Posted on 10/13/2005 1:15:06 PM PDT by indianrightwinger
U.S.: Miers Won't Withdraw Top Court Nod Oct 13 3:31 PM US/Eastern Email this story
WASHINGTON
The White House on Thursday dismissed the possibility that Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers might withdraw if she encounters heavy fire in her Senate confirmation and suggested her nomination was becoming embroiled in "side issues like religion."
Asked if there were any circumstances under which she would ask that her name be withdrawn, presidential spokesman Scott McClellan told reporters: "No one that knows her would make such a suggestion."
"And no one that knows her record and her qualifications would make such a suggestion," McClellan said.
Conservative critics have complained that Miers lacks a clear judicial philosophy and have questioned whether she is the best-qualified nominee, given that she has never been a judge and has little public record.
President Bush and White House officials have sought to reassure conservatives by emphasizing Miers' evangelical faith. "Part of Harriet Miers' life is her religion," Bush said on Wednesday.
Yet in a combative exchange with reporters, McClellan on Thursday said: "You all want to focus on side issues like religion."
"We've always talked about her record and her qualifications," McClellan said.
"And I think that we are doing a disservice for the American people when we focus on other issues and not her record and qualifications and experience, because that's what matters when you're on the nation's highest court," McClellan added.
Miers, 60, currently serves as White House counsel. She is a former Dallas corporate lawyer and was once Bush's personal lawyer.
Copyright 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
[...After all, constitutional law is just...like...so hard...]
Al Gore is wrong, the Constitution is not made out of SILLY PUTTY. It is absolute and understandable. Constitutional relativism is what is confusing to elitists. We average Americans read and understand. Revisionists read "into" and they are confused.
"suggested her nomination was becoming embroiled in "side issues like religion.""
HAH - the white house was the start of the "religion issue", and now they're decrying anyone talking about it?
"She strikes me as average, humble, Godly and American. She's kind of like most of us. What's wrong with having an average American on the Supreme Court?"
If that's the case, why her? I would prefer the President nominate me for the SCOTUS instead.
As long as Bush supports her she will not withdraw. She won't be a pushover at the hearings either.
You said:
What's wrong with having an average American on the Supreme Court?
Who knows? We might like her.
Reply:
Problem with "average" American is that they are highly likely to rule on cases with emotion (Liberal rulings).
"We might like her"?. I don't want to find out too late.
"And no one that knows her record and her qualifications would make such a suggestion," McClellan said.
Right 'Scotty', ya see that's the WHOLE darn problem. NO ONE knows.
BTW, if you find that person (singulat) please let us know.
For some reason, pro-Miers posters at FR tend to be more critical of Miers' opposition than they are supportive of Miers' "record and qualifications and experience."
This convinces me that her withdrawal is mere days away!
I'm glad to see that the WH is finally coming to its senses.
Harriet Miers might suddenly start feeling the need to spend more time with her family.
Then she will not withdraw. Many would lose a lot of respect for the President if he withdrew her because of uninformed opinion.
She won't be a pushover at the hearings either.
I suspect that she is being tempered by the present fire. One can hardly imagine the range of emotions and pressure this nominee must feel at the moment.
Who brought her religion up in the first place?
What a joke.
Yo, Scott, the President is the ONE that made her religion an issue because it is the ONLY selling point he can offer to conservatives.
"And no one that knows her record and her qualifications would make such a suggestion," McClellan said.
What record is that, Scott? The little record there is mostly shows she is a liberal Democrat:
1) While on the Dallas City Council, Miers joined the leftist Democratic Progressive Voters League. Further, according to James Taranto: Her description of her own positions on the City Council suggests that she was far less conservative than the White House would have its supporters on the right believe. She endorsed such fashionable liberal causes of the 1980s as divestment from South Africa (page 47) and the activities of a "Homeless Task Force" (page 49). She also recounts her efforts on behalf of welfare spending (page 49): I have strongly advocated the restoration of the $200,000 dental program as a model program in terms of public partnership. I have supported the maternal nurse care that was eliminated, be restored. The day-care money that was deleted I have asked be restored because they principally benefit women and minorities in my view.
2) As an advisor at SMU, Miers pushed for and donated to a lecture series in honor of left-wing feminist Louise B. Raggio, a woman so liberal that she has been honored by both the ACLU and Planned Parenthood. The lecture series was used to expose law students to left-wing feminists like Gloria Steinem.
Her record is entirely liberal.
Karen Williams would be a great nominee.
William F. Buckley Jr. once said that he would rather have the first 100 names in the Cambridge MA phone book in the Senate instead of what we have. But, we don't actually do that do we?
Oh please. If she were a "flamimng lib" do you think she would be Bush's friend for 15 years and working in the Whitehouse? My niece worked for Governor Bush as his secretary and believe me he doesn't surround himself with liberals. Give him at least an ounce of credit for being a good judge of character. How many bad judicial picks has he made before?
The wails from the BBs are going to be earsplitting when she goes down.
So, Our question is, why haven't they even scheduled the hearings? Are they planning to let her twist in the wind indefinitely?
So will these same GOP Judiciary members fight to the death for Bush if Meirs withdraws and Bush appoints someone with a clear conservative record?
Can anyone see the absolute hypocrisy here?
It's far more the "beltway putz's" that oppose this nomination. One has to be a blithering idiot not to see the damage this nomination is doing to the Republican party because the rank-and-file is, as whole, opposed to it.
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.