Skip to comments.Harriet Miers the pick AP
Posted on 10/03/2005 4:06:25 AM PDT by johnmecainrino
click here to read article
you call yourself a conservative or just a republican party booster?? ?
I call myself a conservative because I AM a conservative.......and have been for a whole lot of years.
And I call you a newbie, who could just might be a DU troll....
Well put, ignore the questions on policy supported by
BUSH and attack me as a troll..please just respond to the questions on policy and we will find out how conservative you are? immigration, gov spending, gov socialism (drug program), what do you say on these??
I think I'll wait for the hearings to make my decision about her.
Agree. Miers just doesn't sound like the most qualified nominee regardless of political leanings. This cronyism ala Michael Brown doesn't reflect well on the process. I guess Laura must have had her way--a woman from SMU.
If only that were true.... I'd email my senator (Coburn) and ask him to be the one.
How about posting some FACTS to prove that assertion.
We can all wait.
Yep, same Sarah Hughes
Lol... yeah right.
The Supreme Court is revisiting Assisted Suicide in Oregon TODAY. I wonder if Harriet Miers is for assisted suicide. I think she'll go along with Ruth Buzzy Ginsberg, Souter and the rest.
She a mystery date to YOU, not to Bush. Give him a little credit for HAVING KNOWN HER FOR YEARS.
DU hates her. Perfect!
in 1987 & 1988. And Reagan used to vote Democrat too. What does this have to do with the price of tea in China. She's been straight Rep ever since.
I agree. So was Laura Bush at one time. Some on here are lou lous.
More like bouncing off rubber room walls, IMO.
Incredible isn't it?
We give the GOP control of the Executive and Legislative branches of government, yet the Democrats are still in charge.
To all you Miers-lets-wait-and-see apologists: Why should we settle for unknowns when there is greatness to choose from?
She states that she is a strict Constitutionalist. President Bush has steadfastly maintained that is what he is looking for in his nominees.
That seems to be more than those who don't believe she is seem to be hanging their hat on.
There's certainly nothing positive, though. One of Roberts' strengths was that he clerked for Rehnquist; clearly the same principle applies.
Further, some post that she donated to Gore. But that was in 1988 when he was avowedly pro-life. As for donating to Lloyd Bentsen, that is a Texan donating to an old-style Texas Democrat, and I have no knowledge of where Bentsen stood then on life issues, so can't speak to that.
Gore and Bentsen were Democrats. 'Nuff said.
BTW, how old was Reagan when he became a Republican? You know who convinced him to do it? I read where it was his daughter Maureen. Of course, he was prime and ripe to do it, it was just a hard thing for him to finally do.
Reagan supported Eisenhower in 1952, so he had a nearly 40 year track record of GOP support prior to running for the Presidency. He would've been 41 at the time.
But like I said, there is Ralph Hall who in Congress switched to the GOP after he was 80 yrs. old. He had the most conservative voting record in the House.
Is he the exception or the rule?
Got some proof, or you just babbling on your one issue agenda?
The first President Bush was lied to about Souter, by people he should not have trusted. That does not speak well of his trust on that nomination. But it is incontrovertible that he was misled. He really knew nothing for himself about Souter at all. But then, that's an easy thing to know and you just love to Bush bash. That much is so clear from your rhetoric.
WTF is this?
Roberts I think will turn out OK, but who's this yahoo?
This is another case of friends of Bush getting plum jobs.
I am sick of it.
I think I'll stay. My chldren and grandchildren are worth it.
"Bush knows her personally, all of us here don't. Why on earth do we think we know more than he?"
It comes down to trust. GWB has a pretty poor track record on things that conservatives care about. Many, however, understanding the importance of judicial nominees, soldiered on, knowing that this was a huge opportunity to do something really important for the country and something for the many conservatives who supported GWB ONLY b/c of judicial nominees. He promised Scalia/Thomas....yet he give us something which we can hardly verify as being in the Scalia/Thomas tradition. The Bush supporters are simply left with this argument: Trust Bush.
That's just not going to get a lot of traction here.
A lot of conservatives simply don't trust him, and they have good reason not to.
I am sure that some Republican Senators will be tempted to break away, but the costs to the party and Bush would be severe. Although this nomination may bring out the under the surface split which is already taking place in the party.
Unless there was another Harriet Miers working for the same law firm, at the same time, it's the same one.
So you're psychic? How long have you known her?
There is one fact, Miers clerked for a pro-abort fed judge that helped get Roe decided.
Except Laura is pro-choice.
Now, I was more concerned that she be a strict constructionist. You can personally believe in something, without believing the constitution supports it. She will follow the constitution (hopefully).
That's it your disappointed and now you'll cut and run.
In the 70s?
What a bunch of uninformed whiners. Already this AM Bill Kristol expressed doubts about her - boosting her in my opinion.
When you all get some facts come back and we'll discuss but until then I'm going with my President!
Think about it.
I hope you're not addressing that to me. :-)
You know what would be "funny"? Not funny ha ha but funny - sigh of relief - what if the President knows he has another nominee coming up in a month or so? I'm completely guessing so take this with a bag of rock salt (but then again a lot of others are guessing today as well).
How can they not know, that this choice was going to P-off "their" base?
Has BUSH HIMSELF actually said this or is it still media buzz??
Not that I'd put it past him but I want to know whether to be mad or not.
And Al Gore was pro-life at the time.
Not sure when she clerked but regardless it was for pro-abort Sarah Hughes whenever it was.
Please calm down and read my posts. I said none of the things you say above. I simply posted the item and asked if this was the same person. See posts 517 and 678.
If it is the same person, then yes it does bother me. But is does not bother me near as much as the fact Bush passed over Luttig. There were far better candidates in my opinion - which is worth less than $.02.
Will I leave the Pubs? NO. Do I still support the President? YES. Will I vote for Hillary? HELL NO. Am I disappointed? Yes.
I know and if they succeed in handing the 06 and 08 elections to the democrats, whats going to happen to our sons? It frightens me.
seems like trolls are amung us.
Bush announced her. And when she voted for Gore he was pro-life.
Being here longer doesn't make your position any more correct.
She's pro-abort. I'll be surprised if the Dems don't throw rose petals at her feet when she walks into her confirmation hearings. Scalia/Thomas mold my a$$...
Justice Warren claimed all hid life to be a strict constructionist. I am underwhelmed.
Look, she could be Alan Keyes, Pat Buchanan, Jack Kemp, Phyllis Schlafley, Steve Forbes and Don Rumsfeld all wrapped into one but that doesn't matter.
She isn't anywhere as qualified as many people who were passed over and actually have paper trails. When it was time for a fight, brave sir Robin ran away, quote Monty Python.
I'm pretty sure W said "Exodus Ministries", not "Exodus International". Big difference.
Good point, Blogger.
State's rights should not trump Civil Rights under the U.S. Constitution.
By the way, in Riviera Beach, Florida, there is an eminent domain test going on. People are being pushed out of their homes.
FV says: Disabled rights and eminent domain inalienable rights are hot button issues of the day. just my opinion
How do you know this?????? I've also heard it said she is pro-life. What is your source?