Posted on 10/23/2005 5:34:36 AM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
Bush said, "Trust me."
We must trust, we must trust, we must trust, we must trust........
/s
"she submitted a 1999 report to the ABA's house of delegates that included recommendations to develop and establish an International Criminal Court"
If that proves to be true, that has to be the last straw on this nomination.
It's as if Bush is trying to force conservatives to the Constitution Party in 2008.
These are not the droids you are looking for.
Like Limbaugh, Frum, Noonan, Rich, Krauthammer et al, Farrah makes a good living telling others what is what. Now the question is, whether what he believes and advocates is anyone's best interest other than a narrow group of pundits who hate Mies since the President did not seek their counsel in the selection process.
About 22% of the people who vote Republican in Minnesota consistently say that the reason they do so is on the basis of moral and traditional values. I do not believe any of the above mentioned pundits speaks for them or even approves of them. Running beneath the opposition to Miers is a strong feeling that some ignorant, knuckle dragging, Neanderthal Jesus freak does not belong on SCOTUS.
Let Miers speak before the Judiciary Committee and let the Senators vote. After all, was not the pundit mantra "give an up or down vote" the basis for the success of the last nominee?
No rule by philosopher kings! Our US Senators can vote her up or down and then face the electorate. That is the way the Constitution proclaims.
But remember we are just supposed to "trust" Bush on this one.
Yesterday I moved from I'll-wait-until-the-hearings to NO WAY on Harriet Miers.
The ICC would be a disqualifier for me. I hate that treaty. And the fact that a Spanish judge issued an international arrest warrant (since quashed by grownups) for 3 American soldiers for a friendly fire incident in which they have already been cleared underscores the problem.
She needs to go.
You guys must be desperate when you repost retread articles.
It just gets better.
Souter in a skirt
Thanks, I didn't know that. The ICC is a real deal closer for me.
Now think, I know you can.
Do you think if Harriet Miers was for the ICC that she would work for an administration that gutted it and gave the UN the finger over it.
You guys are getting desperate. You use your brains once in a while.
I hear Sununu speaks highly of her.
Exactly, what does that say about him if this person has influence on any of his decisions? And the fact that he trusts her and nominated her?
Well, that is what the Senate Judiciary Committee is for--asking these questions. So far they are allegations and it is unclear to me at least whether she supports these things.
Outstanding! You are unwilling to give the President of The United States nominee a fair hearing! Brilliant defense of the Constitution. Rule by Limbaugh et al is your choice of governance. /sarcasm
I no longer support Miers and think she should remove herself from consideration. However, I dont see any where in Farrah's lastest trash piece that he has any proof that Miers favored any of these issues. ABA lawyers put them up for a vote. Once they get enough support from the committee, the go to the membership for a vote. Fact that they went up for a vote doesnt mean that Miers personally favored any of these issues. It's similar to certain issues being voted on in the House or Senate that the leadership opposes. What is she supposed to do, resign her position if an issue comes up that she disagrees with? Or should she stay and be influential in preventing their passage?
Embarrassingly for your baldly stated assertion: there is, in fact, no substantive "debunking" of any of Farrah's points anywhere in the thread cited. Oopsie.
You guys must be desperate when you repost retread articles.
Didn't show up on Search. If the Mods feel it should be removed: I have no hey problema with that.
"Desperate," however, is a term better reserved, I feel, for those so slavish in their need to prove their undying devotion to a political party (rather than conservative political principal, per se), that they ardently champion -- and even lie on behalf of! -- a pro-ICC quota queen for the United States Supreme Court. YMMV, however.
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.