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

To: new yorker 77
This miserable nomination must be withdrawn. The more you learn about the woman, the more mind blowing it becomes that the president actually put her name forward.

I don't give a rat's behind how well she does before the committee. I already know enough about her to know she is not a reliable conservative, and once she gets a permanent, nearly unimpeachable sinecure atop our system of justice the chances that she'll become best buddies with and an ideological consort of Ruth Ginsberg are extremely high, much too high to risk taking.

She was a liberal Democrat until 1988, for cryin' out loud, when she was already 42 years old! She considers the conservative Federalist Society too politically tainted to join, but never said anything similar about her membership in the ultra-liberal ABA.

This woman is just a bureaucrat who skillfully got on Bush's good side by winning over his wife. By flattering the powerful, she played the power game very well. But that says nothing about what she truly believes in her heart about the law. Once she is fully free and safe to vote with her deepest beliefs, the odds are almost a slam-dunk that she will be shown to be just another wishy-washy liberal.

294 posted on 10/14/2005 10:35:11 AM PDT by beckett (Amor Fati)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: beckett

OK. Tell me three things you have learned about Harriet Miers in the last two weeks that make her unqualified.


329 posted on 10/14/2005 11:23:56 AM PDT by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 294 | 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