Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What Is To Be Done?. . . about the Harriet Miers nomination.
Weekly Standard ^ | 10/17/2005 | William Kristol

Posted on 10/12/2005 3:09:32 PM PDT by indcons

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-152 next last
To: Pessimist

Or everyone who thinks he might actually know what he's doing a Bushbot? C'mon, you know you're standing on quicksand with that pathetic retort.


41 posted on 10/12/2005 3:41:50 PM PDT by WinOne4TheGipper (I'd never question a DUmmie's patriotism. Even after 14 years, they're still loyal to the USSR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: trubluolyguy

What Is To Be Done?. . . about the Harriet Miers nomination?

Well, William, your options include:
Happy pills,
Hiri Kiri,
Have Hillary undergo a sex-change operation to turn her into a woman and propose her for the SCOTUS position.


42 posted on 10/12/2005 3:42:12 PM PDT by MilleniumBug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: linkinpunk

43 posted on 10/12/2005 3:42:30 PM PDT by Colonial Warrior ("I've entered the snapdragon part of my life....Part of me has snapped...the rest is draggin'.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: indcons
What Is To Be Done?. . . about the Harriet Miers nomination.

Get used to it.

Pres. Bush might have to withdraw her nomination, but if he does I think we all know that he will then strike from every judicial list every candidate put forward by the right, pundits and Senators.

In other words, they will like her replacement considerably less.

He might even decide to guarantee republican control of the whitehouse in '08 by nominating Hillary for the court and thus taking her out of the running for president.

And yes, a monolithic block of democrat Senators and a handful of RINOs would confirm her.

So9

44 posted on 10/12/2005 3:42:36 PM PDT by Servant of the 9 (Trust Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: right-wingin_It

"Actually, the best scenario is for the Democrats to threaten to fight the nomination via filibuster "

I don't think they (the Dems) will oblige him on that though. I don't think they're seriously against her.


45 posted on 10/12/2005 3:42:50 PM PDT by Pessimist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: ez
Bush necessarily knows more than you.

No he doesn't.

Apparently, I knew enough to realize what an extremely idiotic idea it was to name your crony to a seat on the Supreme Court, but this rather elementary insight was lost on Bush.

46 posted on 10/12/2005 3:43:13 PM PDT by Do not dub me shapka broham ("We don't want a Supreme Court justice just like George W. Bush. We can do better.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: right-wingin_It

Why would the Dems be unsuccessful? They would filibuster the next pick and the next and on...you underestimate the Dems. Face it, with 7-8 Rinos in the Senate Miers is the best we can do because she is a stealth conservative. Bush doesn't have the votes to pick a fight with Democrats. Reality bites sometimes.


47 posted on 10/12/2005 3:43:17 PM PDT by nyconse (a)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: sine_nomine

Yeah, yeah. Sorry, oh Sultan of Spelling.:)


48 posted on 10/12/2005 3:43:20 PM PDT by WinOne4TheGipper (I'd never question a DUmmie's patriotism. Even after 14 years, they're still loyal to the USSR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Pessimist

I think this nomination is good for the conservative movement in the long term. Right now there is a groundswell of opposition to this nomination (and rightly so!!). Pres. Bush miscalculated his base's loyalty.....he probably thought they had no choice but to vote for Republicans. The Laura Bush comment was the last straw.


49 posted on 10/12/2005 3:43:40 PM PDT by indcons (Let the Arabs take care of their jihadi brothers this time around (re: Paki earthquake))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Don'tMessWithTexas
How about taking an oath never to rely on anything mentioned by anyone else that does not support Miers? Why not cry out for a purge of FR and the party of anyone who is against Harriet?

Nah. I want you guys to be here when Miers is confirmed, and when she issues her first few opinions.

50 posted on 10/12/2005 3:44:39 PM PDT by sinkspur (If you're not willing to give Harriett Miers a hearing, I don't give a damn what you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Don'tMessWithTexas; sinkspur

"Why not cry out for a purge of FR and the party of anyone who is against Harriet?"

I'm sure if he could, he would.


51 posted on 10/12/2005 3:46:33 PM PDT by Pessimist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: mom-7

"If we trusted President Bush enough to vote for him, why can we not trust his nomination of Miss Miers?"

How about... because we voted for Bush because the alternative was John F. Kerry, not because we trust him.


52 posted on 10/12/2005 3:49:03 PM PDT by Pravious
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: indcons
I read the article and am not the least bit impressed by Kristol.

neither am I impressed by the lynch squad from the right. I am amazed at how many people don't like it when the left is off the wall but think it's ok to be off the wall as a far right conservative

I have to tell you that being a conservative does not necessarily mean agreeing with the far right who right now are using the same tactics against this nomination as they would scream very loud if the liberal left were doing the same.

Also I might add that many of the far right act as if they are the only base the president have. That's wrong, but most of us don't go whining every time things may not go our exact way about abandoning the party.

On balance I'm not the least bit impressed with the arguments I have heard here against Harriet Miers.

But I am convinced that many of the people here who are against her have such narrow views of how we should be governed that they could never carry an election without us center right people.

And I'm even less impressed every time I read another one of the temper tantrums.

53 posted on 10/12/2005 3:50:22 PM PDT by billva
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Do not dub me shapka broham
Bush necessarily knows more than you.

No he doesn't.

Apparently, I knew enough to realize what an extremely idiotic idea it was to name your crony to a seat on the Supreme Court, but this rather elementary insight was lost on Bush.

Yes he does, only you're too egocentric to see it. How many meeting did you have with the members of the Judiciary Committee?

Insiders and friends of the administration have been named to the Court, and diplomatic posts since the beginning of the republic, this is nothing new. Except to those like yourself.

54 posted on 10/12/2005 3:51:22 PM PDT by ez (W. quells 2 consecutive filibusters and gets 2 religious people on the court. Bravo!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: WinOne4TheGipper

Don't tell me you object to the term BushBot, do you? I've seen some here actually brag about it. And why not? Those who are proud of it have apparently looked within themselves and are ready to admit that "Yes" they will agree with absolutely anything he does.

I'll give 'em credit for honesty anyway.

But now as for the DUmmie troll monicker: Do you really think that's even remotely accurate? Honestly?

Or is it in fact the only thing your side can think of when someone points out how bad Bush sucks?


55 posted on 10/12/2005 3:53:32 PM PDT by Pessimist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: indcons
>>>>It may be--we can certainly hope--that Miers will be very impressive and that conservatives can support her in good conscience.

That's exactly what some of us conservatives have been saying from the get-go, Mr.Kristol. Some conservative pundits have shown that they don't abide by the old axiom, patients is a virtue. Instead, they opine to adnauseam how the Miers nomination is a deathblow to the conservative movement. Ridiculous! Granted Miers is no Scalia, Thomas or Luttig, but she is qualified to sit on the high court. She is a pro-life conservative who believes as a justice of the SCOTUS, she would be responsible to uphold the original intent of the Founding Fathers, as it is written in the US Constitution. Let's see what is revealed about Miers in the Senate hearings before we ask for her head on a platter. So far, so "okay".

56 posted on 10/12/2005 3:57:31 PM PDT by Reagan Man (Secure our borders;punish employers who hire illegals;stop all welfare to illegals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ez
Yes, and look at what a smashing success it's been thus far.

-Fortas

-Goldberg

-Those two flaming mediocrities that Truman named to the bench, but who are such an historical footnote that I can't even recall their names

-John Mitchell

-Michael Brown

-Ron Brown

-Julie Miers

-Craig Livingstone

-Bruce Lindsay

-Alberto Gonzales

Need I continue enumerating the specific names of those vivid illustrations of the efficiency and good government that rampant cronynism promotes?

57 posted on 10/12/2005 3:57:40 PM PDT by Do not dub me shapka broham ("We don't want a Supreme Court justice just like George W. Bush. We can do better.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: Pessimist
Or is it in fact the only thing your side can think of when someone points out how bad Bush sucks?

No. But if I said what I really wanted to, I'd be banned.

58 posted on 10/12/2005 3:59:10 PM PDT by sinkspur (If you're not willing to give Harriett Miers a hearing, I don't give a damn what you think.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: trubluolyguy
Have you seen the border? How do ya like that spending in Washington?

How do you solve number 1 without number 2? I guess you could hire a bunch of illegals to construct your wall. Save a bunch of money. Ironic, no?

59 posted on 10/12/2005 3:59:41 PM PDT by AmusedBystander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: mom-7
If we trusted President Bush enough to vote for him, why can we not trust his nomination of Miss Miers?

Same reason why his father's choice of Souter shouldn't have been trusted and Reagan's choice of Kennedy shouldn't have been trusted and Ford's choice of Stevens shouldn't have been trusted and Nixon's choice of Blackmun shouldn't.....and all of those looked more trustworthy than this Miers.

60 posted on 10/12/2005 4:00:12 PM PDT by Jim_Curtis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-152 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson