Posted on 10/29/2005 7:17:04 AM PDT by shrinkermd
Do you have a problem with speech as a part of the process? Please, you're bloviating about "Constitutional process" is a bit much. I guess we're supposed to wait for W to nominate someone then shut-up and let the Senate vote. Miers was unqualified and not up to the job. She was an embarrassment.
I spent election day in a phone bank for W, support him wholeheartedly, but the best favor you can do a friend is to tell him when he's dead wrong. This has nothing to do with the filibuster debate.
An up or down vote is the right of a nominee after Judiciary Committee hearings, not when first submitted by the President. Suppose someone is nominated that it turns out has committed some past or previously unknown crime? What if someone is nominated who falsified his resume? Do we waste time on an up or down vote or hearings for such nominees. The Miers withdrawl has nothing to do with the up or down issue.
This idea that conservatives somehow thwarted the constitutional process by criticizing or opposing the nomination is nonsense. What are pundits expected to do, remain silent? I guess it then follows that conservative pundits should have been unopposed to Ruth Bader Ginsburg so as not to disrupt the constitutional process.
So who's Dave's next favorite "dark horse" Supreme Court nominee, huh?
What a piece of work he is.
Oh BTW, how many of you knew this about Huffy?
Arianna Huffington (born July 15, 1950) is an author and a nationally syndicated columnist in the United States. She describes herself as a "former right-winger who has evolved into a compassionate and progressive populist
Yep she started out as one of ours who found her niche by "evolving" to the Left. Wonder if David is considering following in her footsteps?
Oh but that's right, guilt by innuendo can only be used by 100%ers, never AGAINST them!
I didn't sign it. But then, I was already fully aware of what was at stake. A petition has value as a center of gravity around which opinion may coalesce, gain mass, and thereby draw more distant, disinterested opinion toward it.
This is a great day in America. I am confident that George W. Bush isn't pouting or moping like the few Mierskats at FR.
BTTT
I would want him to have the decency to shut up his face. I will not read his stuff or watch him on TV op ed shows any more.
Who's "we"? You and the mouse in your pocket?
Us mice don't have much to say. We just vote.
But we're not talking about any conservatives - we're talking about you. LOL.
Are you telling me you don't think exercising free speech via a petition is an effective means of influencing opinion?
Well, at least you're taking the mature approach...
That those two sentences should follow each other in your post is truly ironic. Apparently, only people who call Bush an idiot, and Miers any number of names are allowed the privilege of free speech. No where in my posts do I say Frum isn't allowed to speak his mind. I realize that unlike you and me, that is how Frum makes his money. By bloviating. But I question the judgment of anyone who considers his opinion worth anything more than warm spit after he decides something as worthless as a petition is an effective means of changing a process. That he circulated his petition nationally on a variety of media and got next to no response indicates I am not alone in my opinion of his effort. The last time I saw such tactics they were either being initiated by leftwing moonbats protesting the war, or junior high children protesting a dress code. If you consider Frum someone worth listening to, you are free to do so. Just as I am free to question his judgment and the worth of his (paid for) opinion.
I will have a hard time with Coulter/Frum/Kristol/etc. for a long time. (Ann Coulter is forgivable, if sufficient number of her pictures are posted here on FR)
But the rest will have to prove themselves to ever be trusted again.
And I look forward to seeing what Frum does with the money he raised to rap Miers.
Is he going to use it to get the next nominee confirmed? Or is he going to use it as seed money for the new organization he started to further his voice in Washington?
You are giving pundits responsibility that rests solely with the American voter. Frankly, I don't want idiot pundits whose world can be defined by the Washington D.C. beltway to make decisions for me. I did not vote for them. Nobody did. In many cases, their qualifications are similar to those of Hollywood actors. "I call myself an expert, therefore I am". If you don't like the decisions made by people you elect, vote them out of office. But if you are going to allow "pundits" to do your work for you, you are no better than liberals who dote on every word and whim from the Hollywood left. Replace Barbra Streisand with Ann Coulter and tell me what the difference is between anyone who wants such celebrities to involve themselves in the political process. I voted for George Bush. Part of that vote included giving him the authority to make decisions like appointing Supreme Court nominees. I also voted for the Senators who are ultimately responsible for deciding whether those nominees deserve a seat on the bench. I didn't vote for Bill Kristol, David Frum, Hugh Hewitt or Rush Limbaugh. I am perfectly willing to listen to what they have to say. And I am perfectly happy to reject their rambling when I don't agree with it. And when one of them (or all of them) ramble on in such a way that they look more stupid than the people they are trying to tear down, I cheerfully toss them onto the great scrap pile of reject celebrities who think their opinion matters more than my vote. Frum currently sits right at the top of my reject pile.
Then apparently you don't believe people like George Will, Ann Coulter, David Frum et al, very publicly calling Bush an "idiot", a "mental midget", a "liar", a "promise breaker", a "lame duck", a "traitor" etc etc etc, had any impact with regard to embarrassing Bush. Don't be a hypocrite. You don't care about embarrassing Bush. All you care about is whether or not your choice makes it to the Supreme Court.
"But then, I was already fully aware of what was at stake. A petition has value as a center of gravity around which opinion may coalesce, gain mass, and thereby draw more distant, disinterested opinion toward it."
Some center of gravity. Last time I looked the dumb thing had generated less than 5000 signatures. It was a joke, and it is a credit to most Americans that they ignored it. It is a supreme discredit to Frum (and National Review) that they ever created it in the first place. You can be sure, they won't make that mistake again.
Absolutely. With the exception of the California governor recall, which was a procedural effort put in place with specific guidelines, can you tell me when a petition effort has succeeded in changing the course of events? And don't say the Miers nomination, because Frum's petition was overwhelming ignored by even the most vocal Miers opponents.
Do, or don't. We don't care, either way.
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.