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

Skip to comments.

Franck & Miers (Mark Levin's take on Harriet Miers)
National Review ^ | October 3, 2005 | Mark Levin

Posted on 10/03/2005 7:04:43 AM PDT by buckeyeblogger

Franck & Miers [Mark R. Levin 10/03 09:50 AM] I understand Matt's point, as he's written so eloquently about it many times. But, in truth, we already know what's going on here, and that the president, despite a magnificent farm team from which to choose a solid nominee, chose otherwise. Miers was chosen for two reasons and two reasons alone: 1. she's a she; 2. she's a long-time Bush friend. Otherwise, there's nothing to distinguish her from thousands of other lawyers. And holding a high post in the Bar, which the White House seems to be touting, is like holding a high position in any professional organization. But it reveals nothing about the nominee's judicial philosophy. There are many top officials in the Bar who I wouldn't trust to handle a fender-bender. Also, early in his term, the president singled out the Bar for its partisan agenda and excluded it from a formal role in judicial selection. The president said he would pick a candidate like Antonin Scalia or Clarence Thomas, and he did not. We all know of outstanding individuals who fit that bill, and they were once again passed over. Even David Souter had a more compelling resume that Miers.

(Excerpt) Read more at bench.nationalreview.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: georgewcarter; harrietmiers; scotus; stabbedintheback
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260261-263 next last
To: nickcarraway

Have faith Nick. We have to see how this plays out. Take heart that the senators are in the dark too, but that POTUS knows more than all of us combined. GWB is not his daddy's son. No paper trail cuts both ways. She's a serious lawyer and a GOOD Christian.


221 posted on 10/03/2005 9:55:58 AM PDT by onyx ((Vicksburg, MS) North is a direction. South is a way of life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 217 | View Replies]

To: Paradox
Perhaps she is Souter in womans clothing, but I mean that in a GOOD way for us, think about it.

The only thing more pathetic than party loyalists making excuses for Bush is any comment that labels Bush a "conservative".

There were fine originalists available to choose from. Bush continues with his bewildering array of decisions, from allowing an invasion to go answered to our south, to spending more on Africa than some agencies in the USA (like NASA), to picking unknown and likely liberal SCOTUS nominees, when outstanding originalists were available.

Bush is afraid of a fight, or is simply a bad actor pretending to be a conservative when he is not.

This is beyond pathetic. If I were a Republican Senator, I would filibuster the nomination.

222 posted on 10/03/2005 9:56:09 AM PDT by Dont_Tread_On_Me_888 (Bush's #1 priority Africa. #2 priority appease Fox and Mexico . . . USA priority #64.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies]

To: buckeyeblogger
The president said he would pick a candidate like Antonin Scalia or Clarence Thomas, and he did not. We all know of outstanding individuals who fit that bill, and they were once again passed over. Even David Souter had a more compelling resume that Miers.

I'm a Levin fan, but to be fair, Levin doesn't know whether or not Harriet Miers will be another Scalia or Thomas. But his David Souter comment proves the point that all too often, resumes don't mean a hill of beans and for that, he lost his own argument.
223 posted on 10/03/2005 9:57:30 AM PDT by demkicker (Life has many choices. Eternity has only two. Which one have you chosen?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: buckeyeblogger
Look, it's over. Finally, with these two picks Bush has proved himself a traitor to conservatives. He's always been a moderate just his like father. A weak, linguini-spined liberal. This conforms the END of his Presidency and his official lame-duck status.

Batter-up!

224 posted on 10/03/2005 9:59:50 AM PDT by Doc Savage (...because they stand on a wall, and they say nothing is going to hurt you tonight, not on my watch!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kryptonite
She donated money to BILL CLINTON.

No she did not. You need to cite your lame source.

225 posted on 10/03/2005 10:01:06 AM PDT by demkicker (Life has many choices. Eternity has only two. Which one have you chosen?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 209 | View Replies]

To: harris33
and what ever happened to the Marriage Amendment?

That's a good clue to what this administration is about: The Marriage Amendment was rushed to a vote in the Senate too quickly, before its proponents had a chance to build support for it, because Rove and company wanted to run ads saying that Kerry and Edwards voted against protecting marriage from the homos. Well, whoops, there were only 48 votes for the Amendment, so two democrats got to stay home and not vote against it, and you know which two got that privilege. And now, oddly enough, the Amendment has evaporated completely. This gives away the game -- it was never sincere. Just a bone to throw to a restive base during a close election.

Another classic issue that they are not sincere about is the flag-burning amendment. Just as it looked like it would pass the Senate, and then the States, Sen. Mitch McConnell (Tobacco-R) switches his vote and gives a pious speech in favor of freedom of speech.

Abortion too, I am afraid to say, is also just a wedge issue to these people. It keeps the conservatives coming out to vote. But you can be absolutely certain it will never pass. This would be a disaster politically. There were plenty of people who voted for Bush who would never have voted for him if they thought Roe v. Wade would be overturned. Everyone is opposed to abortion but want it legal just in case their 14-year-old daughter gets pregnant, or their sister gets raped. (How many times have you heard a politician say they're against abortion "except in cases of rape or incest"? The only argument against abortion is that it is murder and it's just as much a murder in cases of rape or incest. The Republican leadership is unclear on the concept or else entirely insincere on this issue.)

226 posted on 10/03/2005 10:26:40 AM PDT by megatherium
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: buckeyeblogger; All
VP Cheney likes her and that's good enough for me......
227 posted on 10/03/2005 10:31:25 AM PDT by Fawn (Try Not----Do or Do not ~~ Yoda)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Irontank
That's correct, I should have clarified that remark. Thanks :)
228 posted on 10/03/2005 10:48:13 AM PDT by TheForceOfOne (It was a village of idiots that raised Hillary to Senator status.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
No problem, sometimes I think in my head more than I type into my posts. I woke up this morning and headed for FR and when I got here it was like "Unleash the hounds!" lol

Everyone is praying the president has been misunderestimated one more time. I hope that comes true.
229 posted on 10/03/2005 10:52:30 AM PDT by TheForceOfOne (It was a village of idiots that raised Hillary to Senator status.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: ClaireSolt; sittnick
I am a man, a year younger than she is, married (once only until death do us part) with three kids. I do not doubt that many women in the early baby boom generation, and even more so, many women born earlier than that have had to sacrifice the personal life in order to attain professional achievement. That is a tragedy insofar as those women might have chosen to have a life with marriage and children. Some of them may still have chosen for whatever legitimate reason not to marry: the right guy never came along or was killed in Vietnam, marriage was a lesser priority than for others, enjoying the freedom that single life can offer, having witnessed bad marriages of others and not wanting the risk, or whatever.

I had not yet married at 40 and my own experience militates against my suspecting the single folks of alternative "affectional" preferences. I was firmly resolved to marry no one who was not trustworthy as to divorce. So far so good with no reason to suspect future changes.

Again, if anything I said seemed insensitive, I did not intend insensitivity and apologize for inartfulness in posting. On a number of matters, I insult others around here with the best of us, but this is not one of those matters.

As to Harriet Miers character and fitness, I will believe little or nothing of what I hear and about half of what I see. Generally, I have a good deal of trust in this president. My default position is that, if he chose her, I am going to be happy with Harriet Miers until SHE proves that I should not be. I would rather have had Janice Rogers Brown but no one elected me to make the appointment. I wish Harriet Miers the very best in her nomination and in her confirmation and in her tenure on SCOTUS.

I want her to help Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, CJ John Roberts and at least one more new justice to overrule Roe vs. Wade so bad that I can taste it. In the best case scenario, we will still need to persuade Anthony Kennedy or get another appointment to replace a pro-abort justice (Stephens? Ginsburg?). 45 million slaughtered is more than enough.

230 posted on 10/03/2005 11:04:45 AM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: TheForceOfOne
Think of it this way . . .

Miers and Roberts are going to be making their first Supreme Court decisions and writing their first opinions sometime around June of next year -- right in the middle of the 2006 midterm election cycle. I find it hard to believe that the GOP would invite the kind of election disaster that would be brought down upon them if these two justices turn out to be anything remotely close to a David Souter.

231 posted on 10/03/2005 11:11:08 AM PDT by Alberta's Child (I ain't got a dime, but what I got is mine. I ain't rich, but Lord I'm free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child

And if the SCOTUS would just so happen to reverse a court decision that favored the Liberal agenda just prior to the midterm elections such as the "Eminent Domain" case, then a 2006 Republican victory could be well in hand.

I would love to be a fly on the wall at the White House today.


232 posted on 10/03/2005 11:18:03 AM PDT by TheForceOfOne (It was a village of idiots that raised Hillary to Senator status.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 231 | View Replies]

To: harris33; onyx; ninenot; sittnick; nickcarraway; Mo1
The sooner that abortionist witch (sp.?) and phony: Sandra Day O'Connor is off the bench and swept into the dustbin of history the better. If that makes pro-abortion and pro-homosexual and pro-affirmative action people "feel" less comfortable with the GOP, tooooooo baaaaaaadddd! O'Connor was sold to Reagan by lies produced by James Baker's flunkies who thought it was a bright idea to name a pretty blonde to SCOTUS and that abortion lies were a small and verrrrrry temporary price to pay. As soon as Reagan retired Sandy baby reverted to being the modern Margaret Sanger that she always had been as a state legislator in Arizona where she was Planned Barrenhood's main spokesthing.

And I am willing to take Dubya's word for his nominees until THEY prove unworthy. I would have preferred Janice Rogers Brown or probably ten other potential nominees but Dubya was elected. I wasn't.

Anyone who thinks that GOP senators are going to torpedo Miers (without some major unforeseen development before the vote), that the Democrats will try but fail to save her, and that Dubya (now chastened) will nominate and see confirmed Attila the Judge who will right every wrong we have ever suffered must be using awfully effective hallucinogens.

The woman is apparently a strong Evangelical. I am Roman Catholic but her faith as a nominee works for me, particularly on the life issues. She is not going to decide by what means we may be saved: grace, Scripture, faith (each somehow alone) or three yards and a cloud of dust until the moment of death as we Catholics may see it. The perfect is the enemy of the good. Let's not be foolish as so many here are dying to be.

She has never married which is what probably bothers some folks here. Yet each of us has known perfectly respectable folks who never married (Souter is certainly not one of them). There is an awful lot of purely disingenuous BS being posted against her.

Dubya's momma is undoubtedly more pro-death than Laura but I want both on my side when the switchblades are opened in the alleyway and the fight for the rest of civilization begins. The mutual enemy will be Ted the Swimmer, Biden the Prevaricating image of Neil Kinnock, Schmuckie Chewmer, Dick Eddie Haskell Turban, Madame Arkansas Antichrist, BaaBaa Boxer, et al., not Dubya.

233 posted on 10/03/2005 11:48:03 AM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 204 | View Replies]

To: Torie

It may well be that the sorry Carswell was done in by senatorial knowledge of the reputation that he earned in the men's rooms of Florida country clubs and which eventually led to his arrest in those dear, dead times.


234 posted on 10/03/2005 11:51:19 AM PDT by BlackElk (Dean of Discipline of the Tomas de Torquemada Gentlemen's Club)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies]

To: Acts 2:38

Waaaah, we didn't get the one we wanted. Waaah, this nomination will not p.o. half the country so it is bad. Waaah, (fill in the blank with another dumb comment) so she is bad.

It is remarklable the simularity between the comments of alleged conservatives and DU/Pelosi/NAARL/NOW etc. Must be because of a shared view of the Constitution and Court.

If I want to hear dumbassed KnowNothing comments about Bush I can just go to DU why listen to the B-team's bitching here?


235 posted on 10/03/2005 11:57:57 AM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (Public Enemy #1, the RATmedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: BlackElk
She has never married which is what probably bothers some folks here. Yet each of us has known perfectly respectable folks who never married (Souter is certainly not one of them). There is an awful lot of purely disingenuous BS being posted against her.

There are a number of KNOWN conservative women that haven't married either .. (Ann .. Laura .. etc)

I'll be waiting for the slams on them

Oh wait .. what's that I hear ???

crickets

236 posted on 10/03/2005 11:59:08 AM PDT by Mo1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 233 | View Replies]

To: ZULU

This is total BS. So far all the Antis/Perpetually P.O.ed have to rest their whines upon are political contributions almost twenty years old. Oh, and SUPPOSEDLY Harry Reid said she was acceptable.

There are few things more tiresome that listening to the whines of the KnowNothings and DU wannabees.


237 posted on 10/03/2005 12:00:47 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (Public Enemy #1, the RATmedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Cautor

Most of the opposition is based upon lies such as yours. She was never a FoB. Not even close but that will not stop you from repeating that lie every chance you get I will wage.


238 posted on 10/03/2005 12:02:30 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (Public Enemy #1, the RATmedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: msnimje

Simply put you have no clue as to her qualifications. Nor has anyone else pointed to anything which would support your opinion.

Given the tendency of Bush's alleged friends to attack him over everything there is little doubt that he would go with someone he implicitly trusts and knows well.

The same ridiculous comments were made when Bush selected Cheney for VP by the same mindset, self-proclaimed conservatives who act more like denizens of DU. They do little but bitch and whine so who cares what they think?


239 posted on 10/03/2005 12:06:26 PM PDT by justshutupandtakeit (Public Enemy #1, the RATmedia.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: demkicker
Levin doesn't know whether or not Harriet Miers will be another Scalia or Thomas

Well, yes, take heart -- Cheney told Rush that we'll all be very happy with this pick in ten years. Just have to be patient, I guess -- after all, conservatives have waited all these decades, worked our arses off, and urged to hold our noses and vote for Rhinos so we could win the all-important prize: Supreme Court nominations. Now we'll get to see the fruits of our efforts in ten years, when the present administration is ancient history and who-knows-what inhabits the WH and Congress.

In the meantime, let's work to prevent Hillary from gaining the White House, and re-elect all those rhinos in Congress -- because there really is a world of difference between Arlen Specter and Harry Reid, though it might be hard to see sometimes.

Yessir, I'm pumped.

240 posted on 10/03/2005 12:15:29 PM PDT by browardchad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 223 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260261-263 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