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

To: Mike Darancette
After all the howling they have made about Miers not being a judge, not having a paper trail or having a discernable position.

Objecting to not having a discernable position doesn't mean they're willing to accept any discernable position. The whole point of wanting a discernable position is so they can examine it and see if it's suitable. They'll be very likely to conclude that it's not in his case.

If you think that would make Republican Senators guilty of flip-flopping, what would that say about nominating Gonzales after he's already said that he's not a candidate?

152 posted on 10/14/2005 9:05:29 AM PDT by inquest (FTAA delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies ]


To: inquest
what would that say about nominating Gonzales after he's already said that he's not a candidate?

You mean not a candidate then, he will be if Bush asks him to help save the Party.

Don't let the RATS and RINOs win by default, let Miers be heard. The RATS, in the end, Cannot let Miers go unchallenged because they cant be sure that Miers is not exactly what Bush advertises.

173 posted on 10/14/2005 9:17:01 AM PDT by Mike Darancette (Mesocons for Rice '08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | 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