[presidio9]

The party might even consider doing what the Democrats did in the 2000 Senate race: importing their best candidate from somewhere else to vie for the New York seat. Hillary Clinton showed the Republicans how to play that game. Now why not turn the tables?

Because it's not necessary. Chucky Cheese can be beaten without resorting to the bush-league tactics employed by the Democrats. Why give them the satisfaction of pointing out that we are engaging in the same behavior we criticized them for. Because the intelligent members of the Democrat Party know that the are on the flat-out wrong side of every policy, they enjoy nothing so much as irrelevant topics that cloud the issues.

[sneakypete]

a moderate Hispanic Republican

Great! That's just what the country needs,yet one more "moderate" Republican to vote with the Dims on 99% of the issues. A "moderate" Republican in NY would be called a "communist" in Moscow.

Oh yeah,more "moderate Republicans" like Bloomberg and Guiliani are really what is needed. We could just go ahead and do away with the Dim Party and be done with it,because they will be us.

To those of you in NY who want to talk about how "good" Rudy is,you really need to get the hell out of NY.

[OrioleFan]

He would make a great addition to the Senate Judiciary Committee with Senator Sessions. The would make a great team of Senator Kennedy rejects - drive him to drinking.

[A2J]

a moderate Hispanic Republican

Hmmmm. Maybe the Democrats are doing us a favor by blocking him.

We don't need anymore stinking moderates on the bench, we need conservatives.

[PJ-Comix]

I think Hispanics are a lot more conservative than they are usually given credit for. I was recently dining with a Columbian chick I know and she told me when she was in ballet she had an opportunity to perform in Moscow but her father forbid her to go. I almost never talk politics when out on dates but I asked if she ever performed in Havana and got a violent reaction from her as she denounced the commies much to my pleasant surprise.

BTW, I am now giving her private English language lessons. Very private.

[syriacus]

This is a wonderful idea!!!

Poor Schumer must be in a daze, if he has heard of this idea.

I can picture Schumer in a isolation ward at Creedmore picking "dazey" petals,

I'll allow a vote, I won't allow a vote.
I'll allow a vote, I won't allow a vote

....

At last, I might have a Senator who answers my letters!!!! Joy! Joy! Joy!

Sore₂₀₀₂

LoserDems

[A CA Guy]

I would send him up all over again!

[CyberAnt]

Sorry WSJ - his title is JUSTICE MIGUEL ESTRADA - get used to it!!

[nutmeg]

Schmuck Schumer ping!

[votelife]

My email to W:

Dear President Bush, With the Surpeme Court session getting ready to close, it may well be time for perhaps the most important domestic decision of your presidency: the appointment of a Supreme Court Justice(s). The main reason why I supported you in 2000 and why I wanted Daschle out of power in 02 (and 04) has to do with the courts. I want America courts to interpret law, not write law. During your presidential campaign you said Thomas and Scalia were your two model justices. Those are excellent models. The High Court needs more like them. Clarence Thomas recently said to students that the tough cases were when what he wanted to do was different from what the law said. And he goes by the law. This should be a model philosophy for our justices. Your father, President Bush lost his reelection campaign for 3 main reasosn, as far as I can see. 1. he broke the no new taxes pledge 2. David Souter 3. Clinton convinced people we were in a Bush recession (which we had already come out of by the time Clinton was getting sworn in)

I urge you to learn from all three of these: 1. on taxes, you're doing great. Awesome job on the tax cut. 2. good job so far on judicial appointments. I want to see more of a fight for Estrada, Owen, and Pickering, but I commend you on your nominations. 3. by staying engaged in the economic debate you'll serve yourself well

I have been thoroughly impressed with your handling of al Queida, Iraq, and terrorism. You have inspired confidence and have shown great leadership.

But I want to remind you that your Supreme Court pick(s) will be with us LONG after you have departed office. I urge you to avoid the tempation to find a "compromise" pick. Go for a Scalia or Thomas. Don't go for an O'Connor or Kennedy. To be specific, get someone who is pro-life. Roe v Wade is one of the worst court decisions I know of, and it's the perfect example of unrestrained judicial power.

I know the temptation will be tremendous on you to nominate a moderate. But remember who your true supporters are. I am not a important leader or politician. I am "simply" a citizen who has been an enthusiatic supporter of you. I am willing to accept compromise in many areas of government but I will watch your Court nomiantions extremely closely. What the Senate Dems are doing right now is disgusting, but as the President you have the bully pulpit to stop it. Democrats will back down if you turn up serious heat on them.

Moreover, I think public opinion is shifting towards the pro-life position. Dems will want you to nominate a moderate, but almost all will vote against you anyways. Pro-choice Repubs will likely still vote for you if you nominate a Scalia, after all, you campaigned on it. So Mr. President, I urge you to stick with your campaign statements and nominate justices who believe in judicial restraint, like Scalia and Thomas.

Happy Memorial Day and may God bless you and your family.

[votelife]

Why Frist and all won't go 24/7 (Vanity)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/958139/posts?page=1