That the White House could fill its quota and find an strong conservative woman on its short list willing to go through a confirmation hearing IS ABSOLUTELY NO excuse for not appointing an known originalist job for the position.
Playing the affirmative action game for political gain is absolutely no reason to sacrifice principle and renege on a the promise to appointed a known conservative justice.
This nomination needs to be withdrawn and a known originalist of any gender, race or ethnicity needs to be nominated in her place.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21 next last
To: Ol' Sparky
There's a simple way to handle this.. You pick a person to be Bork'ed. The RINOs get their feed for the year, the RATs can show what champions they are for the cause, then you toss someone else in and even if they are a clone of the first, they are approved, likely with overwhelming numbers.
Pick people with obvious, open opinions. You don't have to play the dig for everything game because the juicy parts are out in the open. Will this person overturn Roe? Probably. They get attacked for it, the person shrugs and notes that that is their opinion.
These stealth candidates are the ones that require finding kindergarten teachers and other arcane journalistic tea leaf readings.
2 posted on
10/12/2005 12:12:34 AM PDT by
kingu
(Draft Fmr Senator Fred Thompson for '08.)
To: Ol' Sparky
"the promise to appointed a known conservative justice."
I'd like to see that "promise" sourced. A "known" conservative? Known to who? I don't believe Bush ever said that.
3 posted on
10/12/2005 12:13:30 AM PDT by
Rokke
To: Ol' Sparky
That's swell.
Just so you know, an embarassing Bush retreat here will likely weaken his Presidency to the point of irrelvancy.
All this ranting merely strengthens the Left.
Flame away, but I have no doubt of it. The DU'ers are laughing their a**s off.
4 posted on
10/12/2005 12:14:17 AM PDT by
Wiseghy
(Discontent is the want of self-reliance: it is infirmity of will. – Ralph Waldo Emerson)
To: Ol' Sparky
It's particularly odd that this was leaked by previously tight lipped staffers to two different bloggers on the same day that Rove "gave permission" to Dobson to reveal this part of their supposed conversation. I don't know if I buy it. I definetly don't buy the insinuation that not ONE of the several highly qualified and known conservative women turned down the nomination. Nut even if we assume this to me true, there are so many more known originalists from which he could choose - some minority and some (Gasp!) white males. At the very least, if we assume this is true, it proves that Bush is willing to play affirmative action games with our country's future.
6 posted on
10/12/2005 12:18:37 AM PDT by
Texas Federalist
(qualified to serve on the United States Supreme Court)
To: Ol' Sparky
IMHO, Dobson isn't exactly helping the situation any. In fact, he just seems to aggravate things every time he talks about it.
8 posted on
10/12/2005 12:37:49 AM PDT by
AntiGuv
(™)
Dem's and the gang of 7 traitors have so poisoned the process that no one wants to go through it. It's sad but it should also be used as a hammer over the head of the gang of 7.
9 posted on
10/12/2005 12:40:41 AM PDT by
KingKongCobra
(The "Donner Party" can just go eat themselves)
To: Ol' Sparky
I haven't read this entire thread, but basically this is the same "inside" info we got from Pukin Dog the other day.
People withdrew because they didn't want to face the scrutiny to themselves or their families and who can blame them.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1499585/posts
21 posted on
10/12/2005 1:57:56 AM PDT by
dawn53
To: Ol' Sparky
...they would not allow their names to be considered, because the process has become so vicious and so vitriolic and so bitter, that they didn't want to subject themselves or the members of their families to it."There's the money quote. Maybe it's time we donated to a fund that would investigate Democrat senators and newspeople. They want to play this vicious game of tearing down Republicans and there is no cost to them. Lets's make them pay a price as well.
25 posted on
10/12/2005 2:54:50 AM PDT by
patj
To: Ol' Sparky
The fact that this list was limited to women only sounds rather sexist and elitist on it's face. Where does the RNC come down on this one? Find the microphone Ken! Blackbird.
To: Ol' Sparky
From the Wash Times Mr. Specter had suggested he might call Mr. Dobson and Mr. Rove to testify before his committee about any inside knowledge they might have about Miss Miers -- a threat that has only heightened the angst many conservatives feel about the nomination.
Gee, what a friend we have in Specter.
To: Ol' Sparky
Oh great... now we got people who don't want to go through the rigors of hearings.
32 posted on
10/12/2005 3:56:36 AM PDT by
johnny7
(“Nah, I ain’t Jewish, I just don’t dig on swine, that’s all.”)
To: Ol' Sparky
I would agree in that on the surface this appears to be a sexist nomination.
33 posted on
10/12/2005 3:57:22 AM PDT by
mo
To: Pukin Dog
Ping!...
...especially read paragragh 3....sound familiar? :)
40 posted on
10/12/2005 4:34:20 AM PDT by
Guenevere
(God bless our military!...and God bless the President of the United States!)
To: Ol' Sparky
I've told you what will happen: the nomination won't be withdrawn. It will go to hearings. The ONLY people who will stop this are conservative senators, and if they do, you will not in the next three years see a more conservative name put forward.
These are the realities to deal with.
50 posted on
10/12/2005 5:03:44 AM PDT by
LS
(CNN is the Amtrak of news)
To: Ol' Sparky
Have ya'll noticed the FRpoll lately, it's almost completely even, For, Against,or Maybe with more info. We could argue this until the cows come home wiht little or no result. LETS WAIT TO SEE WHAT COMES OUT OF THE HEARINGS
To: Ol' Sparky
So Rove told Dobson that Rogers-Brown and Owen took themselves out of contention because they feared the process? Bullsh*t! They stuck it out through two entire rounds over 3 years. These women are made of steel. I do not believe for a minute that either one would have taken themselves out of the game.
To: Pukin Dog
Looks like some folks owe you a bit of an apology, Dog. Looks to me like your vanity the other day was pretty much right on.
63 posted on
10/12/2005 5:32:18 AM PDT by
Terabitten
(God grant me the strength to live a life worthy of those who have gone before me.)
To: Ol' Sparky
I want to make sure I unmderstand this line of reasoning:
1. The democrats have turned the nomination process into a total travesty that is so terrible that most people don't want to go through it. Any opinion written or verbla will be misconstrued and turned against the nominee. They will be villified and/or have tangential scandalous stories broadcast to the public.
2. Because SD O'Connor is a woman, the next justice must be a woman.
3. These two factors require that the WH can choose only an unknown woman. ergo Meirs.
Sooner or later someone must stand up to these charlatons.
68 posted on
10/12/2005 5:42:28 AM PDT by
Pietro
To: Ol' Sparky
"What Karl told me is that some of those individuals took themselves off that list and they would not allow their names to be considered, because the process has become so vicious and so vitriolic and so bitter, that they didn't want to subject themselves or the members of their families to it."This is the "natural selection" part of the process.
87 posted on
10/12/2005 7:00:16 AM PDT by
TaxRelief
(Until the age of 46, Miers was a hard-core Dem.)
To: All
It has occurred to me that the Miers nomination, and its Dobson gambit, might be a plan by the WH to get Gonzales nominated to the SC. If W had nominated Gonzales outright, there would have been a hue and cry from conservatives. However, if he nominates Miers as one of only a few willing to be subjected to a RAT confirmation inquisistion, and then she withdraws, he may then be able to nominate Gonzales with the justification that he had no other credible alternative.
I hope that the Republicans are playing close attention to the way that the RATs play the nomination confirmation game, and make certain to give any RAT president nominee a painful, public 5-finger rectal exam during confirmation hearings. However, if the past is any indication, our side will simply roll over for RAT nominees.
88 posted on
10/12/2005 7:01:43 AM PDT by
white trash redneck
(Everything I needed to know about Islam I learned on 9-11-01.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson