Posted on 10/09/2005 3:28:25 PM PDT by Pukin Dog
Hear, hear. I knew this would become a talking point.
Surely it does sometimes. But not always.
Are you able to consider something outside of your little worldview?
If so, I'll share my reason for saying welcome to the jovial cad.
And we play their game. Not two minutes ago on this board on another of the never ending Harriet threads the following was posted..
Quote "does anybody know anything about her personal life?" Unquote.
Charming. This has got to stop. Makes you long for the days when dueling was legal.
Got a link to your analysis?
I'm not ragging on you - but it just seems to me - if GWB doen't want to appear a lame duck, then he should quit acting like one. We didn't get control of the House and Senate by hiding our intentions - we did it by stating them and acting accordingly. This whole SCOTUS thing has us acting like Democrats, hiding our intentions and I for one am not happy about it.
Perhaps, but I did not imply such. You did.
There's nothing fuzzy about 5-2=3.
That is the only context I've ever seen it used in, but whatever. Go on with your "principled" self....
Your point about the "data mining" being too good intrigues me. Wouldn't that be profoundly embarrassing if one of our picks found themselves shattered by personal and revealing information while they sat before the committee? I can hear certain freepers now,"Why didn't Bush know about this, etc?"
What bothers me is how his critics (Freepers included) kept saying "we have 55 senators, use them." Guess what folks, we don't have 55 Republican senators who share our conservative worldview and these intangibles are the kind of things President Bush is struggling against. He knows if he will win or lose. He's made his most winning move. Thanks for your input. It's very helpful.
But, I think we will see the conservative pundits start falling for this, one by one.
We are weak.
Conservatism may not be dead, but it is going back into hibernation.
wow, two replies to my one post...just admit your mistake :)
Clear as a bell. If I knew you already read and commented on it I wouldn't have directed you to it.
no way you should.
Remember around that time?
People here were defending the decision to support specter over toomey because "if we didn't, specter wouldn't support the president when he needed it".
Now, specter has his job for anohter 6 years and we're told we can't put up conservative judges because we have RINOs like specter in the senate.
I guess detecting contradictions isn't some peoples strong suit.
Don't forget, the GOP kicks you in the ass for questioning its tactics. At least the FR contingent of the GOP hasn't learned manners and "how to win friends and influence enemies." It's you fault for not falling in line, the party has no obligation or duty.
You're my brother my another mother, Dog. I flew off the handle at you the other day because you flew off the handle over this nomination.
Now that anyone with a brain has had a chance to simmer down, this whole nomination can become a little clearer.
What you've heard makes sense to me. I can't imagine anybody with any sense of dignity and self-respect wanting to endure the humiliation of what confirmation hearings have become. Plus, if they so much as banged a cheerleader after Homecoming of their Senior year of high school, Oppo Research will find out about it.
I want Miers to do well in the hearings; there's no reason to think she won't.
But, if she doesn't, that could sink her, and likely should. But she at least deserves a hearing.
save
You come at this from the inside baseball standpoint. I come at it from the standpoint that Miers WILL follow and respect the law, rather than rewrite it. That is, after all, the Scalia-Thomas position.
So I think this will be a double win. She will be confirmed, and she will be an "originalist."
Regarding your comments about Senator Spector, there is a solution to that problem. I expect the Republicans to gain either two or four seats in the Senate in 2006. Then, when the new Congress meets, the Committees will be reshuffled, and Spector can be given a brass plaque on a back bench. And THEN, some serious conservatives can be named, and CONFIRMED, to replace the likes of Ginsburg and Stevens.
We come at it from different directions. But we reach the same point on this nomination.
Congressman Billybob
Latest column: "Hillary Knew, David Knew, Only the Post Reporter Was in the Dark"
" But, I think we will see the conservative pundits start falling for this, one by one."
We will know at 12pm Eastern time monday, I guess. ;)
It will always amaze me just how many Bush supporters have disregarded HIS opinion in place of their own without even the slightest analysis.
I've said this all along: Bush is quarterbacking a team that is only putting 8 members on offense and 5 members on defense.
If you have a weak offensive line and no defense, guess what? The quarterback has to adjust the plays.
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.