Posted on 10/17/2005 2:40:50 PM PDT by Cautor
QUESTION: Many conservatives feel profound disappointment at a missed opportunity to steer the Court back to constitutional sanity, even if Miers does turn out to be a conservative vote. They also, as the president asks them to trust him, have lost a lot of faith in Mr. Bush, who pledged to nominate people in the mold of Justices Scalia and Thomas. What damage do you think this flap could have on the political fortunes of the Republican Party?
BAUER: The fallout could be tremendous.
There are millions of “values voters” who have donated blood, sweat and tears to elect conservative Republicans to public office in order get the courts back on track. Our values prevail at the ballot box, but we consistently lose in the courts—whether it’s life issues like partial-birth abortion or parental notification, the meaning of marriage, “under God” in our Pledge or the Ten Commandments on the courthouse lawn. Millions of Americans care deeply about these issues and now, for the first time in years, we have a conservative president and a relatively conservative Senate with 55 [Republican] seats.
But we can’t win this fight if we don’t have it. And, with all due respect to our president, Harriet Miers isn’t exactly the standard bearer we were expecting. We needed another Robert Bork, another Antonin Scalia. Even if Miers turns out to be a pleasant surprise, her nomination has validated the stealth strategy and gives us no assurances that there won’t be another David Souter next time. To borrow one of John Roberts’ baseball analogies, this was the time to hit a home run, and it looks like we bunted.
(Excerpt) Read more at stanguthrie.com ...
Which was Roberts?
Conservatives dont like OUIJI Board Sup picks.
Roberts was a friend of the family from the Reagan years, remember? He was a safe bet and a friend at the same time.
They had been grooming him for Rehnquist's job for two years.
This information is hardly secret.
I have long since cared what Bauer has to say on many subjects
Harriet sounds pretty good all things considered...and looks
GTG
The borders however need to be closed....STAT
Ping
Priceless. Is that a pisso or what?
That stupid Bush.. Why can't he be smart like Ike... And nominate a known life long Republican who served as governor of a major state. Everyone knew he was a solid Republican. Why can't Bush nominate a man like Earl Warren and give us another Warren court like Ike did.
Bush should do what Ike did and talk to prominent Republicans and have them suggest a man like Earl Warren they say would be a great justice. Ike followed their advice. Aren't you glad Ike did not nominate someone he had worked with and someone whose views he knew.. NAH!! Had Ike done that he would not have been able to list nominating Earl Warren as his biggest presidential mistake.
And what about JFK, He nominated Bryon White... White was a Democrat who once on the court voted against abortion in Roe Vs Wade. Do you suppose Democrats were happy that their Democratic President appointed to the court a man who opposed abortion?
What about what Reagan did after Bork was borked? Reagan said he would appoint someone even more conservative than Bork. Advisers and other Republicans told Ron that Kennedy was a real conservative. So Reagan appointed Kennedy. Kennedy turned out to be a RINO... What if Reagan had been stupid enough to do what Dubya has done and select someone who he had worked with and whose views he knew but other people did not? NAHHHH!!! Much better to take the advice of public advisers rather than choose from someone whose views Reagan knew and hte public didn't.
What about Reagan and O'Connor. Reagan told his advisers to find him a conservative woman justice.. .and they brought him O'Connor. What if Reagan had selected someone he knew shared his views? NAH!!!! Better to take adviser advice than nominate someone he knew was conservative. Perhaps Reagan knew that appointing a person he knew was a real conservative that could be confirmed would cost him approval points with the right. Better to appoint people like O'Connor and Kennedy that the right would accept. Reagan did not appoint someone he knew would vote his way on the court. He knew better than to appoint someone who would be opposed because the right did now know where that nominee stood. A president should never appoint someone he knows completely and the base doesn't. Better a borked Bork than that.
And what about Bush 43 and Souter. Bush 43 did not know Souter.. He took others advice that Souter was conservative and look what we got. Why can't Dubya follow in his fathers foot steps and have his good Republican friends pick someone like Souter. Senators and advisor's assured Bush 41 that Souter was conservative.. Bush 43 should do the same or at least appoint someone the Democrats and Rinos will refuse to confirm. Keep failing until Hillary is president should be the rights battle cry!!!
Bush said he would take the court to the right. How dare he appoint some one he knows. Bush should withdraw Miers name.. and do what Reagan would have done.. That is, appoint an O'Connor or Kennedy. Bush should do what Reagan did. He should appoint someone the RINOs and Democrats can BORK. What he hell is wrong with Dubya.. After two or three nominees are borked he can do what Reagan did and find another Kennedy or O'Connor.. That would surely make the right happy. Bush should always ask what did Reagan do ... and then do it..
Miers is going to be trashed in the media and by the right and the left
If Miers is turned down, Bush will not get anyone confirmed short of his appointing Bill Clinton. The Democrats kept appellate court nominees stalled for four years. The Democrats and Liberal Republican Senators can do the same to any Bush Supreme court nominee in the Bork tradition. That way they will be able to let President Hillary chose the nominee and the Seven RINOs can assure her choice will be confirmed.
People on the right often don't know or refuse to know the situation. Forty years ago there were lots of conservatives in the Democratic party. Back then there were also a number of liberals in the Republican party. A president could almost always get his nominee confirmed by Senators crossing party lines on an ideological basis.
But the Nixon strategy of realignment started a movement that attracted all Democratic Conservative Senators to the Republican party. There are no Conservative Democratic Senators in office. However the Democrats have been unable to attract all the liberal Republican Senators to the Democratic party. Jeffords is about the only example. As many as seven liberal Republican Senators remain. If they had jumped to the Democratic party, the Democrats would control the Senate.
So the right wingers refuse to trust President Bush. They want a conservative appointed so the seven Liberal Republicans can agree that the Bush appointed candidate is extreme and join with the Democrats to defeat that candidate. They want Bush to keep appointing known conservatives so the seven liberal Republicans can jump ship and continue to defeat until President Hillary takes office.
President Bush tried a stealth Candidate that just might have gotten past the liberal Republican opposition enough to be confirmed. But the right will have none of it. They prefer certain defeat in a battle that can't be won to uncertain victory.
"I'm getting sick and tired of the excuses why we can't win or can't fight while we're in power. If we can't do this now, why in the hell were you telling everybody to get you in power?"
Exactly. I didn't vote for Bush so he could put his TX crony on the court.
Because your "friends" stab you in the front. I guess it's a little more comforting to watch your buddy thrust his knife into your chest.
"I have long since cared what Bauer has to say on many subjects "
Is this what you mean?
Yes.
Absolutely.
Bump to that!
..I chose to click on this thread ..... although I have long since cared what he actually says.
I was once a big fan.
in a word.........yes
>Didn't this guy back McCain in 2000?
No. He ran for president. The crowd in Iowa didn't notice though.
We needed another Robert Bork, another Antonin Scalia. Even if Miers turns out to be a pleasant surprise, her nomination has validated the stealth strategy and gives us no assurances that there won’t be another David Souter next time
Mainly because they will fight our enemies
And I find it rather amusing that many people are as apoplectic as if GWB nominated hillary. He hasn't.
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.