We have on her? Who exactly would that be? You and Larry Flynt?
Pompacity is a terrible thing to waste, and in your case, face.
Posted on 10/08/2005 6:01:01 PM PDT by arnoldpalmerfan
A conservative uproar erupted over President George Bush's recent appointee to the Supreme Court. Bush nominated Harriet Miers to replace Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. But several key Republican senators say she not the best candidate.
MSNBC-TV's Tucker Carlson talks to former judge and Supreme Court nominee Robert Bork about the Harriet Miers' nomination. He says it's, "a disaster on every level" because she has "no experience with constitutional law whatever". The nomination is a "slap in the face" to conservatives.
TUCKER CARLSON, MSNBC HOST: Are you impressed by the president’s choice of Harriet Miers?
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
I voted "need more info" and since I've gotten more, I've turned into a "no" although it's too late to change it on tht poll.
Less than a third say "yes" I'm just going bu what it says.
Her support is weak and shallow around here.
"Did you see the results of the last election? "
...................................................
what? you mean where repubs gained in both senate and house and kept Bush in office is that the election you are using to say conservative values on SCOTUS will hurt US??
We won't KNOW about Roberts for a year or so, and if he's a bad pick the Republic is over.
Harriet won't even matter at that point.
Should Roberts be a stout Constitutionalist, we still, absolutely, have to get, an absolute fire breather for the associate position or we still are over and done with.
We need at least one more after that to survive as a Republic.
No time to be guessing.
George Bush squeaked by. We have a majority only with the RINOS in the Senate, the ones Bush was trashed for not dumping.
How about a little common sense.
... It's called employing lenin's useful idiot strategy and it seems the right has more than enough useful idiots...
Stand up and take a bow, Useful!
the great Republican God Ronald Reagan gave us Sandra Day O'Conner and Anthony Kennedy and they trash Bush for nominating a person who is most likely much more conservative
Bush has also been much more vocal on pro life issues than Reagan was and yet Bush gets trashed and Reagan could do no wrong,, go figure
do we call them Reaganbots?
We have on her? Who exactly would that be? You and Larry Flynt?
Pompacity is a terrible thing to waste, and in your case, face.
Sign up with a new ID and vote "no". Or log off, clear your cookies (so to speak) and vote "no" as anonymous. But then all you did was negate your original "yes" vote. You will need to repeat this one more time and put in another "no" vote to make it a net +1 in the "no" column.
I am not sure Bush checks the poll results, but it is worth a shot.
(ok, so I was being sarcastic. i am still waiting for the confirmation hearings before i decide one way or another. unfortunately, what i think doesn't really matter. either way, i am not voting for Hillary in '08)
Don't get me wrong. Her strongest suit is that she is from outside the Beltway, not that she is a woman or hands out M&M's boxes with GWB's photocopied signature on them. (That line from another post just weirds me out.)
"Pompacity is a terrible thing to waste, and in your case, face."
............................................
Projecting are we?
Ping me when Scalia calls Miers nomination a disaster.
...The right to bear arms will never be taken away, don't worry, there are MUCH bigger issues than that...
No. There are no greater issues.
Bwahahahahahahahaha
Don't tell me. You got an email from Pat Buchanan and he told you we were going to be assimilated by the Chicoms.
Better not let your dad find out you've been using his computer.
There isn't a person alive who could walk into the Oval Office, even if his father had been president, and know how to anticipate every single reaction to every single action he/she makes. Bush DID consult with key Senators ahead of time. The Senate is supposed to take these nominations seriously under advisement and make their collective judgments on whether or not to confirm after the vetting and hearings. It's the same old same old stinking American impatience -- give us the results before we take the quiz garbage. It's the same as the media making instantaneous calls on what caused this or that problem, ON September 11, when the New Orleans levees broke, etc. "He who makes haste with his feet [or mouth] errs." Proverbs 19:2
Having said that, I agree, W might have saved himself some difficulty if he'd put Miers' name about ahead of time. OTOH, he might have prejudiced an audience of traditional skeptics even more by letting her blood drain into the public shark pond before shoving her into the water.
If I remember the Bork hearings he was the disaster.
You have gotten that right. Projecting so much laughter that the wife is getting pissed at me.
Later ... and keep it up. The show is terrific!
Sir, you are a fool.
Yeah, Miers reads the second amendment and carries a 45.
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.