Posted on 10/23/2005 8:40:50 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
I agree completely! The heat had been turned up before I checked the date.
If you're depending on university profs to shape the kind of legal minds you claim to want, you will be very disappointed.
Robert Bork did a pretty good job I think.
John Eastman of Chapman University Law is doing a good job, too.
Is he on the court or something?
No, he was very influential as a professor of law at Yale.
I thought that was what we were talking about, "university profs to shape ... legal minds."
However, he did also serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. circuit and also argued 41 cases before the U.S. Supreme Court.
I hope you're right.
This is the part of your argument I don't get. The Constitution gives the president the power to nominate judges. No one else can nominate a judge. So, if you trust GWB to nominate conservatives--if his record speaks for itself in that regard--then what is there to worry about? The Senate can cry all they like, but all they will get are conservative nominees, right? Why would GWB nominate a liberal? You think he'd do that?
I respectfully disagree. I believe when Miers asks Bush to withdraw her name (this week) from consideration Bush will quickly nominate a well known staunch conservative in order to appease/fire up his base. The President needs to reach out to conservatives, plus he will need some sort of diversion if or when Rove and/or Libby are indicted.
But the question is whether they will be approved. I doubt it.
I know i'll be glued to my radio.
As will I.
I'm not worried at all. I look at this whole process from the standpoint of the Constitution. It's the Coulterbots that want to undermine the whole process that gets me.
Forgive me for keeping after this point, but I still don't get why you think we will get a "more liberal nominee." The only one who can nominate judges is the president. Why do you think he is going to move to the left on judges? I don't get that at all. It makes even less sense given the recent pressure from the right. If the pressure were coming from the left, at least I could see a political reason for moving left. But why do you think the president will move left?
ps- what's with "coulterbots?" Do you honestly think ppl are influenced that much by Ann Coulter? Do you think people are putting allegience to Coulter above their own beliefs/interests? I don't get that term.
>>>"What'll happen is he's come back with a more conservative nominee, who will be defeated because the liberals think he's too conservative. Then he'll have no choice but to nominate a more liberal nominee."
Are you saying we should expect Bubba Clinton as a Supreme Court nominee, now that the Bushes are pals with the Clintons? Interesting possibility. He's from Yale, you know.
Bush needs to just fall back on the basic strategy for the candidate: a constitutional conservative + great qualifications. If he wants to pick a female, there were several under consideration. Otherwise, there are plenty of males.
The faster he drops Miers, the faster he can start mending the conservative vs. liberal split in the Republican party. Just because Miers is an evangelical Christian doesn't mean she's conservative... and so it appears.
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.