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

To: xzins; P-Marlowe; BibChr; jude24; Congressman Billybob
I think this withdrawal injures the president. He is obviously weakened.

He was weak to begin with. He did this entirely to himself.

Bush had an opportunity to follow up John Roberts with another home run. At school, when we were talking about this news soon after it broke, the unanimous opinion was that Roberts, while conservative, was a scholar of impeccable ability. No one thought he didn't deserve to sit on the Supreme Court bench.

Instead, he picked Miers - a woman we know nothing about. Where Roberts was cool and articulate on Constitutional law matters, Miers showed ignorance. During Robert's confirmation proceedings, he showed a firm grasp of Constitutional law. No one - even my most liberal friends - could deny he know what he was talking about. Miers showed no such command. What glimpses we had - and they were preciously scant - suggested she might just be out of her league.

And then, when Bush found that this nomination wasn't the bone to his base that he thought it was, he tried to pander, and it backfired tremendously. I was insulted by the whispering campaign that Rove tried with Dobson, trying to surriptitiously assure him that, "Psst. She's an Evangelical. Read between the lines." Unabashed pandering. I voted against Kerry because, even when he was right, he was clearly pandering to tell people what they wanted to hear. Bush fell into the exact same trap.

What does Bush need to do now? Pick another John Roberts - not a firebrand ideologue like Luttig or Janice Rogers Brown. He just doesn't have the political weight to push around to get that done. Rather, he needs to find someone who clearly knows what he is talking about. The person needs to be conservative, qualified, and confirmable.

The other thing Bush needs to do is end this affirmative action hiring crap. It shouldn't matter whether the nominee is a woman, Hispanic, or any other group he wishes to pander to. Pick a person based off of their knowledge of Constitutional Law and their judicial temperment, not their heritage or gender. Enough of the focus group pandering.

2,666 posted on 10/27/2005 12:49:43 PM PDT by jude24 ("Stupid" isn't illegal - but it should be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1317 | View Replies ]


To: jude24
Pick a person based off of their knowledge of Constitutional Law and their judicial temperment, not their heritage or gender.

Well, I hear Lawrence Tribe is available.

2,668 posted on 10/27/2005 12:51:33 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2666 | View Replies ]

To: jude24

psssst... see post 2,685.


2,690 posted on 10/27/2005 12:58:56 PM PDT by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2666 | View Replies ]

To: jude24
What does Bush need to do now? Pick another John Roberts - not a firebrand ideologue like Luttig or Janice Rogers Brown.

I respectively disagree. We cannot allow the rats and rinos to dictate who sits on the Supreme Court. If this battle isn't fought now, it will never be fought. Far too long we have acquiesed to the rats and rinos and what has it gotten us? A 90+ confirmation vote on Ginsberg. I'm sick of our civility. Fight now or destroy the future of Republican party over this. There is no other option. If Bush betrays us again, and seeks Reid's pre-approval over OURS, he will pay the politcal price again.

And not only that, it will end the Republican party. There is no point to being a Republican if our president cannot appoint a conservative justice to the Supreme Court.

None of us care if the Senate has to be shut down for an entire year over this. They'll vote the nominee in as soon as a BUDGET has to be passed. If that takes a month, a year, or never, I don't care.

Bush needs to keep his promise to us and stop playing games. I'm sick of the ninnies and the twits dictating policy. Fight or give birth to a third party that will respect it's conservative base. Many of us have had enough and I promise you it has nothing to do with being a Christian.

2,727 posted on 10/27/2005 1:16:06 PM PDT by Diplomat (Give me a real Conservative on the Supreme Court, or give me Republican party death!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2666 | View Replies ]

To: jude24; P-Marlowe; Alamo-Girl; betty boop
I have no real disagreement with anything you wrote. I do think there is political calculation in diversity appointments, but then again, I'm one who did support affirmative action so long as it was for a defined period of time. (OK, ok, I've got my flame retardant underroos on...flame away! :>)

In any case, I'm not yet convinced that Miers' conservative Christianity wasn't a part of the distaste some powerful persons had for her. I'll keep my eyes on that one to see that I hopefully am wrong.

I still think she should have been allowed to speak for herself.

Finally, I'm still not sure that this whole appointment wasn't some strategery that either backfired terribly or is working brilliantly. Unfortunately, those kind of memoirs get written years after a president is gone, so I'll probably never get to read about it.

On the other hand, I'll be with the Lord.

3,115 posted on 10/27/2005 6:34:13 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2666 | 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