Skip to comments.White House Pours More Gasoline On The Fire (Captain's Quarters Blog)
Posted on 10/11/2005 12:49:28 PM PDT by Stellar Dendrite
click here to read article
What a jerk I turned out to be for not loving the Miers nomination!
Perhaps people haven't looked at her accomplishments because this White House has been completely inept at promoting them. We have heard about her work in cleaning up the Texas Lottery Commission, her status as the first woman to lead the Texas Bar Association, and her leadership as the managing partner of a large Texas law firm. Given that conservatives generally don't trust trial lawyers and the Bar Association and are at best ambivalent to government sponsorship of gambling, those sound rather weak as arguments for a nomination to the Supreme Court. If Miers has other accomplishments that indicate why conservatives should trust Bush in her nomination, we've yet to hear that from the White House.
It's enough to start making me think that we need to send a clearer message to George Bush. The White House needs to rethink its relationship to reality and its so-far loyal supporters.
But don't let me stop you from feeling aggrieved.
[Mark R. Levin 10/11 12:52 PM]
Let's be clear about something re the Miers appointment and the arguments of some of her advocates: it's not sexist to oppose quotas in the judicial selection process, it's not elitist to demand excellence from nominees to the Supreme Court, it's not a virtue to promise voters justices in the mold of Scalia and Thomas and then fail to deliver, and it's not disloyal to the president to raise legitimate questions about a nominee's untraceable judicial philosophy.
Oh, you Male Chauvanist Pig, you!
In my opinion, this should come with an idiot alert. Will the press and Democrats take what the President says FOR this nominee or against her?
He made the statements regarding her judicial philosophy and about how he knows her and for conservatives, that should be enough.
Bush in his brilliance IMO also put someone out there that wouldn't get a 100 million dollars in donations to use against Republicans in two election cycles coming up.
IMO Bush out thought most even here and nominated a person we need, not the one we wanted, but the choice gave Democrats far less ability to raise fund raising dollars against Republicans as I see it.
Seems IMO that Bush was brilliant.
PS, this would NOT be breaking news, but should be under bloggers, right?
Isn't that the same thing Cokie Roberts and Barbara Mikulski said?
Remind me again. Which party controls the White House?
While that's a fair point to make, we hardly live in a world that demands to be served by news from one source (e.g. the White House).
CQ, with little effort on their own part, could easily research to find that Miers picked Judges Janice Rogers Brown, Bill Pryor, Owen, and other staunch right-wingers for the federal bench. She led the President's research committee for those judicial openings.
If you are happy with her selections for the federal bench, then perhaps you should show some minute respect for the person who wanted them there.
Levin knows better than that. That's not what SOME -- I wonder if you people understand the word "some" -- people are doing.
Referring to Ms. Miers as a cleaning lady, for example. It's possible that could be sexist.
Attacking her because she's a "dried up old maid." Perhaps that's sexist.
Saying she's not qualified to be on the Supreme Court because she has a long-term friendship with a member of the opposite sex and is therefore sexually promiscuous (this one wins the prize for the stupidest objection) could also qualify as sexist.
Those things HAVE happened.
" Oh horsesh%^t, I can't wait for the hearings to get this over with."
how many times has it been pointed out that the hearings wont tell us anything? that doesnt stop you people from say "wait till the hearings"...give me a break. she will likely invoke the ginsburg rule on matters that will come before the court--even if she DID answer the questions-- this does NOT mean that she would NOT drift leftward within 5-10 years.
from her previous support for affirmative action, creating a "women's studies" (read: feminist) lecture series-- one cannot hold much hope in "trust me"
These are the qualities of a good chief executive,
but not a judge.
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.