Replies

I do not think the criticism of Laura on this is right.

READ HER STATEMENT.

She was trapped by a reporter who ASKED her if the criticism was a result of sexism.

If she answered no, she would, by default be accused of saying Miers wasn't qualified.

So she answered "That's possible." It's a dodge. Anyone who wants to read more into it is just looking for one more excuse to attack the President over this.

I AM DISAPPOINTED IN ALL OF YOU WHO CHECK YOUR PRINCIPLES AT THE DOOR. Disagree, think it's a horrible nomination...but for crying out loud—DON'T GIVE THE PRESS A PASS AS THEY ATTEMPT TO TORPEDO EVERYTHING YOU STAND FOR USING YOUR OWN THOUGHTLESSNESS.

Whew. I feel better.

You would think, being in political circles that there are TONS of better ways of answering such a charged question such as that.

What if the interviewer had asked, "Do you think that it's possible that homophobia plays a part?" (this is actually less far out than the sexism charge, some Freepers were even asking if she was a lesbian(!) after reading her bio). What would you do if she said "it's possible". You'd be OUTRAGED.

The proper answer could be "Oh, I'm not sure about that". I mean c'mon -- she has to have some rebuttals to the REAL reason people are questioning this woman (something, that I have taken a wait and see attitude towards). I am somewhat disappointed in her nomination.

But frankly, I expected better of the First Lady -- but hearing about her quest to get a woman on the bench, and now that she's Pro Roe v. Wade, I'm not so sure about her anymore. Her classiness rating went down a smidgen with me after this.

I'm also sick of the Coulter's and Malkin's of the world. What the heck is wrong with them? Are they trying to beat each other in "shrillness"? I have a hard time reading Coulter's columns. They're so full of rage and hatred that her arguments are just drowned out by her writing. They should switch ideologies if they want to be the voice of anger (that goes for that loon Savage as well).