Posted on 10/11/2005 10:03:46 AM PDT by quidnunc
Because I’m something of a rarity in New York City — a woman who is a pro-life columnist — I’ve been getting a lot of e-mail asking for my opinion of the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. My answer has been considered unsatisfactory, but it’s an honest one: I am withholding my opinion because I simply have not honed an ability to read someone’s mind. That has not prevented many right-wing pundits, such as George Will and Patrick Buchanan, from weighing in negatively on the president’s pick.
It seems to me, however, that they are all doing exactly what we criticize the liberal pundits for: jumping the gun to make a deadline. I’m all for mounting a battle for conservative principles, but wouldn’t it be wiser to wait until we’re sure they’re in imminent danger?
One would think that after the cruel vetting of Miguel Estrada by rabid-dog senators, these gladiators on the right would be predisposed to uniting behind the president they supported last year. Senator Schumer, along with Senators Leahy and Kennedy, has been ignoring the president’s right to select his Supreme Court nominee.Now conservatives are doing the exact same thing.The Republicans gave the ACLU’s counsel, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, a pass because they acknowledged President Clinton’s right to select his Supreme Court justices. It’s appalling that they are showing less respect for President Bush.
-snip-
The extreme right-wing base may feel that Mr. Bush betrayed them, but I think that, sadly, the opposite is true.
-snip
Preach it sister! Can I have an 'Amen'!?
(Excerpt) Read more at daily.nysun.com ...
The Supreme Court is the next area for us to take back. It will be a long, drawn out battle. We need legal Marines for the job, and W sent up a Boy Scout.
The fact that such an ability is needed to assess the nominee is itself reason to complain. I have nothing against Harriet Miers -- for all I know, she'll be a great justice -- but I absolutely condemn Bush's crappy, weak decision-making in this instance.
They think legislating is all about "battles." It is not. It is about compromise and meeting in the middle.
There is no compromise where the Constitution is concerned. Either you are for it, or you aren't.
Most Republicans and all Democrats are against it.
Right, you don't know.
This is the battle: conservatives versus "middlers" like you.
Don't try to rationalize with the irrational. They demand their pound of red meat.
Incorrect. RINO is to a large number of Freepers as Communists are to a large number of Socialists -- a designation of significantly more Communist ideas.
And let Hilary and the Dems pick up the pieces, eh? Great thinking.
I lost so much interest, I'm not even going to post this.
"Some people might not like that conclusion, and might demand a battle."
After about five years here on free republic, I've come to the conclusion that the definition of 'real conservatives' is some one who has far more opinions on how to win than they have wins to their credit.
Liked your post.
Supreme Court Justices are appointed.
There's no "win" or "lose" here, there is only conservatisim, or quasi-liberalism, or outright liberalism as in the results of other Republican picks you probably supported or to which didn't pay attention.
At least you didn't call me a moron.
Thanks for that, anyway.
"Supreme Court Justices are appointed."
Appointment is not the whole issue. They must also be confirmed. Just my opinion, but most of those opposing this nomination seem to be focused on only the first part. They seem to be only interested in the nomination of some one that would force a battle. It's as if they think the battle is more important than a victory. I cannot conceive that Bush would appoint some one in whom he did not believe. I trust the man.
RINO is to a small number of FReepers
as
RACIST is to liberals
... A name to call someone when you are out of intelligent ideas.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can continue to call me a RINO...I will continue to site a very accurate definition.
You are out of intelligent ideas sir. RINO is worn a worn out acronym. Much like you it has overstayed it's welcome.
Now why don't you carry out your threats to be apathetic and go...unless they are what I originally said, EMPTY THREATS.
I await your response as my proof of your empty threat.
"Right, you don't know"
Neither do you or any other supporters of this nomination.
I kinda enjoy seeing 'wingers' like you having a hissy. An impotent hissy, but nevermind that ...
Might want to read this thread and think about her point for a while.
I did read it. I have thought about it. I posted a note above, that while tangential to the point of the orginal article, was responsive to the post I replied to.
I meant to reply, but I lost interest.
That should say it all right there for conservatives. If those two support this nominee they must know something we don't.
Yes, they know some among us are easily strung along and easily played like tarpons. Exactly what part of disinformation do you not understand? Do you really believe these two scumsuckers truly like Ms Miers, or is it possible they are responding to the talking points formulated by their staffs after reading all the hysterical drama here? Something to cogitate about in between true and principled rants.
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.