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

To: Urbane_Guerilla
W does not know, and nobody knows, how she will turn out. W is Michael Jackson holding his baby over the railing, and smirking.

The smirk is the elder Bush non-vision thing. Hey, we are dolts! and we defy you! we are rich and privileged! We are Kennebunkport, you are voodoo!

Bush knows. He knows Harriett Miers as well as anyone in the entire world.

Your "smirk" comments are DU-type remarks, and really ought to make you ashamed.

But, I doubt they do, as you despise George W. Bush, and it comes through, loud and clear.

And, yes, you are, indeed, a dolt.

15 posted on 10/07/2005 9:17:53 PM PDT by sinkspur (American Staffordshire Terriers should be bred out of existence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies ]


To: sinkspur

lol......I responded before reading down the thread.

You had the same comments I did.

The "smirk" comments always tell the true intention of the poster.


25 posted on 10/07/2005 9:24:38 PM PDT by Shortstop7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur
And, yes, you are, indeed, a dolt.

I may very well be a dolt. I have been humbled by reading Hugh Hewitt, disagreeing with him (in my mind) and then eventually realizing he was right all along.

That may happen here, in some respect. But in another respect, it will not. W is not my personal leader. He is not a man who believes in constitutional government. I am not bound to believe him.

The Miers decision was one some folks anticipated for 30 years. It came down to a moment. With an opportunity to completely and perfectly respond to the moment, W instead decided to nominate a retainer who was a cypher.

After that moment, I do not care. It was a smirk moment. Apart from how it all turns out, it was a moment of selfishness and betrayal.

I have always appreciated and respected your remarks Sink, but in this instance I disagree with you.

47 posted on 10/07/2005 9:59:42 PM PDT by Urbane_Guerilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur
How could Republican senators vote against Miers when the voted almost unanimously to confirm Ginsburg and Breyer?

Anybody doing that would be eaten alive during their next election campaign

53 posted on 10/07/2005 10:07:13 PM PDT by quidnunc (Omnis Gaul delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

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.


89 posted on 10/07/2005 10:34:04 PM PDT by Blowtorch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur

The anti-Meirs crowd is loaded with DU types. I've checked the posts from several of the posters of these threads and have found nothing but posts opposing Bush's judicial nominations for the past several months (and that's as far back as I went). Nattering nabobs of negativity, all of them.


228 posted on 10/08/2005 12:13:44 AM PDT by Eva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur

I am not going to use DU style attacks in any posting, but would like this kicked around. Let's say Bush made a great choice in the nomination of Miers. Why would he pick someone who was in the White House as Mr. Bush's lawyer, who will have to sit out (recuse) any area she came into contact while Mr. Bush's counsel?

Not an ideal situation, in my opinion.


274 posted on 10/08/2005 4:48:59 AM PDT by JohnD9207 (Lead...follow...or get the HELL out of the way!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]

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