Posted on 10/04/2005 7:16:56 PM PDT by buzzyboop
Ok, never posted vanity thread, but Rush is on Greta now. He is summarizing the arguments he made on his show regarding Harriet Miers.
Also, his Slickness is also on Greta's show tonight. Rush is the bigger coup, though. Wasn't the last TV interview he did with Letterman??
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
"I thought he was as sharp as he's ever been, and I agreed with every word."
Agreed. My only complaint was that he implied conservatives were more interested in using the SCOTUS confirmation hearings to have a national debate. I can see that, but its not our primary motivation.
I hope not. Considering what he did yesterday I have no doubt he would nominate Alberto Gonzales.
I've held my position over a year now, since the Democrats ran roughshod over every "qualified" known quantity. The "nuclear option" was bantied about on our side to quash the Democrat filibuster tactic, and I was one of those who were screaming "PULL THE EFFING TRIGGER!!".
The missed opportunity is not Bush's fault, it's the fault of the Republican Senators who didn't bother to show up and fight.
I don't know why you're frustrated now. You should have been frustrated with the Republicans in the Senate when the Democrats were filibustering judges a year ago.
"The only thing I believe about this nominee is that the PRESIDENT believes in her. Although I do NOT agree with the President on all issues, I believe he is a man of his word."
Me too, but that is not enough in this case. You have to undestand that we have been burned too many times before on this. GOD himself could promise this and we would still demand proof.
PULLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!!!!!
"I also wonder if some of the outrage on the right would be less if Pres. Bush appeared to be actively or reactively taking action on some of our pressing needs beyond Iraq"
Yes. There is a frustration amoung his base that his Comm Team is not getting the message out - on Iraq, on immigration, on Katrina. Its been said that he has the most talented but least effective comm team in history.
And the base is tired of spineless congress-critters. We used to ingore the moonbat ravings at the dinner table/cocktail parties. But we have engaged them and stood up for Bush time and time again - many of us have lost family and friends in defending him, so it really sucks to see our leadership lay down.
"I think Bush may be wiser than we give him credit for. And I don't think he has made that many misteps."
Although I too had wanted a duel with the dems, I am trusting Bush more on his choice for the following reasons:
1) He knows this woman and respects her. It's not cronyism.
He really knows what she believes. Yes, it comes down to trust, and there is something about Bush that continues to make me believe and trust in him.
2) I like that she has changed parties. Converts make dogmatic true believers ( like Reagan ).
3) I think since the dems can't sink our candidates by direct attacks,they are using reverse psychology to divide us, and we shouldn't fall for false tautalogies, ala - "If Reid likes her, she can't be good." The dems will try anything - anything !
4) Finally, unlike George Will who believes intelligence trumps character, I believe just the opposite. It's why we elected Bush, right ?
It's the intellectual elites who have changed philosophies once appointed to the court, not the ones with character ( like Thomas; yes, he is an intellectual, but when I hear him speak I know I am in the presence of a profoundly sincere and genuine human being. His character trumps his intelligence.
We need more like him, and I hope I am correct in seeing the same humility and depth of character in Miers.
RE: THE PICK [Mark Levin]
I am actually hoping there are no more vacancies during this presidency. Posted at 10:55 AM
(Sigh of resignation.)
Maybe we oughta have a national election for the Supreme Court instead of relying on the President to make the best choice < /sarcasm>
No, we need to go back to appointing Senators.
LOL! Man, FReepers are so quick. I love it.
Well, I was most motivated by his promise to put more Scalia and Thomas-like judges on the Supreme Court to get the vote out for Bush. That was my primary motivation.
In fact, that was the #1 reason to support Bush, according to not only me but the founder of FR, JimRob himself.
Another excellent point that Rush made on his radio show was that there are many proud conservative judges out there who have been active warriors for conservatism for decades. These judges have been fighting on the front lines, proudly leaving "paper trails" of conservative judicial rulings and written decisions a mile long.
But these deserving warriors have just been dealt a slap in the face - - they have been passed over for a "safe" choice who is (apparently) acceptable to the Democrats. Rush essentially said this (paraphrasing):
"What does this nomination say to all those judges across the land who perhaps have ambitions for higher courts? This nomination tells them that if they ever want to advance then they better be "stealth" and by all means do not leave a "paper trail" that might give ammunition to the extreme left. It tells them they better stay quiet about their convictions and keep a low profile. Because that's what you have to do if you want to move up."
Rush is absolutely correct. I have to imagine that there are a lot of solid conservative judges across America who have paid their dues and then some and who are mighty pee'd off at Bush today.
It sure is Bush's fault, but yes, some blame goes to McCain and Lindsay Graham and the rest of the gang of 7.
I think it would be wise to expose the gutless Republican Senators who aren't willing to go to bat for this White House and the Conservative movement. Send them a message at the ballot box that you've had enough with their gutless machinations of caving in to the enemy. You don't win wars by not showing up to the battlefield.
Personally, I have to confess I was looking forward to the fight, hoping against hope that those we gave victory to would give victory back to us in the form of a principled thumping of the shrieking losers on the left. No compromise, no quarter. I relished the possibility of an in-your-face Janice Rogers Brown category nomination. It is for these reasons that I was initially let down by yesterday's announcement. That being said, I retain my belief in the character and will of this President and will prayerfully support his choice, which so many of us here have insisted is his to make.
Rush preferred to have it out with the Dims, to expose them, by picking a conservative with a public track record. Although, Rush inferred about Bush's 'strategery' by picking a solid conservative that he knows personally, who the Dims do not know.
As if all those great judges across the country don't have enough problems to deal with, as you point out, but now they're told that being true to themselves and not hiding in a corner disqualifies them for the nation's highest court.
That's a huge problem with all this stealth crap. In fact, it could result in greatly diminishing our farm system of jurists, to use a baseball analogy.
We need great judicial leaders, not friggin' spies.
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.