Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush at War With Right Over Court Nomination (And why Rush Limbaugh &c are sadly mistaken)
The Telegraph ^ | October 17, 2005 | Francis Harris

Posted on 10/16/2005 6:40:03 PM PDT by quidnunc

The White House branded its increasingly vocal conservative critics as "cynical" yesterday as the dispute over President George W Bush's nomination of his official lawyer to the Supreme Court deepened.

Many Republicans have described Harriet Miers as unqualified for such an important job. They are lobbying for an ultra-conservative with an established judicial record.

Critics have seized on correspondence between Miss Miers and the Bush family to portray her as a lightweight.

Mr Bush's top aide, the White House chief of staff Andy Card, criticised the campaign by influential party figures to prevent Miss Miers's elevation to America's most powerful court.

"I'm a little surprised they came out of the box so cynically," he told a television interviewer.

The use of such language by a top Bush aide about prominent Republican party supporters was unprecedented, indicating a growing sense of desperation.

The White House has suffered a dire six weeks during which it has been criticised for the handling of Hurricane Katrina, the Iraq war and its legislative programme.

As Mr Bush's approval ratings have sunk to an all-time low, his chief strategist, Karl Rove, has faced questioning for his role in the leaking of a CIA agent's name.

To add to the Republican's woes, the party's "iron fist" in Congress, Tom DeLay, has been indicted for criminal conspiracy and money laundering.

He says the charges are politically motivated.

Newsweek magazine noted yesterday that the Bush administration was now being seen as "a political machine that has lost its bearings, and even its skill, in a whorl of war, hurricanes, scandal, internal strife and second-term ennui".

Such talk has increased the Bush team's determination not to suffer defeat on the Miers nomination. But many believe the case against her is already overwhelming.

-snip-

(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: miers
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 381-385 next last
To: IVote2

You miss the point. Once she goes into the hearing room it's all over. She will go to the Senate and be confirmed. After all, the Demrats recognize the closet social liberal she is.
There will be enough RINOs and rats to seat her. Want proof?
Harry Reid thinks she is wonderful and other rats are holdinding their fire. They are in a no-lose situation.


121 posted on 10/16/2005 8:42:13 PM PDT by hdstmf (too)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: indcons

Compromise? The Howard Deans are many things, but not compromisers. The party is dominated by the liberal left in a way that some conservatives would like to dominate the Republican party.


122 posted on 10/16/2005 8:43:13 PM PDT by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: af_vet_1981
During the Clinton administration when the Fed raised interest rates for no apparent reason, I called Rush's 800 line and suggested that the increase was an attempt by the Fed to pull investors away from the stock market and back to banks to improve liquidity ratios. About a week later Rush claimed some sort of epiphany on the interest rate issue and restated what I had suggested on the phone. IMO, Rush would not know bank liquidity from his a$$. He took someone else's idea, did some checking then claimed it as his own. Others on this board have has similar experiences with both the 800 line and Rush 24/7. I wonder how long it has been since Rush really had an original idea.
123 posted on 10/16/2005 8:43:53 PM PDT by gov_bean_ counter (It is easy to call for a pi$$ing contest when you aren't going to be in the line of fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Stellar Dendrite

Don't you know? Anyone who questions, in the least, any action of the President is guilty of treason. Anyone who suggests the need for a healthy debate over principles, is guilty of seeking the impeachment of the President. /s


124 posted on 10/16/2005 8:44:06 PM PDT by Don'tMessWithTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS

Ah.

You are comparing pro-Constitution pro-Life Pro Troops pro-fiscal responsibility and low taxes etc...to the Liberal wing of the party?

Those that supply Al-Quida with propaganda for al Jazeera? those that cheer our troops comparison to Pol Pot? those that support jacking taxes skyward and reciting foreign law?

Yes, what a fright it would be if conservatives controlled the Republican party.


125 posted on 10/16/2005 8:46:03 PM PDT by Soul Seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
This is beautiful...

I love the term RINO ... A true Republican would never leave the GOP, nor would they ever accept a victory by any Democrat, anywhere, for any reason whatsoever ... RINOs, sir or madam, are they who leave the ranks.

Then you are a RINO

Tell the truth - are you George Lakoff?

LOL...

126 posted on 10/16/2005 8:46:24 PM PDT by Ogie Oglethorpe (The people have spoken...the b*stards!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: gov_bean_ counter
I wonder how long it has been since Rush really had an original idea.

He has a tough job.

127 posted on 10/16/2005 8:47:11 PM PDT by af_vet_1981
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 123 | View Replies]

To: hispanichoosier

Excellent. Looks like you ran into two of FR's "South Park Republicans."


128 posted on 10/16/2005 8:48:19 PM PDT by I got the rope
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

To: I got the rope
It looks like all of Jim Jeffords' staff is online tonight ...

Tell me, how is Traitor Jeffords ?

129 posted on 10/16/2005 8:49:43 PM PDT by af_vet_1981
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: jdhljc169
I agree with Rush. Miers possibly being pro-life does not EQUAL overturning ROE.

It pains me to say it, but I think the President is taking advantage of people's faith in order to advance a political "agenda," and that agenda may or may not include taking the abourtion question out of the hands of SCOTUS.

Overturning ROE, by the way, only changes the venue for making abortion policy. Instead of at SCOTUS, each state Court will do the same thing. The big battle just splits into 50 little battles. See, e.g., Massachusetts Supreme Court mandating the Legislature to pass a law that codified gay marriage.

130 posted on 10/16/2005 8:50:28 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: jveritas
Rush Limbaugh is the best political analyst in the country and he is right over 95% of the time. Unfortunately his stand on the Miers nomination, and his analysis in this whole issue of being anti-Miers, is wrong, very wrong.

Well at least he is in good company.

131 posted on 10/16/2005 8:50:50 PM PDT by King Black Robe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

To hear the Bushbots sipping their kool aid tell it: Bush is the conservative mastermind and the 100+ some conservatives all across America who have been preaching the vision and leading the battles for the last 30 years are all to a one wrong? I am beside myself...


132 posted on 10/16/2005 8:50:57 PM PDT by Waywardson (Carry on! Nothing equals the splendor!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cahome
There are many of us - his base - who side with the President on his choice of Miers. He isn't fighting us.

Well, we could argue about who is entitled to be associated with the term "base." But that isn't going to advance anything, is it?

I think it is fairly evident the GOP is undergoing a split. It's at an early stage, and the internal battle lines and battle tactics are still fuzzy.

133 posted on 10/16/2005 8:53:50 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker

I think your point was that the Democratic Party is a bunch of compromisers. The simple fact is that they control the Democratic Party in a way that the Conservatives do NOT control the Republican Party. In any case. you are leaving the religious conservatives out, are you not?


134 posted on 10/16/2005 8:55:22 PM PDT by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker

they

meaning the liberal left.


135 posted on 10/16/2005 8:56:46 PM PDT by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: Soul Seeker

they

meaning the liberal left.


136 posted on 10/16/2005 8:56:50 PM PDT by RobbyS ( CHIRHO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: Don'tMessWithTexas
If you feel like you might need us, treat us with respect and do not patrronize us. If you feel like you don't need us, please tell us. It might be good for us to see where we stand.

I'll have what you're having. Guess you didn't get the memo. I was told to get the hell out of the party.

137 posted on 10/16/2005 8:57:27 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
We’re still paying for the Carter administration — the Iranian ayatollahs, the Panama Canal lost, a prohibition on oil drilling in Anwar and other national indignities.

What is different with Bush?

1] Carter's Iranian ayatollahs, or Bush spending $300 billion in Iraq while having knowledge that the Iranians are sending in terrorists and Iran makes most of the IEDs that are killing our troops--Bush does nothing, and even allows Iran to go nuclear.

2] Carter's "Panama Canal lost" or Bush's "New Mexico, California and Arizona lost" to Mexicans?

3] Carter's prohibition on oil drilling or Bush's failure to restart nuclear power plants while we pay $3.00 a gallon for gas?

Bush is starting to make Carter look like a world leader.

138 posted on 10/16/2005 8:57:34 PM PDT by Dont_Tread_On_Me_888 (Bush's #1 priority Africa. #2 priority appease Fox and Mexico . . . USA priority #64.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
I think it is fairly evident the GOP is undergoing a split.

Just like we did when Buchanan and Traitor Jeffords left.

139 posted on 10/16/2005 8:57:51 PM PDT by af_vet_1981
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 133 | View Replies]

To: hdstmf
There will be enough RINOs and rats to seat her. Want proof?
Harry Reid thinks she is wonderful and other rats are holdinding their fire. They are in a no-lose situation.

Not only no-lose, but also, no-confrontation. And, since the nominee is a cipher, no accountability. After all, how can you blame a Senator for guessing wrong?

Those wacky politicians, gotta love 'em.

140 posted on 10/16/2005 8:59:30 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 121 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 381-385 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson