Posted on 10/03/2005 6:31:17 AM PDT by governsleastgovernsbest
In a just-completed interview on Fox News, Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol made no effort to sugar coat his criticism of President Bush's selection of Harriet Miers as his Supreme Court nominee.
Among Kristol's comments:
There is no way to say she is the best-qualified.
It really looks like W, faced with pressure and criticism, "flinched."
This is an insult to the well-qualified conserative women W has appointed to the federal bench.
W could have appointed Miers to a federal judgeship before but didn't do so. Could reflect his views on her qualifications up till now.
He's spoken with a number of leading conservatives already this morning and they are disappointed.
Kristol stated more than once that he was surprised by the pick and was obviously disappointed, to the point of seeming almost angry.
Maybe we were wrong all along. Bush is not conservative. He's Souter's long lost brother!
Kristol doesn't speak for me.
"Kristol stated more than once that he was surprised by the pick and was obviously disappointed, to the point of seeming almost angry."
Were tears welling up in Willy's eyes?
Somebody set up us the bum.
Whatever people think of Kristol, I have the sense he is speaking with some authority for the inside-the-beltway conservative establishment.
Kristol is a whiny little prissy boy.
Hey this could be a good thing. Any decision that makes that faux conservative Bill Kristol angry could actually be a good decision. Course I will withhold final judgement until I read up a bit more about her.
This is what happens when you vote Republican to try to change the courts -- you get Roberts and Miers, not the kind of strict constructionist justices we need. More Republican jurisprudence in the Souter/Stevens/Warren/Brennan/Blackmun tradition.
Bush is the "new" breed Conservative, buy now, pay later, give to corporate and hope for best.
I have to agree with that. She has never served as a judge so how could she be the best-qualified? She is a total blank slate as far as judicial temperment. A stealth candidate for both us and the lefties.
Why not Brown or Luttig or Garza or ....?
From Political Moneyline, contributions made by Harriet E. Miers in the 2000 election cycle:
$1,000 to Kay Bailey Hutchison for Senate Committee
$1,000 to Bush for President
$5,000 to Bush-Cheney 2000 Recount Fund
$1,000 to Bush-Cheney 2000 Compliance Committee
$1,000 to Dallas County Republican Party
Pppfffttt...Kristol?? Geeesh...that really shakes me up!
(sarc)
To me, Bush is serving up a nominee who he knows the Dems will reject, it will not get out of committee, and then he can nominate his preferred candidate. Not a good idea if true.
I was hoping that Bush would nominate Atilla the Hun rather than a split.
On Fox News, Fred Barnes just said it is a shock to conservatives. Fred said he had sources in the White House tell him that Bush would not have nominated her if she was not a judicial conservative (for what that's worth).
Great Pick... The more conservatives learn about her the more they will like her...
Krystol's main point was there were many others with proven records that were passed over in favor of this homley looking woman.
GW could have tried....
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.