Posted on 10/03/2005 3:25:16 AM PDT by johnmecainrino
I am glad Bush is advancing the conservative agenda I elected him for...
First of all, it wasn't directed at you, secondly, chill out.
You act like this is the only thing she has ever done in her 59 years. Would you be judged for one job you have had out of your entire working life? It was a job that called for a lot of responsibility and you would be wise to stop picking on a woman's credentials just because she is not Janice Rogers Brown. Get over it, you do not get to pick the nominee.
Don't be obtuse, you replied to my post #316 which wasn't directed at you.
We have to disagree. It is a favorite liberal tactic to claim the country is clearly pro-choice (the uphemism of the left for baby killing) when it it is not pro-abortion by some wide measure. Bush would not have won the presidency if he were not clearly interpreted as being pro-life. If his court nominees end up upholding Roe v Wade, which will likely come up on this court's calendar, the conservative base will be fragmented and the Republicans will have trouble in '06 and '08 and beyond, as well they should. IMHO of course.
Hint: Tone it down and knock it off now!
Well, it's certainly not overwhelmingly pro-life.
If his court nominees end up upholding Roe v Wade, which will likely come up on this court's calendar, the conservative base will be fragmented and the Republicans will have trouble in '06 and '08 and beyond, as well they should. IMHO of course.
If Bush's base gets fragmented because his nominees uphold the rule of law, I won't keep you from going to some other fringe party.
It seems Bush hand Schummer and Biden handing out literature for his elecion and he decided to go with Schummer. This Meirs woman will be very satisfactory to them.
What a shame for the conservatives in this country, that after promising a Thomas or Scalia we are given luke-warm question marks among available giant conservative. Bush, perhaps, was cowed into this assignment, but I'm afraid he has lost me.
I could send him more money for taxes. I could buy guns to protect me from a foreign invasion which he is sworn to protect the country from and didn't. I could overlook the largest deficits in the history of the country and still stay a Bush man. All of these things are forgivable. But the next 40 years is set in stone with an OConnor redux. And that means the exact same type of rulings we have been having for the past 20 years. Ever left. Ever left. Never moving to the right. We got Regan, but Regan would not utter one word for Bork. We lost a chance at a great Justice. Bush 41 gave Suiter. Ever left. Then Ginsberg. EVer left. Kennedy moves left. Bryer ever left. Now we are solidifying the demands of Kennedy, Clinton, Schummer and discounting the promises Bush made to loyal conservatives to his campaign. I went with Bush because he promised to move the court to the Right. He has had the opportunity to move it and he chose the status quo. I am dissappointed for my posterity and the future of the country. This is not the best Bush could have done. He has calculated it will minimize his trouble in fighting with the left. That was the tipping point. Not conviction.I guess I could sum it up like this.????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
No, I am not suggesting shutting down the thread, I am suggesting you stop throwing insults out there at everyone including the nominee that does not think in lock step with you. You are being unfair to The President and his nominee, and you can disagree all you want, but be fair about it. Democrats are the ones that behave so unfairly, except one Republican or so called Republican Pat Buchanan.
You are gracious with something you have no control over. That's a start...Now if we could just get you to agree that killing babies is not good we would be making progress.
For me, it all hinges on that last claim. If she's another pig in a poke, I'm either sitting out the next two elections, or moving to the Constitution Party.
President Bush promised us, on more than one occasion, strict constructionalists for the Court. The jury's still out on Chief Justice Roberts in that regard. If that turns out to not be clear WRT Miers also, then that's the last straw. I take promises seriously, and I'm willing to pay the consequences.
(The two other huge issues for me are border control and Israel. So far, President Bush has greatly disappointed me WRT those two issues as well. So he's 0 for 3.)
I'm pro-life, I'm not delusional to reality.
You are not alone....
And I think the outcry against Harriet Miers is totally uncalled for at this time. Give the woman a chance to be heard before demeaning her name.
I give President Bush a lot more credit than a lot of people on this board. He thinks for himself.
Matter of perspective I think. Thanks for the insult.
but where does it say he votes for who WE want? Is it done by popular vote? When do We vote? Who are the candidates?
Where did I insult you?
Well, "We The People" don't nominate or vote for judges.
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.