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 ...
Nah. I enjoy being acccountable. Plus, I'm bald.
I am flattered though. Seriously. Thank you very much.
It's not a GOP split, it's a base split and it will be the end of any hopes for the White House in the future unless some candidate emerges that can put it back together.
It looks like she is at the very least a RINO. My experience with Texas Dems that have switched to the Republican party is that you can't trust'em.
Case in point...Rick Perry.
I'm more conservative than any of them. I'm also more loyal than any of them.
Would "purist fanatics" be better. :->
I hate to use the term 'other side' when talking with fellow conservatives. What is the shorthand we can use for those who want Miers to withdraw?
I don't personally care what I am called -- kool-aid drinker, bushbot, whatever. Not very polite, but I choose not to be upset. Anyway, I like kool-aid, and I trust Bush when he says it isn't poisoned.
"Base split", "GOP split", I'm not up to speed on all the poll driven politikin' terminology and stuff. I'll take your word for it though, "base split" has a nice ring to it. GOnna make it hard though, 'casue it seems those on "The Side of The Force" want dibs on being called the base.
GWB has the helm. He can fix it if he wants to.
I'm watching.
I don't have issue with Dobson
I did not read that as a repudiation of his impolite personal attack on the man.
You said he had a right to be in politics, but that would be true even if you agreed that he was a moron.
So I think it is unfair to chastise me for complaining about a personal attack on a man who said nothing but what he believed, who attacked nobody here.
Who is really a RINO?
Someone who is going along with the Republicans for now but will desert the GOP and vote third party if all their issues are not implemented immediately could also merit the term RINO.
There was a time in my living memory when the Republicans had a liberal wing and those who are called RINO now were in the center of the party.
As the country has become more polarized, the liberal Republicans have become Democrats or Libertarians, and the conservative Democrats have become Republicans or written books like A National Party No More.
Parties are coalitions of people who are willing to set aside certain differences in order to achieve some mutual goal. There is no fixed philosophy carved in stone for any political party.
Using the term RINO is an ad hominem, not a cogent argument. It's better to state your disagreements and explain why you believe it is better for the Republican party to back a certain stand you care about.
I prefer no name calling. But, that is just me.
Seemingly the intent of this particular post was to use it as yet another avenue to do just that.
Color me unimpressed with the waste of space.
Still waiting on documentation of a Judicial philosophy and specific understanding of the text of the Constitution. Ping me when you find it.
There is none, nor has there ever been, a split in the GOP. The ones who are causing the most ruckus "within", are not even people who belong to the GOP to begin with. They're embeds either from the DNC or some loser third party. This is how either one of them can win. They can't win by being truly honest about who they really are.
Ah, so you are determined to sink low and impugn my character. I'm shocked.
Again, character attacks substituting for being unable to defend the nominee aside from "Trust Bush.
It was a repudiation of the content, or else I wouldn't have bothered with a response at all. I now repudiate any reason to engage in conversation with you since you offer nothing to this debate.
Is that too much to ask? I've tried several names that I didn't think would offend "the side who want Miers to withdraw", but so far have been unsuccessful. So I asked for a suggestion from you. Why did you think I wanted to call you names?
I'm with you, waiting for some indication of judicial philosophy. Probably have to wait for the hearings, I doubt anything that comes out now will be acceptable.
This is however the normal time at which for a "normal" nomination we would start getting into the meat of her philosophy -- the 1st two weeks are usually for biography.
So maybe some tidbits will come out.
In the meantime, if you are really interested in an analysis of her legal and intellectual qualifications, I suggest you pop over to BeldarBlog, he's got a full collection there and he knows the law so he can actually comment on it.
I take it from your comments that you are voting me off the island.
That's for you to decide.
I was merely pointing out that your statement in response to that post did not suggest to me that you were repudiating the statement. I didn't say that you AGREED with the statement. I said that I didn't think I deserved to be attacked on the basis of your having made your statement.
Are you looking to pick a fight? That's OK, but I'm trying to let you get your punches in here in the hopes you will tire and find someone else to beat up.
That depends on how you run your island.
The problem may have been that President Bush wanted to appoint a woman.
Bush has great respect for women, and considering the influence that Condi Rice, Laura and Barbara Bush have had in his life, it is understandable.
Miers has been listed among the top 50 lawyers in the country for a long time. Who else is on that list?
Rumor has it that Priscilla Owens withdrew her name from consideration. Maybe Janet Rogers Brown did also, wanting more time on her new bench before going through that fight again.
I assume most of the top 50 women lawyers are Democrats or liberals. Who among the rest is also a reliable conservative vote for the Court?
Miers may have been the only available name that was in the top 50 that he trusted not to go liberal on him.
As I say, the problem may have been that he wanted to appoint a woman. He did go white male for his first pick despite expectations of a minority or woman.
Well, we will see if in the end it turns out as well as he is betting. I know a lot of us would have been happier if we hadn't had to hope, if we could have been sure, too.
But I am not one of those who wanted a fight to stick it in the eyes of the libs just because we had the power. My husband wants to stick it to them, but concedes George may have done the wiser thing in terms of getting the vote on the court, as in the end to him it's about having the "having their warm butt in the chair." ...his expression. :-)
I don't run an island. Even if I did, I'd be a benevolent dictator and give you 72 hour's notice.
I'm growing a bit attached to "the dark side" myself. I can't speak for all of us, I'm sure, but from the fellows I've been kiddin' around with, I don't think it'd be taken as an insult.
So you're kicking me off?
Wwaaaahhhh (insert crybaby graphic here - you could even put my handle on it)
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.