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

To: stockstrader

1. Keeping O'Connor wasn't an option, given her decision to retire.

2. O'Connor's vote kept Roe v. Wade the law of the land. Miers tried to get the ABA to abandon its pro-choice bias.

3. I said that Miers is almost certainly to the right of Justice O'Connor, simply because Bush picked her. He is well aware that this may be the last pick he gets. I really doubt he would deliberately blow the chance to move the Court to the right.

4. After being humiliated by Roberts, the Democrats were going to filibuster any of the real conservative sitting judges mentioned on this board (Luttig, etc).

5. Miers is untouchable. She has no left no record for the Dems to beat her up with. Only Bush knows what she believes and where she'll take the Court. Do you really think she told him she dreamed of being a moderate/liberal, and he still picked her.

6. Watch - she's the anti-Souter. She'll wind up to the right of Scalia and Thomas, but by the time that becomes clear, she'll be on the Court for life.


144 posted on 10/03/2005 11:51:19 AM PDT by RepublicanCentury
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies ]


To: RepublicanCentury
1. No one ever said keeping O'Connor was an option.

2. I can't refute this point.

3. I couldn't disagree more. You say that you make your comment based on the simple fact that Bush picked her? Well, Reagan picked O'Connor and I'm sure he thought she would be be more conservative than she turned out to be. My point is, I'll trust Reagan over Bush anyday,,,and Reagan was probably a little disappointed.

4. This is just a total 'cop-out' excuse. No reply needed on my part.

5. Yes, again, I agree,,,she IS untouchable given the fact she has no paper trail. This is PRECISELY why many of W's base are so upset. After all, do you expect that his base would be excited by someone who has been described (by both sides) as a 'moderate democrat' as late as the 80's?

6. Pure speculation on your part. This is as credible as my pure speculation that given the fact she was a democrat as late as the 80's--she is HARDLY someone that conservatives can rally around. I must say that I do feel my speculation is a little more realistic--given the fact that I just mentioned.

Although, I respectfully disagree with much of what you have said, thanks for the debate. To me, this is a huge disappointment. I just hope that I am wrong.

191 posted on 10/03/2005 3:51:14 PM PDT by stockstrader
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies ]

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