Replies

It's not just ann being ann, it's them ripping on people like krauthammer, noonan, limbaugh, etc, all because they've dared express doubt about the nomination in one way or another.

" true lack of respect for the president"

Respect is a two way street.

People love to talk about how GWB honors loyalty...and noonan nailed this in her piece - it's like he now feels he doesn't owe any loyalty to the same base that got him elected on his promise of 'judges in the mold of scalia and thomas.

Over the past few days I've seen the usual liberal tactics being used to defend this nomination. On this thread, it's the divided and conquer technique of the 'elitist' charge.

Yesterday, it was the whisper campaign that the people who are opposing this miers are doing so because they're sexists who don't want to see a woman on the bench...never mind most of her detractors wanted someone like janice rogers brown.

Heck, even yesterday I saw a freeper saying her detractors were using 'code words' to insult her....you know, just the kind of thing liberals accuse republicans of doing???

Have some people like ann crossed over a certain polite line? Yes. But on the other side, nothing will invite a vitriolic attack faster than saying you question the pick of miers. Then you're called a traitor, a troll, and told to STFU or kiss their @ss.

Some people need to take a long, hard look at what they've resorted to.

You are correct about the nastiness - but it's one thing to voice your dissent another to resort to personal attacks. Ann crossed the line. As far as the elitist label, just read some of the talking heads' columns - their words speak volumes. I'm sorry that you've been called names but unfortunately manners seem to leave along with rational thinking.