THE TROUBLE WITH HARRIET [Michelle Malkin on Miers]

Michelle Malkin's Blog ^ | 10-20-2005 | Michelle Malkin

[MikefromOhio]

So are you fasting for Roy Moore?

Are you still building your Y2K bunker?

Are aircraft contrails REALLY just the government's attempt to pacify the nation?


LOL

ok.....

[Dont_Tread_On_Me_888]

Do you mind posting a hyperlink to a FULL article that you believe proves Joseph Farah should be removed from my list of respected conservative commentators? I will withhold judgement until I see a full article written by him that proves to me he is unworthy of my title and worthy of yours.

[meema]

Please remind us all.

What was his argument again?

Trust me.
I know she'll vote right.
When you get to know her, you'll love her.
She's an Evangelical Christian.
She's pro-life.

I give up. He got into this all by himself, (with the help and encouragement of Laura, Andy Card and Miers' Deputy, Kelley) he's going to have to get out of it by standing up by himself.
Sign me: Disgusted and dismayed.

[MikefromOhio]

LOL

ummm errr ok....

you wouldn't believe it anyway since Farah is obviously one of your heroes....

[MikefromOhio]

And I'm really glad AQ hasn't used those nukes that were smuggled in like Farah predicted too...

The guy is insane.

[TAdams8591]

"Even those who were impressed said that she offered up little of herself in conversation. "In these meetings she has been very guarded," said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.)."

It's a well-tuned characteristic she has practiced her whole life. She is not going to change now.

There is NOTHING, NOTHING about this woman's life which indicates she has stood for principle, except the principle of NOT revealing her principles. This practice has obviously stunted her intellectual and personal growth.

Harriet has gotten to this point sheerly by keeping her mouth shut regarding her beliefs, butt-kissing and faking expertise and critical thought

We've all worked with and for, people like Harriet Miers. And part of the many problems of today's society, is that people like her are all too frequently rewarded for their mediocrity.

[PeoplesRep_of_LA]

So, what is the argument? Isn't the President given any credit for his "thoughtful" nomination?

Of course he was, the people criticizing him aren't Bush bashers, they are people who realize this is a very serious decision, more then any cabinet or ambasador position, and these same people trusted his father who gave us David Soutter. Reagan, who I respect far more then Bush could ever hope to be respected, made mistakes in this area. At least Anthony Kennedy and Sandra Day OConner had more extensive track records than this personal lawyer...and the problem with all 3 of them is that they DIDN'T have enough of a paper trail.

This was no willy-nilly decision and the President has the right and responsibility to select.

No one is questioning his right, but they are questioning knee jerk reactions to confirming the selection.

Congress, you and I can disagree but absent a murder charge, we're acting like the Democrats - "she's not conservative enough". Bunk!!

Thank you for confirming 2 things; that you would only disagree with the President if the nominee actually took a life, and two, that you have positively no clue what you are talking about in constitutional law matters. I suggest you read Men In Black by Mark Levin to understand that you don't "vote" on the Supreme Court-you interpret, and that has been done poorly for 50 years. It will take an exceptional person to withstand the myriad of challenges strict constructionalists will face.

we're acting like the Democrats - "she's not conservative enough". Bunk!

I'm quite sure that's not the issue people are raising, we don't care about conservative-we care about competent, there is a difference, and this one doesn't have the latter.