Good! bttt
Conservative Republicans (of which I am a proud member) have only two choices on the Meirs pick.
1) Accept the President't nomination gracefully and lobby for him to pick an unabashed conservative judge the next time around.
2) Behave like a hypocritical Democrat and try to stop the confirmation of the president's pick.
The fact is, the president picks, the Senate confirms. If the Republicans do not vote to confirm, they are acknowledging the Democrat's argument that it is OK to vote against a nominee strictly because you are unhappy with their political position.
Bush has said that Scalia and Thomas are the standard of successful nominations. Out of two nominations P41 only named one such; even the sainted Ronald Reagan only named one out of three. Bush has surpassed his father by winning reelection to a second term. But now Bush has his second nomination to SCOTUS, and he doesn't know that he will have a third one. Bush knows that he will suffer in comparison with his father if neither Roberts nor Miers were to pan out like Thomas, and that he will have bragging rights if they both do.
And I think that that's the way to bet 'em.
It's infuriating that, with 55 Republican senators, Bush can't openly name a Scalia the way Reagan was able to - but that's the senators' fault, not Bush's. We can hope to improve the Senate in '06, even if we lose a RINO or two while picking up a couple of red-state senate seats.
....Conservatives should feel confident with the selection of Harriet Miers to replace Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court for a simple reason: George W. Bush selected her......
Read it again....
Conservatives should feel confident with the selection of Harriet Miers to replace Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court for a simple reason: George W. Bush selected her.
Newt said it. believe it.
Untrue. He ran on a platform of free drugs for seniors, and modifying 'conservative' with the word 'compassionate' is hardly compatible with being "unabashedly conservative."
bump to read in a few
The Fact Newt has NOTHING to base his support on. Not only that, I doubt Newt is that much of a social conservative.
The guy did a good job taking over the house but he's basically a bag of hot air that should blow away.
At the nomination news conference, Ms. Miers' first remarks were reassuring in this regard: "It is the responsibility of every generation to be true to the founders' vision of the proper role of the courts and our society." She promised to "strictly apply the laws and the Constitution."Contrary to the spin from the MSM, this is not rocket science. We don't need Albert-Einstein-brilliance here. We need fairness. And loyalty. To the constitution. Bush says Miers will give us that. I trust Bush. I think we will all be very happy in the years to come. Happy that Bush had the wisdom to make this pick, and the power to get Miers confirmed.
(Which he has. Both the wisdom and the power.)
Forget it Newtie, conservatives not buying Bush now, wont buy you later for being an errand boy.
"the president has stayed remarkably true to conservative principles on every major decision he has made since winning the Republican primary."
Newt's hallucinating.
As Bush's personal friend and personal lawyer, not to mention holding the same position in the Bush White House that John Dean held in the Nixon White House, Miers is just the person Kennedy, Durbin, Biden, Leahy, and Schumer would just love to interrogate for hours on end.
By the time its all over, the public won't be able to tell if they just watched a confirmation hearing or an impeachment trial. What did Bush know and when did he know it? We're about to find out.
History has proven me right about Quayle, and I pray that I'm wrong about Miers, but my "gut feelings" are usually correct.