Skip to comments.
READ MY LIPS: THOMAS AND SCALIA
Me
| 10-7-02
| Me
Posted on 10/07/2005 8:51:48 PM PDT by Urbane_Guerilla
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 381-392 next last
To: Urbane_Guerilla
It is a matter of calling out a charlatan, who pretended to be one of our own. "Our own" what?
You're certainly not speaking for the vast majority of people on this forum.
81
posted on
10/07/2005 10:28:13 PM PDT
by
Howlin
To: Spiff
And the president didn't promise someone who MIGHT somehow, miraculously be a justice in the mold of Thomas and Scalia - he promised to nominate somebody who already was in that mold. Miers is not, nor do I doubt she will ever be, a Thomas or Scalia.Wow ... an amazingly right-on comment.
To: Urbane_Guerilla
When W made his promise, we knew who Thomas and Scalia wereAnd so did he.
Why don't you wait until you're sure he's screwed you before you damn him to hell?
83
posted on
10/07/2005 10:29:48 PM PDT
by
Howlin
To: McGavin999
What you are seeing is the lie put to the "true conservatives" assertion that they want judges that are not activists. The truth is they want their own Warren court and they are every bit as willing to destroy any nominee that does not share their zeal. I am as sick of the far right as I am of the far left.
To: DCPatriot
Don't pay attention to the far right extremists...You mean The Wrist Slitting Right?
85
posted on
10/07/2005 10:30:40 PM PDT
by
Howlin
To: Acts 2:38
NO ONE knows...but we would have had a much better idea with a Luttig or Jones.
BUT WE DON'T
Why do you all INSIST on rehashing this over and over?
It was his pick; he made it; it's over; now leave the party if you don't like it.
86
posted on
10/07/2005 10:31:46 PM PDT
by
Howlin
To: KingKongCobra
I won't argue on those points, but here's the dig,
Even after the nomination hearings we won't know anything about the woman.
She'll answer questions as the Senators wanted them answered. We won't get any deep revelations, we won't hear even a summary description of her judicial philosophy, we won't hear a single position she has on any issue because she'll take the Ginsburg defense.
All we'll know is whether or not she's quick on her feet, the level of her preparation to manufacture her first public persona to absorb the blathering Senators rambling ego trips of questions, and what her voice sounds like when she's talking into Congressional mics.
To: Nephi
In fact, he's proven to conservatives that he can't be trusted. Of course, you mean YOURSELF as a conservative.
Because I'm one, too, and you certainly don't speak for me.
88
posted on
10/07/2005 10:33:43 PM PDT
by
Howlin
To: sinkspur
Reading your posts on several threads, anyone who complains about Miers seems to be a dolt in your book. So we all have to trust Bush on this lifelong appointment? I don't think so.
To: Urbane_Guerilla
W has already spoken: "I offer a cypher. I do not grant you the dignity of offering you anything you could possibly know. I don't deal in life that way, I deal in life by fiat."Now you're showing your true colors.
90
posted on
10/07/2005 10:35:52 PM PDT
by
Howlin
To: sinkspur; Stellar Dendrite
The Knights of Columbus comparison is flawed.
A more apt analogy would be a member of the College of Cardinals who was eligible to be selected as the next pontiff, but who had spent sixty years of his life desperately avoiding comment on any controversial doctrinal issue.
Miers rejected the Fed. Society-and if you want confirmation of this you can just punch up the revelatory pieces published recently in the WSJ by writers like Dan Heninger and John Fund-for either of two reasons:
1. She wanted to avoid being tied to any controversial-read Constitutionalist-judicial philosophy,
or
2. She has no such philosophy to speak of, and merely arrives at her views on an ad hoc, Justice Burger-like basis.
Neither possibility is comforting in the least.
To: Dane
It was when the rats brought out anita hill, that put him over the top. That's what has been lingering in my mind this whole week; the Democrats actually gave him the seat by the way they acted.
92
posted on
10/07/2005 10:37:28 PM PDT
by
Howlin
To: Howlin
Why don't you wait until you're sure he's screwed you before you damn him to hell?
Yes, but how long do we have to wait? Weeks? Months? Years? Once we find out it will have been too late to do anything about it anyways, except damn the President.
To: Do not dub me shapka broham
Game, set, match.Only if you're playing "Ineffectual Politics: How Not to Ever Put Yourself in A Position of Power."
94
posted on
10/07/2005 10:38:46 PM PDT
by
Howlin
To: Blowtorch
Reading your posts on several threads, anyone who complains about Miers seems to be a dolt in your book. So we all have to trust Bush on this lifelong appointment? I don't think so. No. That's not true.
Those who are calling for Miers to step down, or for Bush to withdraw her nomination are, indeed, dolts.
Give her a hearing. Let her share her views with the Senators, and with us. If she fails, she will go.
95
posted on
10/07/2005 10:39:05 PM PDT
by
sinkspur
(American Staffordshire Terriers should be bred out of existence.)
To: Howlin
I hear people say all the time including pundits like Rush and Laura Ingraham that they are conservatives first and foremost and Republicans second.
My question for these people is, if they make a point of not being loyal to the Republican Party then why should that expect any loyalty from the Republican Party?
96
posted on
10/07/2005 10:39:29 PM PDT
by
quidnunc
(Omnis Gaul delenda est)
To: Urbane_Guerilla
Not that it is very relevant or informative, but how do you account for the smirk?Are you really THIS dumb?
He got it from HIS MOTHER.
You're a troll.
97
posted on
10/07/2005 10:40:16 PM PDT
by
Howlin
To: Blowtorch
The conservative base wanted a sure thing. Miers is an unknown. I have no doubt she will be confirmed, so we have no choice but to hope for the best.
To: JerseyHighlander
Do you know that you just proved my point about open debate?
It doesn't matter to you how she performs in the hearings and I'm supposed to engage you in an intelligent discussion?
99
posted on
10/07/2005 10:40:46 PM PDT
by
KingKongCobra
(Trying to save the "Donner Party" from themselves.)
To: JerseyHighlander
100
posted on
10/07/2005 10:41:31 PM PDT
by
Howlin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 ... 381-392 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson