Posted on 10/14/2005 4:17:25 PM PDT by Stellar Dendrite
It's very interesting to go to RadioBlogger's july 2005 archives and read what Mr. Hewitt was saying about the SC back then. Here's a small sample. I'll put them all together, the perfect ingredients for a ** sandwich:
Hugh Hewitt on why federal judicial experience and a track record do matter:
You see, I've tried to explain to people about Judge Janice Rogers Brown, that she has not been a federal judge. And my concern over her and Priscilla Owen is, that federal judges just do different things than state judges. And I want to see a little bit from them, before you run as a conservative. I don't want to run blind. And I think she really hasn't done, for example, federalism issues, hasn't done federal pre-emption, hasn't interpreted the free exercise of the establishment clause, though there are Constitutional counterparts in California. That's my concern, Erwin. I just don't think they're reliable enough when it comes to understanding how they'll handle federal issues.
Hugh Hewitt on why age matters and why you don't want someone close to 60:
HH: You know, I had this argument with people earlier. I view every year as 70 votes. So when you trade from a Luttig or a Roberts at 50-51, or McConnell, or even a Miguel Estrada at 44, you're giving up seven hundred votes, seven hundred decisions. That's a lot of future influence for a president to give away to someone who he doesn't know who it's going to be.
and
Now let me close with Larry Thompson and Ted Olson, in the Washington Post write-up, as well as J. Harvey Wilkinson. They're all a little long in the tooth, really.
and now for the COUP DE GRACE. Hugh Hewitt on why Brilliance and Intellectual Greatness matter:
I want to pause for a moment, because you'll say great things about Luttig, Roberts and McConnell, as I have. There is an argument for brilliance that's got to be made here. And I don't know some of these judges. But those three I do, and they're brilliant. And brilliance matters, even if you're a dissent, because you've got to mold the law schools. You've got to mold the professions. You've got to look ahead. I think Bush needs to go for someone about whom there is no question of intellectual...the capacity for intellectual greatness.
Your Honor, Mr. Hewiit is GUILTY of fraud in his support for Miers. The evidence is clear and convincing, beyond a shadow of a doubt.
Just popped on the thread.
Any uber ultra stuff goin' down I should know about?
Bill Bennett said he was against the nomination on Hannity & Colmes last night.
How about this for a super duper off topic subject:
Angel Hair, yah Angel hair. Well it happened here today. It is supposedly a rare phonemonon and I couldn't find out exactly what causes it but I'm sure some FReeper will know more than I have been able to find.
Here is an old account of angel hair that happened exactly like that here today, and I've got witnesses.
The Roxburgh Castle was morred to her berth in Montreal on October 10, 1962. The Captain, Mr. R.H. Pape, was taking the air on the deck when he noticed "fine white filaments of unknown kind" draped around the railings and stanchions.
"Calling the attention of the chief officer, I pulled one of these strands from a stanchion and found it to be quite tough and resilient. I stretched it but it not break easily (as for instance, a cobweb would have done) and after keeping it in my hand for about three or four minutes it disappeared completely; in other words it vanished into nothing. Looking up ( the captain continued) we could see small cocoons of the material floating down from the sky but as far as we could ascertain there was nothing either above or at street level which could account for this extraordinary occurrence.
"The Marine Observer, 33:187, October 1963"
I couldn't believe what I was seeing today, the whole area was covered with this stuff. Just thought it strange.
Carry On.
For what it's worth Hugh has said from the frist that Harriet Miers was not his first choice.
Let's see which side goes negative first on this thread.
Beautiful. Thank you. Hewitt just lost all credibility on the Miers nomination unless he starts to oppose her based upon everything that he said here.
7 posted on 10/14/2005 6:22:00 PM CDT by Spiff
I think you have your answer,
Pray for W and Harriet Miers
"Hugh has said from the frist that Harriet Miers was not his first choice."
Was "from the frist" a Freudian slip?
Scalia received an A.B. summa cum laude in history from Georgetown University. He was the class valedictorian.
http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/legal_entity/103/biography
WooHoo! Another Miers thread!
With any luck Stern will be on Sirius about now.
I haven't made a final decision on this nomination, but I'm leaning against. Her resume doesn't lend itself to nominiation as Attorney General, much less a lifetime appointment to the United States Supreme Court.
Many of us are asking "why Harriet Miers?" and the answer we're being given is "why not?".
I'm not impressed. Let's have the hearings and find out what sort of jurist Miss Miers would be.
Memo to self: Read before hitting the post button...you idiot.
He's a fraud. HH was againts breaking the filibuster and for Specter chairing Judicary.
He had a "wait and see" approach is the type of mentality that has us in the fix we are now in.
Actually there is a lot more info on her than what Dubya thinks of her. The fact she is not Bob Bork is the reason she was nominated. Heck, I would love a down & dirty senate fight with Bork again. But it's not going to happen
"He's a fraud. HH was againts breaking the filibuster and for Specter chairing Judicary.
He had a "wait and see" approach is the type of mentality that has us in the fix we are now in."
I'm also thinking that he is a wolf in sheeps clothing. I was against Specter but HH pushed it with "we need to support the electable", I ain't buying it anymore, we need to fight for the conservative cause and screw HH. JMO.
<< .... conservatives [say] ..... she is not smart enough for their standards.
Someone, please explain how it is known that Miers is not the smartest mind to ever join the Court. >>
Her lower-mediocre-range LSAT score, decades ago, measured her IQ and established her unfitness, even before she scored similarly -- and thus confirmed it -- in her lower-mediocre-range law school.
She's a Hillary-esque-level no-neck low-brow room-temparature IQd lawyer. A hack. And, by the facts writ clear in her track record, a "Democrat" supporting liberal.
Well you are doing good. Some who ask "why Harriet Miers?" get "What's the matter with you, you disloyal traitor! Begone, go back to DU where you belong."
That's usually after pointing out that "Why not?" is not a responsive answer.
I almost spit out my popcorn. Good thing I wasn't taking a drink.
Hugh spends too much time at Disneyland, specifically Fantasyland. Lost me when he went for Arnie over Tommy.
LOL. There's another one on another thread. Not sure if it'll hit you like it did me.
You are hip that those who are seriously sceptical about this nomination are now labeled "cynical" per WH spokesman, right? Well, you are now. Check out ...
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1502829/posts?page=21#21
So did I, I didn't want to see Davis stay in office a day longer.
I was one of those who voted for Perot in 92 and got Clintoon, never again.
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.