Posted on 10/28/2005 3:23:24 AM PDT by WaterDragon
OVER the last two elections, the Republican Party regained control of the United States Senate by electing new senators in Florida, Georgia, Minnesota, Missouri, North Carolina, South Carolina, South Dakota and Texas. These victories were attributable in large measure to the central demand made by Republican candidates, and heard and embraced by voters, that President Bush's nominees deserved an up-or-down decision on the floor of the Senate. Now, with the withdrawal of Harriet Miers under an instant, fierce and sometimes false assault from conservative pundits and activists, it will be difficult for Republican candidates to continue to make this winning argument: that Democrats have deeply damaged the integrity of the advice and consent process.
The right's embrace in the Miers nomination of tactics previously exclusive to the left - exaggeration, invective, anonymous sources, an unbroken stream of new charges, television advertisements paid for by secret sources - will make it immeasurably harder to denounce and deflect such assaults when the Democrats make them the next time around. Given the overemphasis on admittedly ambiguous speeches Miers made more than a decade ago, conservative activists will find it difficult to take on liberals in their parallel efforts to destroy some future Robert Bork...(snip)
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I'm gonna' go with my Senator and future POTUS candidate George Allen, who on the news this morning expressed the idea that she was not a suitably conservative candidate. And he did use the word "conservative".
That says much about Allen and much about Miers.
I must admit, that's one wacky definition of 'litmus test' you're implying.Hmm, let's see.. the Dems litmus test for judges consists of believing in things like the unfettered 'from eight to eighty' government funded abortion. Communistic redistribution of wealth 'from those who have to those that need'. Sex acts is public (Oregon), but NO Christmas tree in the town square. And the 'heck' with the Bill of Rights, you can't have a gun. And last but not least - homosexual life style 'choices' being shoved down our kids throats (no pun) as a-okay.
Conservative 'litmus test' -- The U.S. Constitution
I, for one, have never criticized Democrats for applying 'litmus tests' to nominees. It's perfectly appropriate to do so.
Utter nonsense. She's had all kinds of time to speak. What media outlet would not have killed for an interview with her? If she wanted a chance to speak in the hearings, then she shouldn't have withdrawn.
You bet we have a litmus test. But it is the only LEGITIMATE litmus test---to wit---the nominee should be an "originalist" (i.e. rule on cases based on what the Constitution actually says and means, and not what the particular justice happens to think would be "socially expedient").
No offense and maybe I should have included "all" in this response, but as to "the hearings", you and many others seem to be missing one minor fact -- NOTHING of substance comes out of said hearings. And I mean nothing.
Working at home I had the opportunity to watch and listen to all of Roberts' hearing (except those on CSPAN3) and they are utterly useless. A waste of everyones time and OUR money.So please, and with all due respect, enough of "well we'll find out about 'xyz' at the hearings" because that just 'ain't' so. Not one single thing is learned at the hearings - except that the senators are long winded and like being on TV.The senators bloviate for 15 minutes, Biden being the worst followed by Chuckie Schumer. They 'ask' a 36 part question which is more of a statement of their views, and then Roberts had 5 minutes to respond. It was a JOKE.
In many instances the senator then had to summarize his 36 part question into ONE single issue, say the Commerce Clause, to which Roberts would then finally give his answer - sort of.
Calling those that wanted Miers to at least get a hearing "RINOs" is completely off base. RINO's are those in the Senate that undermined the conservatives by licking the boots of the Dems.
didn't Kristol oppose the "nuclear option"?
It is rare we have an opportunity to change the court for the better. A chance to correct horrendous rulings assulting free speech and property rights. These are issues people die to protect.
As they say, the proof is in the pudding.
Oh? how many interviews did Thomas give?
Some RINOs are more committed to leeching onto power than others. But after reading her '93 speech, if you were still on the fence and thought she deserved a hearing, you ARE a RINO.
I hear the argument that is being floated that conservatives have ruined the 'everyone should get a vote' mantra. But the fact is that this wasn't about stopping a filibuster or a committee hold, which was the point of that line. This was about getting the man who made the nomination to reconsider before the votes even came up to put on hold or filibuster. And the President did reconsider, because in the end, he knew this appointment was a mistake. The hearings and votes were only ever in jeopardy because the Senate has a bunch of nervous nelly RINOs who were afraid for their jobs if forced to vote her up or down. They're horrified right now.
BTW: what was she going to say in her 'hearing' that would have swayed anyone to vote for her? She was better than or as good as Roberts, according to Miers partisans. So would she have clammed up and said nothing of her judicial leanings even better? Or would she have been Ms. Constitutional Law, fighting the good fight for the right and taking the Leahys and Kennedys head on? I doubt either of those options woulda worked out well, and I think we all know she'd have looked bad in comparison with Roberts regardless.
None, so far as I am aware. And it would have been equally disingenuous to claim that he was denied the chance to speak.
Because he had a formal hearing.
I guess we'll never know how she would have responded.
Maybe RINO should be changed to CINO (conservative in name only). I think that is much more fitting.
Which Miers CHOSE not to have.
Like many women with hard-fisted boyfriends CHOOSE to have an abortion.
I watched the hearings too and they were a farce - with the Senators going on and on about their own positions that prefaced their questions and Roberts only could sit and wait until they finaly shut up! I'm sure they would have done the same to Miers - as a matter of fact - the questions that Arlen Specter sent her to answer - were very complicated - in order - I'm sure to make her look stupid! And that was what was planned for her and she knew it!
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.