Leaders on Right Call for New Pick (Viguerie: "Bush Has Broken His Word to the Conservative Base.")

Washington Times ^ | 10/25/2005 | Ralph Z. Hallow

[Doogle]

...consider The Washington Times, trying to explain what conservatives are doing....nuff said.


Doogle

[bybybill]

Now I understand. All this GWB bashing from the loony right is about fund raising. THEY NEED AN ENEMY IF THEY ARE GOING TO GET US TO SEND THEM $$. By convincing us that Bush stabbed us in the back with Miers (notice they never remember the others he nominated and seldom say what is wrong with Miers)they are able to fill their coffers just like they were able to do when Billy was POTUS

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

Consider that the Richard Viguerie/Phyllis Schlafly web site WithdrawMiers.com, mentioned in the very first paragraph of said article, is easily enough viewed right here, and backs up every last quote attributed to both.

REALLY 'nuff said.

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

>>THEY NEED AN ENEMY IF THEY ARE GOING TO GET US TO SEND THEM $$.<<

[Paladin2]

IWWT.

[Paladin2]

Ms. Miers is a RINO at best, another ABA Souter at worst. She is not what the country needs, even in the short term. Definately not good for the long term, though now it does seem to be a good thing that she is 60 rather than 50 or 43.

[Doogle]

Richard Viguerie/Phyllis Schlafly..??? where do they stand on other issues? What other web sites have they collaberated on?

Doogle

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

where do they stand on other issues?

Are you seriously posting opinions on a conservative political board, without knowing who Richard Viguerie and Phyllis Schlafly are, and WHAT THEY'VE MEANT TO THE CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT OVER THE DECADES -- ?!?

This is some sort of parody, or online "performance art"... right?

[David Isaac]

When logic opposes logic, there may be a winner. When logic opposes belief, there will not.

[xzins]

Again, this adds no new information to the debate unless it's significant that Schlaffly and Viguerie are catholic and that Miers is conservative evangelical.

Is that supposed to be the point?

[PositiveCogins]

"By convincing us that Bush stabbed us in the back with Miers"

Not just Miers. Immigration, CFR, Ted Kennedy and the education bill, the federal budget (no veto), whitewash of Able Danger and covering for Clinton are just a few.

The war on terror is the ONLY thing Bush has going for him right now.

[counterpunch]

In 1793, George Washington nominated William Patterson for the Supreme Court, only to later withdraw the nomination.
In 1987, Ronald Reagan nominated Douglas Ginsburg for the Supreme Court, also later withdrawing the nomination.

Sometimes, a great president needs to know when to withdraw a nominee.
If President Bush withdrew the nomination of Harriet Miers, he would be in good company.

[johnny7]

We really need to get a second FRPoll on Miers... things have 'evolved' since the first.

[thulldud]

Again, this adds no new information to the debate unless it's significant that Schlaffly and Viguerie are catholic and that Miers is conservative evangelical.

I refer you to the story of the "Emperor's New Clothes", in which everybody went along with the charade until a child spoke up and said, in the hearing of all, "He's naked!"

There was nothing new in that statement, either. The point is that somebody audibly uttered what everybody was thinking, and that made it "all right".

Viguerie and Schlafly are not primarily famous for their church affiliations, but for their pioneering work in conservatism.

If a kid can call down an emperor for parading around in his "birthday suit", these two titans can definitely take W to the woodshed for this appointment.

[xzins]

That wasn't my point.

The article added nothing new. It expressed their disapproval once again.

And......???

Everybody knows that Miers has her supporters and everyone knows that Miers has her critics. If they going to write something, at least they could contribute to the conversation by adding new factual information.

[thulldud]

And my point was that it didn't NEED to add anything new (in the way of facts, etc.)

The fact that somebody is saying what everybody knows, is significant per se.

Now, let's see who else chimes in.

(Don't wish for a world ruled entirely by logic -- that would have MEN riding sidesaddle.)

[xzins]

It did need new info for me.

It was a waste of perfectly good time, paper, and ink.

:>)

[KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle]

this adds no new information to the debate unless it's significant that Schlaffly and Viguerie are catholic and that Miers is conservative evangelical.

Is that supposed to be the point?

Go back to Post #9, and try again.

[xzins]

I already know that Shlaffley and Viguerie are conservatives and that they're opposed to Miers.

What's new?

This is an article without a point.

Unless the point is more grousing, or that they're catholic and Miers isn't.

We're at the stage where they should be adding new pro or con information on the appointment. Guess they just had to fill column inches.