Posted on 10/12/2005 3:09:32 PM PDT by indcons
Oh, wow, you've really got to worry about them Canadians up there in Washington./sarc. Actually, I live in Texas and am virtually surrounded by Hispanics. Yes, the border is a concern. But, if you think that bulding a wall along the border is going to solve the problem, I've got some oceanfront property in Arizona I've been trying to get rid of.
Of course campaign finance reform is bad. I'd like to see it repealed and I'm not even going to defend Dubya on that one.
"Ted Kennedy wrote the education bill," huh? Well, if you knew anything about Dubya, you would have known that he worked with Democrats to get things done here in Texas, or did you forget the whole "uniter, not a divider" pledge? He got things done that way. He took that idea to Washington, where he admittedly faced a whole different kind of Democrat, one that didn't give a sh*t about getting anything done as long as they could smear a Republican, any Republican. Since the Education bill, he has been playing rope-a-dope with the Dems to highlight their hypocrisy.
Got any other issues unrelated to the Miers nomination?
"Harriet used to keep a humidor full of M&M's in her West Wing office. It wasn't a huge secret. She'd stash some boxes of the coveted red, white, and blue M&M's in specially made boxes bearing George W. Bush's reprinted signature."
Her door was always open and the M&M's were always available. I dared ask one time why they were there. Her answer: "I like M&M's, and I like sharing."
Do these things matter at all when it comes to her qualifications for being an Associate Justice on the United States Supreme Court? Yes. They speak to her character. And in matters of justice, matters of character count.
And this example of "character" speaks to Kristol's own character; He's living in RINO Disneyland.
You're using a bit created by an America-hating moonbat? I've been critical of Kristol on this thread, but c'mon...
Ok...just for grins, suppose you are now President.
Which strangers are you going to surround yourself with to help run your administration?
You are going to surround yourself with friends you personally know, trust, can count on to do the job you want and how you want, and won't let you down. Everyone does it, and most of the time it works well.
Humor...son...only humor.
It's a little thick in here. Laugh a little.
I believe that Bush knows any of the other who did not withdraw their names would not be confirmed.
That left Meirs and Gonzales.
I think that the Conservative Movement has benefited from this open and spirited discussion.
I now say, Let her go through the Hearing process .
In America, we don't have the hanging before the trial.
Hear, hear. Well said.
Let's hear all sides and then decide.
Frankly, I don't find anything that SOB says or does funny. If you surfed CU, you'd know why.
Look at the disasters that occur when you DON'T pick a crony...
David Souter
Anthony Kennedy
Sandra Day O'Connor.
Need I remind you what happens when you choose an unknown?
If you had said O'Conner, I would agree with you. When Reagan nominated Anthony Kennedy to the high court, he garnered support from the largest pro-life organization in America, National Right to Life and other pro-life groups. After Kennedy was on the high court he began to reverse himself on the abortion issue. On issues related to crime, he remains a solid conservative, while somewhat moderately conservative on other issues. Don't forget, Kennedy was Reagan's third nominee, after Bork was shot down and Ginsberg withdrew for being a pot head.
What is the source of your superior knowledge that eclipses that of the President? The MSM? TV?
If the President was going to insist on naming a woman to replace O'Connor, why didn't he nominate ME?
Sorry, I don't know what CU is...but it doesn't sound good.
I dont think conservatives expected a OUIJI Board pick? Kind of disrespectful, y'know?
OK....gotta laugh..LOL. Good one.
All of them are far superior in every way to Miers. There are known quantities and fully reliable strict constructionists who have proven themselves on the bench.
McConnell would have been confirmed with ease. Luttig would have had a more difficult time but likely would have still been confirmed.
Rogers-Brown might well have been defeated, but the Democrats would have paid a terrible price in the voters' eyes and Republicans would have picked up between two and five Senate seats next year as a consequence.
Sadly, Bush has decided to govern from weakness rather than strength. No good ever comes from adopting a position of weakness. I am amazed that you or any supposed conservative would make excuses for him.
The Move-On, Naral and other anti-gun and anti-life organizations will pillory her when push comes to shove and use many of the same arguments posted here to do so.
So we want to side with Soros?
"I'd take Big Blue over Harriet Miers any day of the week."
I would have guessed your preference to be Robbie the Robot..
I caint say what sinkspur would but I would. I despise the silly sniveling self important little pri-k.
Why did he arbitrarily exclude men from consideration? Don't you agree that's sexist? Do you really think Bush should govern according to quotas? What conservative principle is that in support of?
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.