Posted on 10/23/2005 5:34:36 AM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
WASHINGTON – Harriet Miers, President Bush's nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court to replace Sandra Day O'Connor, is on record as supporting the establishment of the International Criminal Court, homosexual adoptions, a major local tax increase and women in combat, WorldNetDaily has learned.
While some conservative leaders and organizations were stunned by the appointment, most were not alarmed by the lack of a paper trail by the nominee who has never served as a judge at any level.
But a profile of her positions as a leader of the American Bar Association, a Dallas city councilwoman and as presidential counselor is unlikely to ease the concerns of those who were expecting Bush to fulfill his promise to name a justice in the mold of Clarence Thomas or Antonin Scalia.
According to Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness, Miers has taken positions as White House counsel that violate the law banning women in combat.
"As White House counsel, Ms. Miers either approved of the Department of Defense's illegal assignments of women in units required to be all-male, which is still continuing in violation of the law requiring notice to Congress in advance, or she was oblivious to the legal consequences of those assignments," she said.
Donnelly believes the actions of Miers could lead directly to a future court ruling requiring women to register with the Selective Service for the draft because they are now being, against the wishes of Congress, assigned to land combat.
"I am very disappointed by the president's choice," she said. "Ms. Miers does not have a judicial 'paper trail,' but her record as White House counsel is a legitimate cause for concern. Democrats and liberals who were willing to use the military for purposes of social experimentation have reason to be pleased."
Donnelly also concludes that Miers approved the Bush administrations retention of President Clinton's "don't ask, don't tell" regulations, which, she says, are different from the 1993 law passed by Congress
Meanwhile, during Miers long affiliation with the American Bar Association, she submitted a 1999 report to the ABA's house of delegates that included recommendations to develop and establish an International Criminal Court and the enactment of laws and public policy providing that the sexual orientation of adults be no bar to adoption of children.
Under the heading Family Law and subheading Adoption, the document states: "Supports the enactment of laws and public policy which provide that sexual orientation shall not be a bar to adoption when the adoption is determined to be in the best interest of the child."
Also included, under the heading International Law and Practice, is a recommendation for "the development and establishment of an International Criminal Court."
Along with the proposed agenda was a memo, dated Oct. 28, 1998, that explained the document.
"The Committee urges all Delegates to review this list for items of interest to their constituencies, and to act as the catalyst for further contact and action so that each entity will have the earliest opportunity for consideration and input."
The memo is signed by Miers as chairwoman of the Select Committee of the House.
As a city councilwoman, Miers also said Dallas had a responsibility to pay for AIDS education and patient services. And she courted the support of the Lesbian/Gay Coalition of Dallas in her successful 1989 campaign.
In addition, economic conservatives pleased by her corporate law background may find it distressing that in 1990 Miers voted for a 7 percent property tax increase during her short tenure on the Dallas City Council.
She should withdraw and allow Pres. Bush to put forward
a qualified conservative: such as Ms. Brown or Mr. Olsen.
What part of "We don't have the votes." don't you understand?
The content of the article is false - we have been through this already - I don't know how many times. Again, parroting the same nonsense over and over again does not make it anymore true than the first time it was posted.
To allow you to become the adjudicator of our efforts would be tantamount to smashing one's head into a brick wall.
No thanks.
Um, debunked where?
Asserting that someone is a paranoid liar doesn't really qualify as having "debunked" them.
You should withdraw and allow Pres. Bush to have his pick.
See, I have as much power to edit your decisions as you have to edit Bush's.
Sure.
Next question.
Keep on reading, it is thouroghly debunked.
What part of political hardball and payback don't you understand. You don't have the votes with a majority in your hands you pound the freakin hammer and squeeze the Senators in your own party.
To every thing turn, turn, turn,
there is a season, turn, turn, turn,
and a time to every purpose under Heaven.
Read my tag...there's a time to be extreme and a time to moderate. When you don't have the votes, you compromise.
We thought 55 R votes in the Senate gave us a conservative majority. We thought wrong.
I agree with this statement wholeheartedly.
EXAMPLE: stammering, desperately -- as some on this thread have done, in the doomed attempt to score however slight a point as they felt capable of achieving -- that Miers' advocacy for "civil rights" for gays and lesbians could be plausibly spun (somehow) as meaning something other than marriage and/or adoption rights for same, no matter HOW often repeated, or with what robotic persistence, cannot -- does not -- render it one jot or whit less nonsensical, or more "true."
It'd be nice, really, if everyone were willing to agree that rote repetition of apologist b.s. didn't do anything to make it more "true."
Ah, well. It's an imperfect world, isn't it...?
On the odd chance that it needs to be said, you're becoming increasingly shrill and paranoid.
LThat's only because you aren't using the Kidz 4 Saint Harriet Lucky Magic Decoder Ring -- ! :)
I find it rather interesting you are posting an article from 10/3.
All this stuff has been refuted before.
Especially given that the document proving that there was no such endorsement of the positions Farah claims is linked in this very article. It's nothing more than an itinerary for topics to discuss at the conference. How embarrassing for you.
She also told the gay group she didn't want their endorsement in the race for city council. Farah claims that she courted their support. That's called lying.
So everyone keeps saying; much like the similarly overheated "sworn testimony" of toothless drifters regarding their quasi-sexual encounters with Bigfoot, or Elvis.
If you're just going to ignore it, I'm just going to repeat it.
Overwhelmingly stupid. She didn't even support repealing the sodomy laws.
Why don't you support Miers, who submitted a srong conservative statement to the judiciary committee on the role of the courts?
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.