Posted on 12/08/2005 7:35:47 PM PST by Plutarch
Sorry for late reply, exams. :e
If the most rightwards candidate possible (RCP) had no chance of winning, I agree. If the I know that the French Queen would be President, I would still vote for the real man who is now, thankfully in charge.
Even 5 degrees to the right is beneficial. That 5 still counts for something. There are just something you will never get from the traitor party.
Re: Ms. Miers, I believe the sytem did her in. This admin isn't into spin or CYA. That's the job of the toons, RINOs, and the traitor party. If the Pres. and Miers chose to, they could compromise executive privelege and get the Senators the papers they wanted. She would still be SCOTUS candidate. They chose not to, so we have J. Alito. Even without conservative outcry, if at any point the Senate demands additional proof, eg traitor party dirty tricks, that requires these papers, her nomination is DOA.
I don't think that's true at all. What power do they have, other than the filibuster (which they could use against any nominee they don't like)? I don't think most Democrats would have considered Alito a good trade for Miers. And the Republicans could have easily put the Democrats on the defensive. Here's a candidate who could not in any way be portrayed as extremist, and who had Harry Reid's seal of approval. If they tried to filibuster her, they would have totally destroyed whatever credibility they might have left with the average voter.
I don't think it's a coincidence that she withdrew from the running right after the unearthing of those speeches of hers from the '90s that put down the pro-life movement.
That was just an example. I didn't think about what the Demons would do for real, but one could never underestimate how low the traitor party would go.
My point is, if at any point at all there is a risk that exec priv might be cvompromised, her nominatinon is DOA.
I read those speeches that are touted as proof of her liberalism, I was less than impressed. But two things for sure, we'll never know how she would have been and Dubya should have thought harder about the nomination. He should realize that the exec priv may be a problem and not nominate her in the first place.
And if that's the case, then as you said, he should have known this and not nominated her in the first place. That leads me to think that executive privilege was not in danger of being compromised. He could have simply refused to turn over the documents. There really wouldn't have been anything the Democrats could have done at that point.
"He could have simply refused to turn over the documents."
Then the Pres. would lose Sen. support and the nomination is still DOA.
Either way it was done. We can speculate whether or not she will make a good Justice because we don't know her.
It is more than likely that at one time or another, most people have put their trust in someone knowing that they will do a good job but ended up having a lot of people object to that person. That's what happened with Miers.
Then the Pres. would lose Sen. support and the nomination is still DOA.
You mean the Republicans would vote against her? Not if she had conservative support.
Either way it was done. We can speculate whether or not she will make a good Justice because we don't know her.
The point I'm making had less to do with whether or not she was a good choice, than with the extent to which the Republicans are sensitive to threats of conservatives abandoning them for third parties (or not voting at all).
My point is that the Pres. won't withdraw her regardless of criticism. He does what he believes is right and sticks to it. Miers saved him a lot of trouble by withdrewing herself.
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.