Posted on 10/27/2005 5:54:48 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
just breaking!!!!!!!!
"The seat to be filled in place of the retiring O'Connor is a woman's seat"
You mean it doesn't have the bar in the middle, like a "boy's" bike?
Just don't listen to Laura this time, W.
His head would sooner explode.
Nicely said.
Oh, like we buy that 'threat.' C'mon, Wolfie, anyone who's seen you post around here knows you'd never have voted for a conservative anyway! As long as there's a RINO in the mix you'd be too busy pestering him for an autograph and a cozy place near his rectum with the rest of your moonbot sycophant pals to even think about voting for a conservative. I pity you in 2008, with McRINO and RINOliani and RINOmney all likely to be in the primary. Fiddledeedee, whatever will you do, with so many RINOs to brownnose?!?!
See post 823....we don't have a ruling majority because we don't have a cohesive majority.
No, Bush's dentist. Because he can handle the tooth! :^)
What got me angry was hearing a DC pundit who has been particularly nasty about this nomination speaking on our local talk radio show. He acted like he had been so reasonable and civil through this whole process, and it was a LIE. You can find his postings all over the internet. I tried to call in but they weren't taking calls during the interview.
I assume Kristol has been chortling with glee all over the television. I guess everyone wants to make him the leader of the party.
Can you tell I am mad? These pundits aren't getting a dime from me! Ever!
"Turn this into a conservative vs. liberal dog fight. Like it should be."
I hope not. I think know who would win!
We have just realized that we've always been conservative. In the past we didn't self-identify as a conservative or a Republican because we didn't LIKE conservatives or Republicans. We like them better now, and after 9-11 believed they were the better choice to lead the nation, bou Our disgust is growing. Like many conservatives, neo-cons and paleocons alike, we feel out in the cold by the RINO, namby-pamby, double-talking, perfumed princes in the government who look and govern, (I almost said act, but that would have been unfair) like democrats or like limp noodles.
Two comments this AM before work:
1) O'Conner will now hear and decide on the Church&State and Parental Notification cases. I doubt this forum will reach consensus on who might be responsible for whatever results come from that. Great opportunities for SDO'C to write swan-song majority opinions.
2) I do hope this forum combines with the pundits and the next nominee to apply pressure where it belongs, with all the vehemence we have seen for the last few weeks: the Senate. There lies the source of weakness that the President took into account with the Mier's nomination. Already Trent Lott was on screen signalling that 'very conservative' nominees (by name, Owens or Brown) might not be the 'wisest' choices, implying that the constitutional option is not a done deal at all.
"Cleaning Lady" - Ann Coulter.
I'm not referring to legitimate concerns about Harriet Miers. I'm talking about vile attacks on her character, and the character of the President.
If these angry ubers think they've WON anything here, they're sadly mistaken.
All they've done is reveal the depths of their own depravity and scorn.
Pray for the President and for Harriet Miers. The wounds are deep.
I'm getting tired of repeating this. Miers got the nomination by default because those on the list ahead of her WITHDREW THEIR NAMES DUE TO THE POLITICAL GANTLET THAY WOULD HAVE TO RUN
While I don't know for sure if Brown withdrew her name from the list, neither do any of the other people on this thread. What I DO know FOR A FACT is that, if Brown DID withdraw her name from that list and is not renominated because she doesn't want the nomination, another conservative hatefest will ensue. THAT I will bet money on.
That is true, and very unfortunate.
By the way, Charles Krauthammer had a decent article the other day called "Saving Face" that seems to be about what has happened. Let's hope this turns out well.
"This is the right outcome for a mistaken nomination. But how does Bush find a female version of John Roberts?"
The underlying assumptions are incorrect. We don't need someone with a "thin file/almost no judicial history". The president needs to get his base back yesterday. Especially if indictments are coming, he will need every available conservative in his corner. If he delivers on a predictable originalist jurist that is known to the base, even if that results in a brawl, then he will immediately shore up his support. If he serves up Alberto Gonzales, the fight will make the Miers nomination look like a picnic.
..but it can never be a good thing to air our grievances (within the Party) in public for our enemy to use and abuse....and they will!
A house divided cannot stand!
It's been good for me; I love to fight.
There has been a nasty undercurrent to many of the arguments against Miers that surprised me, especially seeing it on FR and hearing it from people like Frum and Coulter and Will.
Let's see how willing those who now have their boot on Bush's neck will be to let him up so they can support a new nominee.
Those who despise Bush (and they are legion) will just move on to immigration, or spending, or Iraq, or rebuilding the Gulf Coast and commence firing.
You've got some good sources, and your vanities have been thoughtful.
Yet the "wrong crowd" is here in mass, still running their mouths.
I guess they expect the right just to remain silent when the President makes a real bad move.
The "wrong crowd" got that wrong too.
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.