Posted on 10/03/2005 7:10:27 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
Bar Associations of most states usually represent the "mainstream" of lawyers, which is usually a very liberal segment of society. That gives me some concern. Then again, Texas being unique, it might be that its lawyer culture is more conservative than most of the country, so she might not be so bad.
What is "sleath" to YOU is not so for the President.
That's a PLUS, there is no such requirement.
In other words, it's his style to give them as much of what they demand as he can while vaguely pretending to be conservative.
It's really odd how conservatives' fear of the Left can lead them to cling ever more tightly to someone who sells them out to the Left time and again.
1987? Any word on who she's financially supported in more recent times? I remember that a lot of people were unhappy with Papa Bush "way back when," perhaps enough to write a check for some of those hacks. I think the Clinton years "re-educated" them. I'd like a more substantial reason than that one to join the anti's. So far, everything I'm reading about her (not counting the "she looks ugly" comments) looks pretty positive, but I'm still reading.
So what? Are we supposed to take it on faith that she has become a true believer? I am more than willing to give her the benefit of the doubt if there is reasonable evidence available to do so. Nothing more than her status as a long-time Bush crony doesn't constitute that evidence.
Take your own advice before you quote things as fact.
I always do. Refute away.
No argument there!
I'm waiting for the dust to settle and the confirmation hearings.
Thanks, I'll keep an eye out for it.
I think most of the anxiety here is generated from the selection of David Souter. Supreme Court picks are too rare and too important to take a chance on. It takes decades to overcome one bad move.
I heard she switched parties. So what.
There's a whole lot of pre-judging the judge around here this morning.
RE: the WH Kool-aid comment, these picks are more important to GWB than you or me.
Souter is his father's worst mistake(he says so).
I for one do NOT think GWB is willing to make that kind of mistake.
How about a little faith?
So in other words, she was supporting the Democrats during the height of Reagan's popularity? Has she ever denounced having done so as being a mistake on her part?
You must be under the false impression that the President should take a poll to decide who to nominate. Maybe you should review Article II, Section 2 paragraph 2 of the US Constitution.
Hate to be petty, but what's with the eye-liner?
No, Steve, you're not suppose to support anybody you don't personally know.
She's been with Bush since 1988; do you think she did that while believing in the liberal causes?
Quite a mature way to start your reply. It is indicative of the fact that you have nothing in the way of substance to say and are attempting to artificially prop up your response, and that is indeed what we find in the rest of your response:
A member of the Federalist Society made a comment.
What a ridiculous thing to say. Leonard Leo is not some obscure member from the local law school, he's the executive vice president of the organization.
By your logic, you are an official White House spokesman and everything you say should be taken as the official position of the White House. Right. Sure. Whatever.
No, my logic is that the Executive Vice President does speak for the organization. And as you could have seen, I want to know more about what he bases his statement on, I didn't just declare it to be the end of the discussion. I see that basic common sense and reading comprehension is lost on you - or perhaps you are just lying. In either case, you have no credibility.
I'm glad Tammy is on our side. I would rather he had nominated HER. Has he done ANYTHING to thank us for reelecting him?
Huh? We're not going to have to live with the consequences of these picks? He'll just go off into retirement.
I for one do NOT think GWB is willing to make that kind of mistake.
Based on what? His vague promises?
All Bush and GOP; even the Recount.
Who on earth said she looks ugly? Was it faithincowboys? She's trying to start a rumor that she's a lesbian, did you hear?
Picking through the background of newly minted Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, there's some political activities that may irritate the president's conservative base -- she donated campaign cash to a handful of Democrats, including Al Gore.
In her defense, the donations date back to the 1980s. For example,Miers gave $1,000 to Gore, then a senator from Tennessee, during his 1988 bid for the Democratic presidential nomination, according to Political Moneyline -- the best site on the Web to track money and politics.
During that same cycle, Miers also donated $1,000 each to Democratic Texas Sen. Lloyd Bentsen and the Democratic National Committee. Miers's more recent donations less surprising. She gave $2,000 to President Bush's 2004 re-election effort and $5,000 to Bush's recount fund in the aftermath of the 2000 election....
http://blogs.washingtonpost.com/thefix/
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.