posted on 10/14/2005 6:47:26 PM PDT
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
The answer is easy...it was either Bush or Gore, or Bush or Kerry....
I have a wait and see attitude about Miers and yes I do trust Bush as much as I can trust any politician.....but the question is pretty lame.
posted on 10/14/2005 6:51:45 PM PDT
Well, who the hell were we going to vote for? Our choice was what? Bush or Gore/Kerry----oh I forgot we had Nader in there and the Libertarians (who I have a soft spot for in amny things). The SCOTUS choice is far bigger than the concerns of social conservatives. It has a lot to do with more of an originalist approach and each branch of government operating as it is supposed to. Ok I am not minimizing the concerns of social conservatives but look at the bigger picture--and still I think Miers falls short.
posted on 10/14/2005 6:54:56 PM PDT
by brooklyn dave
(Allah is a Moon god)
Who ate all the strawberry ice cream?
posted on 10/14/2005 6:55:13 PM PDT
(Open Borders: The RINOcracy waging class warfare against American wage earners)
The conservative intelligentsia sees the President's membership in the social conservative club overshadowing their power to control the dissemination of conservative information, and they are having none of it.
This is the lamest Mier's thread I've seen posted all week. The author maligns the motives of sincere principled conservatives, just like every other article quidnunc has been posting lately. Is your purpose to demonize and split a significant portion of the party?
The Republican Party isn't a religion where the leader gets the doctrine of infallibility applied to his decisions.
My other choice was John Kerry.
The religious conservatives, with no particular knowledge of Roberts, immediately got on board. Why? Because they trusted the man who nominated him.
No that is not why. We did not blindly trust Bush. But we looked at Roberts record of working for Rehnquist, working for Reagan, working for Bush. We saw a long history of supporting Republicans and making rulings based on Constitutional principles. We have none of that with Harriet. Harriet has supported more Democrats in her life than Republicans. Maybe Harriet has changed, but we are not confortable hoping.
What makes you think they voted for him or he was their first choice?
This place was banana's when he got the nomination. Almost as bad as it is now.
posted on 10/14/2005 7:01:40 PM PDT
After his failure to secure our open border with Mexico, even after 9-11, I don't trust him.
But the choice was between Bush and Kerry: arsenic or cyanide.
posted on 10/14/2005 7:01:52 PM PDT
by Travis McGee
(--- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com ---)
I mistakenly believed that after re-election, Bush could be convinced to control the borders. Now my support is for the WOT and not much else.
posted on 10/14/2005 7:02:02 PM PDT
(MSM rioted over Katrina and looted the truth)
Because Bush promised to put good solid conservatives of the breed of Scalia and Thomas on the Court. He did not compromise on court appointments during his first term, preferring to endure the filibuster, so it looked like a good bet to vote for him again in 2004 on the basis of these promises. That was also the reason why people worked so hard to increase his majority in the Senate.
Now he has broken his promise. It's not the first time that a politician has done so, but I will say that Bush is usually a man of his word, which makes it all the more disappointing. Maybe he thought he was doing the right thing by nominating Miers, but now he needs to think again.
posted on 10/14/2005 7:02:45 PM PDT
All this optimism was based not on who would be the likely nominees, but on who would be the one to pick such nominees
Not really, at least not for me. Bush made a very specific campaign promise to nominate folks like Scalia and Thomas. He should expect us to see if his nominees actually measure up to that standard.
Assumes facts not in evidence.
posted on 10/14/2005 7:09:38 PM PDT
(It's never right to do wrong to do right.)
I was Charlie Brown and he was Lucy holding the football. He said he'd appoint Scalia or Thomas types to the Supremes and my brain didn't remember that he's the son of the "Read my lips" Bush. He's "conservative", not a conservative.
posted on 10/14/2005 7:10:10 PM PDT
This may be the dumbest article I've sort of read today.
(skipped through to the ending "Trust & obey, for there's no other way" quote)
Adam and Eve ate from the Tree of Knowledge, OK? That's why God kicked us out from our jobs as head of the dumb animals food chain.
It wasn't all down-side: so we sweat for a living. We also got the power to think for ourselves.
And I think this article is stupid.
posted on 10/14/2005 7:11:11 PM PDT
I choose to support our President and to follow the rules set forth in our Constitution. He nominates and the Senate performs due diligence and provides advice and consent.
I expect and demand that following the Hearing a fair up or down vote be taken by the full Senate. I will accept the result of a fair up or down vote.
I am proud to be an American. We should all remember the following:
I AM an AMERICAN
I AM an AMERICAN. I am not white, I am not black, I am not red , I am not yellow. I AM an AMERICAN, not because of my religious or philosophical beliefs but because of principals and ideals that were handed down to me by my Forefathers. I am not rich but neither am I poor because I AM an AMERICAN and I have the right to pursue life, liberty and happiness.
I am not a REPUBLICAN, DEMOCRAT, MODERATE, INDEPENDENT, or LIBERTARIAN. I am not a conservative nor am I a liberal. I AM an AMERICAN and I AM FREE to go where I want to go, to do what I want to do and to say what I want to say but I do not believe I have the right to harm my fellowman or indulge in conversation or perform malicious acts that would dishonor my God, Family or Country.
I AM an AMERICAN not because I live in America but because America lives in me. I am not free because of our President, Senate, Congress, Supreme Court or Free Press. I am Free because BRAVE and COURAGEOUS men and women endured hardships and made many sacrifices to preserve the Way of Life our Founding Fathers birthed when they drafted and adopted our Great Constitution and started this Nation on the pathway of Democracy.
I am forever indebted to our MILITARY, past and present, for it is they who have fought, shed blood and even died, to protect and defend our sacred homeland. It is our Military that should be honored as Heroes because it is they who will battle forces that would try to take away my Freedom and deny me the God given Right to say I AM an AMERICAN.
By, Ray Cornelius
posted on 10/14/2005 7:12:55 PM PDT
by Colonial Warrior
("I've entered the snapdragon part of my life....Part of me has snapped...the rest is draggin'.")
Trust and verify. For a politician to prate of 'leadership' should be political suicide. A pol must be effectively led by his constituency else his thoughts turn to re-election and pandering to the dumbest of the masses. Democracy, the rule of fools by fools.
posted on 10/14/2005 7:20:15 PM PDT
(The conspiracy of ignorance masquerades as common sense.)
One of the key issues in the 2000 & 2004 elections was the upcoming vacancies on the Supreme Court. A lot of money and work was put in by many folks to get Republicans in positions to nominate and approve good candidates.
Instead of good verifiable nominees we get stealth candidates, that we hope will be good Supreme Court Judges.
Republicans have been rolled by Democrats too often with Republican choices like Kennedy and Souter.
We want to know why liberals get to nominate and seat flaming ACLU card carrying liberals like Ruth Bader Ginsburg with almost no opposition while we have to nominate stealth candidates and hope they are good conservatives?
We fought, we won, we promptly surrendered!
posted on 10/14/2005 7:23:30 PM PDT
I voted for him in 2000. I didn't approve of the patriot act and its potential for abuse by future administrations. I decided to vote for third party candidates that more closely matched my desire for smaller, less intrusive government. But I don't understand why we are chastised for mistrusting our leaders even if we did vote for them. I would think it foolish to not keep an eye on those who are entrusted with power.
posted on 10/14/2005 7:23:41 PM PDT
Bush, and other elite Republicans, used the Conservatives as a vehicle to power. Now that they have it, who are we to question them? Lowly scum!
posted on 10/14/2005 7:24:07 PM PDT
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson