Posted on 10/27/2005 6:09:25 AM PDT by procomone
WASHINGTON - Harriet Miers withdrew her nomination to be a Supreme Court justice Thursday in the face of stiff opposition and mounting criticism about her qualifications.
Bush said he reluctantly accepted her decision to withdraw, after weeks of insisting that he did not want her to step down. He blamed her withdrawal on calls in the Senate for the release of internal White House documents that the administration has insisted were protected by executive privilege.
"It is clear that senators would not be satisfied until they gained access to internal documents concerning advice provided during her tenure at the White House — disclosures that would undermine a president's ability to receive candid counsel," Bush said. "Harriet Miers' decision demonstrates her deep respect for this essential aspect of the constitutional separation of powers — and confirms my deep respect and admiration for her."
I just woke up from a horrible dream, Toto!!!
How is Harriet Miers "not a conservative"?
I mean, specifically? IF Limbaugh, Kristol, Coulter and others epitomize "conservative" to your view, and the view of others, then the GOP has more problems than just Miers.
The only thing so far I can see as to Miers' past opinions that can be called into question among the "conservative" test is that she supported one application of affirmative action. But even that was framed in a certain area and also not even yet explained by her as to her thinking involved ("conservatives" have not allowed her the opportunity to do that).
Funny but today all the media spokespeople among notorious liberals now are saying pretty much exactly what the so-called conservatives in media have been complaining about as to Miers. They're all saying the same things, with only minor differences. I see nothing "conservative" about the complaints about Miers, so far. Now we'll never know.
Bush will be replacing Miers with a moderate who will get confirmed and the S.C. will continue to slide into liberal legislating land, with the help and cheerleading of the so-called "conservative media" among us.
"Solid conservative" is not going to get past the Senate as to any nominee, unless we find John Kerry and Teresa in a black mass in Berlin honoring Hitler.
RINOS LIKE ME??? You in the fu^%$ do you think you are talking to, you newbie moron.. Get real, you have been played for a chump, and with a stupidly simple plan, and don't even see it coming or going.. Rino indeed.. Jerk!
That is the main qualification in my eyes, but I haven't read that in the Constitution either.
I also believe that Harriet Miers would have upheld the Constitution.
Many here are overlooking that a persons "qualifications" are subjective to the person that nominated them and the the views of the American People.
How many of you outside of Texas new much about the President before he was nominated, shoot, before he was my governor. If you were to judge him based on your perception of his qualifications how did he get elected based on his prior achievements and failures. He had a "colorful life" at best and had failed businesses and sych to his credit, but he had one thing I love, character. He does what he says. We elected him on what he "said" he would do.
Miers said she would defend the Constitution, I believed her and so did GW.
Thanks. It's a crying shame that the circumstances are what they are, truly a shame.
. I will have a good day, but find it a shame that people in my own party can be so turn coat and so demanding in their own temper tantrums.
I agree. Now they can get a insider. Outsiders need not apply. I have supported conservative Republicans for the last 40 years but I will sit the next elections out. Time to disperse some of the power. Most are riding a ego trip and have only been around 10-15 years. They haven't experience 30 years of Dem. rule yet. My life and decisions is not determined by pundit agenda. I always have a nice day regardless of politics. My security is in my head not in a Government or pundit.
"Borking is attacking someone based on little to no facts and scewing those facts to attack that person."
By your definition, then, Miers was not Borked. She was opposed on valid grounds.
"If your justifying Borking based on "moral equivalency"
No, I am saying that to equate what the scumbag left did to Bork with the moderate and valid criticism of Miers is to draw a false moral equivalence.
Thank you; I'm doing my best. I am humbled by your support.
Yep, he's learned that conservatives will turn on him like a pack of dogs just as fast as liberals will.
Maybe it was a case of Bush would turn on his conservative base in a heartbeat, to please his wife, to please a crony, to run down the hall and find a woman, to pick a candidate for all the wrong reasons.
" And what facts did the National Review get wrong?"
You're missing how Borking works. It's done by taking something factual, such as a statement saying that courts are sometimes forced into doing things because the legislature has failed to do their duty, and claiming it's support of judicial activism.
By the way, she happened to be talking about State support of schools in Texas, and the Texas constitution requires the State to provide free public education. The courts requiring the State to meet their constitutional obligations isn't Judicial activism. It's a purely constitutional approach.
"Rino indeed."
No, you don't look like a rino to me. You look like someone whose loyalty to the Republican Party trumps his loyalty to the Constitution.
I'm taking it a bit differently. I don't think Republicans will ask for internal documents on Gonzales. The only reason they asked for them on Miers is because they didn't have anything else to go on. That and they wanted to know what Dobson "knew". Gonzales is better known; they don't need internal documents.
Whoever the next nominee is will have to be humble. He/she will always be known as Bush's 2nd choice.
She supported quotas, set asides, called abortion clinic protestors terrorists, disparaged the Federalist Society, supported Judicial activism (when legislatures didn't have the "will" to make hard decisions).
She certainly has no record of solid conservatism, and nothing in her past would lead me to believe she would be a strict constructionist or originalist Justice.
Bush passed over several known quantities to choose his *personal lawyer* The classic definition of cronyism.
To suggest she was more qualifed than other potential nominees is an insult.
"I also believe that Harriet Miers would have upheld the Constitution."
The question in many peoples' minds was, would she be able to uphold the constitution?
I don't think so. I think the Robert Reichs and Anthony Kennedys would have played her like a little toy drum.
It's about abortion. And what is so tragic for those opposed to her, Ms. Miers being an evangelical Christian probably would have been a vote against abortion.
Well said.
What's sad is that at best they rasied some questions that could have been ansered through the the questionaires and the confirmation process.
There were some comments in speaches and spme stances on issues in the past that needed to be better explained. Those will be present in any nomination process. They always have been.
What these extremist people on the right did was to take those few things that needed clarified and said that their interpretation of those few items they were able to disagree with represented Miers views.
People have every right to disagree with the President's nominee and fight against their confirmation. However the manner in which these people fought Miers was deplorable.
How about Alito?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_A._Alito,_Jr.
Samuel A. Alito Jr. (born April 1, 1950) is a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. His ideological likeness to United States Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonin Scalia has earned him the nickname "Scalito."
Alito was born in Trenton, New Jersey. He graduated from Princeton University with an A.B. in 1972, and went to Yale Law School, where he earned a J.D. in 1975. From 1981 to 1985 he was Assistant to the United States Solicitor General, and was Deputy assistant to the U.S. attorney general from 1985 to 1987. After a brief stint as U.S. Attorney for the district of New Jersey, he was nominated by George H. W. Bush in 1990 to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. His chambers are in Newark, New Jersey.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_A._Alito%2C_Jr."
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.