Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: flashbunny
I see what you're saying about Hillary, but I imagine that should she be nominated for SCOTUS and should she take a Ginsberg / Roberts style path through the questioning she would be confirmed. The Constitution seems to imply that by electing a President we give that person the authority to use their judgment in selecting members of the supreme court. Miers wasn't even on my personal radar of people I thought best for the position, but I don't see any reason she could be deemed unable to perform the duties of the supreme court. Is there a genuine objection which we could raise of which you are aware?
154 posted on 10/12/2005 1:17:13 PM PDT by Aldin (George Miller's Rebellious Serf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 126 | View Replies ]


To: Aldin

Oh, I have a bunch of of them.

Here are just ten:

1. Make a list of the top 100 candidates for the job based on proven history of being the 'strict constructionists' bush promised. Miers would be nowhere on anyones list before this nomination.
2. Miers wouldn't have been nominated by any other republican president.
3. Miers wouldn't have even been on bush's radar screen if he didn't know her personally.
4. She is a complete unknown quantity when it comes to judicial philosophy.
5. She apparently has not had the courage to take a principle stand on any constitutional issue EVER in her professional career. 30+ years and NOT ONE stand on record.
6. She cited the federalist society as 'partisan' as a reason she refused to join. They are not partisan - except towards the constitution.
7. By nominating a stealth candidate, GWB sends a message that you will not be rewarded for taking a stand against judicial activism as a judge. The message is "if you want the top job, don't take a stand on anything." That is counterproductive and hurts our cause.
8. Her support for affirmative action WRT the fire department lowering height/ weight standards so more women can be hired (the very definition of affirmative actions)
9. Her vetoing a white house christmas card for being 'too christian'.
10. The fact that since the the confirmation hearings are worthless at discovering anything of value about a nominee, putting up an unknown quantity is extremely dangerous.


173 posted on 10/12/2005 1:26:00 PM PDT by flashbunny (Sorry, but I'm allergic to KoolAid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 154 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson