For you.
< |:)~
It's a good point, and it's a hell of a lot better an argument than "Trust me."
"...Mr. Bush has had to fight to keep his word."
Wish he'd fight to secure our borders.
I would be worlds more content with the choice process if I had seen evidence of Mr. Bush looking all over the country for qualified candidates. The method of choice he used doesn't do a thing for inclusive representation. It smells strongly of the good ol' boy system.
For you.
< |:)~
"Every absurdity has a champion to defend it." -Oliver Goldsmith
"I do know enough about Mr. Bush's judicial appointments over the past five years to give three cheers for his record on picking judges. Almost to a man and a woman, they are judicial conservatives who are already shifting the ideological balance of the federal judiciary to the right."
Exactly. Let me say something for the last time on my favorite website here: We had paper trails on Stevens, O'Connor and Souter. A lot of good it did us. I just have to trust the Prez on this one.
Thanks for posting.
The lies, distortions, and character assassination "conservatives" have spread about Harriet Miers have been worthy of DU. I am disgusted.
But what else are the alarmist, cannibals, extremist, subversives, and DUer's to do?
Weren't Reagan's judicial selection fine also...except for two SCOTUS selections? Weren't Bush41's judicial selections fine....except a SCOTUS selection?
If you look at all his appointments, and not just the judicial ones, Bush has made some outstanding appointments. We have all remarked that his people, unlike clinton's, are real grownups, and for the most part really competent. I won't list all the good names, because there are so many of them.
But he does occasionally make a poor appointment. Mueller at the FBI is an example. And he does sometimes retain a poor (or even stupid) appointment, such as Tenet at the CIA. Nobody's perfect.
The more I look at the Miers appointment, the less I like it. I think this is one of his big mistakes. Not because he was trying to put one over on us, but because it's a MISTAKE. He was talked into it by Card and Laura. He was flattered into it by Harriet. Under pressure, decided he had to appoint a woman to a woman's slot. Then he eliminated a couple of the best candidates because he had grudges against the senators from their states. Then he sent Karl Rove out to lie or obfuscate about the unavailability of any other woman candidate.
Bush made the decision, however much he was pushed or swayed. Unfortunately, he made a real whopper of a mistake. Even the best leaders do that occasionally. Miers simply can't be trusted not to go soppy or multicultural on us, not to become another bleeding heart liberal; she has shown plenty of symptoms of that already, if you read her writings and examine her record.
So before the hearings, to question his nomination of Miers is to say that one feels he has either had a drastic change of political heart or has lost it.
I find both of these possibilities to be a stretch that is inconceivable.
Since the nomination that has brought Meirs to prominence nothing is known about her or her attitudes except for what pundits and the MSM speculate.
*YAWN!* How many different ways are there to say "Trust Bush"? I guess we're going to find out in the next month and a half....
Sat PM bump.