Misunderestimating The Furor Over Hurricane Harriet

GOPUSA ^ | October 10, 2005 | Chuck Muth

[flashbunny]

chuck muth just killed a kitten!

[Betaille]

"George W is not the Pope. He is not infallible. He made a mistake. But it's a mistake which can and should be rectified."

Exactly. Bush shouldn't ignore the fact that he's losing his "Halo Effect" from this. If he rams Miers through every conservative commentator that's against this will judge him just as tough as they would if he were a Democratic President. He will have totally lost his base of support both intellectually and electorally.

[Dahoser]

We could have thrown a touchdown. Instead we ran it up the middle for a two-yard gain.

So that's what happened to Paul Hackett.

[Howlin]

His base? Well, that doesn't include you, does it, since you voted for Gore in 2000.

[David1]

Congratulations!!! This is probably the best defense of the Miers nomination I can find. ;-) LOL

[Betaille]

"His base? Well, that doesn't include you, does it, since you voted for Gore in 2000."

What a ridiculous ad-hominem attack. I voted Republican in 2002 and for Bush in 2004 (and got many other people at my religious college to vote as well). All I hear from you is the most babyish ad-hominem attacks, which tells me that I've won on the facts and logic.

[dead]

The visceral objections to Harriet Miers have more to do with the fact that many conservative activists have been toiling in the political trenches for many years to elect a Republican president and a Republican Senate for the expressed purpose of being able to seat individuals on the nation's highest court who have the conservative judicial and intellectual star-power and brain-power we were denied by the Left when they "borked" Robert Bork.

That's the whole enchilada in a mixed metaphor nutshell.

[Blood of Tyrants]

The president is too short sighted in this. His conservative base has been given precious little to rally around lately. It iswishy washy moves like this that will cause the GOP to lose control of the House and Senate next year. Give uus something to sink our teeth into and LEAD!

[Howlin]

Well, according to what's been posted on here, Harriet Miers is suspect because she was still donating to the DNC in 1988.

That makes you HIGHLY suspect.

[flashbunny]

don't get nellie olsen upset!

[The Ghost of FReepers Past]

Actually I think Thomas Sowell supports her, somewhat. But the list is still long.

[thoughtomator]

Actually, that's the ONLY defense of the Miers nomination you can find.

[NYS_Eric]

And then to rub salt in this open wound, the president insulted the nation's collective intelligence by claiming, laughably, that he "picked the best person (he) could find."

That line really is hard to ignore, isn't it? He must have bit his lip hard when he said it to prevent the involuntatry laughter.

[Paleo Conservative]

[Wolfstar]

Well, that doesn't include you, does it, since you voted for Gore in 2000.

Thanks, Howlin. I didn't know that, although I just got finished calling Betaille a liar on another thread.

[flashbunny]

it was the natural evolution of the attacks to get the critics to shut up. Let's go back and see how it evolved:

1. You don't support the president.
2. You're trying to undermine the party
3. You're an elitist
4. You're a sexist.
5. You're hurting the war effort.

The only way they could escalate it was by going nuclear - hence, the 'kitten killing' defense.

[Howlin]

I mean, if it had been Buchanan, I'd understand.

But Gore? That's quite a leap.

Lots of people coming out of the woodwork, claiming lots of things lately, eh?

[GarySpFc]

All of the hate Mier-mongers need to read, "I was wrong; so please join me in supporting Harriet Miers" by Pukin Dog.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1499585/posts?page=1,50

[dakine]

hahaha...good one...!