She gave to Loyd, Al and the DNC for $1,000.00 each. Enough Friggin' said WH!
Posted on 10/03/2005 7:02:08 AM PDT by frankjr
Jay Sekulow joins Leonard Leo:
(Washington, DC) – The American Center for Law and Justice (ACLJ), specializing in constitutional law said today that Harriet Miers, the nominee named by President Bush for a seat on the Supreme Court of the United States, is an excellent choice who represents the conservative mainstream of judicial philosophy of interpreting the Constitution, not re-writing it.
“Once again, President Bush showed exceptional judgment in naming Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court to replace Justice O’Connor,” said Jay Sekulow, Chief Counsel of the ACLJ, who argues regularly before the high court and has a pro-life protest case at the high court this term. “At a time when the high court is facing some of the most critical issues of the day – including a number of cases dealing directly with abortion and life issues – the person who replaces Justice O’Connor is critical. Harriet Miers is an excellent choice with an extraordinary record of service in the legal community and is certain to approach her work on the high court with a firm commitment to follow the Constitution and the rule of law. I have been privileged to work with her in her capacity as White House counsel. She is bright, thoughtful, and a consummate professional and I enthusiastically endorse her nomination.”
Sekulow added: “We look forward to a speedy confirmation process and will work aggressively to ensure that Harriet Miers gets full and fair consideration before the Senate. We call on members of the Senate to reject the partisan political rhetoric and focus on the judicial philosophy of this conservative mainstream nominee.”
Sekulow said the ACLJ will begin mobilizing a national campaign to ensure that Miers is confirmed. Sekulow said he will generate support for the nominee through his daily radio broadcast that reaches 1.5 million listeners, through his weekly television show, by using direct mail, phone calls, and emails to a list approaching one million supporters.
“We know the intentions of the liberal left – to do anything possible to derail this nominee,” said Sekulow. “We are prepared to meet those challenges head on and ensure that this battle ends with the confirmation of Harriet Miers as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.”
Sekulow and the ACLJ support ANYTHING Pres. Bush does. It isn't reassuring that they support Miers. It means nothing to me really. She is along the lines of O'Connor I believe. ie Pro-abort
"Some old stuff on Miers:
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.”
In favor of democracy on the issue of abortion? Let’s hope she carries that through."
http://www.timothypcarney.com/?p=156
What evidence do you have to support your post?
Well you are the self procalimed expert on such so I won't argue with you.
Lol! Sorry...this just struck me as funny. In favor of mob rule on the issue of abortion. Let's hope she's in favor of the constitution....which doesn't mention abortion. When people start appealing to "democracy", I immediately start thinking of the moonbats who don't give a rip about the constitution...it's all about "what I want".
The fact that she supported pro-abort al gore in the 80's and is single w/no kids. It screams pro-abort lesbo. I hope she isnt some woman version of Souter. Bush had a chance at getting McConnell or Luttig in and really change the face of the court. He puts a lukewarm old lady in instead. yuck
---"Sekulow and the ACLJ support ANYTHING Pres. Bush does. It isn't reassuring that they support Miers. It means nothing to me really. She is along the lines of O'Connor I believe. ie Pro-abort."---
Sekulow is showing more and more signs of being agreeable to anything Bush does. I expected this of any nominee Bush put forth.
Until we get something solid, something very solid, my heart is broken. I am just so sad today it's unbelievable.
W : Don't worry. They will follow my leadership. In any case, what else, can they do? Voting for Democrats? He..he..he.. (giggle).
Sekulow just guaranteed that Miers, if confirmed, will recuse herself in the case that the ACLJ has before the court. Sekulow is a brilliant idiot. If he has a case before the court he should hush on whoever the nominee is.
Then explain this DUmmie troll.
Yunz guys are going to have egg all over your face when this is over.
Who is she, and what is she doing here?
meh. that's semi-reassuring. Although I think PP would oppose mother theresa if Bush nominated her. Ill believe it when I see it (when Roe is overturned)
Banned Parenthood will oppose any Republican nominee. They opposed David Sutter. This means nothing. NOTHING.
She gave to Loyd, Al and the DNC for $1,000.00 each. Enough Friggin' said WH!
Jay Sekulow is a conservative as they come.
Leonard Leo is the President of the Federalist Society and is also a staunch conservative and strict constructionist.
Al Gore was pro-life during the 1980s.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Gore
Though Gore has gradually moved politically further left; he was once a moderate-to-conservative lawmaker. Early in his career, he was pro-life; his Congressional voting record was rated by the National Right to Life Committee as 84% anti-abortion. Through the late 1980s, Gore maintained that abortion destroyed innocent human life. He had adopted a pro-choice position by 1988, when he sought the Democratic presidential nomination. Conservatives have criticized his change as stemming from political expedience rather than conviction.
So maybe Miers isn't a "pro-abort lesbo" after all.
Frankly, you should be embarrassed about making such an offensive claim without the least shred of evidence.
It's actually souter, DUmmie troll.
Her nomination shows why affirmative action is so detrimental to any organization. When any criteria other than ability and experience are used to determine a candidate's qualifications you will inevitable create mediocrity in your organization.
She also gave, and more recently, to Phil Gramm and Pete Sessions.
Riiiiight. I'm sure all her career accomplishments are due to affirmative action. I'm sure Bush made her deputy chief of staff due to affirmative action. (rolls eyes)
I don't suppose it occurred to you that perhaps Bush nominated her because he thinks she is qualified?
The fact that she supported pro-abort al gore in the 80's and is single w/no kids. It screams pro-abort lesbo
I'm sure there are some single w/no kid freepers out there that might take offense to that one. At one point in my life, I was single and had no kids... Then I got married and had some kids... but no lesbian sex, though.
My problem is why do this to us.
Why a stealth candidate.
We would go to war for a proven female originalist.
Why make us doubtful.
I don't care what W knows that I don't.
It's not right to reward two elections with this
uncertainty.
maybe will=maybe won't
hopefully=unfortunately
best guess=worst guess
Why guess at all.
I'm dissapoined that I was not given someone
I could clearly jump behind from the get go.
You have a wonderful way with spinning this. Call the WH for a job.
Al Gore was PRO-LIFE in '88. Look it up.
My biggest gripes:
She is old
donated to Al Gore
She seems wishy washy on key issues
No judicial record to speak of
lack of children might indicate a love for abort
the fact that she's single is odd. Im not sure what it says about her beliefs.
I'm mad it wasn't McConnell or Luttig.
This means that if Bush gets another opportunity to nominate a justice, it will most likely be abortion lover extraordinaire Gonzalez, then Bush will have the Court his Dad always wanted: lukewarm and Anthony Kennedy-ish.
Reagan once was a Dimocrat, so was I. Is there no forgive for those who come into the light?
Then he should know the Constitution hasn't existed "as the framers wrote it" for many years. Or does he not know the Constitution has been amended a number of times?
I suppose in your world, Ronald Reagan was elected as a Democrat? Or, can people evolve politically?
The constitution has been "amended a number of times" because it was constructed by the founding fathers to be a living document.
Did you not know?
Notice in that last entry of your post on Miers campaign contributions she is listed as Mrs..
Typo? Divorced?
My point is it doesnt matter who Bush nominates, PP will oppose them. Im not sure I take PP's opposition as anything substantive.
I read your list as sexist. More than anything else, women voters will be watching, and it is very annoying to see someone like you list all of the things a professional woman must give up to succeed as detriments. Please watch your step.
Bush is 59.
donated to Al Gore
Back when he was a conservative, pro-life Democrat.
She seems wishy washy on key issues
Evidence?
No judicial record to speak of
Same as William Rehnquist.
lack of children might indicate a love for abort
And it might not. You simply have NO basis for making this conclusion.
the fact that she's single is odd. Im not sure what it says about her beliefs.
It doesn't say anything about her beliefs.
This means that if Bush gets another opportunity to nominate a justice, it will most likely be abortion lover extraordinaire Gonzalez
It doesn't mean any such thing. You are drawing outrageous conclusions on little more than your own feelings about the nominee.
Actually, this is not true. The framers created the amendment process because it isn't a living document AS WRITTEN. Amendments are intended to breathe new life into a document that doesn't "keep up with the times".
But this is splitting hairs. Leo's statement was revealing, and not correct.
This statement is pretty ironic. It indicates you don't know anything solid about Miers, but despite that you are "so sad today it's unbelievable". Do you often suffer from great emotional shifts without anything solid to base those shifts on?
Gee maybe we should take a poll right here on whether conservatives are pleased with this choice?
For one thing she is 60 years old, and looks a lot more like O'conner than Scalia.
Count me as a Pi$$ed off conservative.
Obviously nothing would embarrass "Coxy". He's relatively new here and with statements like the ones he's made in this thread, I doubt his stay will be long.
Lack of a spine?
---"This statement is pretty ironic. It indicates you don't know anything solid about Miers, but despite that you are "so sad today it's unbelievable". Do you often suffer from great emotional shifts without anything solid to base those shifts on?"---
Again, enjoy your ridicule. To some of us, this is too important for cronies and Wild Cards. Mock me (us) if it makes you feel smugly superior or more intellectual. Fine.
To me, it means the world to have a Scalia or Thomas; that's what we were promised. Do you think Scalia or Thomas voted for Dukakis/Bensen in 1988? I doubt it.
She wasn't young and impressionable. She was 43.
There is nothing to be happy about today. As Harry Reid and Schumer just announce their support, you will begin to see why today is a sad, sad day.
I am done for a couple of elections with the GOP. Now take your parting shots and be done with it.
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.