Posted on 10/15/2005 5:21:50 PM PDT by Impeach98
I am hoping for Option A as well. Let Harriet Miers help save Bush from his own mistake. And let Bush appreciate her loyalty and give her a trial run on constitutional law in a non-SCOTUS position and see how she does.
Many of them have raised the unaddressed conflicts of interest. If you haven't heard the substantive questions that await answers, then you haven't been listening.
Speaking for all of the working class filth of the United States, I cast my vote: nay.
Look, what the conservatives wanted was Armageddon, what Bush promissed was a conservative jurist.
All of these professional blowhards have their teat in a wringer because they didnt get the knock down drag out they wanted.
Can you assure me that Janice Rogers Brown and Priscilla Owens were even open to the idea of being nominated?
And what about J Michael Luttigs' siding with the Democrats on the GITMO issue?
You simple assume facts not in evidence, you assumed that your candidate was available and more so you assume that your candidate was acceptable to our spineless GOP Senators.
That's true, we do have some hard evidence on her, and that hard evidence says we should expect Al Gore style policy preferences. I am willing to entertain the "she's changed" story - if only there were a shred of evidence to back it up!
You are certainly entitled to say whatever you wish here at Free Republic but that is an extremely intellectually dishonest thing to say.
They HAVE offered all the reasons why Miers should not be the nominee, and that is precisely why you accuse them of throwing a temper tantrum.
May I point out that the collective pro-Harriet defense thus far is "trust me," and "she's a pretty good lawyer" (which it appears she is), "shut up you elitists" and "shut up you sexists" oh and "did we not mention she's an evangelical Christian, what more of a code phrase do you nutballs in the extreme Right want from us"
That's hardly a compelling argument for someone to be nominated to the most important SCOTUS opening of the past 30 years.
There are dozens of candidates more acceptable and I bet few if any were even asked. If she was the only one able and willing, what will Bush do if another spot opens up? Nominate his wife?
This nominee is showing the split within the conservative movement
Neocon conservatives dislike her because she lacks the pedigree and her ideologue is religiously based.
Religious right conservatives like her or are not worried about her because she is a Evangelical Christian and her ideologue is morally based
Do you disagree that Bush has done a good job so far in his appointees to the Federal Bench?
exactly.
This reminds me of my law professors who though only law professors were competent about "cutting edge" law.
Nah, you're just attacking the position that a majority of conservative leaders have come to.
You are welcome to point out that a few conservatives DO support Miers, although not because they think she's great, but because they think the President has the perogative to appoint whomever he pleases and so long as the person isn't a convicted felon, while we may not like it we should go along with him.
That list I believe includes Fred Barnes, R Emmett Tyrell, William Rusher, Hugh Hewitt (he's more establishment Repub. then movement conservative, but still...), James Dobson (depending on which day of the week you ask him). David Limbaugh might even join this list - he's gone back and forth. Oh and Thomas Sowell.
It speaks volumes to me that the Miers' proponents I've listed above go through grueling gymnastics, explaining they don't really like her that much, but that the fit conservatives are throwing just isn't right.
Meanwhile, the arguments against Miers made by the conservatives I've posted in this thread all pretty much get down to fitness for the job, experience, qualifications, background in constitutional law issues. I think that makes their argument much more compelling.
I've already contacted my two senators - neither of whom serves on the Judiciary Committee - to inform them that I and most of the people I know (conservative AND liberal) are opposed to seeing this third-rate crony trumping the BEST prospects. The reason? If this nonentity gets thru the Judiciary Committee she will need confirmation by the full senate. More important, if senators start feeling the heat of public opposition they'll both communicate it to Bush and start thinking about their own reelection prospects. This may be the last opportunity for a generation to move the Supreme Court in an originalist direction. Bush blew it but we conservatives are NOT powerless! Let's raise hell and let them know in DC that we've had it with this farce!!
Rush has finally now said "I oppose her nomination" or something very close. However, he didn't have it on his website, and I didn't want to post a link to something and have people then say the transcript of that person was wrong. But you are right - I just don't have a good document to cite.
David Limbaugh has both blasted Miers and the Bush Administration for attacking her critics, and then also said maybe her critics are too riled up. Mark Steyn I thought was neutral for now even though he was not fond of the pick.
Help set me straight if I've got my facts wrong on any of what I've just written.
Popman
There is indeed a split between conservative probably several fissures is even a better way to look at it.
I want to actually hear the lady answer questions and not prejudge the matter as all of these professional talkers have.
Im still waiting for someone to come to the defence of William Kristol who supported John McCrazy, exactly why is his judgment good.
And as for Natl Review please remember how they totally caved to CAIR over that Islamist groups allegation of anti-muslim motivation behind featuring a hard hitting book on the Islamists in their bookstore.
On that one Rich Lowrey showed his cowardice and sorry I simply dont trust that periodical anywhere near as much as I used to.
Nope I am disagreeing with you and you seem to think you silly thread will be a rallying point for FR conservatives, I had the temerity to disagree with you.
Neither of us has any idea where Miers is on the important issues, I say wait until she testifies and I say that I trust my President who in case you havent noticed has done a superlative job on judidical nominations up to this point and Miers has been his chief "vetter"
Will she or will she not be confirmed?
Be fair. He wasn't just the bestest President ever. He was the brightest man she ever met.
But that's OK - Bush returned the favor.
He said Harriet Miers was the MOST QUALIFIED person in the nation to serve on the SCOTUS. Michael Graham wrote about this (in a different column from the one I posted):
"Sorry, George, but you lost me at Harriet. When a reporter asked you Oct. 4 if Harriet Miers was the most qualified possible candidate for the U.S. Supreme Court and you answered, "Yes I picked the best person I could find" (and you did it with a straight face) that was it."
"And George, when you look me in the eye and throw me a good old-fashioned Bill Clinton "I did not have sex with that woman" line like Harriet Miers is the most qualified person in America for the Supreme Court þ buddy, you're on your own."
"It's bad enough that she's hardly conservative and has no record of achievement. Mr. President, making an affirmative-action appointment of an unqualified crony to one of the highest offices of the land is wrong, no matter what your politics. It's not just a mistake. It is shameful. You should be ashamed of yourself."
"How about we use this as a resource to key in on a bunch of self important crybabies who think they speak for conservatives?"
They speak for me and I've heard of them. I've never heard of you.
I can certainly see why so many people are flocking to public service considering how some of you conservatives are treating your own.
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.