Posted on 10/03/2005 5:12:53 PM PDT by Mike10542
Can we beat this pick? I don't think so, but we can try. Here are three options:
1) Try to beat her in committee - A possibility, but highly unlikely. Enought Democrats would vote for her, that it wouldn't matter if we can get 2-3 Republicans not to.
2) Try to beat her on the floor - Never going to happen. We would be lucky to get 4-5 Republicans to vote against her and I believe most Democrats will vote for her. Bush will probably only need 5-10 Republicans once the Democrats decide voting for her as a whole is in their best interests. (45 Dems plus 5-10 Republicans equals confirmed)
3) We force Miers to withdraw her name by making it clear we will sit this battle out (there won't even be one to fight) and the 2006 election if she is confirmed.
While I don't actually think sitting out an election and letting liberals win is ever a good idea, it is our only option here. I suggest anyone with the capability to start a website or petition simply stating "If Bush does not withdraw Miers name and replace her with a known originalist, I will not contribute any time, money or my vote in the 2006 elections. Enough people sign that and we may be getting somewhere.
So I go with my third option. Oh and by the way, before anyone on here accuses me of being a Bush hater, look at my past posts. I supported Roberts the whole way through and bashed people on here that didn't But come on, even I can see the writing on the wall here. Enough is enough. Cronyism + unqualified + 60 years old + unknown judicial philosophy = BAD PICK!!!!!
You flatter yourself, sir. Why don't you just vote for "None of the Above". That'll show 'em.
Even if we get a Republican president, I am not convinced we will get on who has committed to Thomas/Scalia clones on the court. So, this was our chance to get one who is very young installed for few decades. Lost it.
I agree. I doubt if Dubya would have nominated her if he didn't like where she was at. She's tried to fight for life with the bar association, even if she didn't win, she belongs to a conservative Christian church which is strongly pro-life, and from all accounts is a good person, and has worked with Bush a lot.
A lot of people today have been acting like lovers who found out their significant other betrayed them.
Talk about overreacting.
There are reasons, good reasons, why he picked this person to nominate. I trust his judgment about her character, and the more we listen, the more we will learn.
Must be something like an organist. We don't have one right now but we do have a pianist. Do you suppose that will be good enough?
I don't know what they feed them on the SC, but they seem to live forever. I wouldn't oppose Meirs on her age alone, at this point (and women live longer than men).
What a pathetic waste of band width.
Maybe everyone should post a stupid vanity instead of posting their ideas on any of the several related threads.
I know what they meant.... just reminded me of Spinal Tap and the band The NEW Originals!
What part of that is difficult to understand?
The part about "I need." Meirs' mother is 93. Meirs could very well serve as long as Stevens has.
I'm 99.9% positive you know nothing about her.
She can and will be portrayed as a lightweight on Constitutional law. That's where she'll twist in the wind. I really don't think it's going to take much activism. Just wait and see, there will be plenty of Senators who will want to disassociate themselves with the idea of confirming her, both pubbies and rats.
I'm not saying that she won't be confirmed. I am saying that her confirmation is far from a sure thing and that she may in fact get voted down or withdrawn.
For the record, the day Roberts was nominated I predicted he'd get at least 70 votes in the Senate. He ended up with 78.
Cronyism + unqualified + 60 years old + unknown judicial philosophy = BAD PICK!!!!!
While I agree somewhat with this equation, in the end I do belove that GW consults with our Lord each day and has been guided in his decision. Romans 13 would be a good chapter to review for all of us.
I like this guy's take on her (and the selection process in general):
http://frum.nationalreview.com/archives/09292005.asp
Why did you bash them? If they aren't allowed to have a difference of opinion why should you be allowed to?
Cronyism + unqualified + 60 years old + unknown judicial philosophy = BAD PICK!!!!!
While I agree somewhat with this equation, in the end I do belove that GW consults with our Lord each day and has been guided in his decision. Romans 13 would be a good chapter to review for all of us.
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.