To: quidnunc
We lost one election to William Jefferson Clinton because too many Republicans were mad at Bush Sr. including me, and so we voted for Perot. As a result, we had Clinton for 8 years. Let's not make that error again. Because, in addition to other reasons, George H.W. Bush appointed David Souter... Why didn't George W. Bush learn this? Conservatives care most about the Supreme Court, because it is an institution that affects the entire country for decades at a time. If anything else, he should not have appointed an unknown for this position.
3 posted on
10/10/2005 3:04:11 PM PDT by
SunStar
(Democrats piss me off!)
To: SunStar
If anything else, he should not have appointed an unknown for this position. Bush knows her. You forget this.
14 posted on
10/10/2005 3:11:07 PM PDT by
sinkspur
(If you're not willing to give Harriett Miers a hearing, I don't give a damn what you think.)
To: SunStar
I think is has been more than well established that Meirs is no Souter.
21 posted on
10/10/2005 3:15:14 PM PDT by
Wiseghy
(Discontent is the want of self-reliance: it is infirmity of will. – Ralph Waldo Emerson)
To: SunStar
Souter was "known". Kennedy was "known".
Where did that get us?
To: SunStar
I think the Miers appointment was a mistake, but there is one sense in which Miers cannot be compared to Souter.
Souter was an unknown not only to the country, but to Bush Sr himself. He was foisted on Bush by the dastardly Warren Rudman, who said "trust me." (And he, a liberal Republican, could be trusted to hand Bush a liberal judge.)
In this case, Miers is an unknown to the country, but is intimately known by Bush. Bush could make the argument that he knows her and her judicial philosophy much better than he would know the philosophy even of someone we think would be very reliable, like Janice Rogers Brown, Priscilla Owens, etc...
In other words, in some respect, Bush may have viewed himself as specifically NOT repeating his father's mistake with Souter, which was that of nominating someone he didn't know at all...
To: SunStar
Because, in addition to other reasons, George H.W. Bush appointed David Souter... Why didn't George W. Bush learn this? Conservatives care most about the Supreme Court, because it is an institution that affects the entire country for decades at a time. If anything else, he should not have appointed an unknown for this position.
And I presume you are going to bring a curse down on Ronald Reagan's soul for his appointment gone bad. I have worked in conservative politics and the pro-life movement for over 30 years, and I cannot believe the emotional venom being spewed against Miers without giving her a chance to speak. To my mind these individuals are rejecting every bit of integrity our movements stood for in the past. I would ask a simple what would Jesus do, but will settle for what would Ronald Reagan do?
119 posted on
10/10/2005 5:31:34 PM PDT by
GarySpFc
(Sneakypete, De Oppresso Liber)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson