Posted on 10/07/2005 12:02:21 PM PDT by Betaille
They are angry, dismayed and disheartened, but, more importantly, concerned for the fate of the Supreme Court.
The conservative reaction against President Bush’s nomination of untested White House Counsel Harriet Miers to the U.S. Supreme Court was so universal and intense that it erupted at each of the two separate meetings of activist leaders held Wednesday by Americans for Tax Reform President Grover Norquist and Free Congress Foundation Chairman Paul Weyrich.
At the Norquist meeting, conservatives targeted their ire at former Republican National Chairman Ed Gillespie, who is working with the White House on Supreme Court nominations. At the Weyrich meeting, Republican National Chairman Ken Mehlman and Tim Goeglein, White House liaison to the conservative community, found themselves in the crosshairs.
(Excerpt) Read more at humaneventsonline.com ...
I have a lot of respect here on FR.
Who are you, again?
Except that the Church was not divided , as the Court is. Plus, Miers was never a party person, like Beckett.
I was replying to what you said:
It looks like she was a decent manager, but the article you cite is hardly compelling in terms of a SC nomination.
That is in fact your implication.
Refuting weak points and arguments is not "hostile".
Furthermore, others have explicitly stated that "the only qualification she has is (fill in the blank with Religion or the Texas Bar)" and I was pointing to the fallacy of those statements as well.
I see you are your own best defender.
Maybe those are the only two factors that matter to you, but there are other significant political factors and effects fully in play.
She has worked closely with first a governor, and then a president, for eleven years. And she wasn't a functionary, she was an integral part of Bush's team.
Which makes it easier to level a charge of "crony" even if that isn't what motivated the pick. She vetted GWB's past for dirt in 1994, before he ran for governor. He trusts her, obviously. But also on a personal level - and that lends credence to thoughts of cronyism too. One would be naive to conclude that factor has no political impact.
At least DeWine and McCain have asserted that the nuclear option is on the table, and that "extraordinary" means what it sounds like. If Ginsberg wasn't rxtraordinary from the left, then Own, Brown and Pryor are not extraordinary from the right.
It's rote and an article of faith. The mere fact that Ms. Miers is Presindent Bush's pick makes her most qualified.
And then, in a predictable debating tactic, they then shift the burden of proof. Hardly sporting, and shows the position is weak.
That doesn't make the position wrong, FWIW. Not on the grounds of Miers' predicted performance anyway.
Ugh. The Senate now controls the nomination?
No wonder conservatives are livid. That concession was give without so much as a whimper.
Well aren't you a piece of work! You had no trouble defending daughterofetc with NO research into her background as a liar and a personal attack diva.
I also am bothered by people who mock and deride her experience with the Texas Lottery when they clearly have no idea what her responsibilities and achievements there were.
Are you bothered when YOU support someone with out checking out their history of anti-freeping and false personal attacks?
Little girl, you have no room to be instructing people on what comprises a shallow argument when you are posting prime examples.
Good grief you are a clone of Daughterofetc!
As I suggested earlier, you need to do a little research before you adopt your unwarranted snotty tone.
Goodness, hon chill out. You did no research when you decided to support a proven liar and anti-freeper who has been making personal attacks for years here at FR.
I have a lot of respect here on FR.
Why blow it then with your selfrightous condescending attitude? Anyone that supports liars and anti-freepers like you do should have no respect here.
Do you think that dtr lets HLL use her password here?
Oh BTW nerdgirl I do not agree with all of your posts but I see no reason for you to be demonized for your opinions. Don't let the holier-than-thou crowd get you down!
Gonna stalk me now?
LOL
Thanks for the ping. By and large most freepers are here to engage in lively discussion, with no need to agree with one another in order to refrain from bizarro personal attacks. Yet there are also those that appear go off the deep end when people disagree with them - I've noticed that he who begins the personal offensive is usually the guy losing the argument...
Thanks for the supportive words. Freep on!
dirtboy #59. you go boy! tells it like it is.
The "christian right" = REPUBLICAN ( and the great majority of Americans ). HM quals. are as good as Renquist. What are all you losers doin home on fri. nite?
I'll defend cyncooper - if any defending is needed.
I'll defend cyncooper - if any defending is needed.
I'll defend cyncooper - if any defending is needed.
you're welcome to read all of the backposts and jump in if you like, although I believe the thread is winding down.
So was OJ's.
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.