Dr. Dobson Says Bush Made 'Wise Decision' on Miers Nomination

Focus on the Family ^ | 10/27/05 | Dr. Dobson

[jdhljc169]

Focus Action founder believes president was right to accept her withdrawal as SCOTUS nominee. Colorado Springs, Colo.

-- Focus on the Family Action founder and chairman Dr. James C. Dobson issued the following statement today in response to Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers' decision to withdraw her name from consideration:

"I believe the president has made a wise decision in accepting Harriet Miers' withdrawal as a nominee to the Supreme Court.

"In recent days I have grown increasingly concerned about her conservative credentials, and I was dismayed to learn this week about her speech in 1993, in which she sounded pro-abortion themes, and expressed so much praise for left-wing feminist leaders.

"When the president announced this nominee, I expressed my tentative support, based on what I was able to discover about her. But I also said I would await the hearings to learn more about her judicial philosophy. Based on what we now know about Miss Miers, it appears that we would not have been able to support her candidacy. Thankfully, that difficult evaluation is no longer necessary."

[kpp_kpp]

Karl Rove told Dobson that Miers was bait for the left and would pull her nomination before confirmation. That way he could nominate a real conservative and try and get the testicleless pukes in the Senate to fight for him/her.

...that's my story and i'm sticking to it... (at least until i see who he nominates)

[nmh]

"Why do we have to have a supreme court judge who is pro-life? WE should have a supreme court judge who recognizes that Roe V Wade was wrongly ruled because the issue is not raised and resolved in our constitution. Rather, it is an issue that needs to be debated and voted on by the people."

You have me curious. Since it is not raised or resolved in our Constitution, according to you, the way our rule of law works is that it goes to the Supreme Court for a final decision. So if you acknowledge that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided why are you against a pro life Judge, assuming Miers was one? How do you think Roe v. Wade got to the Supreme Court? Are you familiar with how the system works?

Maybe I am misunderstanding you ... do you believe that states are to decide this rather than the Supreme Court? If so, why? I also beg to differ that life is NOT protected in the Constitution. Surely you can't be foolish enough to believe that our founders wanted something like mrudering the unborn a "right"?

[Guenevere]

Ping!

[Walkingfeather]

You my friend are politically tone deaf.

[Terabitten]

I agree with you... I think maybe Dobson should continue focusing on the family and stay the heck outta politics.

[Pylot]

I am from Colorado Springs and have been listening to Dobson for a long time. I just think he is opportunistic and unjustifiably egotistical.

Care to elaborate on what you mean by politically tone deaf?

[Rightwing Conspiratr1]

Dr. Dobson was abused by WH spin machine.

Exactly. What do you think is going to happen when the WH makes its round of calls the next time?

[Walkingfeather]

Sure if you say "who cares about what he thinks" then you must not understand the power he could yeild politically at any time. If he wanted to run for any office most likely he would be elected. His program is listened to by millions on a daily basis. They send 10's of millions peices of mail out every year. Even if you do not agree with him, You must respect the power he holds politically. He also rarely uses the political power he holds to the extent he could. Why do you think the whitehouse lobbied him for his support of Meir's before her announcement? You get dobsons stamp of approval you got 26 million or more people in your camp.

Dobson is rarely attacked in public by the media because it will cost them their shows because Dobson is viewed as a saint. Any attack on Dobson is met with a avalanche of bad press.

So regardless if you agree with dobson, or think him egotistical ( I would say he is confident rather than egotistical) you are politically tone deaf if you do not recognize the power and POTIENTIAL power he has.

[cynicom]

Dobson was conned and used. I hope he has learned a lesson.

[Walkingfeather]

Wishful thinking, But knowing Bush he would not use a personal fried for a bait and switch.

[nikos1121]

I'm not against a pro-life judge. I would of course "prefer" a pro-life judge, but the issue here is not whether or not abortion is right or wrong, the issue in my mind is that 9 people shouldn't be interpreting the constitution so that abortion, on demand and at anytime, is right and proper. As a physician, I'm seeing young girls having third tri-mester abortions. How can this be happening? I'm confident the people can make these decisions after discussing and debating the issue and then voting on it. Did you happen to read the recent Richard Cohen article, whom I disagree with 95% of the time?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/19/AR2005101901974.html

[Pylot]

Good points.

He probably is electable to a house or senate seat, but why would he take the cut in pay?

He, without doubt, has the ear of a lot of people.

I don't think he did Bush any good by coming out and saying he "could not reveal" everything that was told to him. That was throwing gas on the fire.

Aside from stroking his own enormous ego, what possible good could have come from him making such a statement??

So in this case anyway, he is no better than the last guy who said (paraphrasing) I agreed with this before I disagreed with this.

[nikos1121]

I re-read your post. Are you saying that the Supreme Court should rule that Abortion is illegal and leave it at that? If you believe that, then you are putting your faith in 9 people, with life time appointments, with no checks and balance to their authority.

[nmh]

You don't ANSWER a question with another QUESTION.

Answer MY questions to you.

Again:

---

YOU: "Why do we have to have a supreme court judge who is pro-life? WE should have a supreme court judge who recognizes that Roe V Wade was wrongly ruled because the issue is not raised and resolved in our constitution. Rather, it is an issue that needs to be debated and voted on by the people."

You have me curious. Since it is not raised or resolved in our Constitution, according to you, the way our rule of law works is that it goes to the Supreme Court for a final decision. So if you acknowledge that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided why are you against a pro life Judge, assuming Miers was one? How do you think Roe v. Wade got to the Supreme Court? Are you familiar with how the system works?

Maybe I am misunderstanding you ... do you believe that states are to decide this rather than the Supreme Court? If so, why? I also beg to differ that life is NOT protected in the Constitution. Surely you can't be foolish enough to believe that our founders wanted something like murdering the unborn a "right"?

[nikos1121]

I answered you. I am not against a pro-life judge. I don't understand why this is the only issue guiding the president's decision. I get the feeling that he chose Harriet Miers because she is pro-life. What guarantee is there that as a judge whe would vote to over turn Roe V Wade? Just because she is pro-life? Was O'Conner pro-life?
Are Scalia and Thomas pro-life? In fact, do we know the personal positions of any of the SC judges on this matter?

[nikos1121]

Something else, apparently James Dobson agrees with me. If Harriet Miers is pro-life, he was uncomfortable with her because he wasn't sure how she stood on the issue if she were called upon to make a decision on abortion as a judge.

I guess what I'm saying is being a pro-life judge is no guarantee that you will determine that the right to an abortion on demand is unconstitutional.

[DC Ripper]

>>Dobson was for Miers, before he was against her. Sheesh!<<

The term for someone who will not change his mind when presented with new evidence is "bigot."

[DC Ripper]

>>This seems to confirm the rumor Dobson phoned the W.H. yesterday saying he'd go public with dissent if she remained.<<

That EXACT THOUGHT occured to me.

[DC Ripper]

Just out of curiousity: were you troubled in the slightest by Miers' pro-abortion views?

[Walkingfeather]

Because at that point he did not have the permission to reveal that the administration had come to him first before going to the public. He did not want to break any confidence that he had made not to reveal that they had him vet her. Although I believe that the whitehouse used dobson by not revealing all that they knew. I would imagine their relationship with him was hurt because he could have been used to bait support on someone that he might not have approved.

I think his listeners had a right to know where he was getting the info from. however he also has their confidence to say.... I cant tell you where I got this info but you have to trust me that it is realiable. I would bet 90% would give him the bennifit of the doubt. That is called trust and relationship. He has earned his listeners trust. He acted in good faith, however I am questioning whether the whitehouse did.