Bush pick for high court outrages conservatives

Yahoo (Reuters) ^ | 10/03/05 | Steve Holland

[Final Authority]

With liberalism and and judicial activism it is unlikely USA will ever be able to move to a nationalist policy. Without nationalism we will have globalism (just what GWB and the global elite desire) and ultimately, destruction of our liberties and the Constitution. If GWB nominates a nationalist and constitutionalist all of his buddies in the globalist crowd will take him to task. When he leaves the WH he won't be invited for CFR membership and he may not receive $millions to speak to the same in Davos.

[onyx]

LOL! Careful now.... I'm creeping up to her age...lol.

[deport]

And she may not......

However I suspect President Bush has seen her work product over some 10+ years and likes the way she arrives at decisions.... My guess is he is confident in her methodoligy to the point he's willing to stick his neck on the line for her. I want someone that applies the Constitution without writing law from the bench and that doesn't always go along with what conservatives want.

[ManHunter]

Excellent point. Wasn't Bush recently warned by "his" chairman of the judiciary to nominate a mainstream candidate for the court. Of course, Bush doesn't have such a spectacular conservative record himself...

[RepublicanCentury]

Miers is almost certainly further to the right than Justice O'Connor, so her confirmation will by definition move the Court to the right. Further movement to the right requires retirement of one of the liberal Justices (Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg). A pick that would please all FReepers would never be confirmed. That's not Bush's fault, and it won't change until the Republicans in the Senate ditch all RINOs and get 61 real Republicans in office.

[voreddy]

1. Why go with an unknown when there are judges who are proven social conservatives? There is an inherent risk here that she will turn out to be a souter. Why? Why add that risk to the equation?

And here are two resolutions she sponsored in the ABA

"Supports the enactment of laws and public policy which provide that sexual orientation shall not be a bar to adoption when the adoption is determined to be in the best interest of the child. ...
Recommends the development and establishment of an International Criminal Court."

[BadAndy]

"Well...Rush just nailed it.
If you were Bush, would you go to war against the Libs with the GOP Senate team he's been delt ?"

Rush is out to lunch on this. A leader leads, a wimp doesnt. Try to get the best you can, compromise only if you must. If you fail with JRB, then you can try a lesser candidate. Bush has actively avoided a fight with the RATS that he probably could have won.

[kabar]

Both Bentsen and Gore were Pro-life in 1987 when those donations were made. Just food for thought.

Some more food for thought. Miers donated to the Dem Party at a time when Reagan was one of our most popular Presidents ever and who had won one of most decisive Presidential elections in 1984. Why would Miers contribute to Bentsen, Gore, and the DNC in 1987-88? Did she have a problem with Reagan's political philosophy and its continuation under Bush 41?

[The_Victor]

Bentsen voting record and public positions were not decisive. He voted to increase federal funding for abortions very consistently, but Newsweek in the 1988 election cycle said that Bentsen had more in common with the pro-life position of Bush/Quail, that with his on running mate.

But you might well be right, Bentsen's abortion position might be better described as pro-abortion.

[Eric in the Ozarks]

I wouldn't take Frist to a marble shoot.

[onyx]

It's a matter of trust -- I trust POTUS. That;'s why I voted for him and worked for his election twice.

Can you imagine Kerry or any democrat nominating Harriet Miers? The answer is NO. Not even Harry Reid. MSM are trying to make a big deal out of Reid suggesting her name... as though POTUS wasn't already thinking about her.

She's his close personal friend. Think Karen Hughes. Would she disappoint? Of course not.

[prairiebreeze]

ROFL!

[Do not dub me shapka broham]

Actually, when Al Gore ran for president in 1988 he was still-to the best of my recollection-pro-life.

[Looper]

The fact that you don't know about Miers means you should be outraged.

Bush should have appointed someone as obviously conservative as Ginsburg is liberal. Conservatives who've supported Bush have done so in large part because of his steadfastness on nominating judges. We shouldn't have to guess as to whether Miers is conservative. We deserved a Luttig or a Jones, even a Garza, not a crony.

[rightwinggoth]

"I will never understand why the Dems opposed Bork. He was totally apolitical in his view on the law. HE was the strictest of the the strict and would have been a brilliant Supreme Court Justice."

Umm...I think you just answered your own question.

[stockstrader]

Please cite your basis for the "Miers is almost certainly to the right than Justice O'Connor..." comment. "CERTAINLY" is a strong word. So is your use of DEFINITELY moving the Court to the right.

My basis for saying she is NOT, is that......anyone that contributed to the election of Bill Clinton over Bush41 is NOT to the right of Justice O'Connor (who was a solid Arizona republican). Not even close.

[BadAndy]

"Like she made donuts for her church group?"

I noticed that too. An excellent qualification, she probably sealed her nomination by baking Bush some cookies.

BTW, I got an email from the RNC asking me to support Meirs and Bush. I basically told them to stick it.

[The_Victor]

Ronald Regean was a democrat once. People can change a lot in 15 years. Plus, I would read too much into the political donations of a lawyer.

[Looper]

I'd rather keep O'Connor, who's as strong as they come on property rights, Bush v. Gore, gun rights, than take my chances with Miers.

[batter]

I also hope things pan out. I'm just a bit on edge given Schumer's remark (I'm paraphrasing here) that she's a step in the right direction to replace O'Connor..
Maybe Schumer et al. are just saying that because they know they can't stop her confirmation and want to tweak conservatives...nevertheless, it gives me a bit of indegestion.