(Just joking!)
Posted on 07/03/2005 8:14:34 AM PDT by colonel mosby
George Stephanopoulos joined the growing left-wing chorus this morning, pushing for the Supreme Court nomination of Alberto Gonzales on his weekly Sunday show.
In a cleverly worded question to Newt Gingrich, Stephanopoulos asked if it would be better for George W. Bush to go ahead and nominate Gonzales for the O'Connor seat, or appoint and appease the conservatives with a "hardliner" now, and appoint Gonzales at a later date.
Cokie Roberts and Walter Dellinger, the other two panelists on the Stephanopoulos show whose liberal voices were necessary to balance out Gingrich, both pushed for either Gonzales or a nominee who has held elective office. Cokie Roberts liked the idea of Elizabeth Dole, probably because she is an aging "moderate".
MoveOn.Org can save themselves a lot of advertising money by pulling all of their TV ads. The network talking heads are carrying the water for the advancement of a liberal agenda and, as usual, it's very transparent.
Yes, Garza or an obscure conservative Hispanic woman!
Gonzalez is the guy we should nominate if someone liberal like Stevens retires. He shouldn't replace an O'Connor or Rehnquist.
I agree with you. She would be the best candidate to replace O'Connor. I dare the 'Rats to oppose a Black woman.
Besides, she is indeed a no-nonsense Conservative, who deserves serious consideration. And, again, let's see the Left tar her with their usual lies and misrepresentations.
Then we will be the ones who can shout "racism".
I agree, Garza makes a whole lot of sense. Hispanic, solidly conservative and he's in his 50s. Then you replace Rehnquist with Luttig, Robert or McConnell whenever he retires.
Why should Bush appoint Gonzales if Stevens retires ?
You seem to be suggesting that a conservative president owes it to the left-wing to appoint someone who is acceptable to them.
Clinton nominated two hard line liberals. Why should George W. Bush do anything to appease a few screaming Democrats in Congress by appointing so-called "moderates" ?
1. Bush hates judicial activism, he campaigned against it. I am sure he remembers the 2000 election well.
2. Liberals in the media have got to be the stupidest creatures on the planet to start this stuff again. If they think throwing Gonzales's name around will convince Bush to nominate him (and they really do think it will) they will never understand the man. That kind of crap worked with Clinton because Clinton wanted to be loved. Bush will do whats right.
We'll soon see....
Stepinshitopoulos just killed his chances for conservative approval. If they're for it it can't be good.
"Why should Bush appoint Gonzales if Stevens retires ?"
I guess it depends on whether we could use the nuclear option if the Dems filibustered. If so, then I agree to push through a more conservative guy. But if the RINO 7 hold firm in their compromise, then I see no chance that a guy like Luttig wouldn't be successfully filibustered. No use nominating a guy if he can't be confirmed.
And Gonzalez isn't exactly a liberal, you know. Much more conservative than, say, Souter.
Why concede ANY seats to a RINO?
(Just joking!)
To George Steponallofus: It ain't gonna happen. Gonzales is 1 Gone Zales.
"George Stephanopoulos joined the growing left-wing chorus this morning, pushing for the Supreme Court nomination of Alberto Gonzales on his weekly Sunday show."
nuff said
I couldn't agree more! We've got one chance now. Fill it with a true right-wing conservative.
We may have one, maybe two more chances before President Bush's term ends. Pack in more conservatives. Do it now while we have the chance.
If the RATS want to continue jamming their destructive agenda down our throats, we must see to it that they have to do it through the legislature 'cause they'll no longer get it done through the judiciary.
From a "future of the country" standpoint, the next six months may be the most important in the last century. Now is the time to make our conservative stand. And doing it through the SCOTUS is the way to go!
Bush likely will have two vacancies to fill on the court but will only get one..ONE!..fight out of the weak-willed Republicans in the Senate. That fight needs to take place at a much more advantageous time than now. One such time would be closer to mid-term elections to force HRC's hand--thereby neutralizing her moderate makeover--as well as motivate the base to turn out and vote.
Unfortunately, what happens this summer will be old news to too many of the instant-oatmeal generation by 2006.
It's taken a long time to get where we are now. Think strategically, think patience. Repeat: whether we like it or not we are constrained by RINOs in the Senate.
Remember: a fair portion of our victories over the liberal left have been because of their overreaching...not our collective resolve. Let's not repeat their mistakes.
Also, it will remind the Hispanic community this will be the SECOND time the Democrats trashed Garza.
That's not true. The problem is that the President has over and over again let the Democrats and RINOs have the microphone. He needs to go over the heads of the media and explain to the public why these guys are wrong. If he's not willing to do that, then our side will keep losing battles.
Remember: a fair portion of our victories over the liberal left have been because of their overreaching...not our collective resolve. Let's not repeat their mistakes.
It's been because of the left's irrationality, not "overreaching". You're implying that there's some kind of moral equivalency between the right and the left. Not so.
If I didn't know anything about Gonzales, this would be enough to convince me he's the wrong guy for the job.
Not implying "moral equivalency" at all...that's your interpretation...just stating facts.
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.