Skip to comments.
80% of Potential SCOTUS Nominees on W's List Decline His Offer
Fox News
| 10-11-05
| freedom4me
Posted on 10/11/2005 9:08:44 PM PDT by freedom4me
During the 11:00 p.m. (CST) newsbreak, Donna Fuducia reported that Karl Rove told James Dobson that 80% of the potential SCOTUS nominees on the President's list declined his offer because of they didn't want to undergo the grueling confirmation process. Perhaps this sheds new light on the reason why W chose Miers.
TOPICS: Government; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: bush43; judicialnominees; miers; nothanks; rove; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 461-480, 481-500, 501-520 ... 761-770 next last
To: Ol' Sparky
If Miers goes down due to fear by of the political damage done by confirming her, Bush is certainly not going to be dumb enough nor will the Republican Senators let him put forth another candidate that alienates the base.I frankly believe the Senators don't give a damn what happens in the event Miers goes down. Most of them have demonstrated in the recent past they're not principled enough to fight the Democrats. We wouldn't be where we are if the Republicans hadn't been skipping floor debates to attend social events while the Democrats were running roughshod over stellar nominees with their filibustering left and right at will.
481
posted on
10/11/2005 11:06:31 PM PDT
by
BigSkyFreeper
("Don't Get Stuck On Stupid!" - Lieutenant General Russell "Ragin' Cajun" Honore)
To: Jim Robinson
well 20% without any skeleton in their adult life that might be dragged out. Many of these judges may have been appointed in saner times, or with less scrutiny, or both.
How many people on FR could go before a congressional panel with unlimited motivation and resources and not have something in their past which could be trotted out?
To: Cboldt
The public "gets" the idea of "up or down vote," and YOUR vaunted GOP is mute.The "public" couldn't care less about Circuit Court nominees. They are too busy watching Judge Judy taking out her menopause on hapless participants in her "Court".
483
posted on
10/11/2005 11:07:18 PM PDT
by
You Dirty Rats
(Lashed to the USS George W. Bush: "Damn the Torpedos, Full Miers Ahead!!")
To: freedom4me
Thanks for your insight, Pukin. Bush knows the importance of this appointment. He knows the stakes are high. I don't believe he would squander this opportunity by nominating someone in whom he didn't have complete confidence. And, whoever thought one of the most principled and respected Presidents of all-time, Ronald Reagan, would have gotten burned twice by stealth nominees. But, it did happen twice.
The stealth strategy has been an utter failure. This is too important a nomination to take the chance again.
To: onyx
485
posted on
10/11/2005 11:07:37 PM PDT
by
BigSkyFreeper
("Don't Get Stuck On Stupid!" - Lieutenant General Russell "Ragin' Cajun" Honore)
To: samantha
My memory may be a little hazy, but I don't recall Charles Krauthammer or Michelle Malkin ever singing the praises of world-class terrorist UBL.
486
posted on
10/11/2005 11:07:44 PM PDT
by
Do not dub me shapka broham
("We don't want a Supreme Court justice just like George W. Bush. We can do better.")
To: onyx
"Heck, why not a transexual then? Or aren't any of them conservatives?" What's a conservative transexual, one who wears a full length dress to church and keeps 'her' nuts in a safety deposit box?
487
posted on
10/11/2005 11:08:00 PM PDT
by
TheCrusader
("The frenzy of the Mohammedans has devastated the churches of God" -Pope Urban II, 1097AD)
To: counterpunch
Rick Santorum or John Cornyn would have been shoe-ins. Did you follow the Ashcroft confirmation? There is absolutely no way that Santorum would be a shoo-in. As for Cornyn...he's supporting Miers.
488
posted on
10/11/2005 11:08:03 PM PDT
by
Dolphy
To: jonrick46
Sorry, Jonrick. I've been arguing this for days. I couldn't disagree more. Not only is the nomination of Harriet Miers a poor choice it is a ridiculous one. Stroke of genius? Brilliance? Utterably laughable.
Harriet Miers is NOT an ideological conservative, has no experience as a Judge and does NOT know Constitutional Law.
While much remains to be seen about Judge Roberts, THAT nomination is more likely a stroke of genius. The Miers nomination will prove to be as STUPID as the Roberts nomination was Brilliant.
489
posted on
10/11/2005 11:08:24 PM PDT
by
TAdams8591
(A Reagan Conservative and mighty proud of it.)
To: Iwo Jima
I have contempt for anyone who gets the call to defend our Constitution and declines "for personal reasons." Like today's armed forces service is voluntary.
To: BigSkyFreeper
Brown was on a list of many. What's your point? If Brown was considered ONLY because she was female, I would consider it an affront to Brown.
491
posted on
10/11/2005 11:09:00 PM PDT
by
sageb1
(This is the Final Crusade. There are only 2 sides. Pick one.)
To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
No, he's not a politician.If only you had stamped your feet, gritted your teeth, and glared at me when you said that, I'd have believed you...
492
posted on
10/11/2005 11:09:01 PM PDT
by
Map Kernow
("I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing" ---Thomas Jefferson)
To: Do not dub me shapka broham
I just hope the RNC has come up with some better talking points since this weekend.What do you care? You've told me you're not a Republican anyway.
493
posted on
10/11/2005 11:09:14 PM PDT
by
BigSkyFreeper
("Don't Get Stuck On Stupid!" - Lieutenant General Russell "Ragin' Cajun" Honore)
To: Pukin Dog
THE SHORT LIST WAS 5 WOMEN, 3 declined, 1 was disqualified on her history, and Miers was left holding the trophy. If true, start the WH needed to start a new list or expanded that one and keep going until an known originalist that wanted the job was found. Duh.
To: Pukin Dog
"If Miers doesn't make it or drops out, you can be sure it will be a man next time around, but probably not a white man." Way things are going it might be an illegal Mexican.
495
posted on
10/11/2005 11:09:38 PM PDT
by
TheCrusader
("The frenzy of the Mohammedans has devastated the churches of God" -Pope Urban II, 1097AD)
To: You Dirty Rats
why do it when the 'Rats would block a vote Oh ye of little faith and little fight. The GOP would win this. If not now, when? How far do the RATs push before we decide to simply openly object their unconstitutional actions?
Stealth Conservatism is a losing strategy. Bluff and fold - that's what happened here. Great poker. NOT.
496
posted on
10/11/2005 11:09:46 PM PDT
by
Cboldt
To: TheCrusader
FOTFLOL! Thanks for that.
497
posted on
10/11/2005 11:10:11 PM PDT
by
onyx
((Vicksburg, MS) North is a direction. South is a way of life.)
To: sageb1
What's your point?My point is this sexism charge is phony.
498
posted on
10/11/2005 11:10:36 PM PDT
by
BigSkyFreeper
("Don't Get Stuck On Stupid!" - Lieutenant General Russell "Ragin' Cajun" Honore)
To: Mike Darancette
Good point.
When your country needs you-in whatever capacity-you need to step up.
499
posted on
10/11/2005 11:10:46 PM PDT
by
Do not dub me shapka broham
("We don't want a Supreme Court justice just like George W. Bush. We can do better.")
To: WoofDog123
So let them drag out the embarrassing dirty laundry. Who cares? How many millions more are we going to allow the Democrats to kill in the womb before someone steps up to the plate?
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 461-480, 481-500, 501-520 ... 761-770 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson