Posted on 10/03/2005 4:06:25 AM PDT by johnmecainrino
Harriet Miers
Want to start a list. It's not going to be very long, and that's the problem.
yup.
Then I suggest you don't know squat about business majors or schools.
Seriously, what is your background? Are you a business major? Taken 400 level business classes? Are you familiar at any level with admin classes, auditing theory, finance, business statistical analysis, organizational behavior, or anything MBAs have to study?
Or are you just flapping your gums? MBA, especially from Harvard Business, is tough. I know several Harvard MBAs - they didn't major in "making pretty presentations" or "adding up columns of numbers". They are crystal-clear, iron hard thinkers with a hell of a lot of knowledge.
MBA is not an easy ride. I was in Engineering (CSE) in my university until I thought I would switch to Business because it was "easier". What a laugh. And that was just to get my BS, not my MBA - and it wasn't Harvard.
Just wanted to report that the sky is still up in the air here in Georgia, no sign of falling yet.
Many FReepers would love to see a judicial activist choice as long as that activist marched in lockstep with their thinking.
As for me, I'll take someone with the correct philosphy and intelligence and leave them to come to the right conclusions.
By my calculations, there are precisely 15,132,764 Americans who are intelligent enough and have the proper Constitutional understanding and philosphy to be a SCOTUS judge. We have to hope that Miers is one of those 15 million.
Many Freepers who are already lining up against her would not fit the mold, because they are too narrow-minded to judge fairly on the Constitutional merits of the issues.
So we are at a standstill. Neither one of us knows for a fact.
I am just wondering where her light on the road to Damascus occurred. If she supported Clinton, it's a lot harder to take than Gore 88 without any explanation of what exactly made her think Clinton was wonderful enough to part cash for, and what made her change her mind. She will be 60 this year. She was 44 when she gave to Clinton. She wasn't a young confused liberal. She was a woman on her way to middle age, supporting the rapist.
I am in the give the president the benefit of the doubt camp for the most part, but the Clinton donation does make me want to at least get some clarification here.
I guess these bland platitudes reassure some, but that's a pretty meaningless comment. Was he playing chess when he signed CFR? When he signed huge increases in agricultural and education budgets?
Wow. What a brilliant argument. Doofus.
The fact that any of this has to be debated in the first place is proof that W made a lousy pick. I don't care about the outcome. Either he's being cute to avoid a fight in the Senate with a stealth conservative instead of a jurist whose earned the bona fides to be there, or he doesn't care about the people who elected him.
Oh..now you are really ticking off the Karl man.:)
I'm accusing her of nothing. I'm not smearing her. I'm saying--which is inarguable-- that she wasn't the best pick, she's too old and her non-traditional personal life are all liabilites.
In the same vein, Condi isn't a good candidate for POTUS. In life, with very few exceptions, people want people who will decide controversial social cases --especially if they are going to come down for the sanctity of marriage and on the side of limiting/ returning abortion to the States-- to be married with kids.
That's freaking life. If you resemble Harriet Miers that might be a problem to hear this, but it's objective reality.
Imagine if Bush was a confirmed bachelor-- he'd have a helluva time saying marriage is only between a man and a wife and if he was childless-- he'd have no leg to stand on in the abortion/adoption debate.
Let's face it, if Bush were never married and childless, he wouldn't be POTUS right now... that's just reality... Deal with it.
"Harriet Miers contributed $250 to Clinton for President Committee on December 23, 1991"
I'll go ahead and answer for the other side since we know what they will say.
"Quit being hysterical, you idiot. Clinton was a conservative at that time. Even Reagan was a Democrat once! Trust George! He and Karl have a secret plan! They are geniuses and all of you conservative hand-wringers are fools. By denouncing this pick, you are just helping Hillary!"
If I have missed any more of the other sides potent arguments, I hope someone will fill in the blanks.....
There is no way around it. This pick is simply pathetic. Not surprising, but, even so, still pathetic.
WOW......
Time to pull the nom....
Exactly. I believe 'faithincowboys' may be a ....well...a won't say it. lol
#####
We can definitely say that faithincowboys is a thread disrupter. I just wish we would all ignore f-i-c. She never contributes a positive statement, but seems to thrive on getting flamed.
Condi is nearing 50 and unmarried...
Next accusation please? I know you are full of 'em.
You haven't been here long enough to know that The Unappeasables and The Malcontents LIVE for days like today; it makes them so happy because they have something else to bash Bush with.
By the way, I have been here for atleast 2-3 years. I got a new email address so posted under a different name. It has been enjoyable to see people call me a newbie.
Correction::::::::::
THIS conservative base voter
My bad
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.