Posted on 10/13/2005 5:47:35 PM PDT by baystaterebel
White House officials have a message for conservative Republican senators who have expressed doubt about supporting Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers.
The West Wing types argue that she will turn out to be just as conservative as President Bush says she is, and voting against her would be an embarrassment over the long term. This message is intended for holdouts including Sam Brownback of Kansas, Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, and Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania.
"If Miers is confirmed and she winds up being what the president says she is, Republican senators who voted against her will look quite foolish," says a GOP insider. This could cause a backlash against these legislators from conservative Bush supporters at the grass roots.
(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.com ...
You quoted what I said, correct? Then READ IT. Comprehend the wording. The definition of the words used.
Do no DARE accuse me of any such thing. Go read all my posts on the matter than come back here and issue an apology. If you prefer not to do that, then do not communicate to me. I have no use for people that engage in character slurs to protect this nomination.
Go back to DU. You'll be more comfortable there with Mary Mapes.
DID ANYONE actually "Read" this alleged article?
It's pure hype and scare mongering from top to bottom!
I've said it before, it's a good and healthy thing that we
honest conservatives are having the family squabble now!
The real fight is going to come soon enough!
Hold your fire and let the Dem's blow this one!
Let's sit back and enjoy the fire!
The thing I find so appalling is the difference between Democrats and Republicans on Supreme Court vacancies.
If a vacancy occurs under a Democrat president, he will appoint a leftist activist to fill the vacancy. Period. End of discussion. Leftist senators never have to worry about whether or not the nominee will promote abortion, homosexuality, secularism, quotas, softness of crime, or anything else. They know the nominee will promote those things, and so do the leftist activist groups like the ACLU, NARAL, and NAACP. As for the GOP senators, they simply roll over and confirm whomever the Democrat president sends up, even if they control the senate. Clinton's two leftist nominees were confirmed unanimously (Breyer) and 97-3 (Ginzburg).
But when a Republican is in the White House, we have to worry much of the time when he sends up his nominee. For every Bork or Scalia we get an O'Connor, Kennedy, Souter, or Miers. We have no certainty how they'll rule once on the court. Sometimes they move to the far left almost as soon as their ass hits the judicial chair (Blackmun & Souter). Other times they drift ever so slowly further to the left each year (O'Connor & Kennedy). Even if the nominee is a good constitutionalist, we still have to worry about our own GOP senators. Several of them will split off and vote with the Democrats if the nominee might actually reign in the court's leftist drift. We even have a proponent of leftist judicial activism (Specter) as our judiciary chairman. And unlike the Republicans, who generously confirm the leftist nominees of Democrat presidents, the Democrat senators form a phalanx of opposition to solid constitutionalist GOP nominees, even to the point of filibustering to keep a nominee with majority senate support from having a fair up or down vote.
The difference is appalling.
You need look no futher what a base will do to you than the special election in Ohio recently.
The heavily predicted winner was non other than Mike Dewine's son Pat. He had all the money, all the Washington support and THE NAME..
That is untill the base in ohio decides to send a little message to Dewine Sr, through his son.
The base was not happy about Dewine's involvement in the Gang of 14 and a message was sent loud and clear.
The base has a long memory, especially on supreme court nominee's.
It's too early to tell if it will be a stay at home base, like Ohio, or a :Throw the bums out base like in 94. One of them will occur.
I can't believe we would have to explain this again for the ? time. The Senate hearings are milktoast in so far as they devulge judicial philosophy from nominees. The nominee will not answer any of those questions.
There's your answer. You won't know any more about her then than I do now.
Ha, gets better and better. You're calling me a Democrat and a traitor, becuase I have reservations that Miers isn't conservative enough? Ha. You're hopeless my friend.
And you're kidding yourself if you think my views are a handful. I don't know a single Republican off FR that's pleased with this pick. Not one.
Don't worry...the Bushbot RINOs will continue to throw those arguments around until they need our conservative votes to get back into office yet again. Prep yourself for some more Clinton years and hope that after this time around we can get a true conservative in there...
I bet they were quaking in their boots.
***
I'm sure they weren't but I wasn't going to type it on here.
But please be sure to multiply my outrage by the 25% or so that are against this nomination and see how much that comes to money wise.
Oh crap. No need to drag all that baggage and allegation in here. I think it's fair to say that all of us want nothing but the best for the country, and for the men and women who put their very lives on the line so we can have a whack at preserving our form of government.
This thread is about filling vacant seats on SCOTUS, and the political fallout that results from errors in judgement in that regard.
The President won't be so bold when conservatives don't show up for the midterms. Then again, with the spending going on now, with no veto's, how can a Dem. Senate be any worse.
If someone calls me a traitor, I'll put a Dan Post boot in their @$$. Strong arming conservatives and giving the gald hand to Dems and RINOs. OK. From the heartland, it appears that the dudes in this WH have become a bit too big for their fancy britches.
Good point. They already gave them what they wanted, a candidate like Harriet Miers.
No, it is not fair to say that all of us want that.
Those of us who support the President want that.
Thanks. I guess it's just Bush personally. We've all become somewhat accustomed to defending him against unreasonable criticism. Perhaps it's just an axiomatic reaction for some, irrespective of whatever he actually does. Or, it's the pure faith he appealed to. But, note someone mentioned Nixon. Nixon had about 20% support at time of resignation. Perhaps there's an element of the Republican Party that will never question whether the leader is in error, irrespective of how much harm any particular decision has done or is doing.
"That is why we have judicial hearings. What is it about letting the process take its normal course that bothers you? Seriously? I can not for the life of me figure out the Anti-Miers crowd insatiable blood lust to cleave this woman in half before she has had a chance to speak for herself. Someone. Anyone please explain this to me."
Do you really believe that the White House is interested in having an open debate about Ms. Miers' record during the hearings? At that point, the mantra will be "she's made it this far... don't reject her now."
So I say... now is as good a time as any to begin debating Ms. Miers' qualifications and conservative credentials.
If Ms. Miers is wrongly rejected (i.e. she truly is a conservative but doesn't make it through the process), the White House will nominate a conservative with a long track record, and Ms. Miers will lose her chance but our country will still benefit from the end of liberal judicial tyranny.
If Ms. Miers is wrongly confirmed (i.e. she proves to be a liberal such as Souter and Kennedy both nominated by Republican presidents), Ms. Miers will get "her chance" and our country will be paying for another 20 years.
You are not drinking kool aid, dude. You've been dropping acid. Mona Charen is evil? Brett Bozell is evil? Mark Levin is evil? Phyllis Schlagly is evil? If you think that, you have some severe psychiatric issues that need urgent treatment.
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.