Ah, but the Miers strawberries! That's, that's where we had them. They laughed at us and made jokes, but we proved beyond the shadow of a doubt, and with, with geometric logic, that, that a George Bush's nominee was conservative.
Posted on 10/10/2005 11:30:08 AM PDT by jdhljc169
Washington, D.C. – Concerned Women for America (CWA) has released a memorandum explaining its evaluation of information about Harriet Miers, President Bush’s nominee to succeed Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor. The memo explains why CWA is unable to endorse the nomination at this time based on current information about Miss Miers. It is available on CWA’s Web site, www.cwfa.org.
“CWA staff have been heavily involved in evaluating Miss Miers’ background and qualifications,” said Jan LaRue, CWA’s chief counsel. “We have learned nothing new that allows us to endorse her at this time. Whether we can eventually support her will depend on answers to questions raised in our memorandum and what is learned during the hearing process. We believe the American people deserve convincing evidence that Miss Miers can be trusted with a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court,” LaRue added.
“Nothing we have seen or heard establishes Miss Miers' knowledge of and experience in constitutional law. Much is made of her leadership within the American Bar Association, an organization that is hardly known for opposing the ‘living theory’ of constitutional interpretation and judicial activism,” LaRue concluded.
“While we share Miss Miers’ evangelical faith, we find the continual emphasis on it by her supporters to be inappropriate and patronizing,” LaRue said. “It offends the Constitution.”
Every judicial nominee deserves a dignified hearing and nothing less than a swift, up or down vote at the conclusion of the Senate Judiciary Committee hearing. The American people are entitled to fairness from judges and from senators who sit in judgment of them.
This nomination should be opposed by CWA, Paul Weyrich and others that know what an unnecessary gamble it is.
a pathetic cave to the libs,,, 'tis time to "just say NO"
probably athiests, too.
betaille, can you use that pinglist? i dont have it handy ATM
they just hate bush.
PING
Not just Elitist sexists. A LYNCH MOB of Elitist Sexists.
Is Miers a sexist?
A Place at the Table for Miers and High-Level Friends, http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/10/politics/politicsspecial1/10letter.html
Not Just a lynch mob of elitist sexists. A lynch mob of elitist sexist RINOs
Ah, but the Miers strawberries! That's, that's where we had them. They laughed at us and made jokes, but we proved beyond the shadow of a doubt, and with, with geometric logic, that, that a George Bush's nominee was conservative.
" We will never learn what we need to know "
Have you read these?
Cases and Articles:
http://www.law.umich.edu/library/news/topics/miers/miersindex.htm#article
MOOSEMUS defined :
http://mysandmen.blogspot.com/2005/10/applying-principles-of-war-to-harriet.html
Beldar blog:
http://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/2005/10/a_westlaw_romp_.html
Another excellent observation by Beldar:
http://beldar.blogs.com/beldarblog/2005/10/is_miers_one_in.html
Justice Scalia defendsMiers:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1499418/posts
http://www.legalunderground.com/2005/10/harriet_miers.html
What they really are is a group that is liberal (and just pretending to be conservative), and they probably never supported Bush in the first place. So why should we take anything they say seriously? /sarcasm
I have not made up my mind about Miers yet, and I do support the President, but there sure are a lot of questions. And I am shocked that anyone who has questions or reservations about her, including some of the best and brightest on our side, are being labeled in awful ways because of it.
That's the worst part right there.
Everybody here railed on the clinton supporters for blindly buying everything clinton did and attacking those who dared question clinton.
Now some of those same people are doing the exact same thing, just because people aren't automatically buying what GWB says.
" We will never learn what we need to know "
Have you read these?
Do not confuse the screaming manics with facts. They are confused enough.
http://www.weeklyworldnews.com/features/politics/61708
So this is what the 'evangelicals' at the White House have in mind for managing the national debt? Harumph!
Call me old-fashioned, but we had quite enough of that stuff back in the `90s.
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.