Posted on 10/04/2005 5:47:59 AM PDT by OXENinFLA
WASHINGTON — President Bush will hold a press conference on Tuesday in the Rose Garden at 10:30 a.m. EDT.
The issue that most likely will dominate the event is Bush's Monday pick of White House counsel Harriet Miers (search) for Supreme Court justice. If confirmed, Miers would take the place of retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor (search).
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
GOOD I hope shes never confirmed.
Yeah.. but they aren't listening to this conference. The only people listening to this thing are us and them.
What "both sides"? No conservatives are allowed in the White House press corps. Anyone who outs himself as one gets smeared and run out of Dodge.
I love the point the president made.... which was basically:
looka here you jerkoffs! I sent up Roberts, the best nominee on the planet and still half the damn democrat obstructionists voted against him! So I figured I'd send up my good friend Harriet. You got any problem with that? Good! Next question!
If I were on the Sen. Judiciary Committe my first questions to Miers would be:
1. Have you ever argued a case before the Supreme Court?
2. Have you ever assisted in litigation before the SC?
3. Have you ever written on matters of constitutional law?
4. Has anyone even ever sought your professional opinion on a matter of constitutional law?
How many times are you going to repeat the president should shut up? He is being asked questions and he's answering them.
It would be brilliant - what die hard liberal could possibly vote for Hillary knowing she slept with a Republican? Humor aside, there is the fact the Ms. Miers has vetted every Federal Judicial nominee for Bush. In that process, I suspect he came to know more about her judicial philosophy than any other nominee. The risk is not knowing whether she will bend to the pressure and tack left over time ala Kennedy, O'Connor and Souter. Whether a nominee was a sitting judge previously won't tell you that either. Positions of power have a tendency to change people.
You would think so, wouldn't you.
So you don't like Krystol and his opinion. How do you look at the opinions of Limbaugh, Medved and Reagan? I'll even throw in Savage who you can slice and dice. Do their opinions hold any weight with you whatsoever?
IMO, Roberts=Scalia, Miers=Thomas. Campaign promise kept.
Bush hasn't worked with Putin everyday for 10 years, but nice try at distraction.
4th question..... Iraq...
The way's he's answering them is giving the liberal groups a ton of ammunition. I really doubt she's going to get confirmed.
Good grief read her "resume." By that standard anyone with a law degree can be considered. Why not nominate Geraldo Rivera?
The reality is most Americans ARE in the middle.
And most Americans don’t vote.
Same people.
Maybe....but their is no way of telling whether they would consistently vote that way once on the court....A Kennedy comes to mind.
You're not. How sad for the nation.
The Supreme Court has a history of having people appointed to it who had never been judges. And I like that. Being a judge is to be part of an echo chamber.
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.