Posted on 10/23/2005 8:40:50 AM PDT by Sub-Driver
"She is the only one whose entire career is in private practice," Hutchison said, in contrast to the current justices. "I can't imagine not having someone with practical real-world experience."That is an outright lie
It's the originalists who are concerned about her being confirmed. We want someone with the qualifications of John Roberts, not another O'Connor.
Seems to me if she is what her opponents here say she is, the democrats would be falling all over themselves to vote for her.
But if you trust Bush, doesn't that mean he'll keep sending up conservatives? Why would he send up a liberal? Wouldn't that be giving in? Do you think he'll give in that easily? It would make no sense, especially since the pressure on Miers has been from the right. In my view, the ones giving him the most grief about Miers are helping the cause. So far all the pressure has been from the left, the moderates. Now, finally, there is pressure from our side as well. I'd say that pushes back on the left. Gives GWB some leverage for picking someone with known conservative views. What's to lose? You can always pick another stealth later if you want/need. But to give in without a fight?
Yep. And it's truly sad to see a lot of people around here apparently cheering Arlen "Magic Bullet" Specter -- simply because he's anti-Miers too.
And before anyone tries it, Guilt by Association is a logical fallacy.
Not trying it. But I think before we jump to conclusions about Miers, we should consider the sources. There's a huge lot of disinformation coming from anti-Miers people on both the left and the right.
FWIW, Susan Estrich had some interesting things to say last night on John Kasich's show on Fox.
Estrich said that when she helped nominee Stephen Breyer prepare for his confirmation, Breyer himself did not fill out those questionnaires submitted by senators.
She implied that Miers probably did not fill out the questionnaire either (the one that reportedly had erroneous answers on it), and said that she suspects Miers has been ill served by staff.
(Kasich jumped in at that point and said that Senate judiciary staffers, who hate Miers, were the ones who were "leaking" negative spin. Kasich added that these staffers should be disciplined.)
Before I get flamed for guilt by association for quoting Estrich (with whom I don't agree 90% of the time), y'all note that on the same program she
1. condemned the prosecution of Tom DeLay;
2. condemned the potential prosecution of Rove and Libby; and
3. has in the recent past condemned Cindy Sheehan.
So whatever we think about Susan Estrich, I think we have to admit she's the rare lefty who's occasionally honest.
Rushbot? Is that supposed to hurt our feelings? Sounds like a phrase the elitist Libs would use to dismiss us conservatives.
Why more liberal? Don't you trust GWB to nominate conservatives?Ironic, isn't it, that the same people who say "trust Bush!" when it comes to Miers don't even trust him to nominate someone conservative in her place.
He can't even get his cliches right.
The tactic of steath is inherently dishonest. It can be used to move the court to the left too. If you don't object to stealth now, you have to change your position to be against it in the future.
Honest government decisions are made with at least some of the cards on the table. There is debate, and then vote.
I don't trust Chuck Schumer's word. In any sense, let alone over Dubya's.
FWIW, Susan Estrich had some interesting things to say last night on John Kasich's show on Fox.Yeah, I saw that and lost what little respect I had for Kasich when he trotted out the despicable "sexism" charge at the end of the interview.
LOL!
Many here on FR said that they were against Miers because Schumer was for her.
Now, Schumer goes negative on Miers, and guilt by association becomes taboo.
Sure glad that I never name drop endorsements when giving my pros and cons.
The Bushbots have been consistently telling us that if we manage to reject Miers, Bush will come back with a more liberal nomination, probably Gonzalez.
I certainly hope not. I think the political stupidity of the Miers nomination was entirely careless and accidental. But if he comes back with Gonzalez, that would be political stupidity on purpose.
Frankly, I think Bush has more sense. Why would he want to go through two flame wars in a row and permanently offend most of his base?
Bushbots seem to hope for such an outcome so they can say, "We told you so." It would be better to hope that the President does the right thing next time, instead, and nominates a solid conservative candidate, as he should have done the first time around.
Yes. The laws are complicated -- the Constitution is simple.
Spiteful? I think right now that term is reserved for the extreme right wing who may have thwarted this nomination. What makes them think he's going to come back now and give them what they want? Very unlikely.
The Bushbots have been consistently telling us that if we manage to reject Miers, Bush will come back with a more liberal nomination, probably Gonzalez.That is just a scare tactic. It's all hyperventilation, hysteria, and histrionics.
I agree with you about Estrich. She infuriates me most of the time, but I also think she has a distaste for liberal idiocy.
I wish I could say I would be disappointed if Miers wasn't confirmed, but that wouldn't be honest. I believe there are far more qualified proven conservative candidates. Trouble is, what is the likelihood of one of them getting confirmed? A Luttig, Brown, etc, is sure to be filibustered. If that happens, perhaps Frist would finally grow a spine and go nuclear. One could only hope.
Having said all that, I have been reserving judgement on Miers until I could hear her for myself in confirmation hearings.
Stealth candidates make me very nervous. No way of knowing what you're going to get. I am not real comfortable with "hoping for the best". This court is to important to the future of conservatism and originalism. I'd rather be certain. Don't know if that is possible.
Because he works for us, not the other way around.
We just want him to nominate a known strict constructionist/originalist.
Funny how those opposed to Miers are Sexist, Elitist and now "far right."
So Laura Ingraham, George Will, Krauthammer, Rush, John Fund, National Review, et al are "far righties," eh? You sould like a liberal.
43% of FR oppose this pick as opposed to 34% who are for it.
Why do you associate yourself with such people?
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.