LOL!!! 
Posted on 10/15/2005 5:21:50 PM PDT by Impeach98
Before you post a few more dozen times on this thread, you should stop, take a few breaths, and try to write your comments in normal English.
The list of people opposed to this nomination goes far beyond Neocons or Bush bashers. It includes a great many people who normally support Bush.
They main reason we oppose this nomination is that she is a lousy candidate, and we are blowing a once in a lifetime chance to turn the court into something truly conservative.
The second reason must of us oppose the nomination is that Bush is shooting himself in the foot. If he goes through with this, he will be severely damaged. Not because we are his enemies, but because he is doing this to himself.
The third reason most of us oppose the nomination is that it sends a terrible signal to other judges. If you EVER, EVER, speak out on the issues or make a conservative decision, you will be forever barred from further advancement in your chosen profession, because the Democrats will hate you and the Republicans won't dare to support you.
Oh give it a rest...those people speak for a sizable chunk of conservatives (and yeah--we get it--they don't speak for you).
Should Harriet Miers be vetted to the same criteria used for the other nominations?
As in, those you know personally?
I'm telling Ken Mehlman on you. You left out sexist. Get it right when insulting the conservative base next time!! ;)
P.S. A few? Hmmmm.... 2 = couple... 3 = a few ... how many did I post above? That's just a few?
"Can you assure me that Janice Rogers Brown and Priscilla Owens were even open to the idea of being nominated?"
Not open to the idea of nomination to the SUPREME COURT? A lifetime appointment to fame, small fortune, and benefits out the wazoo? A guaranteed place in history? A boffo pension plan?
Right, I'm sure they weren't interested at all.
I don't want to hit the mega millions either, but that's just me.
I agree with your sentiments.
Frist was Bushes choice, remember?????? He axed Lott for Frist.
"We cant depend on DeWine, Chaffee, Snowe, Specter or the rest of the squishy RINOS This aint Bushes fault hes playing the hand that he was dealt."
you're right we cant count on them. so if we cant count on them, why is bush supporting chaffee over a more conservative challenger for teh 2006 RI senate race?
you cant complain about the hand you're dealt when you choose to play with the same cards over and over.
I remember Bush41 being mocked for the very same reason, back when he nominated Clarence Thomas.
Except, back then, it was the Dims doing the mocking.
This time, it's our own.
http://frum.nationalreview.com/petition/
From one American to another, "Thank you" for contacting your Senators. Alas, I get to tell Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein what I think. I have a feeling they will care about as much as George Bush cares what conservatives think of his choice for SCOTUS.
Only in your dreams unless you're referring to the 1-percenters won't being voting GOP yet again and haven't since the 1996 primaries.
Then again, you've been saying the same thing on every single issue no matter what it is.
Will she or will she not be confirmed?
Depends on whether or not she pulls out before the hearings.
Just wondering, who do you thinks speaks for the conservatives these days?
LOL!!!
Oh great a pompous dead guy lecturing me.
Look pard you dont have any idea what kind of a candidate she is, you don't know anything about her aside from what people like McCainiac Kristol tells you.
Hannity is against it as well.
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.