Posted on 10/18/2005 9:43:27 PM PDT by Stellar Dendrite
Bush shows himself to be indifferent, if not hostile, to conservative values.
With a single stroke--the nomination of Harriet Miers--the president has damaged the prospects for reform of a left-leaning and imperialistic Supreme Court, taken the heart out of a rising generation of constitutional scholars, and widened the fissures within the conservative movement. That's not a bad day's work--for liberals.
There is, to say the least, a heavy presumption that Ms. Miers, though undoubtedly possessed of many sterling qualities, is not qualified to be on the Supreme Court. It is not just that she has no known experience with constitutional law and no known opinions on judicial philosophy. It is worse than that. As president of the Texas Bar Association, she wrote columns for the association's journal. David Brooks of the New York Times examined those columns. He reports, with supporting examples, that the quality of her thought and writing demonstrates absolutely no "ability to write clearly and argue incisively."
The administration's defense of the nomination is pathetic: Ms. Miers was a bar association president (a nonqualification for anyone familiar with the bureaucratic service that leads to such presidencies); she shares Mr. Bush's judicial philosophy (which seems to consist of bromides about "strict construction" and the like); and she is, as an evangelical Christian, deeply religious. That last, along with her contributions to pro-life causes, is designed to suggest that she does not like Roe v. Wade, though it certainly does not necessarily mean that she would vote to overturn that constitutional travesty.
(Excerpt) Read more at opinionjournal.com ...
All you are doing is throwing insults rather than showcase examples.
Thoughtful article by Judge Bork as well as a clever title.
It's rather sad seeing Bork make statements of this type.
I'd sooner not slouch towards gun grabbing, thank you very much. Bork has really said "up yours" to GOA and NRA. Miers probably never will.
Can you see the difference between a judge with the qualifications of Bork and a crony hanger-on like Miers? Better yet, can you see the difference between a great conservative President like Reagan and a President who feints right but governs left? "Hypocrisy"...
Frankly, your call sucks.
Originalist a buzz term? Surely you can do better than that. I wont hold my breath though. I'm supporting Miers, but I would not begin to put forth such an embarrassing argument as yours.
Very harsh indeed. Robert Bork is right. He knows what superior judicial intellectualism and scholarship are.
Your mental giants have given us all these abominations.
That is a rather generalized rebuttal. Can you find a way to cut to the bone and cut off an artery somewhere? Otherwise, the wound looks to me to be rather subcutaneous.
I just can't get over how the people opposing this nomination, to the last person, are elitists, sexists, washed up, hysterical, shrill, bitter, traitors to the cause, and etc. You'd think if there was a reasonable way to be in opposition you people would have found it by now. /irony
Mores the pity..
Swedish Chef: "Goot Mornink, today Ve make de Squirley Stu!" Here Ve have the Stew, and here ve hav the Boom-Boom.
"Here, Squirle, Squirle, Squirle..."
I know little about his "gungrabbing" to comment on that point, and will have to do some research to understand the controversy about it.
You don't seriously believe the above is the reason for Bork's criticism of the Mier's pick, do you?
Ok ....the other four (minus Spector because we know how he will vote) are still pending...
Seriously, I do.
It would seem as it has been described, the obsessive tendency of Miss Miers to reveal little about herself and her opinions, stunted the development of the same opinions as well as her thought processes and writing skills.
You have no idea what Harriet Miers is and is not. All you have are bits and pieces, which may or may not be true, stated by talking heads/pundits/and a bunch of FREEPERS, who know diddlely squat.
Justice Thomas had as thin a paper trail, when nominated.
The late Chief Justice Rehnquist was never a judge, prior to his nomination.
On paper, Souter looked about as far right wing as one could be.
Standing Ovation!
Thank you, thank you, thank you. :-)
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.