Posted on 10/10/2005 8:53:48 AM PDT by jcb8199
I want to thank W personally for this debacle. It never could have happened w/o him.
Or without all the whiners who think they own the White House, and cry as bad as Liberals do....
At this point all the hand-wringing about her lack of stature, her lack of depth, her lack of high-octane education, her lack of Federalist Society membership, yadda, yadda, yadda, comes down to this:
How will she vote?
If she votes like I think she will vote, the Republican Party is saved.
Otherwise... doom...
This is the fulcrum of the debate. While I too was initially dissapointed by the nomination of Miers, I am now convinced that history will show Miers was a solid, landscape altering pick.
Nice article.
Disappointed though I am in Miers' choice, I'm pragmatic enough to realize that letting the Dems win in '06 will disappoint me orders of magnitude more.
Dissent and churn is part of a healthy democratic process that'll likely keep the Repubs in touch with their base and relevant to the big questions of the day and avoid the fate of the current Dem party. I don't grudge the Bush protestors on the right their protest or their reasons.
Have a nice day.
I don't number myself among either the fall-on-your-sword true believers or the Bushbots. I neither hate Bush nor trust him beyond all contrary evidence.
I don't hate Harriet Miers, either.
What I do think, however, is that her nomination was a grievous mistake. She is not the best candidate. Her nomination has split the conservative ranks down the middle. The tensions and bad feelings on FR are only too clear. I'm not sure whether it may have slowed the process of quarterly fund raising, although certainly Jim Robinson has had nothing to do with this whole business either one way or the other. But it certainly has caste a lot of anger, gloom, bad will, and eagerness to hurl insults on the forum.
I think there's zero chance that her nomination will be withdrawn, and small chance it will be defeated. So we'd just better hope: a) that she proves to be a strong conservative voice on the court, preferably making that crystal clear before the 2006 senate elections (which hardly gives her much time); and b) that Rove and Bush have learned there lesson by this whole unpleasant experience and don't make the same mistake again.
It's very possible that Bush will have a chance to make one or two more SCOTUS appointments. We can't afford to weaken any further. Probably this stupid business of letting the RINOs, Harry Reid, and Arlen Specter dictate terms will already make it impossible for Bush to stiffen up next time and fight for a really strong candidate. But we sure need more reliable conservatives on the court, and this business doesn't help.
No, we can't back down now on Miers. But it was a horrible mistake that never should have been committed in the first place.
Quit your crying and go read, "I was wrong; so please join me in supporting Harriet Miers," by Pukin Dog.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1499585/posts?page=1,50
They have been leading down the path to defeat for 30 years. They have constantly snatched defeat from the jaws of victory. Their defeatism, love of compromise, and pandering to big business and the liberal establishment have gotten us nowhere.
I say reject Miers. Play hardball and maybe GWB will get the message and nominate someone we know is really like Scalia.
What conservatives should be complaining about is how poorly the FBI and FEMA perform compared to WalMart or Home Depot. The folks at Disney World can track people better than the FBI.
"If they do so, and if they hand the election to the Democrats, there could be a real bloodletting among conservatives that could split Republicans for a generation and perhaps even give impetus to the creation of a third party. "
I think creating a viable third party would be a good thing in the long run. 4 or 5 viable parties would be a lot better. People would then have a choice that reflected their views. Choosing between the lesser of 2 evils is not a good way to run a Republic.
I'm far more cynical than that. I will hold my nose and support the nominee. But only because the alternative, left-wing control of our country, stinks to high-heaven.
But I have no illusion anymore that any member of the Republican establishment has any interest, intention, or desire to pay any attention to conservatives; except to our checkbooks, our precinct walking and our votes every two years. None.
The only hope for this country is for conservatives to take over the Republican party and to change the Republican establishment because it stinks.
"Or without all the whiners who think they own the White House, and cry as bad as Liberals do...."
This article's more of a "wanker" than a "whiner".
Who else could he have picked that would have been confirmed.
I don't think there is a chance in the world that any of those we wanted could have been confirmed.
There are too many chicken Republicans and they would have wimped out.
Pukin Dog's post makes as much sense as any I have seen. We need to support the president on this.
"Trust George" is fine once or twice. But all the time? Especially with such a poor success rate? Please.
I tend to believe the landscape is full of people that are losing their patients with the only choice being the better of two evils.
I personally would applaud a new party, that actually reduces the size of this monster government, reduces this endless, needless spending and once and for all secures our borders and enforces our immigration laws. I personally believe government has grown so large, so encompassing, it's lost nearly all control and just grows and consumes.
He hasn't selected a bad judge yet.
"if Harriet Miers falters or comes up short in any way, the coalition that has elected 3 out of the last 4 Presidents could finally collapse in flurry of recrimination and anger."
I have a different analysis: If the President wisely pulls the plug on this mistaken nomination, or Miers herself throws in the towel, Bush can redeem himself and cement the base by being as bold in nominating an originalist, strict-constructionist, no-foreign-precedent nominee as the Slickmeister was in nominating the far-leftist Ruth "Darth Vader" Ginsburg during his presidency.
LOL! Just look at how well it is working in Germany...France, et al, et al. In fact, it was multiple party politics that got goofy Billy Clinton elected, not to mention getting the communist Salvadore Allende elected as the president of Chile with 31% of the vote.
Be careful what you wish for.
So you're suggest having little or no choice is better?
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.