Posted on 10/04/2005 7:16:56 PM PDT by buzzyboop
We were discussing this in the thread with david's column. Apologies to david for confiscating it to discuss his brother. LOL
Articulated the position beautifully, and best of all, Greta hardly spoke. :-)
Sorry for anyone that didn't catch it. It was a summary of his show, but condensed, and straight to the point.
>>>Rush and Bill Clinton on the same show. How about that!
Wonder if they had any time to chat in the green room prior to appearing...imagine that...
So hugh that my beeber is stuned.
hugh=HUGE. Sorry!
I like Rush almost to a hundred percentile but about Miers' and what I heard Rush say about it and the selection involved here by Bush, I disagree.
Rush made a point of saying he wasn't disapproving of Miers herself (I am glad he clarified that) but he also seems to say (correct me if I'm wrong about this) that the selection of Miers is disappointing overall to conservatives as a big let down for the Supreme Court because Miers is not a paragon of conservatism...then he clarified as a conservative he didn't disapprove of Miers but...continuing to emphasize how difficult our conservative present tense politically was arrived at, how hard it's been to get where we are and then there's Miers and, oh boy, what a disappointment and all the rest.
I am not at all sure what Rush said, is what I mean, other than he considers Bush nominating Miers as a big disappointment to conservatives who Rush says are responsible for the current Republican White House. And that there's an expectation accordingly by conservatives (Rush doesn't identify who, specifically, he means here beyond the corporate use of the term, "conservatives") that there would be, should be, was supposed to be some giant authoritarian conservative nominated for the S.C. but instead we have Miers.
I disagree with this. I am rather liking Miers' lowkey, "ordinary person" personna AS a Conservative. She's beginning to look like the Harriet Gump of the S.C. to me.
I paraphrased (read my previous comments, this thread ^), BUT the show is rebroadcast in just a few more hours, at least here where I am, digital channel, PST.
Not quite. He's never said he's against her. He has said that it is potentially a lost opportunity.
You gotta watch Rush. He'll lead you to believe he said X when in fact he said Y. He's good at doing that. He's excellent at turning a phrase that allows deniability.
So Rush, who basically has never met Harriet Miers, is disagreeing with those who have. Interesting. Rush has basically boxed himself in with the clueless among us.
I think Bush may be wiser than we give him credit for. And I don't think he has made that many misteps.
See my earlier post on this thread about his ability to make you think he's said X when in fact he's said Y. He's good at allowing deniability.
God Bless Rush, he gets so long winded in his talking that Bush could get two more nominees during of Rush's lengthy monologues. (Which I love) :-) Rush did a nice job, but I think Miers will be fine. One of the positive thing with Bush and this person is he get a Justice which won't give him any surprises like a Souter did his dad. I think Bush also didn't want to offer someone who would create a lot of fund raising potential for the Democrats to use in future races against the Republicans.
He's never said he's against her. He dances around it, but never says it. He did say that there are many who have toiled long and hard to have a chance to have a SCOTUS nomination only now to be overlooked. Hmmm, what does that sound like?
>>>...clueless among us.
Clueless among us? How can it be? We have some of the greatest minds on the planet posting here. Many of whom are smart without benefit of lodging at a Holiday Inn Express...
:)
You don't think they'll throw a fit about Meyers?
LOL! Greta usually interrogates whomever she has on her program with one question after the next -- as tho the person was in the witness chair. So nice to see her voice stilled! Thanks Rush!
There may be indictments, disclosures, embarrassments in store for the democrats in the pipeline that may make a hardline Conservative easier to get through in the next three years.... a complete unknown may be right for this point in time. (unknown to everyone but Bush).
Then he should withhold judgement instead of firing his gun into a dark room prematurely. He's never met Ms. Miers, so how can he go along with the argument that "she's not Conservative enough"? I don't care if he dances or cakewalks around the issue.
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.