Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Something We Can All Agree Upon Regarding the Miers Nomination
October 11, 2005 | Michael Katz

Posted on 10/10/2005 9:55:59 PM PDT by Mike10542

While it was obvious from the Roberts nomination that whoever Bush picks, there will always be a few freepers who for their own reasons (some valid, some not), don't like him or her. However, as my title mentiones, I think we can all agree, no matter where you stand on the Miers nomination, something is wrong with this pick when a week after the fact, it is US arguing over whether or not to try to kill the nomination, instead of who it should be (and was during the Roberts nomination), the DEMOCRATS!!!!!!!!! Again, you will never please 100% of the base, but at leasat try for half (and probably a lot more!!) when you pick a Supreme Court Justice!!!!


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: duh; dummietrolls; lookatme; miers
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-70 next last

1 posted on 10/10/2005 9:56:02 PM PDT by Mike10542
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All

No one is arguing over that at all. The only argument is over how well she will do in hearings and how may conservative votes she'll cast in rulings next year.

When has GW Bush ever backed down from a decision? You guys are pursuing a course of action to make the Congress more liberal. If you don't think Democrats are more liberal, just who do you think their nominee would be? Rather than looking for pro-life evidence they'd be looking for pro Choice evidence.

Opponents of Miers need to think very carefully about their intentions and whether or not those intentions advance liberalism.

As always, these things are not about what you can gain. They are about what you can avoid losing. All actions must be viewed in terms of denying Democrats the right to nominate left wing extremist Justices. No one can call Miers that.


2 posted on 10/10/2005 10:03:24 PM PDT by Owen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mike10542

Those that want the Miers nomination withdrawn should go to this website. It is probably more suited for them:

http://www.democraticunderground.com


3 posted on 10/10/2005 10:04:14 PM PDT by RepublicanWithIntegrity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mike10542

Yes, it's infinitely frustrating that the debate is WITHIN the GOP, rather than contra the Dems. An interesting piece by David Broder suggests that this fight, in some form, was inevitable: "A valuable historical perspective on all this came from Stephen Skowronek of Yale University in a talk to the American Political Science Association just before Labor Day. At the time, it seemed a bold -- even questionable -- thesis. Now it looks prescient.

"Skowronek, a presidential scholar, defined Bush as "an orthodox innovator," meaning someone who inherits a governing doctrine from others -- in his case, Ronald Reagan -- but applies it in different circumstances and with different techniques....

"Skowronek said that historically what leads to ultimate failure for orthodox innovator presidents is "sectarian infighting." They fail, he said, not because the political opposition becomes so strong but because their own supporters fall out among themselves -- some insisting on the original orthodoxy of the inherited philosophy, others demanding more change to adapt to the new conditions." The rest is at www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/07/AR2005100701700.html.

So what do we do to get back on track?


4 posted on 10/10/2005 10:06:07 PM PDT by I8NY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Owen

Please, you are trying to tell me that at least half if not 2/3's of freepers on here are against the nomination? And most grassroots people are too!!! Why do you think 27 Senators cast reservation on her nomination. It might have to do with the fact that they have been flooded with calls and emails from conservatives opposing this nomination.


5 posted on 10/10/2005 10:06:23 PM PDT by Mike10542
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mike10542

I meant to write that I beleive at least half of freepers want her nomination to be pulled if not more.


6 posted on 10/10/2005 10:08:07 PM PDT by Mike10542
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Stellar Dendrite

I have to say, that of all the vanities I've read on the Miers pick, this is the most recent.


7 posted on 10/10/2005 10:09:56 PM PDT by flashbunny (Sorry, but I'm allergic to KoolAid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RepublicanWithIntegrity

And for those that think that Miers was a bright pick:

 

8 posted on 10/10/2005 10:10:13 PM PDT by quantim (Detroit is the New Orleans of the North as an example of a failed welfare state.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mike10542

27 Senators are NOT against her nomination. They are waiting for the hearings just like they did on the Roberts nomination.

Too bad you learned how to read in the public schools.


9 posted on 10/10/2005 10:10:37 PM PDT by RepublicanWithIntegrity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RepublicanWithIntegrity

RepublicanWithIntegrity
Since Oct 6, 2005

You've been here less than a week, and you call longtime Freepers who disagree with you on Miers DU trolls.

RepublicanWithIntegrity, indeed.


10 posted on 10/10/2005 10:11:50 PM PDT by Ogie Oglethorpe (The people have spoken...the b*stards!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: quantim

LOL


11 posted on 10/10/2005 10:13:21 PM PDT by Stellar Dendrite ( Mike Pence for President!!! http://acuf.org/issues/issue34/050415pol.asp)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Owen
these things are not about what you can gain. They are about what you can avoid losing

Avoid losing?
No gain, no pain.
12 posted on 10/10/2005 10:15:20 PM PDT by gpapa (Boost FR Traffic! Make FR your home page!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mike10542
Those arguing against her have NO REASON to be doing so other than pique that she is not one of the FAVORED. The FACT that she was instrumental in selecting the FAVORED for their judgeships seems not to have registered upon the Antis.

To be actively involved in undermining the President at this time is shortsighted if not deliberate sabotage of conservative hopes. Without his leadership the most crucial activity of this milennium will fail along with most of the rest of our nation's hopes. Anything which undermines him in the fight against Islamic terror is dangerous to this country and not Patriotic work. Particularly when there is no information which indicates this pick is not everything she appears to be a down to earth, religious conservative.
13 posted on 10/10/2005 10:16:16 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (Public Enemy #1, the RATmedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mike10542
Mike10542 wrote: I think we can all agree, no matter where you stand on the Miers nomination, something is wrong with this pick when a week after the fact, it is US arguing over whether or not to try to kill the nomination, instead of who it should be…

Or maybe we can agree that something is wrong with the people who are raising such an unholy stink from a position of sheer ignorance.

14 posted on 10/10/2005 10:16:29 PM PDT by quidnunc (Omnis Gaul delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Owen
Excuse me! Are you telling me to shut up or Congress will be more Liberal. Here read your own logic:

When has GW Bush ever backed down from a decision? You guys are pursuing a course of action to make the Congress more liberal. If you don't think Democrats are more liberal, just who do you think their nominee would be? Rather than looking for pro-life evidence they'd be looking for pro Choice evidence. Opponents of Miers need to think very carefully about their intentions and whether or not those intentions advance liberalism.

Prehaps it is about advancing "Conservatism"

15 posted on 10/10/2005 10:19:24 PM PDT by TheHound (You would be paranoid too - if everyone was out to get you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: quantim

You've been bashing this nomination for a week and still haven't given me a reason why. Your mantra gets old when it is not supported by anything.AWB


16 posted on 10/10/2005 10:20:47 PM PDT by Americanwolfsbrother (Don't hate on someone for using their mind.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RepublicanWithIntegrity
I don't agree that those against the Miers nomination belong at DU...but I will say there is something very wrong with a so-called conservative who believes you need an advanced law degree and years on the bench before you're able to ask the question, What does the Constitution say about this?

Our Constitution was NOT written for lawyers.

17 posted on 10/10/2005 10:20:55 PM PDT by jess35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Ogie Oglethorpe

I call them Democrats for sure. People who oppose Miers yet supported Ginsburg and Breyer are nothing but little sKerry beatnik lovers.

Again, if you don't like the President and our party, you can leave.


18 posted on 10/10/2005 10:22:26 PM PDT by RepublicanWithIntegrity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Owen
No one is arguing over that at all.

My impression is that quite a few are arguing exactly that. That the blowback is coming from an insignificant part of the GOP support.

The only argument is over how well she will do in hearings and how may conservative votes she'll cast in rulings next year.

No. There are several other arguments. Miers proponents tend to focus and speculate -ONLY- on Miers' prospective performance. There are other issues.

Opponents of Miers need to think very carefully about their intentions and whether or not those intentions advance liberalism.

You cast the argument in "opposition to Miers" when it really is "opposition to a nomination that doesn't assert conservatism." Proponents of Miers need to likewise think very carefully about their intentions and whether or not those intentions advance liberalism.

As always, these things are not about what you can gain. They are about what you can avoid losing.

That comes off as an admission of weakness.

All actions must be viewed in terms of denying Democrats the right to nominate left wing extremist Justices.

All defense. No offense. The team that uses that strategy is apt to lose.

19 posted on 10/10/2005 10:23:51 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mike10542
You should be running Zogby's poll. You sure don't speak for me.

PRay for W and Harriet Miers

20 posted on 10/10/2005 10:25:29 PM PDT by bray (Islam IS a terrorist organization)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-70 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson