[oblomov]

No offense intended, but what "brand" of conservative are you? I'm not sure how one could defend the Miers' nomination on conservative principles alone (assuming that, like other "brands" of conservatism, the composition of the federal judiciary is of great importance to you).

What trashy comments have I made? I don't think I've made any trashy comments on FR, ever.

[LibLieSlayer]

"What trashy comments have I made? I don't think I've made any trashy comments on FR, ever".

You are delusional if you really believe this. It's not so much what you say, but the thick hate-filled attitude with which you say it.

However, it is your right to represent yourself in anyway Jim accepts.

LLS

[Miss Marple]

I am a pragmatic, pro-life conservative. That means that I understand that there are other considerations in politics than one issue at a time.

Do I like the highway bill? No. Do I think that senators demanded their pork in payment for support on other things? Yes.

Same with CFR. Bush told Congress if they passed it he would sign it. They passed it. He signed it, hoping the SC would declare it unconstitutional. I will grant that this was a bad decision, but an understandable error, given that no one thought it would pass muster with the Supreme Court.

So, although I wish the CFR outcome would have been different, I am not willing to throw out all of the good the President has done.

Legislation is not a cut and dried process. All sorts of horsetrading goes on behind the scenes. That is the way that Congress works, and how they work in interaction with the President.

So, I am happy to see whatever we can get advanced move forward. I accept that there are setbacks. I keep my eye on the goal, and accept that I won't agree on everything, no matter who is President.

Lots of people think George Allen would be a good candidate. He voted FOR that torture bill and said he would meet with Cindy Sheehan. Are you going to throw him out? I hear a lot of people liking Mike Pence. He supports a federal shield law for the press. Tom Tancredo? He was ready to have DeLay step down.

NO ONE is perfect. I support the President because he is doing a pretty good job, given all that is on his plate. He is head and shoulders above any democrat. He is an honest and decent man who is trying to do his best for this country.

That's the kind of conservative that I am. I will support the most conservative candidate in 2008 whom I deem electable. I am not going to go over the cliff in order to prove myself a person with principles.

[safisoft]

No offense intended, but what "brand" of conservative are you? I'm not sure how one could defend the Miers' nomination on conservative principles alone (assuming that, like other "brands" of conservatism, the composition of the federal judiciary is of great importance to you).

Not conservative. The most disgusting and vapid comments are focused on conservatives who oppose the President on this - by people who think that we conservatives are only "pouting" or "acting like cry-babies".

My view is that such a disconnect with the political philosophy that they claim to adhere to is being revealed. Like the President. They THINK they are conservative - but they have NO IDEA what it means. In fact, they are simply moral Republicans. Not bad, but not conservative either.

True conservatives understand this nomination in this way:

1. Being conservative is no excuse for mediocrity.

2. Being conservative means that you should speak clearly, and plainly about what you believe - because it is right.

3. Being conservative owes allegiance to no man and no party - and that is not a matter convenience, it is a principle.

4. Being conservative is self-evident. A stealth candidate simply cannot be conservative. It is an antithesis.

And lastly, for our less-than-conservative friends here on FR, beating people up by calling them names, accusing their thoughtful principles as being sexist, elitist, etc. only cements opinions against this nomination. If it so right, why resort to such obvious fraud?