Posted on 07/05/2005 7:44:32 PM PDT by nj26
Fair enough. :-)
Someone posted over the weekend we had NO conservative Senators and it is the continual bashing like someone could control McCain -- I would take it to the bank that no one is going to control John McCain and the people he has rounded up to support him on confirmation of judges.
I think the Senators are getting a bad rap as a whole because they have accomplished a lot including passing the partial birth abortion ban that would have been unthinkable to get it passed even two years ago. It is easy to bash and have other people join in but the vast majority of our Republican Senators are conservative, fine people, and don't deserve the rants I am seeing on here day after day.
This site that was so great during the Florida fiasco is turning into a shell of its former self with all the threats about leaving the Republican Party, not donating, attacks on Pres Bush not being conservative enough, attacks on the Senators, attacks on the judicial system -- some want activists judges when it suits them, and just generally attack after attack after attack.
There is a difference between posting facts but I am seeing more and more rumors started pretending to be facts -- saw it tonight when someone openly said Gonzales was pro-abortion or that he was aligned with La Raza -- both not true. I am for Janice Brown as the next SCOTUS so it is not like I am for Gonzales -- I like him as the Attorney General.
I agree with Sen Cornyn -- the rhetoric before someone is even picked has gone way over the top. People have become hysterical and makes me wonder how many conservative groups have become infiltrated since I don't see those kind of people where I live and I live in a conservative state.
And I agree.
Dubya knows judges pretty well, imo. I'll support whomever he selects.
Our President is on our side, and he is also practical and realistic.
I don't expect to get 100% of what I want in what will surely be 2 judges. I'd be happy with a Rehnquist conservative and someone to the right of O'Connor.
(Ironically, I also think that some of the bare-toothed snarling within this very thread would help Gonzales in the confirmation hearings).
Regards all.
.
I hope that when the nominee is named, you will be commenting on the merits of that person, and will remember what I have said.
I am now going to bed. I will check in tomorrow morning.
Mainstream and reasonable conservatives should and would be concerned about Gonzalez.
The egotism on this board from some people NEVER ceases to amaze me. To your comment I would only add, "ditto."
In the President's case, the attacks were becoming personal against Gonzales whom happens to be a close friend. In this instance he had the right to speak in defense of his friend and ask for civility.
The Senators and their staff urging people to trust them is another matter. Trust is earned. They have not earned it. They don't have the right to expect faith they'll do right by the citizenry that elected them. Just to be clear for any that may be confused, yes, there are good Senators in the Body. The Body as a whole, however, has been a severe disappointment.
IF they had operated in good faith people would not be running advertisements. I do not think advertisements will influence the Senate, I believe many of them think they are ruling Lords, however the ads are a symptom of a broken Faith and the Republican Senate is the direct cause of this broken link. They caused the rift, which is why it's irritating beyond measure they would lecture anyone in the base. It rubs me the wrong way.
If they would prefer to lead, then they need to acknowledge it was their very lack of leadership that fueled the lack of faith they are capable of taking a principled stand in defense of the Constitution and nominated Judges (many smeared for years). Actions have consequences. Or lack of action in this particular case.
LOL!
Easy, Bill... Remember:
1. It's a New York Times article; they'd love to foment a schism in our ranks. Read the actual quotes from the Republicans. The NY Times is purposely adding tone to them to make them sound like more of a slap down of the right wing.
2. It's good to remind Bush to dance with the girl he brung, but you're getting all upset because a girl who hates us is telling us he's been eyeing someone else. Make clear he knows you won't put up with his cheating, but save your outrage for when he does something wrong. IOW, wait till he's been unfaithful before your dump him.
What a bunch of clowns.
I agree that Bush has a right to defend his friend. But he also has not only a right, but an obligation, to defend and speak for his FRIENDS, plural: those who elected him and depend on him. Sad that he has less interest in doing this.
We cannot fight the left-wing machine with one hand tied behind our backs. And it seems to me from this article that the GOP establishment is asking us to do this.
Very sensible. I believe the NYT is just trying to brew trouble.
So our "bitching" about Gonzalez is none of the Left's concern....
"need to acknowledge that it was their very lack of leadership that fueled their lack of faith"
Exactly. Very well said, Seeker.
These guys just don't get it, without us you are nothing Republican Senators. You are toast if we don't GOTV
BTW, when considering whether or not to support a nominee, one should not only consider their merits, but their actual judicial decisions. If such decisions, reveal a nominee to be less than a mainstream conservative, as is the case with Gonzalez, they should not receive our support.
Bush has clearly said that he will give no comment on the subject until he returns from his trip.
Now if Bush is a dupe, insecure and a slave to NY Times rumor mongering as you would have him, he could take your advice and start saying no every time he hears a name that he isn't considering. And if he plays this stoopid game, then the rumors will increase and his denials of those he's not considering will increase and at some point, you'll have the list of potential nominee that Bush has hoped not divulge yet.
You don't see anything wrong with your suggestion?
They should do a lottery to select the judge...fire up the ping pong balls.
Best chance of having a conservative named.
you people absolutely cant wait to be sold out and stabbed in the back.
How many times do you have to get burnt by the stove before you stop touching it?
Is this the same type of person that posts the president is a RINO? Those people are vocal but they are a minority not to be taken seriously.
I would take it to the bank that no one is going to control John McCain and the people he has rounded up to support him on confirmation of judges.
No, McCain is off in his own world. Some of the others could have their wings clipped however.
I think the Senators are getting a bad rap as a whole because they have accomplished a lot including passing the partial birth abortion ban that would have been unthinkable to get it passed even two years ago.
Which was a bi-partisan effort.
This site that was so great during the Florida fiasco is turning into a shell of its former self with all the threats about leaving the Republican Party, not donating, attacks on Pres Bush not being conservative enough, attacks on the Senators, attacks on the judicial system -- some want activists judges when it suits them, and just generally attack after attack after attack.
I wouldn't know what the site was like in 2000. I will state it is natural that when the Republicans become the increasing majority that they receive more of the brunt of critism. You cannot expect it to maintain the same flavor when circumstances of power alter.
It is my understanding that even before 2000 this site had its share of battles. Bush vs Buchanon vs Keyes wars? You may be glamorizing the past a bit.
I fail to understand your complaint about critisism of the Judicial system. When a court makes ridiculous split decisions on the Ten Commandments, rules against property rights, inserts foriegn law and S.C. Kennedy demands lawyers defend the Courts as above critism while the DEMS state Delay is urging violence against Justices there is a problem and from my standing it isn't those suggesting the Courts have been tyranical in their approach that are the problem.
The Congress is experiencing heat because during the campaign it was stated only a few more Republicans and we could work to pass our agenda. Instead, for the most part, progress is blocked. Social security stalled, filibusters remain active option, Bolton still in limbo. When reality fails to live up to promise you cannot expect anything but frustration.
The President is who he said he was. Any attacks on him for doing as he said he would are hypocritical. But understand quite a few of those attacks are from people that were against him in 2004.
There is a difference between posting facts but I am seeing more and more rumors started pretending to be facts -- saw it tonight when someone openly said Gonzales was pro-abortion or that he was aligned with La Raza -- both not true.
Well on this you have a point. And as I stated in another thread, I am not sure what is fact and what is fiction about Gonzales. The rhetoric is far above board. I was also one of the people that defended Gonzales when people wanted him disqualified for what they stated were pro choice views. I failed to see whatever his opinion how that would affect his ability to conduct himself well as AG. I lean against Gonzales more on basis I don't believe him the heavyweight needed in this environment.
I agree with Sen Cornyn -- the rhetoric before someone is even picked has gone way over the top. People have become hysterical
The hysteria is driven by fear. I'm not stating you must be accepting of that fear, but you must understand that is driving each side. Liberalism is advanced through the courts. The Left fears that'll be brought to an end. The right (actually the country but in particular the right is incensed) has already been attacked on religion, free speech, property rights and so on. They fear what will occur if this is not stopped. This is what is driving the hysteria. Now, in the case of the President i do not believe they have anything to stand on to give valid reason for fear. In the instance of Gonzales there is no way to even know if he's a nominee. Even if he were, a case ould be mde against without attacking the president's friend personally. The Senate..again this is where we will part ways. I have trust in the President. I have trust in the House. There is a reason people distrust the Senate, and it isn't based on an irrational fear but understanding of the need of many to be liked by the cocktail set.
Does the president really think the talk about Gonzalez will end any other way (i.e. by instructing conservatives NOT to discuss it, LOL)? The president's comments only made it MORE LIKELY that conservatives will continue to discuss it. Many of the talk show hosts including RUSH got fired up about this today, particularly AFTER the president's comments. How do you NOT see that?
If the president is considering Gonzalez (and I believe he is), than the discussion should and will continue.
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.