Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Harriet Miers the pick AP

Posted on 10/03/2005 4:06:25 AM PDT by johnmecainrino

Harriet Miers


TOPICS: Breaking News
KEYWORDS: affirmativeaction; evangelical; harrietmiers; prolife; putin; rino; scotus; winwin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,241-1,2601,261-1,2801,281-1,300 ... 2,941-2,944 next last
To: floriduh voter

Miers sounds like another O'Connor.


1,261 posted on 10/03/2005 7:17:34 AM PDT by amdgmary (Please visit www.terrisfight.org and www.northcountrygazette.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 858 | View Replies]

To: Preachin'

You cannot guarantee anything. You do not speak for "the church".


1,262 posted on 10/03/2005 7:17:40 AM PDT by ValerieUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1084 | View Replies]

To: zook
My thoughts:

Political contributions are meaningless unless they reveal an overt pattern. All career politicians - and,yes, conservatives - will contribute to the occasional opposite-party candidate.

Bush must know, unquestionably and right now, if she's pro-life and conservative. This, too, will become known to us as her history is learned and leaked.
1,263 posted on 10/03/2005 7:17:54 AM PDT by Dansong
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1196 | View Replies]

To: fooman

You can't spin this any other way. Bush blew a big fat opportunity.


1,264 posted on 10/03/2005 7:17:55 AM PDT by Don'tMessWithTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1251 | View Replies]

To: Graymatter

No, do tell!

Well yes actually I am somewhat - but Einstein didn't contribute to Phil Gramm's presidential campaign so apparently they have diverged politically.

(I really like the Gramm for Pres contribution)


1,265 posted on 10/03/2005 7:18:02 AM PDT by Whit
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1106 | View Replies]

To: cbkaty

You're right. Lots of us here are former dems...


1,266 posted on 10/03/2005 7:18:49 AM PDT by GOPJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1228 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1495643/posts

Thanks for that. From the thread ...

AP, 2/2/1992, on whether as President she would ask a potential nominee how he or she would rule on abortion:

"Nominees are clearly prohibited from making such a commitment and presidents are prohibited from asking for it," said Harriet Miers, a Dallas lawyer and president-elect of the State Bar of Texas.

In 1993, after the ABA had voted to adopt a pro-choice stance, the State Bar of Texas, under Miers' leadership, fought to have the issue put to a vote of the full ABA membership. She said:

"If we were going to take a position on this divisive issue, the members should have been able to vote."

http://www.timothypcarney.com/?p=156


1,267 posted on 10/03/2005 7:19:09 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1183 | View Replies]

To: irish_links
President Reagan nominated Justice O'Connor in 1981.

Iran-Contra did not occur until 1986. I do believe that it affected the selection of Justice Kennedy.

1,268 posted on 10/03/2005 7:19:11 AM PDT by writmeister
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1218 | View Replies]

To: Don'tMessWithTexas
That is not the point. I'm not talking about whether or not we had hoped it would be someone else........Luttig, Brown.....anyone.

The point is that this is being labeled 'caving' a 'failure' 'blowing it'...........and that's only the polite stuff.

So far, the facts don't back you up. The histrionics on this thread have been absolutely without merit.............of course unbridled emotions usually are.

(And didn't I see the same stuff about Roberts from the usual suspects, some of whom are happy with him now?)

Just settle down........use your heads.......wait for the facts........and stop spreading rumors.

ACT LIKE CONSERVATIVES.

1,269 posted on 10/03/2005 7:19:19 AM PDT by ohioWfan (If my people which are called by my name will humble themselves and pray......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1200 | View Replies]

To: All

I have new found respect for liberals and Democrats. They will fight, no holds barred to promote their beliefs. They would have filibustered a pick like Owens...they would shut down the Senate. If Roe was overturned, they would bomb the Senate floor.

We Republicans don't fight for anything. This was a once in a 50 year chance to overturn liberal socialist type crap and RoeWade...

Republican elites are no better than Dem elites. All of Bush's talk about "life" and the "sanctity of life" was no more than trivial utterances to get the vote of the pro life base....

Joke is on us guys and gals. I don't care if Hillary wins, Kennedy, or even that socialist creep Sanders...because in the end the person who fights (libs and dems) win...

I have no stake or will to fight for any Republican and I honestly think now that I have to rethink the war on terror...we should just negotiate so that they bomb other satans....

Negotiate Negotiate....CAPITULATE...no reason to watch politics just take care of me and mine...get what I can for myself.

Argument: yeah but what if Hillary wins....Answer it really doesn't matter...this was a life changing moment and it will affect my veiws for a lifetime...F Off Republicans.


1,270 posted on 10/03/2005 7:19:22 AM PDT by rbmillerjr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1200 | View Replies]

Harriet Miers helped draft the late term abortion law.

Is that true?

1,271 posted on 10/03/2005 7:19:48 AM PDT by LdSentinal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1268 | View Replies]

To: Preachin'
You shouldn't leave until after the primaries in 2006. Try to get some real republicans elected and then lv the party if your candidates lose.

NOTE: Numbers for Congress and the POTUS are on my web page - see tag line.

1,272 posted on 10/03/2005 7:19:50 AM PDT by floriduh voter (www.conservative-spirit.org Daily Newsfeeds & Weekly Update)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1084 | View Replies]

To: RockinRight
I'm also worried we might lose the House and Senate.

I haven't looked at the 2006 Senate races, but I'd be surprised if there are enough states with close races to threaten the majority. The House is even more unlikely, considering that nearly 400 of the seats are now incumbent-protected gerrymandered districts.

1,273 posted on 10/03/2005 7:19:52 AM PDT by cogitator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1194 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

Stop being reactionary. Study Gore's record to that point. Are you a conservative by ideology or just a blind Republican? If I had the choice between a RINO and Al Gore in 88, I would have gone for Gore too considering his VOTEs to that point were pro-life. He was only beginning his waffle on Abortion. Was considered a conservative Dem.


1,274 posted on 10/03/2005 7:20:01 AM PDT by Blogger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1242 | View Replies]

I'm a staunch conservative and as much as I would've liked to see JRB nommed, I'm actually okay with this nomination. I've not had a reason to distrust our President yet and I'm not about to start now. He's known her for years and knows her heart. Right now, that's good enough for me.

I really think the Dems are going to regret suggesting her in the first place. Did you guys forget? They are so dumb and keep making mistakes over and over.

And for those who keep mentioning that she's friends with pro-choice Kay Hutchinson, I've got many pro-choice friends but that doesn't make me one too. I've got a feeling she's pro-life from what I'm seeing so far in the last few hours.


1,275 posted on 10/03/2005 7:20:11 AM PDT by Vol2727
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1166 | View Replies]

To: johnmecainrino
Ex-Senator Alan (Aw Shucks) Simpson just took two cheaps shots at Phyllis Schlafly. He said GW should avoid all the extreme-right-wing-extremists and mentioned Schlafly (twice) as an example.

Sorry, Senator, I worked closely years ago with Phyllis in one of the greatest victories nationwide in the history of modern conservatism. This doughty woman put it all together with unflagging effort and time.

You, sir, can take a Flying-A Ranch you-know-what at a rolling wagon wheel.

Leni

1,276 posted on 10/03/2005 7:20:29 AM PDT by MinuteGal (Re: The Anti-War Sheehan-ites - They want to live in the garden but not tend the garden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Let's not forget this is the woman for, for all intents and purposes, has been vetting all of Bush's judicial appointees.


1,277 posted on 10/03/2005 7:20:45 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1267 | View Replies]

To: Don'tMessWithTexas

Bush will have at least one more such opportunity -- Ginsburg isn't going to last much longer.


1,278 posted on 10/03/2005 7:20:47 AM PDT by ValerieUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1264 | View Replies]

To: raybbr

That's cause the objections are assinine.


1,279 posted on 10/03/2005 7:20:57 AM PDT by Blogger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1252 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Harry Reid supports her, and suggested she would be acceptible. In other words, she is NOT a Scalia or Thomas.

BS


Do you watch the news, or should I ping you when it comes on again?
1,280 posted on 10/03/2005 7:21:13 AM PDT by safisoft (Give me Torah!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1250 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,241-1,2601,261-1,2801,281-1,300 ... 2,941-2,944 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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