Posted on 10/08/2005 9:52:18 AM PDT by Allen H
Since I’m sure there are still many conservatives out there who are still upset and whining about Bush not nominating who they wanted, I’m wondering. Do you wish Bush had nominated who you wanted, even if it meant them not being confirmed and Bush being forced to pick a milk toast? I don’t think anyone can argue about the fact that the Republican majority in the Senate haven’t exactly acted with a spine or any kind of united strong conservative voice the four years they’ve been a majority. And it seems the larger their majority gets, the more its spine gets watered down.
This is a reality lesson in life. There are two ways to stand strong to your convictions and beliefs and not waiver. You can go about your life, putting your beliefs into practice, never bending, never breaking, never compromising, and whenever anyone asks what you believe, you tell them, politely, civilly, like how Miers has done it. OR, you can do it another way. You can be all those same things above, and you can also be very vocal, very "in your face", very confrontational, outspoken, and be very well known as to what you believe and stand for, so that if you come up for a position like Supreme Court Justice, it’s known immediately which side of the court you will always come down on. The Scalia / Thomas side, or the Ginsburg / Stevens side. The latter is the kind of person that Michael Luddig, Pricilla Owens, Edith Jones, or David Pryor, who I would sure support. Frankly that’s the kind of person I am, and I was hoping they'd of gotten this nomination. I’m not quite "in your face" with liberals unless confronted, but I also will not sit like a wall flower while people say stupid liberal things in the face of reality. I wouldn’t expect to be nominated for the SCOTUS either. Being that way is not bad in any way, but it is a problem. It’s guaranteeing a nasty, long, drawn out, ugly fight that would not even guarantee ALL the Republicans standing with the President. If Bush thought that the Republican majority in the Senate actually had a spine and would stand up to a fight, I think he would have likely put up someone like Juddig or Jones. I think this pick is an indictment on the complete and total lack of conservative will in the Senate majority. Heck, this woman he did pick stands as a solid conservative nominee with all those who have endorsed her, and not all Republicans are backing her. The bottom line is, Harriet Miers WILL be confirmed, and she much more likely than not, will prove to be a conservative, indications show she will be much like Scalia and Thomas. And if you voted for President Bush both times, like I did, or just one time, then you have to trust that he will keep his promise on Judges, like he has so faithfully kept it to this point. There hasn’t been one single Judge on the district, appellate or federal court level that Bush has nominated that hasn’t been a strong unbending conservative. And this is one fact I STILL can’t get around that frustrates me with those opposing Miers. Miers was pivotal in choosing ALL the Judges that Bush has nominated to all the courts the past five years, all of which have proven to be good solid conservatives that all the conservative voters have liked so much. Yet somehow the person who found, supported, and brought all those good conservative judges to the President, somehow isn’t good enough to be a judge herself when she’s accomplished all the things she’s done in her life? That is simply the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard. Especially after it’s been proven she said now she was worried that perhaps John Roberts might not be conservative enough. And some conservatives are still not supporting her? ARE YOU FRIKKEN KIDDING ME??? THAT is just simply elitism and nothing else.
I was worried initially, because I desperately wanted an Owens, or Luiddig, or someone just like them, someone that was nose to the wind, finger pointing and shaking to the left, well known vocal hard conservative, BUT, if the person put up instead of them is just like that, with the same conservative ideological beliefs, just isn’t a well known confrontational person who will unite all liberals and democrats and milk-toast weak RHINO Republicans against them, then I will choose the Miers over the Owens or Luddig EVERY TIME, because frankly I have NO FAITH in the Republican Senate majority, and while I am more like the judicial Luddig’s and Jones’s, I’ve still seen nothing that yet shows she’s any less conservative than they are. When she gave money to algore, he was pro-life and hadn’t taken the pink liberal without reason pill yet, and since then she has been nothing but a conservative loyalist on all levels, professionally, personally, and religiously. She voted for Reagan in ‘84, she voted for the first Bush in ‘88. Once she became a registered Republican she stayed Republican and voted and worked and donated that way even when clinton was President, even in ‘91 and ’92 when the democrats controlled both Houses of Congress. Not one person who really knows her has come out against her nomination. Frum is the only one I’ve heard of who has worked with her and doesn’t support her, and that was years ago and it’s not as though Frum doesn’t have his own agenda. None of Bush’s judges has disappointed. They’ve all been proven to be very conservative constructionist judges, and there is no reason to believe Miers will be any different. The arguments is stale and smacks of elitism at this point. I prefer someone who hasn’t been indoctrinated by the snobbery of Yale and Harvard liberalism, and has lived most all of her life in very conservative Texas. Even when Texas was majority Democrat, it was conservative and had nothing in common with the radical New England and left coast liberal bases of operation. Instead of being a judge she’s been actually arguing law from the conservative perspective, not sitting on high on a bench disconnected from reality. What is so wrong with that? She will be confirmed, and more and more, I believe she will prove herself to be a dedicated defender of the Constitution and what it REALLY says, not what stevens and souter and ginsburg wish or think it says. Her votes I believe will consistently fall right with Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas and John Roberts, and when that time comes, I hope all here who eviscerated her just because she’s not some elitist insider snob, or a speak first think second hothead that would inflame all democrats and RINOs in the Senate, will remember just how vacuous the opposition to her really was, and just how wrong it has proven to be. Given the past 20 years of her life, I can’t see any rational way she will betray all she has proven to stand for the past two decades. And if you voted for and supported W. Bush last year and in 2000, then for Pete’s sake, show just a little faith and trust in the guy and believe that he would have gotten to know this woman the past 10 years he’s had a close relationship with her. Have a little faith. With faith as small as a mustard seed, a mountain can be moved. I choose to have faith and pray that Harriet Miers will be the conservative strict-constructionist Justice that this nation desperately needs right now, and pray that she will have the strength and wisdom to adjudicate in that way, and continue to display and enforce the beliefs and convictions on the bench, that she has so strongly lived in her life.
Janice Rogers Brown was my first choice but I trust President Bush. All the moaning and bitching and claims that "these so called conservatives will never vote Republican again" ... so don't. Cut off your nose to spite your face. Talk about being "stuck on stupid".
I am tired of Freepers that can't wait to throw GWB over the wall at the first sign of any conflict. We want the senators to show some guts, but when the first volley is fired, the weak kneed Freepers run for cover.
Go ahead, flame away.
The Miers pick is the fulfillment of a promise made to the CHRISTIAN CONSERVATIVE portion of W's base.
The fallout, therefrom, cleves along spiritual, not intellectual lines.
Bush has not earned the right to say, "trust me."
1) He didn't keep his word on embryonic stem cells and created a market in embryos, which is what the culture of death wants.
2) Bush signed McCain/Feingold. His conservative princpled stand rested on hoping the Supreme Court would do what he was afraid to do - kill it.
3) Bush has yet to oppose a dime in socialism.
4) Bush is proud of recruiting Kennedy to write his education bill.
5) Bush created a whole new entitlement - prescription drugs. It wasn't something he was pressured into, either. It's passed and signed but no one wants it.
Some argue that it is the president's choice to pick whomever he will nominate. Not true. He is there to represent the people who put him there and to uphold the constitution. Republicans never should've voted for Ginsberg based on her unconstitutional views, rather than voting for her in spite of her wacky leftist views.
Bush has created a disturbing precedent in choosing Roberts and Miers. He has sent the unmistakable message that known conservatives need not apply. Some will say, "...but look at his appellate appointments." Sure, he made excellent appellate appointments, but he left them to twist in the wind in his first term. I'm sure the stealthy nature of his SC nominations are not lost on his appellate appointments, either.
He's also damaged Christian conservatives with his behind the scenes re-assurances that, "...she's gonna vote the right way." In a way, confirming liberals fears that conservatives want a Christian activist judge. Thankfully, aside from Dobson selling out, Christian conservatives have not endorsed Miers.
Conservatives need to press Miers during the confirmation hearings instead of giving her a pass. She may or may not do well, but Bush, the Nixon Republican, has slighted conservatives for the last time.
You took the words right out of my mouth.
We have the Senate and can run over the filibuster. Why play it safe?
Good point. If Kerry was president ((shudder and puke)) there would be NO DOUBT as to the politics of the person he would pick. Flaming pink as you please hard core left of Socialist left liberal. And I don't know anymore if the gutless Republican majority in the Senate would even have the wevos to oppose it. I certainly trust Bush more than the Senate Republicans. Only about 25 of them seem to consistently have the brass to be conservative all the time no matter the issue because it's a way of life they believe in, not a way of convenience like for mccain and ones like him. There has been ample evidence put foward that Miers will be a conservative Justice just like she's been a politically and ideologically conservative lawyer, person in society, Christian in church, volunteer to conservative causes, etc so on, for so many years. Barring the ability to see the future, all that is good enough for me. Of course I'm scared ****less about having another burn job like suiter and kennedy and o'conner. But I have faith that Bush knows this woman and truly wants a conservative court before he leaves office, and that is the VERY reason that he hass nominated Miers. And frankly, like I said before, I quite like the fact she didn't come from some elitist liberal school like yale or harvard, and given how so many judges are so full of themselves, I like the fact she hasn't been some holier than though on high Judge looking down her nose at the real world from afar. I am encouraged that she's actually been in the real world, seeing how things SHOULD BE, and knows what the Constitution says, and isn't likely to be a stevens or ginsburg who rules based on what they wish it said, or what some socialist in spain or france has ruled.
I prefer the Army acronym: MOOSEMUSS! I begin to wonder if there are bitter little McCains running about on this forum.
This appointment is the 3rd stupidest thing Bush has done. #1 is letting the deficit spiral out of control, and #2 is letting illegal immigration spiral out of control. I held my nose on the first two stupid things, not realizing that Bush was going to do a 3rd stupid thing.
Pox on Bush.
No flames from this quarter! Only applause!
Specter, Collins, Chafey, Snowe, Hagel....
You should be socked fifty bucks for posting a whiny vanity.
it actually seems to be that those who oppose the Miers nomination are *a part of* W's Conservative Christian base. It could be a spiritually-based fallout, but I would disagree that those who are unhappy with Miers are not religious conservatives. I am disappointed with Miers because I am 1) Christian and 2) Conservative. I'm sure Bush knows much more than we do, but Miers doesn't seem to be the Thomas or Scalia Constructionist he promised us. Christian Conservatives worked hard to get GWB elected in order to change the configuration of the Court, and I'm not sure this is happening.
Name 'em.
That post that JohnHuang2 made was BRILLIANT! Excellent thread. I don't think I'm even tempered enough to be a columnist. 8) I only rarely ever go out of my way to remain polite to people who have really irritated me. Where is an example that you think this post I wrote would be good in? Thanks for the advice. 8)
LOL! Me thinks you can stop wondering!
He's worked with closely Miers for 11 years. They're both Born Again Christians. She has no paper trail. Bingo, we get one of our own on the Supreme Court! What more do you want?
With a turncoat like McCain and his gang of 14 running roughshod over the President, it's a pretty limp majority.
"Frum is the only one I’ve heard of who has worked with her and doesn’t support her, and that was years ago and it’s not as though Frum doesn’t have his own agenda."
Frum is a Canadian. Any questions?
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.