[MNJohnnie]

Questions About Miers That Bush Needs to Answer

UM NO, you have this EXACTLY backwards. The Pres picks, the Senate consents. If the "Conservative" pundits want to interject themselves into this THEY have to explain to US why we should listen to them over the people WE picked to represent us. Bush has NO questions to answer. The Conservative PUNDITS need to explain to us WHY we should pay ANY attention to their temper tantrum. So far they have FAILED to make any case beyond "Whaaaa, she is NOT who WE want". Too bad. We are a Constitutional Republic, not a Democracy, you self appointed critics have NO role in this.

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Bush didn't get himself elected. Why spit in the face of those who gave him the power to nominate? Besides, who will you bow to 3 years from now? He's just a man you know.

[nerdgirl]

Johnnie the haphazard use of ALL CAPS makes your posts a bit difficult to read. You may want to try using italics or bold to emphasize your points.

HTML guide

[dc-zoo]

Great post! Absolutely true.

[uncbob]

ou self appointed critics have NO role in this.

They have as much a role as YOU DO in your support

[DManA]

What you are describing is pure arrogance. If Bush agreed with you in anyway he would never have become the successful politician he is.

If the republicans follow your advice in any measure, they will become a minority for another generation.

[indcons]

Ok, Johnnie.......you have made your point. For the sake of your readers, please stop using so many caps. All caps make for bad reading and they are bad etiquette.

[Jim_Curtis]

UM NO, you have this EXACTLY backwards. The Pres picks, the Senate consents. If the "Conservative" pundits want to interject themselves into this THEY have to explain to US why we should listen to them over the people WE picked to represent us. Bush has NO questions to answer.

As usual, the pro-Miers arguments would apply the same had Bush nominated Hillary Clinton.

[HapaxLegamenon]

So, it is alright to promise one thing before an election and do another thing once elected?

Who do the Senators, who will vote whether or not to confirm Miers, represent? Are not the citizens who elected them entitled to express their views on the matter? Are citizens who think their elected leaders have made an error in judgment not entitled to an redress of grievances?

[Oliver Optic]

Bush has NO questions to answer ... you self appointed critics have NO role in this.

Um ... I'm not sure you want to say things like that.

Ms. Schafly is a conserative hero ... and like everyone else, she has a perfect right to question this nomination.

[Prolifeconservative]

"The Conservative PUNDITS need to explain to us WHY we should pay ANY attention to their temper tantrum."

The simplest answer: Because we vote!

[Pessimist]

"THEY have to explain to US why we should listen to them over the people "

Well, she gave you a list of questions she thought Bush should answer.

That's not allowed either in your world?

Wait... Let me rephrase than in terms you can understand:

THAT'S not allowed EITHER in YOUR world?

[hosepipe]

[ We are a Constitutional Republic, not a Democracy, you self appointed critics have NO role in this. ]

True.. Bush is a RINO selecting RINOs. Thats as it should be..
He has a perfect right to select those that mirror or he thinks mirrors his stands..

Meirs and Roberts would and will perform as brilliantly as the one that selected them..

Probably that is what pisses everybody off..
Ok not everybody... the non RINOs then...