Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Franck & Miers (Mark Levin's take on Harriet Miers)
National Review ^ | October 3, 2005 | Mark Levin

Posted on 10/03/2005 7:04:43 AM PDT by buckeyeblogger

Franck & Miers [Mark R. Levin 10/03 09:50 AM] I understand Matt's point, as he's written so eloquently about it many times. But, in truth, we already know what's going on here, and that the president, despite a magnificent farm team from which to choose a solid nominee, chose otherwise. Miers was chosen for two reasons and two reasons alone: 1. she's a she; 2. she's a long-time Bush friend. Otherwise, there's nothing to distinguish her from thousands of other lawyers. And holding a high post in the Bar, which the White House seems to be touting, is like holding a high position in any professional organization. But it reveals nothing about the nominee's judicial philosophy. There are many top officials in the Bar who I wouldn't trust to handle a fender-bender. Also, early in his term, the president singled out the Bar for its partisan agenda and excluded it from a formal role in judicial selection. The president said he would pick a candidate like Antonin Scalia or Clarence Thomas, and he did not. We all know of outstanding individuals who fit that bill, and they were once again passed over. Even David Souter had a more compelling resume that Miers.

(Excerpt) Read more at bench.nationalreview.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: georgewcarter; harrietmiers; scotus; stabbedintheback
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 261-263 next last
To: madconservative

He [Chuckie] just called it a "good first day" for the process. I feel like I am going to throw up.
------
Bush's legacy is now cast. In fact it was cast, when it became clear he was pro-illegal immigration. This is not a good choice and it stinks of politics. There was no room for games in this last choice...only the BEST QUALIFIED would have been the right way to go.

Not someone who the libs see as a soft spot...


61 posted on 10/03/2005 7:23:20 AM PDT by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: bkepley

Or even a no. 4. He knows another nominee will happen is his second term and this one covers the minority pick (even though there are more women than men in this country)

I hear she once gave money to the Gore/Lieberman campaign for president.


62 posted on 10/03/2005 7:23:24 AM PDT by TheForceOfOne (It was a village of idiots that raised Hillary to Senator status.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Acts 2:38

As best I can tell Ingraham was wrong on Roberts. Everything I heard from him was a "Yea, God."


63 posted on 10/03/2005 7:23:36 AM PDT by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of news)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv

Wrong. Sharpton is no Christian. The last time he uttered the words "Jesus Christ" was when he fell down a flight of stairs.


64 posted on 10/03/2005 7:24:27 AM PDT by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of news)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Cautor
We need highly-qualified judges with a proven conservative record

You mean like Rhenquist? He was never a judge, yet he turned out so well he was Chief Justice.

65 posted on 10/03/2005 7:24:56 AM PDT by McGavin999 (We're a First World Country with a Third World Press (Except for Hume & Garrett ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: GianniV
Hey Bush - why don't you raise taxes now - you'll be a certified Democrat then.

He's leaving that for the NEXT POTUS with half trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see.

66 posted on 10/03/2005 7:25:39 AM PDT by NeoCaveman (Sometimes the cat barks at the dog)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: petitfour
What are the qualifications for a justice on the Supreme Court?

Put Miers into the pool with Brown, Luttig, McConnell, Alito, Bathelder and Jones and you find in relation to these WELL QUALIFIED candidates she is not even on their level.

67 posted on 10/03/2005 7:25:52 AM PDT by msnimje (Hurricane KATRINA - An Example of Nature's Enforcement of Eminent Domain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: LS
And Levin said what of Roberts?

Levin supported Roberts.

68 posted on 10/03/2005 7:26:06 AM PDT by NeoCaveman (Sometimes the cat barks at the dog)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: 1Old Pro

I hope that too brother.


69 posted on 10/03/2005 7:26:17 AM PDT by madconservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: RockinRight

Actually, I just heard a clip from Caddy Shack where he says "hey everyone, we're all about to get laid!"

I'd die in laughter as I can see him saying that and watching Gnsburg bat her eyes at Thomas!


70 posted on 10/03/2005 7:26:51 AM PDT by MAD-AS-HELL (Put a mirror to the face of the republican party and all you'll see is a Donkey.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Acts 2:38
Oh I give up

The President should just have picked a flaming liberal

Then y'all would have an excuse for the Doom and Gloom

Me .. I'm going wait and learn more about her before I jump off the cliff

71 posted on 10/03/2005 7:26:56 AM PDT by Mo1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: LS
Since he said in his comments that she is a strict constructionalist and (and I quote) "WILL NOT LEGISLATE FROM THE BENCH," that's good enough for me.

Earl Warren called himself a strict constructionist, as did Berger.

72 posted on 10/03/2005 7:26:59 AM PDT by NeoCaveman (Sometimes the cat barks at the dog)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Acts 2:38
PJ O' Rourke calls Roberts the 'Stealth Scalia,' I think we are in fine shape there.

I'm wondering who is going to be the first major consersative group to come out against Miers.

73 posted on 10/03/2005 7:27:21 AM PDT by gopwinsin04
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Acts 2:38

Speaking of long-legged, blonde conservative bombshells, I expect the next column from Ann Coulter will be a must-read!


74 posted on 10/03/2005 7:27:41 AM PDT by AntiGuv (™)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: ZULU

So now the horde of bushbots will throw Levin under the bus like Coulter, Malkin and anyone else who correctly points out that the emperor has no clothes.


75 posted on 10/03/2005 7:27:41 AM PDT by the gillman@blacklagoon.com (The North American Community welcomes you to Canexico!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: buckeyeblogger
The president said he would pick a candidate like Antonin Scalia or Clarence Thomas, and he did not.

Right on the money...why not Luttig or Rogers-Brown or Owen or McConnell or Doug Ginsburg? Many conservatives, disgusted with the President's first term, voted because they hoped that he would redeem himself with his nominees to the Court. Justice Roberts was an excellent choice. This was another disappointment

76 posted on 10/03/2005 7:27:52 AM PDT by Irontank (Let them revere nothing but religion, morality and liberty -- John Adams)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Acts 2:38
"Stealth nominees have never worked out well for Conservatives."

Rehnquist worked out pretty well

77 posted on 10/03/2005 7:27:57 AM PDT by byteback
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Raycpa
She is a Christian.

Based on what? That she goes to church regularly? By that reasoning, if I sit in my garage, I'm a car.

This is another stealth nominee. That means we cannot know if she's a strict constructionist or not. That's the same as breaking his promise to nominate strict constructionists to the Court. Twice.

Many FReepers declared that if Mark Levin was favorable toward the Roberts nomination, that was good enough for them. Will these FReepers take the same position with Miers? IOW, if Levin is against the nomination of Miers, they are against it, too? I doubt it.

78 posted on 10/03/2005 7:28:06 AM PDT by savedbygrace ("No Monday morning quarterback has ever led a team to victory" GW Bush)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: buckeyeblogger

It seems to be the equivalent of a baseball manager in game 7 of the World Series having the option of picking Willie Mays or Mickie Mantle to pinch hit in the bottom of the ninth and instead picks Buddy Biancalana.


79 posted on 10/03/2005 7:28:32 AM PDT by texasmountainman (proud father of a U.S. Marine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: msnimje
What if that is intentional? Bush nomimates two friends who are willing to have their backgrounds dragged throught the mud. By the time #3 is nominated, the public will be tired of the Dems screeching the same tired lines for each one, and will get behind the next Scalia.

Hey, it's my pipe-dream, let me enjoy it.

80 posted on 10/03/2005 7:28:43 AM PDT by Teacher317
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 261-263 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson