Posted on 10/25/2005 10:55:57 AM PDT by bigsky
A 30-second TV ad is set to air tomorrow, Wednesday, that some believe may be as effective at helping stop the Harriett Miers confirmation as the Swift Boat ads were in helping stop John Kerry.
BetterJustice.org, a conservative grass-roots organization, created and funded the hard-hitting anti-Miers (but pro-Bush) ad. The organization's board of directors includes several otherwise staunch Republican stalwarts, such as David Frum and Linda Chavez.
"Miers is no more qualified to sit on the Supreme Court than I am to be a sumo wrestler!" So stated the so very un-sumo-like Ann Coulter.
(Excerpt) Read more at humaneventsonline.com.edgesuite.net ...
That reminds me of something C. S. Lewis said:
What are you @#!$% talking about???? Opposition??? None of us wants a liberal in the stinking office!!
Will you just listen to reason for once?
"That's just silly. Of course she's a Republican. And, conservative as well."
please explain how affirmative action is a conservative principle...
True. Then, at least, those following the administration's lead on this board would no longer need to rely on the W.H. talking points that we are 'sexist', 'elitist', and 'cynics'.
Probably in the same way that when a Democrat pushes for wealth redistribution it's called socialism, but when a Republican does it, it's called giving a helping hand and extending hope.
It's all about having the (R) after your name.
Then why did Bush make such a divisive pick?
In any event, in all likelihood Miers not getting confirmed will be healthier for the party than forcing a stealth candidate through.
When it gives women the opportunity to compete for the same job a man has.
"When it gives women the opportunity to compete for the same job a man has."
so lets see here, she supported affirmative action in the dallas fire department which " revised minimum height, weight and vision requirements". so because of liberals like yourself that support affirmative action-- people that need to be rescued in a life threatening situation might die.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/1498195/posts?q=1&&page=201
"Miers' time on Dallas City Council provides some insight"
Miers was one of 10 Dallas council members to unanimously approve a 1989 agenda item that revised minimum height, weight and vision requirements for Dallas firefighters to facilitate "promotion of certain ranks in the Fire Department," particularly women.
The agenda item's title: "Implementation of Fire Department Affirmative Action Plan."
You must have been on Confirm them today! :)
When I read this, I just gave up. Somehow, lowering the requirements for a job so that women can compete for the same job is ok in conservative ideology.
Someone earlier justified it because the companies should be free to implement affirmative action and since the fire department reports to the city council, it was just an intracompany policy and had nothing to do with government.
Bush has so confused conservatives that they will walk through fire if told them it was a conservative principle.
Ann Coulter called for his impeachment? Really? I mean seriously? OK, anyone else?
If she doesn't get confirmed it will be because someone had the intelligence to take a deep breath and convince the base and the Senators that she should not be a SCJ in an appropriate manner and one that is in line with the Constitution.
You can scream foul until you are blue in the face but without the support of the base you are dead in the water. People overall want to give her a chance..you can't fight that. It's too late.
IMHO, the only ads that would do any good would be aired during the hearings after she has had a chance to speak.
But no..once again these bozos are ignoring the wishes of the people and jumping the gun by putting out ads prematurely.
What are they thinking?
I don't agree with Christy Todd Whitman, either. But I don't doubt her Republican credentials.
Nah. In the 16 years since the policy was implemented, I don't recall the death of anyone in a fire being blamed on the fact that a woman couldn't get them out. And I read the Dallas paper pretty closely.
The decision on the City Council was unanimous. So, I don't see where Miers was pushing some kind of liberal agenda here.
Me: "Man, you'll try anything to tar the opposition. Who, beside some people behind an anonymous keyboard, has called for the President's impeachment on this issue?"
You: "What are you @#!$% talking about???? Opposition??? None of us wants a liberal in the stinking office!!"
Why the profanity? What could have made you angry? And what don't you understand. I was referring to the opposition, i.e. those opposed to Miers, that you were, in fact, tarring. Where's the confusion?
I agree that none of us want a liberal on the Court. I thought that we were talking about Miers' qualifications.
"Will you just listen to reason for once?"
I'm waiting for some. I believe I heard from you that Miers' critics were ignoring the law. That's not reason in my book.
13 years as a Republican is plenty. And, I disagree that she is not a conservative.
You are free, of course, to disagree.
Only a third of the people on FR support Miers. Exactly what portion of the remaining two/thirds on FR are part of the Republican party is simply unknowable, a good point.
Earthdweller, I am still confused by this. Who has been advocating ignoring the law and what laws do they intend to ignore
Yes, there are many more Conservative outlets now. And sometimes that is not all that much of a good thing; though sometimes it is.
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.