Posted on 10/27/2005 12:32:09 PM PDT by bigsky
Since Harriet Miers withdrew her nomination to the Supreme Court, Democratic senators such as Barbara Boxer, Diane Feinstein, Chuck Schumer, and Dick Durbin—i.e. all the people who had absolutely nothing to do with Miers’ withdrawal—have been blanketing the airwaves with demands that Bush must now accede to their commands. So it’s good to see Democrats are still working on getting in touch with reality.
The Democrats didn’t utter a note of disagreement with the Miers nomination. But now they say her withdrawal is their victory, which Bush must be forced to acknowledge by nominating a candidate to their liking. I believe that’s what got Bush in trouble in the first place: Listening to Democratic Senator Harry Reid, who recommended Miers for the Supreme Court.
Although the circumstances were unfortunate—we prefer fighting liberals to fighting our President—the Miers withdrawal is an unparalleled . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at humaneventsonline.com ...
Well, look at their constituents. Half the people here on FR think standing up for what we believe is really just throwing a tantrum and not being loyal to GWB. If the base itself won't stand up for anything, why should they? But now that some of us HAVE stood up, maybe we'll get some traction. No thanks to the bots.
Sometimes the first statement is the correct one. This White House isn't into excuse making like the toons'. I read the 1993 speech and didn't not see any pro-death indications. Even if she is, that could mean she changed or that she is a libertatrian, not exactly an enemy of the Constitution. I may not be sure about a lot of thing regarding this nomintation but I can be sure of three things.
1) The President thought she was a strict constructionist.
2) He knows everything about her and much more than any of us could hope to.
3) Without this hurdle, you and the other members of the OPFOR will still be protesting, rightly or wrongly.
Ann Coulter is at her best when she really seems to believe in something, and isn't just playing for ratings and image.
She showed that side with the Terri Schiavo case. And now, with this nomination, she showed it again. I trust her judgement about Mier's qualifications, since she has a background relating to this.
Besides that, it seems that a real lot of people were posting pictures of a mini-skirted, likeable Ann Coulter when she was agreeing with the administration, and then turn ugly on her when she has an independent opinion.
"The President will need "whiny moderates" like George Voinovich to vote for his next nominee. Alienating people that you'll need later is just foolish."
Well, if he nominates a real conservative this time, his base will let some of the whiney moderates in the senate know that their job hinges on getting her confirmed.
just tooooooo skinny
You can tell the people who supported Miers by how much they attack Coulter.
As for Fox News, they ARE drifting over to CNN-style lately, especially in their deplorable Hurricane Katrina coverage where Fox repeatedly ad naseum blamed FEMA's Brown and even President Bush for "deplorable" response to the disaster.
Shepard Smith, for heavens sake, reported as fact the "shootings" at helicopters and the raping of babies, not to mention Horaldo Rivera, who boldly claimed while standing in the Superdome that if Bush doesn't get his act together now, we are gonna have a riot of epic proportions.
Of course, that reporting has all been disgraced.
I'll leave the tepid interviewing of Chris Wallace for another day.
Suffice it to say that Ann Coulter is spot on brilliant in her rhetoric against President Bush, who tried to shoe-horn a pro-abortion, pro-quota lib into the highest, most important court in the land simply because she was a "friend of the family," and because he "knows her."
Unfortunately, GWB didn't know Harriet as much as he thinks, based on Miers' speech in 1993 (AFTER SHE SUPPOSEDLY saw the light and became a born again conservative.
BTTT
Not at all. The specific crack she made about the Fed Nominee is, as I said earlier, exactly the same type of crap we get routinely from Maureen Dowd. Adam Clymer, recall, drew the comment from George W. Bush -- and his columns were in the NY Slimes, as are MoDo's.
So when Ann Coulter uses MoDo's MO to slime GWB with a smarmy crack unrelated to the issue at hand, and compares his chief legal counsel to a cleaning lady, I suspect that the President probably thinks of her as a major-league a-hole. That's why I am currently referring to her as Maureen Ann Clymer. The shoe fits.
Most of the other commentators were able to oppose the nomination without resorting to personal smears and smarmy cracks about nominating a qualified Fed Chief. So I praise them and abuse M.A.C.
But it's ok if he alienates the conservative Republicans? If he is going to be alienating some group no matter what he does than I'd rather he alienate the libs and RINOs instead of the conservatives.
Direct language is a far far cry from insulting demeaning language.
Face it, she is wrong on this topic to attack Fox News as being to pro-GOP (they are not!).
Now if you want to scream up and down about GWB making a mistake over Ms. Miers....please try and be intellectually honest and consistent and call Ann out on her ridiculous attacks on Fox News.
Furthermore if you didn't support GWB with Ms. Miers that is fine. You don't trust the man. That is your right. But the next time you are defending his actions on the GWOT. Don't attack DEM's who say they don't trust him (because you don't either) - You only trust outcomes you agree with. There is a big difference.
It is just like how DEM's foolishly demand equal results....NOT equal opportunity.
As long as she doesn't pose in any skin mags.
If there hadn't have been a fuss it was pre-ordained that she would've been nominated with Dems supporting her.
The social-constitutionalist wing of the Republican Party, that elected GWB, finally said ENOUGH. Now, it's up to GWB to find a qualified, respected conservative nominee with impeccable standards.
I'm not going to address your conserned directly since the point is moot. But allow me to say who I would support:
Janice Rogers Brown
Age: 56
Education:
Cal State - Sacramento, B.A, 1974
UCLA Law School, J.D., 1977
University of Virginia, LL.M., 2004
Federal Judicial Service:
U. S. Court of Appeals for District of Columbia Circuit
Nominated by George W. Bush in 2003. Confirmed by the
Senate on June 8, 2005 by a vote of 56-43.
Professional Career:
Justice, California Supreme Court, 1996 - 2005
Associate Justice of the Third District Court of Appeal in Sacramento, 1994-1996
Legal Affairs Secretary to Governor Pete Wilson, 1991-1994
Associate, Nielsen, Merksamer, Parrinello, Mueller & Naylor, 1990-1991
Dpty Secretary & General Counsel, Business, Transportation & Housing Agency, 1987-1990
Deputy Attorney General, CA Attorney General's Office, 1979-1987
Here is what a woman looks like who is qualified to sit on the Sup. Ct. as a conservative, and who shares our family values :
While an undergraduate student working in the Department of Corrections, Janice met and later married Allen Brown. Her husband encouraged her in her career and supported her with enthusiasm. He and their son, Nathan, shared with her the tasks at home so that her role as a wife, mother and career woman was easier.
When Allen became ill with lung cancer, Janice left the very demanding work of litigation in the attorney general's office and accepted a position with the Business, Transportation and Housing Agency so that she could spend more time with her family. Her husband died in 1988.
For at least four generations, Janice notes that her family has been part of the church of Christ. That long family history of using the Bible as the single, undisputed standard for religious beliefs provided her with the foundations of her faith and fueled her analytical mind as well.
Apparently her fist husband died of lung cancer. Since 1978, Janice has been a member of Cordova Church of Christ in Rancho Cordova, Calif., where she worships with her mother, Doris Holland, and her husband, Dewey Parker, whom she married in 1991. Janice has been active in the women's programs at the congregation, and Dewey helps with children's education programs. This is what Miers did not show me. A life dedicated to family and family values.
Here is an example of her brilliant mind and good character:
Freedom is not free. And it will never be the lasting legacy of the lazy or the indifferent. For what we ultimately pursue is a true “vision of justice and ordered liberty, respectful of human dignity and the authority of God.”
To a lot of the Bush sycophants, "conservative" now means "Agree with every Bush policy and nomination."
Talk about hijacking the meaning of a word...
Soth Park conservatives, to borrow from their vernacular, suck.
His base is not their base. You think Olympia Snowe needs the total support of the Right? McCain? Specter? Hagel? Collins? Voinovich? They'll be around long after he's gone -- regardless of what "his base" does.
BRAVO! Gotta love Ann, she is great!
(Thanks for the link)
I've noticed that Leftists don't generally go out of their way to access viewpoints they don't agree with. Yes, Coulter would drive liberals nuts IF THEY WATCHED HER, but they don't so her net effect is to energize the base
I'm not a believer of the philosophy of accomodating people who will still hate you anyway
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.