Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Laura Bush says sexism possible in Miers criticism
Reuters ^ | Tue Oct 11, 2005 8:46 AM ET | By Tabassum Zakaria

Posted on 10/11/2005 6:14:59 AM PDT by Sometimes A River

COVINGTON, Louisiana (Reuters) - First lady Laura Bush joined her husband in defending his nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday and said it was possible some critics were being sexist in their opposition to Harriet Miers.

"That's possible, I think that's possible," Mrs. Bush said when asked on NBC's "Today Show" whether criticism that Miers lacked intellectual heft were sexist in nature. She said Miers' accomplishments as a lawyer were a role model to young women.

...

Mrs. Bush, who had publicly supported the nomination of a woman to the high court, noted that Miers had been president of the Texas Bar Association.

"I know Harriet well, I know how accomplished she is, I know how many times she's broken the glass ceiling herself. She is a role model for young women around our country," she said.


TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: character; crappyjournalism; deathscreammedia; firstlady; goodpoints; laurabush; miers; shutupandbakecookies
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360 ... 401-410 next last
To: Laur

Yes, there is a way to answer it.

She could have said "No Matt, I don't believe that opposition to H Miers is necessarily borne out of sexism. Here's why I believe she is a good nominee: ______"

Laura Bush knew what she was doing. She knew this question was coming. I can promise you she prepared for this very question, and had her answer in mind before he asked it.

Politicians (or their spokespeople) don't say things they don't mean and they never say things by accident.

Gillespie was first with the charge, she is just sontinuing the same approach.


321 posted on 10/11/2005 10:50:04 AM PDT by Sometimes A River (Serving on a Meals-on-Wheels program is NOT a qualification for a SC nominee. Call your Senators!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 310 | View Replies]

To: jla

oh come on--- you know this is just one big rope-a-dope!!

LOL


322 posted on 10/11/2005 10:50:11 AM PDT by Stellar Dendrite ( Mike Pence for President!!! http://acuf.org/issues/issue34/050415pol.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Cautor

with blunders like this, the discontent is growing


323 posted on 10/11/2005 10:52:04 AM PDT by Stellar Dendrite ( Mike Pence for President!!! http://acuf.org/issues/issue34/050415pol.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: ConservativeDude

"She must be married to the guy who said "institutional racism" is partly responsible for the plight of New Orleans. "

*cringe*


324 posted on 10/11/2005 10:53:01 AM PDT by Stellar Dendrite ( Mike Pence for President!!! http://acuf.org/issues/issue34/050415pol.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: xzins
You are not an intellectual lightweight, my friend.

Depends on the group. Among the general population, that's probably true. Amongst the legal community, however, where I know there are minds that are orders of magnitude more brilliant than my own, I am an intellectual lightweight.

It's all a matter of scale in the group. There are times where I may be one of the more intelligent guys in the room. In law school and in the legal community, I can hold my own, but there are certainly sharper minds than mine.

Is Miers a brilliant person? Almost certainly; you don't get to be the White House Counsel if you are a dummy. Is she a brilliant lawyer? Probably. Is she qualified to be one of the top nine lawyers in the country, however? That's the million dollar question.

325 posted on 10/11/2005 10:54:42 AM PDT by jude24 ("Stupid" isn't illegal - but it should be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 317 | View Replies]

To: Don'tMessWithTexas
My wife decided to stay home, raise our kids and be a homemaker. I'd say that she is role model for the young women of America.

Absolutely! Too many parents now pursuing two careers on two full plates with a "side order" of kids.

Every time my youngest has friends over (ages 10-12) I ask them, "Does your mom know you're here?" Nine times out of ten the answer is no. (I make them call home.) Why do parents have kids if neither parent can be bothered to stay by the nest and keep an eye on them?

Often it's a financial sacrifice, and sometimes a sacrifice of career ambitions and goals--- but the woman who makes that sacrifice for her children's sake, is the role model I hope my daughters emulate.

326 posted on 10/11/2005 10:56:00 AM PDT by Graymatter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 161 | View Replies]

To: GarySpFc
To me it does not matter if the nominee is a justice or not. It is all about the views of the nominee. I'm sure she is an excellent lawyer, and a great person, but is she a good nominee in relation to her views on abortion and other issues? When the First Lady of the US starts saying that the conservatives are perhaps sexist we need to sit back and consider what in the world is going wrong here.

327 posted on 10/11/2005 11:00:38 AM PDT by sonsofliberty2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: TAdams8591; You Dirty Rats

Maybe s/he's referring to the snarky, demeaning "cleaning lady" and coffee-fetcher type of remarks from Ann Coulter and Michelle Malkin. Those aren't really things one would ever say about a man, imo.

I'm not saying their opposition to her is sexist - I don't think it is, because I think a different woman would be fine with them - but those remarks have a hint of sexism in them. And yes, women can be sexist.


328 posted on 10/11/2005 11:02:44 AM PDT by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet (I have an FR stalker, folks. He's already driven one woman off of FR...going for two, I guess.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 302 | View Replies]

To: Acts 2:38

"That possibility would be more credible if Gillespie didn't already make the charge. "

exactly. gillespie was quite defensive and irritated on laura ingraham's show. she grilled him quite good.

you'd think they'd learn their lesson from that--but nope.


329 posted on 10/11/2005 11:03:45 AM PDT by Stellar Dendrite ( Mike Pence for President!!! http://acuf.org/issues/issue34/050415pol.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 240 | View Replies]

To: Acts 2:38

laura really has been terrific on this issue...


330 posted on 10/11/2005 11:04:55 AM PDT by Stellar Dendrite ( Mike Pence for President!!! http://acuf.org/issues/issue34/050415pol.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 243 | View Replies]

To: xzins

Good point. I suppose it could also just be that she's not one they consider "elite", and if she's not "elite", then they can't imagine how she could be very intelligent.

Pretty flawed reasoning, but a lot of people are hung up on that, it seems.


331 posted on 10/11/2005 11:06:37 AM PDT by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet (I have an FR stalker, folks. He's already driven one woman off of FR...going for two, I guess.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 304 | View Replies]

To: Acts 2:38

You can see the transcript for the interview here:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/10/20051011.html


332 posted on 10/11/2005 11:11:13 AM PDT by Cautor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cautor

From the interview:

Q A lot of criticism coming for your nominee to the Supreme Court, Harriet Miers, from conservatives - people like Trent Lott and Pat Buchanan and George Will and Bill Kristol. Were you taken off-guard a little bit, caught by surprise by the amount of criticism you're getting for Judge Miers?

THE PRESIDENT: Well, you know, I made a decision to put somebody on the Court who hadn't been a part of what they call the judicial monastery. In other words -- I listened, by the way, to people in the Senate who suggested, why don't you get somebody from the outside. And I figured that people are going to kind of question whether or not it made sense to bring somebody from outside the Court.

Can anyone tell me what Bush mean by "the judicial monastery?"


333 posted on 10/11/2005 11:14:54 AM PDT by Cautor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 332 | View Replies]

To: GarySpFc

John Adams considered his nomination of Marshall as one of the best things he did for the new republic.


334 posted on 10/11/2005 11:19:54 AM PDT by GretchenM (Hooked on porn and hating it? Visit http://www.theophostic.com .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Acts 2:38

Dear God. What is the strategy here with a comment like that? Are they trying to piss us off?


335 posted on 10/11/2005 11:22:15 AM PDT by empirekin768
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TommyDale
How about more than half of the male redneck population in the South?

I was looking for specific names from among the common 'taters. ;)

336 posted on 10/11/2005 11:24:42 AM PDT by Graymatter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 261 | View Replies]

To: Acts 2:38

I see the administration is determined to lose respect, calling their supporters names because they can't fulfill the simplest request to prove Meirs is a strict Constructionist.

Wrong, Mrs. Bush. On all levels. I suggest that you, and those in the administration, re-consider your actions. They are not admirable in this matter.


337 posted on 10/11/2005 11:31:35 AM PDT by Soul Seeker (Barbour/Honore in '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: xzins
It looks as if the First Lady was suckered by Matt Lauer to make the sexism charge on the airwaves. Don't doubt that the liberals love the intramural brawl and that they are fully aware that the White House spokesman who had earlier made the sexism charge to a group of conservatives succeeded not in shaming them but infuriating them. Lauer's ploy worked. Look at the multiple and long threads today about Laura Bush's agreeing with Lauer's loaded question.

Divide and conquer, unite and rule.

338 posted on 10/11/2005 11:33:26 AM PDT by Wallace T.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 304 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

---Stunning, isn't it?---

Pathological. Like little kids throwing a hissy fit because they didn't get what they wanted for Christmas, except that these are adults. It's very disturbing.


339 posted on 10/11/2005 11:37:26 AM PDT by claudiustg (Go Bush! Go Sharon!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: TAdams8591
I have been a Reagan conservative since my college days. And my conservative friends are of the same ilk.

We are all most concerned, particularly regarding Miss Miers lack of conservative credentials.

Perhaps it would best to keep in mind that two of Reagan's SC appointments have been more than disappointing and that a President who has built up a store of credibility (President Bush) deserves at least a modicum of trust when he emphasizes that one aspect in considering this nomination is her strength of character and that he is confident she isn't going to change her attitude toward the role of the judiciary and her deep and abiding respect for the Constitution being the guideposts of this land, not international law (see Sandra Day O'Connor's recent statements---she's a Reagan judge).

340 posted on 10/11/2005 11:38:08 AM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 306 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360 ... 401-410 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson