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 ...
Miers has a fine record and certainly meets any qualification posed by the Constitution.
I stick to the Constitution not some ultra ultra imagination.
It's his to win or lose. Stop blaming the voters.
Second, don't put us down and call us names. You're ranting and raving about what we are doing to the base. Take a good look at yourself.
Third, this is a matter of principle. Many of us care more about conservative principle that party politics. Many of us voted for GWB for no other reason than to have him pick justices in the mold of Scalia and Thomas. It appears to me that this pick has betrayed that trust. We know that the hearing will be a kabuki theater and nothing of substance will be revealed.
Fourth, us dyed in the wool conservatives want to hold the GOP true to its conservative moorings. That is why RWR ran against Ford in 76. He lost in that year but his views prevailed and changed the world. This is the first skirmish in a new battle to hold the party to its moorings. I will try not to level personal attacks, but I believe the fight for the soul of this party is worth it.
Do you try to undermine your father when he is at work because you do not trust him ?
By invocation of the Hitler Rule you lose the debate. Thanks for playing and try again sometime.
So the personality is more important than the party's platform?
You forgot one small detail.
The ultimate ruler of our country is it's citizens, for they are the one's who vote.
President Bush cannot demean or bully the people who voted for him without massive repercussions.
It is YOU who believe there is a risk not the President. Let the Constitutionally mandated process continue.
Whatever
"And they'll turn around and blame us that dared to only support him 98% of the time and not 100% of the time."
Ha! You're probably right about that. Kudos.
So, are you just THRILLED! with the pick? or not?
I'm ticked off at the baggage that comes from flying the Constitution in the dark. With Democrats holding the bar at 60 instead of 50.
Do you take out public ads to undermine him while people are trying to get him fired (even as he is responsible for many people's lives during a war) ?
That a lotta dog for a tiny tail to wag.
"Fourth, us dyed in the wool conservatives want to hold the GOP true to its conservative moorings. That is why RWR ran against Ford in 76. He lost in that year but his views prevailed and changed the world. This is the first skirmish in a new battle to hold the party to its moorings. I will try not to level personal attacks, but I believe the fight for the soul of this party is worth it."
That is a great post.
This has nothing to do with "personality" and such a comment indicates the depth of understanding those who want to see the constitution process continue are arguing against.
I and others don't believe the president is doing his duty. Does the First Amendment of the Constitution grant us the freedom to speak out against his nomination? Or should we be arrested? Are we guilty of treason?
You just proved what I suspected. No one except leftist and liberals use the term "Whatever"!!
You must be from the DU.
Stating the Republicans are EVIL people.
Sheesh.
You are free to to do all of the above. You are so special you can even do it with Cindy Sheehan.
Unless that Senator explained that the unconstitutional filibuster interposed since Clinton nominated Ruth Buzzie has resulted in Bush nominating someone with a record which is incapable of being reasonably discerned. Tough sell, I acknowledge, but it would fly if a large enough contingent of demonrats voted against her to make it possible for her to be voted down with only a few republican votes. That's about the only scenario I see at this point for discrediting the filibuster (the demonrats would have voted against a nominee from their list). Once the filibuster is discredited, Bush can nominate Robert Bork if he wants to.
Conservatives should be trying to convince democrats that she's a bad choice, not trying to convince conservatives that she is.
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.