberts for the Supreme Court?
Composite Opinion
Yes 86.6% 3,234
Pass 7.3% 274
No 6.1% 228
100.0% 3,736
Member Opinion
Yes 87.8% 2,357
Pass 8.1% 217
No 4.1% 109
100.0% 2,683
Non-Member Opinion
Yes 83.3% 877
No 11.3% 119
Pass 5.4% 57
100.0% 1,053
Do you approve of Harriet Miers for Supreme Court?
Need more info 34.9% 1,685
Yes 33.4% 1,613
No 26.9% 1,300
I'm voting Hillary! 2.7% 131
Pass 2.1% 99
100.0% 4,828
Member Opinion
Need more info 40.6% 912
Yes 30.2% 679
No 25.4% 572
Pass 2.4% 53
I'm voting Hillary! 1.4% 32
100.0% 2,248
Non-Member Opinion
Yes 36.2% 934
Need more info 30.0% 773
No 28.2% 728
I'm voting Hillary! 3.8% 99
Pass 1.8% 46
100.0% 2,580
The point about Hillary - is do you think it would occur to anyone, even a liberal, to nominate such a person to the SCOTUS based on that type of record? Do you not think the same sort of charges would have been leveled if Bill had nominated her instead of Ginsburg? Would people have argued that she was qualified because she was voted one of the 100 most influential lawywers?
"I note for the record that Judge Bork was formerly a law professor at Yale. I think there may be just a touch of academic snobbery in his remarks about Miers."
Bork is currently a lecturer at the University of Richmond law school and Ave Maria School of Law in Ann Arbor, Michigan.
Robert Bork - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Bork
Yeah, he's a real academic snob that Bob Bork.
.......because they are acquainted with the issues [really, the tensions within the Constitution and the law] which so many suppose [wrongly] are all so simple. Oh the wonder of the blissfully ignorant!
Trust me, I'm not that delusional.
All I'm trying to do is establish why this woman is such a disastrous nominee-as Judge Bork so aptly put it-and begging-literally begging-one person from her cheerleading squad to disclose some evidence hinting at an heretofore undiscovered brilliance that might make me reconsider my opinion.
Judging by the numbers here, your side has a lot of work to do.
Nor will Bush back down.
That remains to be seen.
Who decides what a technical editor is? Anyone who can read and hold a red pencil can edit a document. Who decides what a software engineer is? Any one who knows BASIC can write a computer program. Who decides what a pilot is? Birds, as stupid as they are, fly with ease. Who decides what a master mechanic is? An engine's an engine; If you can change the oil in your lawnmower, you can diagnose and repair engine trouble in a $60,000 BMW, right? Who decides what a brain surgeon is? Three pounds of goo in a hard bony case. What more do you need to know?
Everybody knows writing a SCOTUS opinion is about as hard as writing a post card to great aunt Maude.
Pray for W and Our Freedom Fighters
What is your source for this?
Bork is also the latest casualty of the confirmation process.
He came off as wanting to see someone join him in the ranks of loserdom.
thank you for your post 210 and the quotation from Hamilton in Federalist 78
By her peers. The National Law Journal is probably the most widely read journal of practicing lawyers, and they select the nominees for the list.
"To me, it says that she was very well connected, not a hell of a lot more."
To me, that demonstrates that you are a little too willing to form opinions about subjects (and possibly people?) you really don't know that much about.
"And it certainly tells us nothing about her judicial philosophy."
Nor should it. That is what the hearings before the Senate will reveal. But why have you chosen to condemn her before you even know where she stands?
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.