Posted on 10/13/2005 2:43:57 PM PDT by KMAJ2
XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX THU OCT 13, 2005 12:52:43 ET XXXXX
2005: PICK PRAISES FEDERALIST SOCIETY IN SPEECH
**Exclusive**
The DRUDGE REPORT has obtained exclusive excerpts from a speech Bush Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers made to the DC Lawyers Chapter of the Federalist Society on April 29, 2005.
At the speech Miers’ declared, “You [the Federalist Society] are an important ally on many issues, especially in our battles to ensure for our Nation a distinguished Federal judiciary, a judiciary the American people deserve.”
MORE
Miers went on: “There is a reason White House Counsels have sought out your organization for over twenty years: the influence your organization has developed within the legal society and society as a whole.
"From your educational publications to your various speaking events to your network of legal professionals, you have stimulated an on-going debate about the principles of the Constitution. Our Nation is better for it. And as this debate has raged your organization has grown tremendously.”
A Republican strategist told of the excerpts was not surprised. “Harriet Miers has at least five lawyers who are members of the Federalist Society on her own staff in the White Counsels Office.”
Yeah? And hundreds of threads and articles to go plow back through to find the specific reference.
No thanks. Do your own digging. It IS there, but I am not going to spend hours going through hundreds of blogs and articles to find it for you. (Yes, embedding the link takes seconds - if that..finding the link again - in all the coverage on this..that's another story).
But I am not making any of this up. Go do the research.
When someone goes "on the record" about Miers having disagreements with the Federalist Society, we'll deal with it then, thank you very much.
Carly Fiorina
Can't you read your own posts? Go back and read your quote from the Human Rights Campaign, then come back here and tell us that Miers supports what the Court did in Lawrence v. Texas.
Gee, and here we bash the MSM on FR all the time..and you quote an MSM poll?
FYI-Bork is on Chrisy's program right now for those who are interested.
Fine - as long as you are backpedeling about Bush / Cheney not supporting the Federalist Society in public, I'm O.K. with that. As I said, once I see some actual confirmation about a "rebellion" growing within the ranks of the Federalist Society, with many going "on the record" with negative remarks about HM, I will respond appropriately at that time.
Thanks..
73% AGAINST, 26% FOR at that link.
Now, what we were saying again about support for HM?
To assert that his ardent support for Miers is born out of conviction, or any outstanding qualities that she has exhibited so far strains credulity.
Perhaps my opinion is completely off-base, but I tend to doubt it.
Yawn ~ HM will be confirmed easily and go on to be a very good justice on the SCOUTS -
You just like the DEM's (concerning Iraq) are simply on the wrong side of history -
You think YOU represent all Republicans, and, indeed, all conservatives.
You don't. You must be young.
Perhaps my phrasing was a bit awkward, but my point was that they have tried to tarnish its image-albeit unintentionally-by insinuating-through emissaries and lower ranking members of the administration-that being a member of the Society is something to be ashamed of.
I think it is interesting and important to note the relative proportion of membership in various religious groups on the Supreme Court. I think that would make Harriet Miers the only evangelical on the court.
And that could be why some conservatives, consciously or unconsciously (Federalist Society)oppose her. So, if Harriet Miers is confirmed, she will be the only evangelical on the U.S. Supreme Court. “faith and trust alone”
Because I trust the President and that brings me to trust his choice of Harriet Miers.
Pathetic of Bork - these MSM networks use him like a cheap hooker when it's convenient.....to attack GWB / GOP).
These networks never give all these "conservatives" air time on any other subjects to state our case - Yet when they are going to attack GWB.....you can't keep them off the MSM news programs.
And these pathetic individuals like Bork lap it up like cheap whores saying who wants sloppy seconds on me.
Another "don't bite the hand that feeds ya" situation, I'm afraid.
So that means, what, that he's a de facto liar? or a man whose willing to compromise his principles in order to get ahead? What you're implying is both cynical and unfair to the good reputation of a good man. And in the absence of credible evidence to back up such an assertion, it looks and smells like a smear.
Rick Garnett on the Federalist Society: In a piece on Bench Memos that deserves wide circulation, Professor Rick Garnett movingly criticizes the marginalization of the Federalist Society by the White House. Here is an excerpt:
. . . Too often, this Administration, prominent nominees, and even Federalist Society members nominated for important positions in government have treated the Society as if it were something out of "The DaVinci Code", or the ultra-secret gaggle of powerful reactionary Rasputins that some on the left imagine, or just a goofy band of train-spotters. In my view, this Administration and the conservative Senators, who owe the clear thinking and dedication to the rule of law of their best staffers, lawyers, and advisors in no small part to the Federalist Society, have an obligation to stop this silly "Federalist Society? Never heart of it!" pose, and forthrightly to endorse, defend, and praise the Society.The Federalist Society has been -- as many honest, left-leaning law professors would concede -- an immense benefit to the intellectual culture and the jurisprudential debate in our law schools. It has supplied countless thoughtful, intelligent, conservative lawyers to the bench, the academy, the bar, and public service. It has provided an invaluable forum for a genuine exchange of ideas, and also some accountability for the American Bar Association and the American Association of Law Schools. Its events, debates and panels are always diverse and provocative. . . .
Just as important, the Federalist Society has provided, in no small part, the intellectual heft for a large part of today's conservative movement in politics. For an Administration that owes its existence to this movement to, time and again, treat the Society like a goofy yearbook photo or an embarasing secret is more than irritating -- it is shameful. If the Federalist Society really were a politically useful but in fact weird and non-mainstream outfit, then perhaps the "Fed Soc? Who?" attitude would be understandable. But, if course, the Society and its ideas are -- among informed and thinking people, anyway -- entirely respectable and, while certainly conservative, entirely "mainstream."
If Ms. Miers really does harbor the tiresome, skittish, establishmentarian, protect-the-guild wariness toward the society described in the accounts mentioned above -- rather than respect for its work, admiration for the vision of David McIntosh, Steve Calabresi, Spence Abraham, and others who founded the Society more than 20 years ago, and gratitude for the dedication of hundreds of law students today who often take real hits in order to stand up for and strengthen the Society and its intellectual mission -- then I am inclined to think that she has not earned (no matter what church she attends, no matter how good a person and impressive a lawyer she is, no matter how much she abhors abortion, no matter how loyal she is to this President, and no matter how Rehnquist-like her record turns out to be) conservatives' support.
Many of my students have worked very hard and sacrificed time for the Federalist Society. In so doing, they have improved their law school and the education of their classmates. (It's worth noting that left-leaning students benefit, too, from an exchange of views and from the competition and challenge that the Society provides).
Having worked for, voted for, taken hits for, and defended this Administration and the legal and moral principles for which it purports to stand, these students deserve better than a nominee who appears to regard -- again, if the accounts are accurate -- them and their ideas as a source of irritation rather than a source of inspiration. (Of course, I hope the accounts of Ms. Miers's views about the Society are wrong). . .
I'll believe you when you post a couple of quotes from "emissaries" or "lower ranking members of the administration."
broham, you are embarrassing yourself with these unproven statements. You simply can't come on here and say that people said stuff without giving us something to back that up.
Not "something to be ashamed of" necessarily, but acknowledging that a member is not confirmable in the current membership of the U.S. Senate, yes. Hoprefully, that continues to change, but for now, that is the reality.
I guess you didn't watch Brit on FOX tonight. He reported that Miers made the statement about the Federalist group back in 1989 just when it was being formed and no one really knew what the group was going to be. So she cannot be blamed for what she said about it. The problem with little snipets of statements is that you don't have a frame of reference for them. You don't know the background or what led up to the comment. You should be more careful about what you post.
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.