Posted on 10/14/2005 10:09:51 AM PDT by Ol' Sparky
Calls for Miers to withdraw get louder
Moves to mollify critics aren't working
Carolyn Lochhead, Chronicle Washington Bureau
Friday, October 14, 2005
Washington -- Calls by conservatives for Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers to withdraw her nomination intensified Thursday as White House efforts to reassure critics continued to backfire.
"The calls to withdraw are serious, and they're going to increase," said Manuel Miranda, chairman of the Third Branch Conference, a conservative alliance of groups interested in judicial nominations. "The more that we heard from the nomination's defenders, the more people became convinced that there was no substance in the nomination and that her friends were her worst enemies."
Miranda, a former aide to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., predicted that a critical point will arrive next week when the Senate returns to Washington from a recess.
By then, Republicans "will have gauged the feeling out in their constituencies, and at that point they will be able to determine whether the White House is delusional or not."
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
You know.... that is actually one heck of a good idea.
Nicely done, Vigilanteman!
... a recently converted Catholic???
"Yes, there's been too much made of it. It appears that most of the whining is about her lack of ivy league pedigree, that she's single, and a recently converted Catholic."
You've bought the White House spin hook line and sinker.
The President really needs to cut his losses now or there is going to be long-term damage to the party.
I've said it since day one... I think Miers is a sacraficial lamb for a larger Rope A Dope move by the White House...
Miers submitted.. cannot get past republicans...so Bush must "tail between legs" nominate a proven conservative.... Dems will attempt to rail and scream that the person is too conservative... and Bush can just go "Awe shucks, we already tried a more moderate Candidate, and the Republican's wouldn't let it... So I had to go more conservative, the people demanded it".... And the Dems ranting is basically nullified.
I may be writing too much into it, but I just don't see this as anything but...
one can only hope
Bush won't withdraw the nomination, and if I read her correctly, neither will Miers. He is loyal to his personal friends, if not his supporters, and she is exceedingly stubborn and determined.
She will pretty certainly be confirmed unless something really bad comes out in the hearings, which I really don't expect. She is too much of a professional, too skilled at getting along with people, for that to be at all likely.
Ham, you may be onto something. I don't think Bush did this -- or anything else, for that matter -- without playing it out six different ways from sideways in his own head...he's every bit the master of 'strategery' Limbaugh gives credit for, IMHO.
Frank - White House spin??? It was Ann Coulter who brought the pout about HM not being from a "good school." She wrote a whole stupid paper about it: "Does This Resume Make Me Look Fat?" Pee-yew!
That is a VERY good idea ...
Can you hear me now?
I think you're reading too much into it. Bush wouldn't nominate a loyal employee and friend to the court as part of a "rope-a-dope" scheme. He has too much respect and loyalty to people that serve him and do a good job doing so.
I think the Miers' nomination was a mistake on his part; more qualified candidates are out there. But I'm not going to get all in a twit about it; its the President's choice and unless something untold comes up in the hearings, the Senators will have a hard time voting against her. She will not be withdrawn and I expect she will be confirmed.
It's a sad day and a darn shame that W would have conservatives fighting among themselves because of this idiotic pick. Im only afraid that if Harriet "steps aside" W will stick it to his right and punish us for not "trusting him" with someone worse. What a waste of my last 20 yrs of support!!
It could just as likely go the other way.
Having been stung by activist conservatives witholding campaign money, and from Republican senators who join Dems in the judicial committee to torpedo Miers, Bush could nominate someone "moderate" out of spite. Or, as suggested in the article being linked to, Gonzales shoved down our throats. Same thing.
You're advocating ignoring the Constitution by forcing ideological votes for SCOTUS candidates? Is that a stated criteria for the Senate's advise and consent role?
"The President really needs to cut his losses now or there is going to be long-term damage to the party."
Caused by the party itself. All the president did was nominate someone he believed in, someone he knows far better than any of her detractors. That's his perogative. He was the one elected, not these litttle POed talking heads and arm-chair quarterbacks. You know, the ones who stand to do long term damage to the party.
If she is not acceptable, she will be voted down. That's the way it works. The truth that so many here ignore is the majority of people of both parties are undecided until they hear from her in the confirmation hearing, me included. All this knee-jerk negativity is nothing but DU inspired drivel. The preident didn't nominate an well known activist so it's not good enough.
Admittedly, I have a different opinion of FR since Miers nomination was announced. When some people here argue against her, they spin the facts and plain old make crap up like kool-ade drinking liberals. The only difference between some FReepers and DUers is ideology. The tactics, hyperbole and rhetoric are the exact same.
"Such as?"
Carswell, Haynsworth were rejected without much fight and amid much complaining about their qualifications. Ginsburg (sp?) was forced to pull his name for allegedly having smoked marijuana but again without much help. I don't have a complete list of all those who never came to a hearing but were forced to withdraw because the party would not give them support, but I would be suprised if it is all that rare. Even Bork did not get all the Republicans.
"Such as?"
Here's an example:
http://thenexthurrah.typepad.com/the_next_hurrah/2005/04/bush_nominees_f.html
"But Griffin is a symbolic figure in the broader fight on the filibuster, because in 1968 his father, Republican Senator Robert Griffin of Michigan, used the filibuster to scuttle Lyndon Johnson's nomination of Justice Abe Fortas to Chief Justice of the Supreme Court."
The President isn't causing the damage. The anti-Miers crowd is. By demanding standards for approval votes that are not in the constitution, you're inventing a brand new ideological standard that is going to come back and bite us in the @ss. It's time you wake up and see the damage you're causing...which is far worse than what the democrats have done with the fillibuster.
The JRB crowd . . . look, why not make this easy. Why not call or email the 7 RINOs and ask them if they will support her.
It's that simple. If they say yes, you're in. If they say no or they won't answer, you are being foolish.
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.