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

To: Cboldt
>>>>And where we can infer that she might have taken a stand, or favored one side, the inference, in 100% of the cases, comes down on the liberal side of the scale.

100%! Come on now. This is exactly the type of rhetoric from members of the anti Miers contingent, that drives so many of us bonkers. As a conservative, if I thought Miers was the hardcore liberal you make her out to be, I certainly wouldn't be leaning towards supporting her confirmation. The Senate hearing for Miers will make or break her nomination. You're not a happy camper over Bush`s choice of Miers and trying to appeal to the fairness factor seems to be an effort in futility.

18 posted on 10/17/2005 3:23:40 PM PDT by Reagan Man (Secure our borders;punish employers who hire illegals;stop all welfare to illegals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]


To: Reagan Man
100%! Come on now. This is exactly the type of rhetoric from members of the anti Miers contingent, that drives so many of us bonkers. As a conservative, if I thought Miers was the hardcore liberal you make her out to be, I certainly wouldn't be leaning towards supporting her confirmation.

Listen, I'm giving you my honest impression from the contents of her Texas Law Journal writing. I didn't say she was a flanming moonbat liberal. There is no evidence of that. There is not much evidence of strong leaning either way.

What I meant to convey was that of the piece I read, all of them seem more liberal than conservative. You know, the pap pep-talk you get froom HR? Not the "Get 'r done, men!" pep talk you get from the shop foreman (or whoever you think takes a stand).

Out of all the writings, most aare smack dab in the middle noncommital, on noncommital subjects. Based on the contents, if somebody asked me "is it neutral, a little liberal, a little conservative, etc., I would put all of them in the "a little bit liberal" camp becuase they like Kumbaya.

The data point doesn't have much value (like the greeting cards have little or no value) - so they don't give enough to base a decision on.

You're not a happy camper over Bush`s choice of Miers and trying to appeal to the fairness factor seems to be an effort in futility.

It is. I pointed that out. When one side has support based in trust, argument is futile because trust cannot be compromised. You have been assimilated.

19 posted on 10/17/2005 3:32:09 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: Reagan Man
100%! Come on now. This is exactly the type of rhetoric from members of the anti Miers contingent, that drives so many of us bonkers. As a conservative, if I thought Miers was the hardcore liberal you make her out to be, I certainly wouldn't be leaning towards supporting her confirmation.

Oh. I just reread my original post, and think your shock at 100% is perhaps an overreaction. Just as example, if she wrote 20, and I reaad 20 (I think I read about 15), most of those are neutral. I didn't keep socre, but lets say 12 of 15 were neutral. ALl fo the others, all 3 of them, leaned to the left. 3 of 3 is 100%. That's what my original post says, but without assigning numerical examples to help the reader.

20 posted on 10/17/2005 3:34:42 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | 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