Antonin Scalia Defends Miers

Newsmax ^ | 10/9/5

[Raycpa]

Because we were promised a Scalia or Thomas by Bush?

Scalia just said the SC doesn't need a Scalia. It needs a Miers. Don't you trust his judgement?

[Stellar Dendrite]

"Stellardendrite: Isnt this hilarious? The same people that want to discount EVERYONE else (ie the pundits like Limbaugh, Levin, etc) --because "BUSH KNOWS HER", are the same people who run right over here and cheer on Scalia, who DOESNT. So which is it?

MCGavin999:How do you know he doesn't?"


"Scalia also declined to comment on Bush's nomination of the inexperienced Harriet Miers to replace the retiring Sandra Day O'Connor on the court.

"Never having met her, I have no impression of her," Scalia said of the president's lawyer."

http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/55057.htm

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

No, I believe that he has deep reservations about this individual...

Why do you believe that - because you do?

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

Damn straight!

What is so difficult about requiring that we know who a person is before we endow that individual with a degree of power that is almost inconceivable to the rest the rest of us ?

[ilovew]

You're convinced that you know for sure something about someone you don't know anything about? Hmm...okay.

[Sabramerican]

Supreme Court Justice and the President's Counsel? Come-on?

[Stellar Dendrite]

"Yep, newbie, no confusion."

Yup, "fuzzy math". No confusion.

[ilovew]

So now you can read minds? That's a neat trick. Can you teach me how to do that?

[Mike Bates]

This Week, Dubya Disappointed

[jdm]

"And you Bush-Haters believe that he would rip her to shreds like you have been, if only he could. It's just that he didn't."

I would argue that a sense of disappointment, betrayal as a result of the President's pick is not equivalent to hatred. I love the President. I'm simply disappointed in his pick. He had so many better folks to choose from.

[Hank Rearden]

Up with the revolution.

Indeed.

Obviously, the Republican Party isn't getting it done, as they continue to grow Big Stupid Government and stomp on the founding principles of our country.

[af_vet_1981]

The issues is twofold, one cronyism, Miers would not be on anybody short list, but for her proxminity to Presisdent Bush ...

As opposed to taking recommendations of a stellar judge and ending up with David Souter ...

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

Yes, voting for him in three consecutive elections was merely an elaborate ruse devised so that I could come back-during the fifth year of his administration-and ruthlessly castigate his policy failures on conservative user forums.

YOU'VE FOUND ME OUT!

[gpapa]

Yup. Me too.

'59 grunt.

[Hank Rearden]

Brown or Owens will NOT be the picks if Miers goes down.

Why not? Does Bush have some kind of overwhelming desire to keep getting his ass kicked for idiotic choices?

[CA Conservative]

Except for the minor detail that Roberts was a circuit court judge - thus completely obviating his main point, if you believe your own post.

[Map Kernow]

You're convinced that you know for sure something about someone you don't know anything about? Hmm...okay.

No, I'm convinced that I shouldn't assume a person is on my side if I don't know anything about that person. Do you "get" it now?

[jdm]

"No, we trusted our Presidents on those. It's time we raised a ruckus before the nominations go to the Senate floor about what we know and don't know about nominees, even from our own guys, and never take on blind faith their assurances again."

Damn, you just hit a home run with this post.

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

Apparently so.

[Stellar Dendrite]

"I see an awful lot of hysteria by those who claim Bush is a genius and resort to immediately denigrate yesterday's heros who dare question that genius."

Well, we know Harriet Miers thinks Bush is a genius-- David Frum said she goes around saying he's the most brilliant man she ever met (Check NRO).