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

To: KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle

Good! Maybe at last Bush will get it into his head that we put him in office and to appoint judges we want, not what he wants.


2 posted on 10/26/2005 12:01:35 AM PDT by Bommer (TEXANS - VOTE NOV 8TH FOR PROPOSITION 2 - THE MARRIAGE PROTECTION AMENDMENT)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Bommer

Harriet still hasn't asked Dubya to withdraw her nomination. Either she's not as loyal as we've been led to believe or she doesn't read newspapers -- neither option bodes well for the future.


3 posted on 10/26/2005 12:03:30 AM PDT by Steve_Stifler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Bommer
Maybe at last Bush will get it into his head that we put him in office and to appoint judges we want, not what he wants

During his bid for Republican votes he made it clear he wanted the same kind of Justices WE wanted. The kind of Justice we want hasn't changes since we believed him and pulled the lever beside his name.
5 posted on 10/26/2005 12:07:54 AM PDT by msnimje (The "Soft Bigotry of Low Expectations" makes its way to Supreme Court nominations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Bommer
Maybe at last Bush will get it into his head that we put him in office and to appoint judges we want, not what he wants.

What the hell does that mean? Who is POTUS? What do you know about this nominee? Besides, it is not "Bush" it is either President Bush, or W as an affectionate note of endearment. Some folks need to go back to DUmmmie Underground and hibernate until their friends like The Beast emerge.

21 posted on 10/26/2005 1:35:34 AM PDT by Cobra64
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Bommer
Politely... since his last Crawford vacation, the boy's been 'off-his-feed'... 'not-on-his-game'.

Impolitely... simply 'stuck-on-stupid'.

43 posted on 10/26/2005 5:41:02 AM PDT by johnny7 (“What now? Let me tell you what now.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Bommer
IMO, this is a situation where the head of the search committee selected herself for the position. "Mr. President, I've looked everywhere for the most qualified candidate for you to nominate, and it's, well... me!"

Granted, the same thought process gave us Dick Cheney as VP, but Harriett Miers is no Dick Cheney (no matter how much alike they look).

59 posted on 10/26/2005 6:10:57 AM PDT by JHL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Bommer
Maybe at last Bush will get it into his head that we put him in office and to appoint judges we want, not what he wants.

You need to get it into your head that if you want to appoint SC justices, YOU run for office.

Until then, the President gets to appoint who HE wants to the Supreme Court, and you can agree or disagree.

84 posted on 10/26/2005 7:18:12 AM PDT by sinkspur (If you're not willing to give Harriett Miers a hearing, I don't give a damn what you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: Bommer

Good???

What in the heck are you reading that indicates Miers is going to be withdrawn?

And by the way, you're wrong about your whole philosophy of elections in a republic. We elect people who we ask to do the best in THEIR judgement, not to ask them to take a poll of what WE want before they act.


132 posted on 10/26/2005 10:13:44 AM PDT by AFPhys ((.Praying for President Bush, our troops, their families, and all my American neighbors..))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

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