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

Skip to comments.

Dobson: What Rove Said About Miers (other FEMALE candidates on short list supposedly withdrew)
Time ^ | 10/11/05 | MIKE ALLEN

Posted on 10/12/2005 12:05:33 AM PDT by Ol' Sparky

Dobson: What Rove Said About Miers

In his radio program, the Focus on the Family founder reveals what reassured him about the Supreme Court nominee

By MIKE ALLEN

Posted Tuesday, Oct. 11, 2005

Trying to reassure his flock about the Supreme Court nomination of Harriet Miers, James C. Dobson set off a firestorm last week when he said that Karl Rove had told him some things he "probably shouldn't know" that led him to believe Miers "will be a good justice." With the Right on a rampage over what some saw as a betrayal, Dobson spoke of "things that I'm privy to that I can't describe because of confidentiality." Had Dobson received an assurance from Rove that Miers, now the White House counsel, would vote to overturn Roe v. Wade? Democrats suspected so, and said they would call Dobson as a witness at her confirmation hearing, which is likely to begin late this month or in early November.

Facing increasing criticism, Dobson announced he would come clean on his Wednesday radio program. In a transcript of the show recorded Tuesday, he says Rove has given him permission to make public their conversation, which occurred two days before Bush's announcement. In brief: Rove assured him Miers was a strong Evangelical Christian—and that some other female candidates supported by the Right had withdrawn their names from consideration.

According to Dobson, Rove said the President "was looking for a certain kind of candidate, namely a woman." Rove added that Miers "was at the top of the short list of names under consideration," but that others had withdrawn from consideration. "Some of the other candidates who had been on that short list, and that many conservatives are now upset about, were highly qualified individuals that had been passed over," Dobson says. "What Karl told me is that some of those individuals took themselves off that list and they would not allow their names to be considered, because the process has become so vicious and so vitriolic and so bitter, that they didn't want to subject themselves or the members of their families to it."

It's hard to overstate the power of Dobson's voice among social conservatives, making him a real life raft for the White House at a time when many in the movement have greeted the pick with skepticism, disdain and outright opposition. A licensed psychologist and former professor of pediatrics, Dobson is perhaps best known in the secular world for his 3-million-seller "Dare to Discipline." His official biography says he has "consulted with President George Bush on family related matters." Focus on the Family says he is heard on 2,000 radio stations in the U.S., and is heard by more than 200 million people around the world every day.

Dobson says on Wednesday's "Focus on the Family" broadcast the information from Rove that reassured him was "what we all know now: that Harriet Miers is an Evangelical Christian, that she is from a very conservative church, which is almost universally pro-life, that she had taken on the American Bar Association on the issue of abortion and fought for a policy that would not be supportive of abortion, that she had been a member of the Texas Right to Life." Even so, Dobson says, “Rove didn't tell me anything about the way Harriet Miers would vote on cases that may come before the Supreme Court. We did not discuss Roe v. Wade in any context or any other pending issue that will be considered by the court."

Miers still has strong public backing from the White House. On Tuesday, the President and the First Lady teamed up for a vigorous defense of Miers in a live interview with Matt Lauer of NBC's "Today" show at a Habitat for Humanity site in Louisiana, with Laura Bush saying that the nominee is "very deliberate and thoughtful, and will bring dignity to wherever she goes." Republicans say there is no chance Bush will yank the Miers nomination of his own accord. But some influential Republicans said there is a small chance she will survey the flak ahead and decide to withdraw on her own.


TOPICS: Extended News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: dobson; fotf; miers; scotus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-104 next last
That the White House could fill its quota and find an strong conservative woman on its short list willing to go through a confirmation hearing IS ABSOLUTELY NO excuse for not appointing an known originalist job for the position.

Playing the affirmative action game for political gain is absolutely no reason to sacrifice principle and renege on a the promise to appointed a known conservative justice.

This nomination needs to be withdrawn and a known originalist of any gender, race or ethnicity needs to be nominated in her place.

1 posted on 10/12/2005 12:05:35 AM PDT by Ol' Sparky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
There's a simple way to handle this.. You pick a person to be Bork'ed. The RINOs get their feed for the year, the RATs can show what champions they are for the cause, then you toss someone else in and even if they are a clone of the first, they are approved, likely with overwhelming numbers.

Pick people with obvious, open opinions. You don't have to play the dig for everything game because the juicy parts are out in the open. Will this person overturn Roe? Probably. They get attacked for it, the person shrugs and notes that that is their opinion.

These stealth candidates are the ones that require finding kindergarten teachers and other arcane journalistic tea leaf readings.
2 posted on 10/12/2005 12:12:34 AM PDT by kingu (Draft Fmr Senator Fred Thompson for '08.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky
"the promise to appointed a known conservative justice."

I'd like to see that "promise" sourced. A "known" conservative? Known to who? I don't believe Bush ever said that.

3 posted on 10/12/2005 12:13:30 AM PDT by Rokke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky

That's swell.

Just so you know, an embarassing Bush retreat here will likely weaken his Presidency to the point of irrelvancy.

All this ranting merely strengthens the Left.

Flame away, but I have no doubt of it. The DU'ers are laughing their a**s off.


4 posted on 10/12/2005 12:14:17 AM PDT by Wiseghy (Discontent is the want of self-reliance: it is infirmity of will. Ralph Waldo Emerson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kingu
There's a simple way to handle this.. You pick a person to be Bork'ed. The RINOs get their feed for the year, the RATs can show what champions they are for the cause, then you toss someone else in and even if they are a clone of the first, they are approved, likely with overwhelming numbers.

But that takes someone who wants to expose their entire life to inspection and nit picking by the likes of Teddy Kennedy, with no gain - No job in the end, and forever known as a court reject.

Pretty big request.

5 posted on 10/12/2005 12:17:38 AM PDT by adamsjas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky

It's particularly odd that this was leaked by previously tight lipped staffers to two different bloggers on the same day that Rove "gave permission" to Dobson to reveal this part of their supposed conversation. I don't know if I buy it. I definetly don't buy the insinuation that not ONE of the several highly qualified and known conservative women turned down the nomination. Nut even if we assume this to me true, there are so many more known originalists from which he could choose - some minority and some (Gasp!) white males. At the very least, if we assume this is true, it proves that Bush is willing to play affirmative action games with our country's future.


6 posted on 10/12/2005 12:18:37 AM PDT by Texas Federalist (qualified to serve on the United States Supreme Court)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wiseghy
Sorry, you're wrong.

The republican party is the party of ideas. Positions are supposed to be debated in order to have the best one win.

The democratic party is the party of lockstep compliance with leadership. Remember how everybody fell in line no matter what Clinton did? And everyone here rightly derided it.

Now, the party and some people here are trying to do the same thing - stifle any debate based on the issues and ideas. They're doing it with things like calling people 'elitists' or 'sexists' or saying they're disloyal or hurting the party. Some even went as far as to say this would 'hurt the war effort'.

Not only is that wrong, it is offensive.

Failing to question bad decisions is why the democratic party is in its current state of freefall. If we do the same, we won't get stronger. We'll just get weaker like they did.

Survival of the fittest ideals and principle leaves you with the fittest ideals and principles. It DOES NOT weaken you!
7 posted on 10/12/2005 12:20:06 AM PDT by flashbunny (Sorry, but I'm allergic to KoolAid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Ol' Sparky

IMHO, Dobson isn't exactly helping the situation any. In fact, he just seems to aggravate things every time he talks about it.


8 posted on 10/12/2005 12:37:49 AM PDT by AntiGuv ()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Dem's and the gang of 7 traitors have so poisoned the process that no one wants to go through it. It's sad but it should also be used as a hammer over the head of the gang of 7.


9 posted on 10/12/2005 12:40:41 AM PDT by KingKongCobra (The "Donner Party" can just go eat themselves)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: flashbunny

You sound a lot like Rush...


10 posted on 10/12/2005 12:43:46 AM PDT by babygene (Viable after 87 trimesters)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Rokke
I'd like to see that "promise" sourced. A "known" conservative? Known to who? I don't believe Bush ever said that.

Al Gore: "And Governor Bush has declared to the anti-choice group that he will appoint justices in the mold of Scalia and Clarence Thomas

"And when the phrase a strict constructionist is used and when the names of Scalia and Thomas are used as the benchmarks for who would be appointed, those are code words, and nobody should mistake this, for saying the governor would appoint people who would overturn Roe v. Wade. It's very clear to me. I would appoint people that have a philosophy that I think will be quite likely would uphold Roe v. Wade."

http://www.debates.org/pages/trans2000a.html

There are many references to then candidate George Bush asserting that he would nominate Supreme Court Justices in the mold of Thomas and Scalia. Al Gore may be a liar, but he did't lie about that.

The promise was again asserted in 2004. If you know of a repositiry for Bush stump speeches, I'll find a direct quoote for you from one or more of those.

The legal opinions of Scalia and Thomas were well known in the year 2000. Known to anybody who is able to read and understand their writings.

11 posted on 10/12/2005 12:44:25 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Wiseghy
All this ranting merely strengthens the Left.

Surely you can't have missed a call for action in the volumes of criticism.

Nominate a known conservative jurist, and watch the RATS drop the laughing.

12 posted on 10/12/2005 12:46:29 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Wiseghy
Just so you know, an embarassing Bush retreat here will likely weaken his Presidency to the point of irrelvancy.

Only if his *retreat* doesn't involve replacing Miers with a nominee conservatives will not rally around.

13 posted on 10/12/2005 12:47:52 AM PDT by Kryptonite
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

Nothing you just posted said Bush would appoint a "known" anybody to the Supreme Court. It said he would appoint justices in the mold of Thomas and Scalia. The only thing most people "know" about Miers is that they "know" very little about her. But while she isn't "known" to most Americans, she may very well be cut from the same ideological mold as Thomas and Scalia. And nobody on this site "knows" for sure that she is not.


14 posted on 10/12/2005 12:48:50 AM PDT by Rokke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Texas Federalist
The supposed inside skinney, delivered by Pukin Dog is out of a list containing the names of 5 women (only women were considered in the final cut), 3 women asked to be taken off the list, 1 was disqualified (backgound check?), and the only one left standing was Miers.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1500910/posts?page=127#127

15 posted on 10/12/2005 12:49:52 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Rokke

Sell your snake oil to somebody gullible. I'm not buying it.


16 posted on 10/12/2005 12:51:31 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: adamsjas
Pretty big request.

Some people here seem to forget that those who go through the confirmation process are human beings.
17 posted on 10/12/2005 12:51:56 AM PDT by Terpfen (Bush is playing chess. Remember that, and stop playing checkers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Terpfen

It's outrageous that Bush is getting away with this. Do you REALLY think that this was the most qualified person he could find? And now we have laura bush suggesting that those who criticize his choice are sexist. Do we all follow "trust me" because he is the leader or are there bigger issues involved. The best thing that could happen to the party is to clean out the bush operatives.


18 posted on 10/12/2005 1:11:28 AM PDT by jraven
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Texas Federalist

i hate to rain on your parade, buttttttttttttt. its the entire nation who is inculcated with affirmative action, nor just this president. i criticize bush when i think he needs it, but you know the court has assigned seats, or you should know that. im not approving, im merely stating reality. put blame where it lies, on the leftist/ commies/socialists, not on bush.


19 posted on 10/12/2005 1:15:50 AM PDT by son of caesar (son of caesar)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
"Sell your snake oil to somebody gullible. I'm not buying it."

No one is asking you to "buy" anything. I simply asked for a source for what is obviously a false statement attributed incorrectly to George Bush. You can't provide a source, but don't feel bad. No one else can either. He never made such a statement.

20 posted on 10/12/2005 1:23:50 AM PDT by Rokke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-104 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