Posted on 10/12/2005 7:21:53 AM PDT by frankjr
The secret stuff (which is bolded in the full entry) is that Rove first spoke to Dobson on Saturday and told him that Miers was high on the short list. And second, that several prominent prospects had taken themsevles out of contention.
This clearly will raise other questions -- clearly, if what Rove told Dobson is true (and we're reading the implication correctly), the president was not choosing from his ideal field of candidates -- and it dovetails with scuttlebutt that other potential nominees asked not to be considered.
According to Dobson: "Karl Rove has now given me permission to go public with our conversation."
---------------------------------------------------
{Dobson partial transcript below}
"But we also talked about something else, and I think this is the first time this has been disclosed. Some of the other candidates who had been on that short list, and that many conservatives are now upset about were highly qualified individuals that had been passed over. Well, what Karl told me is that some of those individuals took themselves off that list and they would not allow their names to be considered, because the process has become so vicious and so vitriolic and so bitter, that they didn't want to subject themselves or the members of their families to it.
So, even today, many conservatives and many of friends of mine, are being interviewed on talk shows and national television programs. And they're saying, "Why didn't the President appoint so-and-so? He or she would have been great. They had a wonderful judicial record. They would have been the kind of person we've been hoping and working and praying for to be on the Court. Well, it very well may be that those individuals didn't want to be appointed."
(Excerpt) Read more at hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com ...
This is what "diversity" has wrought. The Whitehouse decided they just had to have a woman for stupid symbolic purposes and thus severely limited the pool of possibilities. Potential nominees start dropping out rather than go through the grinder and thus we're left with Miers: the only one vague enough and loyal enough to go through with it. For God's sake, let the Liberals appoint women and Hispanics and Native Americans and hunchbacks with cleft palates when they get in charge. Just give us a solid nominee.
Owens was rumored to have removed her name the weekend before Bush nominated Miers. RedState.org and NRO's Bench memo's wrote about it pre-Miers.
I also read rumors that Brown removed her name because she has not yet recovered from her recent 4 year battle to get confirmed on the Appeals Court.
Does it really matter. She was on the list. I don't think she's a good pick at all, but I think we will be very foolish to derail her. Not because of Bush, but because of all our past arguments against the 'rats. How can we say they are wrong to derail someone over ideological differences if we do it? And how could we accept Ginsburg but not Miers? Bad as it is, we are stuck with Miers.
Oh, so it's still Bush's fault?
Bush's fault? Bush's fault? Now where have I heard that before?
The context implies that "solid nominee" = WHITE MAN.
Perhaps the more qualified women removed themselves from consideration because they didn't want to be nominated based on their sex but their qualifications. Perhaps they will allow themselves to be considered for a general-occupancy appointment.
I love "little birdies" that give political cover.
that old word "comity" is one that Senate Republicans still respect but Democrats long ago abandoned. This is nothing new, and is a true harvest of shame for the nation brought about by the savagery of the left and the media. Here's hoping DeLay can punch out Ronnie Earle and show an example of backbone, and hard knuckles, to the Republican party.
Considering that the White House initially nominated Roberts to replace O'Conner, that argument falls apart.
IMO key RINOs in the Senate were the ones who set the gender criteria, and the White House was forced to work within that set guideline.
I understand this, yet at the same time I don't....Look..if it's turem. then it is all thre MORE reasson why they needed to have ther fight NOW...to go nuclear if needed.. and surely Bush could have asked ONE judge like Own, to put herself in the line of fire..
Not really. IMO, this is what weak leadership has wrought.
It’s like when your parents went out of town for the weekend and left you in the care of your 17 year-old cousin.
It becomes problematic because the cousin is more “friend” than “parent.”
Mom or dad asks you to do something and you do it. Second time you aren’t “asked” to do it, you’re instructed to do it. Third time you’ll feel pain AND do it.
But cousin isn’t mom or dad. Cousin is just another dumb kid. Cousin doesn’t command respect or obedience.
Things tend to be chaotic as a result.
Same thing here.
Georgie isn’t President or even Presidential. He’s just a dope that happens to fill the position for the time being. He doesn’t command or deserve respect or cooperation – or obedience, even within his own party.
That’s the problem in a nutshell as I see it.
No, a "solid nominee" is a candidate with impeccable credentials and an established originalist judicial philosophy. The fact is that when you restrict the pool to women (or Hispanics or Eskimos) for pure symbolic, smiley face purposes your options go way down.
That's the kind of crap I expect to hear on DU, not FR.
I disagree with a lot of the stuff that Bush does.
But he's not a dope.
The situation he faces is because of seven RINOs in the Senate. And Senators have their own power and guard it jealously. Except for a couple RINO Senators up for election in 2006, Bush has no power to punish them in any manner. That is the reality here.
It IS a leadership problem. Senators like Schumer and Kennedy or schmucks like clinton, stand up and say things that no gentleman would have stood for in the old days without challenging them to a duel, and Bush just stands there and smiles and names a public building after them, or tells his pa to give them a good-citizenship award or take them for a nice cruise.
When the Democrats play dirty, they should be held accountable for it. Then maybe they wouldn't keep doing it.
And the real irony is, if Miers withdraws and Bush has to hunt for someone else, not only will potential nominees be given pause by potential attacks from the left, they will now also be given pause by potential attacks from those on the right.
Ann Coulter, after all, ripped into John Roberts as well, who turned out to be a very good nominee. Do some on the right now feel it is open season on Bush nominees, no matter what? Do they realize that many of folks they say Bush should have nominated didn't want the job? Do they ever examine their own role in how the situation came to be so toxic as they berate the situation?
Getting ready for your conversion to DU?
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.