Posted on 10/11/2005 10:45:51 PM PDT by Ol' Sparky
Republican staff lawyers on the committee -- normally the ones building the case to confirm a Republican nominee -- say they are despondent over Mr. Bush's choice and some are actively working to thwart her.
"I don't know anybody who is buying what the White House is selling here," said one Republican staffer.
"They're putting out a bunch of positive rhetoric, but they're not putting any substance behind it," said another.
Since her nomination last week, Republican staffers privately have complained bitterly that Miss Miers isn't verifiably conservative. In one staff meeting last week in the office of Judiciary Committee chief counsel Michael O'Neill, a staffer reportedly cried in disappointment.
Mr. O'Neill sent out an e-mail yesterday warning staffers to tread carefully when talking about their dissatisfaction.
A second meeting last week between staffers and White House officials devolved into a confrontational affair. Republican Senate aides who attended that meeting say the White House no longer returns their phone calls and e-mails seeking information about Miss Miers.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
From what I am reading in the Washington Times today, I believe that Miers has been approached by either Senate staffers and/or White House staff to at least contemplate removing her name.
I know you disagree, but from my read, she is going to make a decision in the next 2-3 days to stick it out, or decide she is a liability.
On the hearings, it does not matter how "observant" one is, the hearings are all flash and no bang. Perhaps pre-Clarence Thomas they may have revealed some truths and served a purpose. The don't any longer. Even Justice Scalia has said so in recent days. They are nothing more than a public bloodletting by the accusers, and a necessary stonewall by the nominee.
We can thank the Democrats for that.
I agree with you assessment of the hearings entirely.
I respectfully disagree.
She deserves a hearing. If she wants to withdraw her name, that's fine, too.
She's pretty much been beaten to a bloody pulp by the "conservative" pundits.
I can understand why she would withdraw.
A pre-hearing bloodletting, of sorts.
Thanks for explaining why there was something particularly abhorrent about the series.
You're claiming its not?! Obviously you're a DUmmie troll!
First the 'Rats in 2000 and 2004, then George Voinovich over Bolton, and now this. GWB certainly is an expert at having his opponents cry like babies. Never thought I'd see the day when Republican staffers would channel Sally Struthers. Hilarious!!
Life is hard for true-believers.
Life is hard for true-believers.
When he is the elected President and you voted for him? Sorry, the Constitution vests the right in a single person. The only other opinions that matter are those of the Senators. From what I can determine, the majority of Senators are not reliably conservative.
D-44
I-1
Those numbers aren't likely to improve any time in the near future, so you'll be able to utilize that argument for the remainder of his term, if-God forbid-another Supreme Court vacancy opens up.
At least 4 RINOs are not going away, and if Spector dies, one of those is going to be replaced by a Democrat.
Personally, I would have nominated him before I even thought of referring Miers' name to the Senate.
No Koolaid for me either, flash! Hang in there!
She is damed if she does and damed if she doesn't. He may well have been counting on her to rule on all the GWOT issues, on which he knows where she stands.
But she has to recuse herself from at least all these cases, just like his AG would have had to.
That would depend on the case.
BTTT
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.