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

To: AmericaUnited
Aha! Caught you again! Several have directly said she believed in judicial restraint and a strict interpretation. So, why do you leave that out (somewhat conveniently...)?

Ahhh .. I think I've found it. Here it is, and then I'll make my lame explanation.

Cboldt: I'm inclined to believe that Miers would render opinins that are acceptable to my sense of how SCOTUS should rule. But I am very unhappy with the pick.

Then I'm confused.

I prefer an open discussion of Constitutional principle; correct the overreaching by SCOTUS and other courts into hot-button social issues, the balance of powers between the Senate and the President, etc. But instead of a discussion on principle, we are having a discussion on "qualifications," "cronyism," and "stealth."

I don't like that conservaitism is reduced to stealth. It feels like being ashamed of conservatism, or being afraid that conservatism will lose in the marketplace of ideas. It comes off as "chicken" and "conflict avoidance," not just on the President's part, but also on the part of the GOP-lead Senate.

77 posted on 10/07/2005 3:16:23 PM EDT by Cboldt

Okay - at this point in the development of the story, I am following my first gut reaction, which is "We are fighting the wrong battle. This nomination sucks because the nominee is a ciper." Given that overarching sense, I'm trying to steer others that way. To be honest, my comment "I'm inclined to believe that Miers would render opinins that are acceptable to my sense ..." was based on the same trust many have for the nomination as a whole. At that moment, I couldn't picture GWB picking a Justice that was NOT in the mold of Thomas or Scalia. BUt even he did, I don't like the nomination.

And that has pretty much been my theme all along. We're fighting the wrong battle. THe battle should be against "Uncertainty, the nominee."

Since then, having more research gone by the by, I don't think she is a strong performer, and I have serious doubts that she would render opinins that are acceptable to my sense of how SCOTUS should rule.

I reposted that 10/7 piece on the 16th .. to make the point that not everybody was piling on the nominee from the get-go. I know for a fact that I wasn't, and you caught it too.

Link -> 726 posted on 10/16/2005 2:34:14 PM EDT by Cboldt <- repost

I can see where that sequence of posts could reasonably lead a person to see me as a liar. It's no big leap, for sure.

But that's my baggage. I can't very well fix it up - except, but for you calling me out on it, I would not have bothered to explain what changed, and why.

So I am greatful for your challenge, and in your debt.

216 posted on 10/17/2005 6:57:37 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies ]


To: Cboldt

Have you been following that case that Justice Thomas took up this weekend about the prison abortion?


218 posted on 10/17/2005 7:20:06 PM PDT by Txsleuth (Please say a prayer, and hold positive thoughts for Texas Cowboy...and Faith.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | 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