Posted on 10/07/2005 1:34:08 PM PDT by hinterlander
This is an anti-Miers spin article.
It doesn't take 55 seats.
It doesn't take 60 seats.
It takes 102 (political) testicles. Are you sure that they would be there to break a filibuster and enforce the constitutional for, say, Janice Rogers Brown?
"What an arabist statement. Please, tell me what is a 'palestinian'?"
I am not your teacher. If you do not know what a Palestinian is, there are many sources availble on the internet that can assist you. Responding with fatuous remarks like "arabist statement" reflects poorly on you and shows lack of maturity.
As I said, I am well aware of the origins - let me try one last time - "Dark horse" is an expression which is frequently used in political contexts. When you say that a candidate is a dark horse, for instance, what you mean is that although the individual was an unknown before the election, he / she succeeded in winning the election. It is believed that Benjamin Disraeli was the first person to use this expression.
A "dark horse" doesn't necessarily have to be dark in color. The word "dark" here can also means "secret" — the trainer of the horse keeps the potential of the horse a secret. Everyone ELSE is kept in the dark about the capability of the horse. Any questions?
Yes. It is not the only issue. Unfortunately that little piece of judicial activism called Roe v. Wade has totally politicized the Court.
C'mon James D...the pick was disrespecful to conservatives, the court and even to the lowly liberal.
Signs from God are not good enough on this one.
So, John Roberts also refused to turn over those same documents and he turned out "automatically guilty", hounded and eventually "convicted in the media"? Oh, no - that's right - he is currently the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. I think I understand Washington politics just fine, thank you very much.
Only Ginsburg and Breyer have been nominated by the 'rats.
This problem has been brought on by bad Republican decisions.
Harry Reid (last time I checked, he was registered Democrat) basically endorsed her and will have one hard time explaining a "no" vote once HE GAVE HER NAME TO THE WHITE HOUSE!!!!!
When the cops accidentally shoot an innocent bystander during a bank robbery, do you blame the criminal or the cops?
Reid will probably vote NO. Democrats have no conscience.
The Reagan Library relented.
But it was Bush who refused to turn over the Reagan era documents, not Roberts.
The difference here is that was the Reagan White House.
The Democrats are going to make a whole different ballgame out of the George W. Bush White House documents. Especially when they start accusing the White House of trying to cover-up crimes.
Reid's "no" vote on this hands the GOP a gift larger than "I did not have sexual relations with that woman . . . Miss Lewinsky."
Whatever - as I said, don't expect me to address your points if you won't return the courtesy.
I think Reid put his foot in his mouth when he suggested Miers to Bush.
Thanks for posting this. Look, any way you slice this, this is bad. Dobson seems to be crumbling here. The conservative concerns are definitely growing - not diminishing.
One thing that really bothers me about this is that it seems Bush was more concerned about getting advisement from liberals and RINOS than conservatives. That hurts. We spend time, money - all we have for him, and this is what we get - a lot of fog.
I'm not against Miers, but I'm not convinced I should be for her either. I just don't know. Please, God, save the court.
Like... Yeah, I know who he is, but it won't mean squat to the makeup of the Supreme Court.
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.