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

Skip to comments.

My "Dear George" Letter
Michael Graham ^ | 10/07/2005 | Michael Graham

Posted on 10/07/2005 9:10:28 AM PDT by Sabramerican

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 241-259 next last
Ok folks, maybe I am stupid. I have always accepted such a possibility, so perhaps I am. My reasoning in this post could expose me as the utter fool that I really am.

One question, would you rather have Ruth Bader Ginsberg, or Harriet Miers? Ginsberg is a Rocket Scientist compared to Miers, who is merely a technician at Estes Corp. I got that..

Here is where I get stupid. I think any conservative leaning person, but especially an accomplished lawyer, can read a few books about the Constitution, the Founders, The Federalist papers (of a conservative bent of course), and be a better Supreme Court Judge than half the Jurists we have there already. Am I out of my mind? HOW HARD IS IT to interpret the Constitution, when you are going to do it STRICTLY?

I'd say I trust more Freepers (assuming they'd do a couple of weeks of reading and homework) with this job than I would the 4 liberals sitting on the court right now.

Ok, so I am a blabbering idiot, I know, my wife never says that outright, but I can see it in her eyes sometimes, and my 2 little kids make me feel like it often enough...

101 posted on 10/07/2005 9:45:00 AM PDT by Paradox (Just because we are not perfect, does not mean we are not good.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

he's a former local DC, WMAL, talk radio host. Fired for some arab inspired opposition to stuff he said on air.


102 posted on 10/07/2005 9:45:28 AM PDT by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: nascaryankee
Congress has the power to weaken that branch and nobody actually has to enforce their rulings.

And under-qualified justices make that much more likely to happen. Check and balance. It's not just for the 20th century.

103 posted on 10/07/2005 9:45:48 AM PDT by aBootes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Pessimist

You know, if we repealed the 17th Amendment, it would go a long way in returning this country to the correct path.


104 posted on 10/07/2005 9:45:56 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (G-d is not a Republican. But Satan is definitely a Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

Bump!


105 posted on 10/07/2005 9:46:09 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Sir Gawain

I've yet to see anybody on here say that.

But she IS the pick.


106 posted on 10/07/2005 9:47:20 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: ItsOurTimeNow
Bush is still a Republican, but not a conservative and that's where my loyalty lies - with the ideology, not the party.

Then you and others MUST work even harder to get more conservative Senators elected because as it is now there is NOT a conservative majority in that body.

Just imagine the damage that could be done to the judiciary if the RINOS teamed up with the DUmmies to defeat that judge with the long conservative record they can distort.

Remember what they did to Pickering.

107 posted on 10/07/2005 9:47:26 AM PDT by Mister Baredog (("It dawned on me that I was present at the birth of a political jihad."))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Paradox
So what do you do, nominate a "sure thing" well known and pedigreed moderate, who you know is gonna screw you at least half the time, if not more. Or do you nominate someone YOU KNOW will be on your side the large majority of the time, but who is unknown and not a judicial blue-blood.

False dichotomy, I believe.

108 posted on 10/07/2005 9:47:28 AM PDT by aBootes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Sabramerican

Ok, let me pose a question - why are so many people opposed to Harriet Miers? Most people know next to nothing about her and they automatically assume she's a bad choice. Why?

We complained loudly about the negative press that The Passion of the Christ received long before it was released by people who had never seen the movie. People who had no knowledge of the film or its content. How does that differ from the Harriet Miers nomination?

We gnash our teeth in anger when a credit bureau denies credit to someone because they have no credit history. Same principle - why is the LACK of information a bad thing?

Look, I don't know Harriet Miers from a box of Krispy Kremes, but I'm willing to wait until the evidence is in before I make a decision about her nomination. If I decide that she's not qualified based on not having any information about her, how dumb does that make me?

Rather than beat her and W up when the facts aren't in, let's be a little circumspect and give her the chance to defend herself and justify the nomination before bashing her out of ignorance.


109 posted on 10/07/2005 9:48:35 AM PDT by DustyMoment (FloriDUH - proud inventors of pregnant/hanging chads and judicide!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

By the time this is over, you and I will be the only two left in the Republican party.


110 posted on 10/07/2005 9:49:13 AM PDT by metesky (This land was your land, this land is MY land; I bought the rights from a town selectman!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: sodpoodle
We here - deal only in despair and/or hysteria. Stability R not us.

It's an attack of the Wrist Slitting Conservatives! It's quite embarassing. :-)

111 posted on 10/07/2005 9:49:14 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 95 | View Replies]

To: MNJohnnie

I agree with your post 51. This is a troll to be sure. How come no one has zotted this? I'm dissappointed in my fellow vikings.


112 posted on 10/07/2005 9:49:24 AM PDT by Integrityrocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: metesky

Don't kid yourself; there's a lot more of US than there are of the WSC's!


113 posted on 10/07/2005 9:49:54 AM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

NO ONE on here has said that. but those that are opening their veins, and preparing to mount the hale bopp in their purple shrouds and, nikes continue to accuse anyone remaining rational, of doing so.


114 posted on 10/07/2005 9:49:54 AM PDT by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: Sabramerican
You promised me a Scalia. Instead, you're sticking me with a "sistah," a woman whose qualifications for the Supreme Court begin and end in her brassiere.

This will become a classic!

115 posted on 10/07/2005 9:50:07 AM PDT by varon (Allegiance to the constitution, always. Allegiance to a political party, never.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin

WSC!! LOL!


116 posted on 10/07/2005 9:51:02 AM PDT by xsmommy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: Paloma_55; Blood of Tyrants
Make that about 48 Republicans and 7 RINOs. That makes it a VERY weak majority. At leat five of the RINOs will vote with the 'Rats against any judge who can be proven to be conservative.

UH, and that itself is partly Bush's doing, since he throws his support behind RINOs in the primaries. You seem to think that Bush has his hands tied by the presence of the RINOs. The reality is that he likes them.

117 posted on 10/07/2005 9:51:03 AM PDT by Sloth (We cannot defeat foreign enemies of the Constitution if we yield to the domestic ones.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Sir Gawain
No self-respecting Republican OR conservative would say that Miers is the most qualified for the position.

Matter of fact, I don't think the liberals or the Dems have suggested it either. I think Mr. Bush is alone on this one.

118 posted on 10/07/2005 9:51:09 AM PDT by aBootes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 80 | View Replies]

To: not2worry

P.S. what really agravates me is that Stevens was appointed by Ford, O'Connor and Kennedy by RR, and Souter by Bush I yet NONE of them can be counted on to vote with the Constitution.


119 posted on 10/07/2005 9:51:20 AM PDT by Blood of Tyrants (G-d is not a Republican. But Satan is definitely a Democrat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: aBootes
False dichotomy, I believe.

It very well could be. I assumed as much before, but maybe Bush knows things that we dont.

120 posted on 10/07/2005 9:51:30 AM PDT by Paradox (Just because we are not perfect, does not mean we are not good.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 241-259 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