Posted on 10/23/2005 5:34:36 AM PDT by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
WASHINGTON – Harriet Miers, President Bush's nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court to replace Sandra Day O'Connor, is on record as supporting the establishment of the International Criminal Court, homosexual adoptions, a major local tax increase and women in combat, WorldNetDaily has learned.
While some conservative leaders and organizations were stunned by the appointment, most were not alarmed by the lack of a paper trail by the nominee who has never served as a judge at any level.
But a profile of her positions as a leader of the American Bar Association, a Dallas city councilwoman and as presidential counselor is unlikely to ease the concerns of those who were expecting Bush to fulfill his promise to name a justice in the mold of Clarence Thomas or Antonin Scalia.
According to Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness, Miers has taken positions as White House counsel that violate the law banning women in combat.
"As White House counsel, Ms. Miers either approved of the Department of Defense's illegal assignments of women in units required to be all-male, which is still continuing in violation of the law requiring notice to Congress in advance, or she was oblivious to the legal consequences of those assignments," she said.
Donnelly believes the actions of Miers could lead directly to a future court ruling requiring women to register with the Selective Service for the draft because they are now being, against the wishes of Congress, assigned to land combat.
"I am very disappointed by the president's choice," she said. "Ms. Miers does not have a judicial 'paper trail,' but her record as White House counsel is a legitimate cause for concern. Democrats and liberals who were willing to use the military for purposes of social experimentation have reason to be pleased."
Donnelly also concludes that Miers approved the Bush administrations retention of President Clinton's "don't ask, don't tell" regulations, which, she says, are different from the 1993 law passed by Congress
Meanwhile, during Miers long affiliation with the American Bar Association, she submitted a 1999 report to the ABA's house of delegates that included recommendations to develop and establish an International Criminal Court and the enactment of laws and public policy providing that the sexual orientation of adults be no bar to adoption of children.
Under the heading Family Law and subheading Adoption, the document states: "Supports the enactment of laws and public policy which provide that sexual orientation shall not be a bar to adoption when the adoption is determined to be in the best interest of the child."
Also included, under the heading International Law and Practice, is a recommendation for "the development and establishment of an International Criminal Court."
Along with the proposed agenda was a memo, dated Oct. 28, 1998, that explained the document.
"The Committee urges all Delegates to review this list for items of interest to their constituencies, and to act as the catalyst for further contact and action so that each entity will have the earliest opportunity for consideration and input."
The memo is signed by Miers as chairwoman of the Select Committee of the House.
As a city councilwoman, Miers also said Dallas had a responsibility to pay for AIDS education and patient services. And she courted the support of the Lesbian/Gay Coalition of Dallas in her successful 1989 campaign.
In addition, economic conservatives pleased by her corporate law background may find it distressing that in 1990 Miers voted for a 7 percent property tax increase during her short tenure on the Dallas City Council.
Well, Miss Miers also gave money to the DNC during the fall Dukakis-Bentsen campaign. It was too late to give directly to Dukakis by that time. She must have not yet met the Bush family. And, yes, Olympia Dukakis is a very talented actress.
Actually, is it really possible to be a liberal on "social" issue but not on "economic" issues? Why? The social issues are very costly and affect the economy. LBJ started a $5 trillion expenditure to fight poverty. The program was expanded by Nixon, and still went on under Bill Clinton and now GWB too.
Actually when he said social issues I think he was talking about abortion, gay rights, gun rights and similar issues. Spending on programs to fight poverty would predominantly be an economic issue.
A hearing is irrelevant to discussing whether something is stupid or not.
"Social" issues also have inherent costs in addition to the expenditure of overt government funds. Really, one is either conservative or not: how can he split the difference. King Solomon refuted that concept.
From Federalist #76...
Those who have themselves reflected upon the subject, or who have attended to the observations made in other parts of these papers, in relation to the appointment of the President, will, I presume, agree to the position, that there would always be great probability of having the place supplied by a man of abilities, at least respectable. Premising this, I proceed to lay it down as a rule, that one man of discernment is better fitted to analyze and estimate the peculiar qualities adapted to particular offices, than a body of men of equal or perhaps even of superior discernment.
what would you have us far-right do?
Stop demanding her resignation and let her have her hearing.
The issue is: does she have enough votes to prevail? I don't
think so. Also, it's possible that those choices I mentioned
refused the job.
Agreed.
I'm still half hoping that i'm asleep and the Miers nomination is nothing more than a bad dream. Lets hope I wake up to find a press conference on TV where Bush is nominating a well qualified conservative for the Supreme Court.
I am.
"Now do you honestly think if these social questions were left to the people that Gay marriage couldve happened?"
No.
"nor that a 8 month old fetus could be aborted?"
No.
It is up to the Judiciary Committee to decide on the facts as to the merits of this nomination. They will do so. Then the entire Senate will vote according to the facts and their judgment. That is the way we decide things. Not by pundit fiat but by the prescribed Constitutional remedy.
Ah, a website that proves your case, eh? :-)
Let's see.... who is responsible for that website... Becki Donatelli... and what do we know about Becki...
HOCKADAY-DONATELLI
And what do we know about HOCKADAY-DONATELLI
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:BNyVJ35ZJLAJ:www.publicintegrity.org/527/search.aspx%3Fact%3Dcom%26orgid%3D18%26comid%3D681c+HOCKADAY-DONATELLI&hl=en
Donors to a 527 called "The Wish List"
And what is "The Wish List"?
http://www.thewishlist.org/
Ah, Pro-choice "republician" women... any bells going off yet for all of you single-issue abortion voters who are supporting Miers??
Their money trail:
http://www.publicintegrity.org/527/profile.aspx?act=dir⊂=1&cycle=2002&id=574
Ah, the Donatelli Group appears again... full circle.
Buying Time LLC
Another Pro-choice group..
American Viewpoint
http://www.amview.com/amview_contents/stories/political.shtml
Pro-choice and log-cabin republicans.
California Republican Party
Is that an oxymoron?
Citizens for Corrine Wood
http://www.familyresiliency.uiuc.edu/events/corinne_wood.html
Friends of Barhara Hafer
http://www.runbarbararun.com/
The New Majority Committee
http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:U2BfO-sEg7kJ:www.ocregister.com/ocr/2004/12/25/sections/local/local/article_356383.php+%22The+New+Majority+Committee%22&hl=en
Pro-abortion, pro-gun-control, pro-minority...
Get the picture yet?
Now why would Becki, who certainly looks pro-abortion to me, be running a website for a stealth SCOTUS nominee who is going to repeal Roe v. Wade?
Doesn't that seem more than a bit odd to you?
Some of you people really need to lay off the koolaid...
This comforts me some.
ZOT
Funny thing about webpages, they're often more than a bit misleading...
You might want to take a look at who is responsible for the page and where they've been spending their money etc. before you start taking a lot of "comfort" from it.
So true and your post above illustrates the point wonderfully. Lying asnd obfuscation knows no political bounds. Very sad.
How is Donatelli responsible for the CFJ website? I haven't found her name amongst the members yet.
I briefly looked at the site, did some reading (including the WSJ article they have posted) and looked at the principles. Help me out here. What do you see that is damning, as your message implied?
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.