Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

I was wrong; so please join me in supporting Harriet Miers.

Posted on 10/09/2005 3:28:25 PM PDT by Pukin Dog

I decided to end my self-imposed exile from posting due to information that I received this past weekend from ‘a little birdie’ in Washington, which I subsequently had confirmed by another ‘insider’ if you can call him that.

You know I won’t tell, so don’t bother asking me for names, links, or further information. I trust these individuals, and have received accurate information from them before and shared it here on Free Republic. Of course, all are free to either accept or reject what I am about to share, but if you know anything about the Dog, I don’t change my mind often, and my only goal is to pass on information that can help support the Conservative agenda.

Issue 1.

Information was shared with me on Saturday, which described in no uncertain terms that Harriet Miers stands as the only nominee on Bush’s list which has any chance of confirmation by the Senate Judiciary Committee. The reasons for this are numerous, and would be embarrassing to the Conservative movement should one or many of the ‘stars’ who we hoped Bush would select be shot down in Committee, which again, if true, would be a certainty.

More than one of the persons we might have wanted made it clear to the President that they would not accept his nomination if selected. You can draw your own conclusions as to why, but the only hint I will provide is that data mining works too damn well these days. What we saw back when Clarence Thomas was nominated would seem like a walk in the park, compared to what would be done to some of our most popular jurists.

Our Democrat opponents have been quite busy, especially after John Roberts embarrassed them, searching for any information that would allow an open personal attack on a nominee. Sadly, many of the folks we wanted badly would have had their lives destroyed had they attempted confirmation to the bench, and wisely declined. There is no one among us who has not done (or had a family member do) things that we either regret, or would rather keep to ourselves. Because none of us are perfect, it is possible that had one of our choices been selected, we might have lived to regret that day for a very long time.

Issue 2.

Arlen Specter is in my opinion, a traitor to the Conservative movement. He has made it clear to the White House that he is determined to protect his legacy, by NOT supporting any name among those who might make it possible to overturn Rowe V. Wade. What that means, is that had Bush put up someone who might make us proud, Specter reneged on a PROMISE to support Bush’s judicial nominees in return for his, (and especially Rick Santorum’s) support for his re-election. This promise was made when there was strong consideration for removing Specter’s pending chairmanship in favor of John Coryn, or an extension to the term of Orrin Hatch.

The removal of Specter from the Chairmanship would have been disastrous, because he would have remained a committee member, and would have sided with Democrats against the President’s selections out of spite. So, why not simply remove Specter from the committee? That would have been really bad PR, considering Specter’s health issues at the time these decisions were being made.

One could argue that it might have been best to send up nominee after nominee, even if eventually defeated, but remember that O’Conner is only around hoping for a quick confirmation so that she can be with her ill husband. Bush was under the gun to come up with a confirmable candidate, or risk a Supreme Court not running at full strength as important rulings came under review.

I am told that Arlen Specter has gone back on every single promise he made when his chairmanship was still a question, and feels untouchable now that he is ill, because any punitive measures taken against him would be seen as ‘less than compassionate’ by the MSM and Democrats, who admittedly would have a field day, were Specter punished for his duplicity. The sad thing is that after “Scottish Law” or even the “Magic Bullet theory” that some think that anything that Arlen Specter says can be trusted. Sure, he supported Clarence Thomas, but does anyone believe that Specter would still be a Senator if he had not?

Issue 3.

Let’s face it; our Republican Senate is an embarrassment. From the weakness of Frist, to the petulance of the dude who ‘thinks he is leader’ McCain, down to his McCainiac compadre Lindsey (tinker-bell) Graham, to the nut from Mississippi who thinks he can actually get his leadership position back by actively rebelling against the President, we aint looking to good at all.

Our Republican Senate has as members at least 7 Democrats who could have never gotten elected as Democrats, who nonetheless support the Democrat agenda whenever they can get away with it, which unfortunately due to the weakness of Frist, is all too often. I find myself wishing Tom Delay would run for the Senate against Hutchinson, just so we can have someone in the Senate not afraid to break some heads to get things done. Why can’t we have a Republican Lyndon Johnson when we need one?

Because our Republican Senate is so weak, President Bush cannot rely on them for much. He could not have gotten majority support in this current Senate for any judicial nominee that would have made us proud. The usual suspects have made it clear to the President that any nominee who would have put their re-election prospects at risk would vote against that nominee. The bottom line, is that the Republican Senate is made up of too many who want the job, but not the work. The only job they see before them is that of getting re-elected to another six year term.

Luttig, McConnell, JRB, Owen, Alito, or anyone else you want to name, would have been defeated, and probably defeated in committee, in order to save other Senators from having to vote them down on the floor. Of this, I am now convinced. Only two names were considered allowable for Senate confirmation; Miers and Gonzales. When Bush met with Senators, he was reportedly told that these two names were the only ones that stood a chance to be confirmed, but Gonzales would face pointed questions about Abu Gharab, Gitmo, and the administration’s policy on torture. It would have been ugly, but he would have been confirmed against the added damage done by dejected a dejected conservative base, and liberal attacks on the President’s agenda. There would have also had to be a new search for an Attorney General, which would have been just as ugly.

Had Bush put up selections that would have been defeated, the chorus of ‘Lame Duck’ chanting coming out of Washington would have drowned out the President’s agenda. A defeat in the Senate would have also signaled to Congress that they were on their own, and no longer had to back up, support, or even listen to President Bush. They would have been free to play the political-calculation game that the Democrats have been playing for 6 years; avoiding tough votes that would be used against them in a future campaign.

So, what’s the bottom line?

The bottom line is that Bush did his best to give us what we want, in a way that will not hurt the prospects of the Conservative agenda. The primary thing that must be considered, is that the Congress can NEVER be put back in Democrat hands, for that would destroy all progress made up to now. Our day will come, but this aint it. If we had a Republican Senate made up of real patriots without the odd liberal in Republican clothing, things would be a lot better.

In Miers, Bush has clearly taken what he can get, and our best hope now is for another vacancy on the court before this administration’s term is up. The current makeup of the Congress will just not allow our agenda to be passed at this time without major sacrifices and pragmatic thinking to overcome the inherit weakness of having traitors in our midst.

It appears to me that Harriet Miers is the best CONFIRMABLE candidate for the Supreme Court at this time. This fact is not the fault of the President. Indeed it is OUR fault. It is us who have supported less than the best candidates for the Senate. We are responsible for Chaffee, Snowe, McCain, Graham, Lott, Frist and other persons of questionable courage. We should not be blaming Bush for our own votes. We selected the people that the President must rely upon to move his agenda forward. If they are losers, then he loses too.

Though they literally suck, we are stuck with these people because we must keep the majority to keep our agenda alive. There have been worse moments for us, but none would be worse than than the day we lose the Senate our House majorities. I now believe that although Bush disapointed many of us, that he did the very best he could do without destroying our momentum.

Yes, like Rush Limbaugh said, it was a choice made from weakness.

But the thing to remember, is that it was not Bush’s weakness, but our own, and that of the people we have elected to Congress that made this happen. Had they been strong, Bush could have selected anyone we wanted.

Because of what I now know about how and why Harriet Miers was selected, I withdraw my earlier statements against her, my statements suggesting anything less than my strong support of the President, and finally, my self imposed exile from Free Republic.

Pukin Dog is back, so deal with it.


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: 109th; 1uareright; aaa; allaboutme; allpukinallthetime; americanhero; antiopus; areyoucrazy; areyoudrugged; areyoudrunk; areyoustoned; arrogantidiot; asif; attentionwhore; blahblahblahblah; blowhard; bsbsbsbsbsbs; callingauntcleo; cantfindassindark; cindysheehanclone; crazymanalert; disinformation; dobsonspeaks; doggonepukin; doghasitrightagain; dramaaddict; dreamon; dumbass; egomaniac; elections; flipflop; freddykrugeroffr; frsknowitall; getoveryourself; goawaydontcomeback; goback2exile; hahahajackass; harrietmiers; hesback; ilovemyself; imfullofhotair; inflatedego; inpukinwetrust; itsallaboutme; listentomerant; lookatmelookatme; losers; memememe; memememememememe; miers; mykindomforanopus; narcissist; navalaviator; numberoneegofreak; opusmonger; pukepukepukepukepuke; pukinassclown; pukinasshat; pukindog; pukinopus; quitdoingdrugs; rino; scotus; senate; sowhoareyou; specter; supremecourt; thatdidnttakelong; usefulidiot; weakness; whydowecareaboutu; youarealwaysright; youarestillwrong; youdamandog; younailedit; yourrrrrrrright
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 1,141-1,146 next last
To: Pukin Dog
To recap: It's our fault that the president broke his campaign promise to us, his base. To atone for this fault, that is ours, we must:

A) Not voice any more dissent regarding the Miers pick.

B) Stay on the reservation and pull the lever for republicans next time around to assure more of the same in the future.

C) Take it on faith that Pukin' Dog has inside sources that know the true score, and relate that score to him.

Gee, where do I sign up?

141 posted on 10/09/2005 4:03:40 PM PDT by Washi (You can't get rid of poverty by giving people money.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lucretia Borgia
Yes, the dog's premise is crazy; or we have the most spineless party in the history of the Republic.

Hey, we won the Presidency, the Senate, the House, a majority of State legislatures, the Governorships and we own talk radio and have equal billing on the net. And the "dog" is trying to say the only Supreme Court nominee is the one Senator Harry Reid okays! Give me a break.
142 posted on 10/09/2005 4:03:45 PM PDT by daviscupper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Wolfgang_Blitzkrieg
"Mier's hardware is worn out"

Maybe....but she packs a 0.45

So strong supporter of the 2nd ammendment

143 posted on 10/09/2005 4:04:11 PM PDT by spokeshave
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: kidd

I think the one of the MAJOR things we keep forgetting: She just had her life turned upside down, got a new job and is settling in.

Just because we want someone to do it, they still have to say yes. Everyone behaves as if everyone is clamoring for a position on the Supreme Court. I just don't think that is the case. They have personal lives to consider.

Maybe Owens did not want to go through this crap again. Who would?


144 posted on 10/09/2005 4:04:13 PM PDT by pollyannaish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

"My POV is that the President's job under the circumstances is to get us a better Senate."

The President has done everything he can to get a better Senate. Look at all the campaign appearances and fund raising events he's done. And look at the Senate gains in 2002 and 2004. But he can't do it single-handedly. Strong Republican candidates have to be willing to run and the conservative grass roots has to be willing to go all out for them. And Republican incumbents need to avoid making stupid and inflammitory statements (Rick Santorum, for example) that give their opponents ammunition.


145 posted on 10/09/2005 4:04:29 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued (Jeanine Pirro for Senate, Hillary Clinton for Weight Watchers Spokeswoman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: flashbunny
The head of the Republican party is bound to support incumbents, no matter what losers they are, unless they have done something obviously disloyal to Republicans.

Without this loyalty from the party head, you would have chaos in Congress.

146 posted on 10/09/2005 4:04:40 PM PDT by Miss Marple (Lord, please look after Mozart Lover's son and keep him strong.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog
"So, what’s the bottom line?"

"The bottom line is that Bush did his best to give us what we want, in a way that will not hurt the prospects of the Conservative agenda."

Sadly, I concur. We cannot go to war with a bunch of weak sisters.

147 posted on 10/09/2005 4:05:15 PM PDT by Obadiah (Support Harriet Miers!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Guenevere

What did Brit Hume say exactly. Don't be coy.


148 posted on 10/09/2005 4:05:21 PM PDT by Torie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 132 | View Replies]

To: flashbunny
Strong reply. You're very good (practiced) at namecalling. Congratulations.

Do you think the post had valid ideas? Can you understand them?

149 posted on 10/09/2005 4:05:55 PM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

To: Pukin Dog

Your account makes a lot of sense and fills out what I have been saying. :^)

My main point has been that SPECTRE and the "RINO 7" are the major locus of weakness on judicial issues, and that Bush had a choice between going down in flames and trying to put through the best nominee he could get us under the circumstances.


150 posted on 10/09/2005 4:06:01 PM PDT by Enchante (Bill Clinton: "I'm going to say this again, I DID NOT HAVE SEX WITH THOSE SKELETONS IN MY CLOSET!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfgang_Blitzkrieg

And you know this how?


151 posted on 10/09/2005 4:06:17 PM PDT by pollyannaish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: conservativebabe

No, you're trying to make it about me.

I'mjust the one to point out what is going on here, and for daring to point out the obvious, you and a couple others have attacked my audicity to talk about the 'elephant in the room'.

I'll let you get back to your 'pat on the back' fest now.


152 posted on 10/09/2005 4:06:19 PM PDT by flashbunny (Sorry, but I'm allergic to KoolAid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
The head of the Republican party is bound to support incumbents, no matter what losers they are, unless they have done something obviously disloyal to Republicans.

I think Specter's record is evidence enough of his disloyalty to the GOP.
153 posted on 10/09/2005 4:06:21 PM PDT by counterpunch (Save the GOP - withdraw Miers now)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: Torie
I don't think I made any direct attributions, did I? I tried to be very careful with this. I wish it didn't have to be rumor-mongering, but other than tell where I got this information, what choice is there?

I guess not to say anything? Fair enough.
154 posted on 10/09/2005 4:06:21 PM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 124 | View Replies]

To: flashbunny
That's just RICH flashbunny. How about looking within yourself...
155 posted on 10/09/2005 4:07:06 PM PDT by politicket (Our Supreme Court just destroyed our land...any Patrick Henry's out there?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]

Comment #156 Removed by Moderator

To: spokeshave
Maybe....but she packs a 0.45 So strong supporter of the 2nd ammendment

Does the fact that Sen. Feinstein (D-California) carries also make her a strong supporter of the 2nd?
157 posted on 10/09/2005 4:07:09 PM PDT by kingu (Draft Fmr Senator Fred Thompson for '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: flashbunny

Seems you have trouble with about every poster. Ever wonder why?


158 posted on 10/09/2005 4:07:27 PM PDT by Principled
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Annie5622
guilty.
159 posted on 10/09/2005 4:07:32 PM PDT by Pukin Dog (Sans Reproache)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee; AuH2ORepublican; Brilliant; Salvation; Soul Seeker; votelife

You might find this interesting.


160 posted on 10/09/2005 4:07:38 PM PDT by Clintonfatigued (Jeanine Pirro for Senate, Hillary Clinton for Weight Watchers Spokeswoman)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 1,141-1,146 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson