Posted on 10/03/2005 7:10:27 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
"...the first woman to serve as president of the Texas State Bar and the Dallas Bar Association"
... and then as a chair of TX Lottery....
HEY - works for me !
Rehnquist was never a judge either, as have a number of SCOTUS members.
You know zippo, nada, about this subject, but commenting anyway like you are an expert.
So if this prediction turns out to be true, what will be the rationalization this time? After all, we were told over and over again that that the Roberts nomination was "strategery" to get someone more solid next time and make the Democrats look extremist in their reaction to whoever that might be. So when that fails to happen, then what will be the Ofiicial Party Line?
David Frum worked with Harriet Miers. He says:
She's a lovely person: intelligent, honest, capable, loyal, discreet, dedicated ... I could pile on the praise all morning. But there is no reason at all to believe either that she is a legal conservative or - and more importantly - that she has the spine and steel necessary to resist the pressures that constantly bend the American legal system toward the left.
I am not saying that she is not a legal conservative. I am not saying that she is not steely. I am saying only that there is no good reason to believe either of these things. Not even her closest associates on the job have no good reason to believe either of these things. In other words, we are being asked by this president to take this appointment purely on trust, without any independent reason to support it. And that is not a request conservatives can safely grant.
Not quite sure what you are saying.
But if anyone believed the President was going to deliberately provoke a fight with the RATs over this they have apparently been asleep for the last five years. It is not his style to wade into avoidable fights with RATs.
Our major struggle is against the enemy within, the Treason Media.
Stevens isn't immortal, he's ready to move on,,
This pick may, at best, keep us close to the center.
I agree, look ahead to the 3rd and 4th picks.
The left took years to build a court that could wreak its havoc on this nation, it will take many to undo their damage.
I also have concerns about a number of issues facing this antion and how the President's administration is or refuses to deal with a couple key items, but we are at war.
We are Americans and we can either focus on what needs to get done or run around like a flock of chickens with our heads cut off.
I prefer the former. I see enough of the latter portrayed in and by the MSM and the left.
"Conservatives need to leave the Republican Party to people like Chaffee, Snowe, McCain (You can now add Bush to that list) et al and reconstituent themselves as new political force which more clearly represents an anti-liberal, pro-traditional value, pro-strict constructionist and original intent political philosophy."
No they don't. Conservatives just need to take back the Republican party from these betrayers.
Don't know if I oppose her.
You got references for this?
Since English isn't apparently your first language, I'll give you a pass on this one. A member of the Federalist Society made a comment. 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.
You are just making things up as you go along...
I see. Do you have some evidence of that, or are you just barking?
...if the liars and idiots are against her like this she must be a good nominee.
And if the Bush lemmings are starting to mindlessly support her like this, I am even more doubtful than before.
I thought the picture in post #5 looked like a scene from the exorcist.
Laura Ingraham just reported it on her program. I'm sure it will show up on her site shortly.
Not since 1987.
Maybe you need to spend less time drinking the White House Kool-aid and more time doing research.
Take your own advice before you quote things as fact.
BS
Rheinquist had no judicial experience.
The Left would probably assume that Chomsky sold his soul to satan and had converted to conservatism.
The Left may run around calling the President an idiot, but when it comes down to it - they're afraid of him. He's outwitted them far longer than any other conservative since Reagan, and chances are he might even do Reagan a one up before his second term is over.
It's probably time for someone to play hardball with Stevens.
If the Pres has nudged this court ever so slightly to the right...because this woman sounds like a constructionist, non-activist...then a soon departure by Stevens would set up a huge battle about the time of the mid-term elections.
The president could appoint a pure conservative and the fight would energize the base for the elections...at which we have a chance to forge an unfilibusterable lead.
Then, real damage can be done. I've got some concerns, but I see this as a political move, and I see it as part of a grander strategy.
drudge is blaring that she gave money to clinton/gore . . . .
There are several in the history of the court. To me, that's a good thing.
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.