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

Skip to comments.

CNN: HARRIET MIERS HAS WITHDRAWN!

Posted on 10/27/2005 5:54:48 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper

just breaking!!!!!!!!


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 0; 00000000000000000000; 00000nosantorum; 000sorryfirstkeyword; 0notsofast1stkeyword; 0real1stkeyword; 1firstkeyword; alangreenspan; alito; alltogethernow; angieharmon; borked; botsuicidewatch; bradpitt; brown; bushsquagmier; dealwithit; edithbrownclement; faves; fredthompson; harrietemiers; harrietmiers; harrietthemere; hightechlynching; humphreybogart; janicerbrown; janicerogersbrown; jellopudding; jrb; judgeclement; judicialnominees; luttig; marklevinforscotus; miers; noloyaltytopresident; noricksantorum; rightsviolated; rino; sadday; santorumdogcatcher08; scotus; snugasabuginarug; sorrybushbots; spinelessrinos; stupidsenatetricks; traitorrepubs; unjustandunfair; victory; withdrawal
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 3,281-3,3003,301-3,3203,321-3,340 ... 3,421-3,436 next last
To: Cboldt

Speaking of Gonzales, do you see him as the next nominee? I have been predicting Gonzales' section since Roberts was nominated. If it's not Gonzles now, it will surely be for the third opening, if there is a third opening.


3,301 posted on 10/28/2005 6:28:14 AM PDT by Theodore R. (Cowardice is forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3297 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
Exactly. Any employer should see the potential risks in such a situation. Especially since President Bush should by now be wondering just who this Harriet Miers is and did he ever know her half as well as he thought that he did.
3,302 posted on 10/28/2005 6:35:58 AM PDT by Iwo Jima
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3298 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.
Speaking of Gonzales, do you see him as the next nominee?

I honestly don't know. I see two primary camps in that prediction department.

One camp predicts that Gonzales will be a pick, nominally because the pick will energize Hispanic voters, and perhaps because Bush rewards loyalty (another crony pick), or because Bush wants to stick a needle in the eye of the uber-right-wing conservatives who objected to the Miers nomination, since he knows these same people object to Gonzales on the frounds that GOnzales has demonstrated judicial activism (see TX parental notification cases).

The other camp predicts that Bush will avoid a Gonzales pick, for the same reasons noted above. That he is not vindictive, and that he intends to honor his campaing promise to nominate strict constructionists, where "strict constructionist" can be fleshed out with the benchmark examples of Thomas and Scalia.

3,303 posted on 10/28/2005 6:38:19 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3301 | View Replies]

To: joesbucks
I would have to know Blackwell's heart, and how much he knows about McCain to answer that question.

And since I don't, I can't.

I have seen nothing in Blackwell to indicate that he is not a man of character, and we need him to govern this state.

3,304 posted on 10/28/2005 7:00:17 AM PDT by ohioWfan (Take comfort, Friend George, God is with thee!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3289 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
If you are around Cboldt, may I ask you a question?

I have heard that JRB is pro-choice (only recently). Do you know if that's true?

She has been my first choice as SC nominee from the beginning, but if she isn't pro-life, I have a problem with supporting her.

3,305 posted on 10/28/2005 7:02:42 AM PDT by ohioWfan (Take comfort, Friend George, God is with thee!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3303 | View Replies]

To: Guenevere

That's fair enough. Did Dr. Dobson make a statement lately that reflected a change of heart?

I emailed him a very tactful letter asking him to comment on the 1993 speech. I respect Dr. Dobson very much.


3,306 posted on 10/28/2005 7:05:59 AM PDT by DC Ripper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3300 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan
I have heard that JRB is pro-choice (only recently). Do you know if that's true?

As I've asserted on numerous occasions, a person's PERSONAL attitude toward an issue is not a good indicator of how that person would rule, if in the position of being a judge of the facts and the law.

In this particular decision, Brown came down on the pro-life side of the issue. Her side lost.

In American Academy of Pediatrics v. Lungren, 16 Cal.4th 307 (1997), the majority struck down on state constitutional grounds a statute requiring pregnant minors to secure parental consent or judicial authorization before obtaining an abortion.

In a lengthy dissent, Brown castigates the court for acting as a super-legislature. She states early in her dissent, "The fundamental flaw running throughout [the majority's] analysis is the utter lack of deference to the ordinary constraints of judicial decisionmaking--deference to state precedent, to federal precedent, to the collective judgment of our Legislature, and, ultimately, to the people we serve."

She is particularly dismayed by the court's lack of deference when, as here, the standards dictated by state, federal, and legislative precedent are clearly derived from history, context, and text. With regard to the statute itself, it is notable that Brown (1) finds the statute's age limitation not unreasonable, and (2) acknowledges a liberty interest in parents' controlling their children that is "historically more sacrosanct than a minor's right to privacy."

http://www.goldsteinhowe.com/blog/archive/2003_03_23_SCOTUSblog.cfm

Lots more good stuff at that link, not all of it about Brown, but much of it including cites to other cases where Brown rendered an opinion.

Here is the ACLU take on the case ...
http://www.aclunc.org/reproductive-rights/ca-court.html

Keep in mind, the ACLU is talking about the majority in the case, and Brown dissented against the majority opinion.

3,307 posted on 10/28/2005 7:25:01 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3305 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan

Sorry to field the post to Cbolt, but you might want to read this:

"...As I noted in an earlier piece, pro-life minority nominees represent the perfect storm for Left-leaning opposition groups: non-conformist role models from the Left's most reliable voting blocs who may one day be in a position to reconsider Roe v. Wade. In that regard, Janice Rogers Brown could well be the Storm of the Century: A black female who has been nominated to the court viewed as a springboard to the Supreme Court and who may not view Roe as the zenith of constitutional jurisprudence.
Thomas Sowell adds the kicker: "What really scares the left about Janice Rogers Brown is that she has guts as well as brains. They haven't been able to get her to weaken or to waver. Character assassination is all that the left has left."


Source: NRO: http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/kirsanow200505170812.asp

Or, how about this:

"Professor Steven Calabresi of Northwestern University Law School maintains that the Democrats’ unprecedented filibuster of federal appellate-court nominees is driven by the party’s imperative to retain its political advantage with minorities and women...[and] notes that nominees such as “Miguel Estrada, who is Hispanic, Janice Rogers Brown, who is African American, Bill Pryor, a brilliant young Catholic, and two white women, Priscilla Owen and Carolyn Kuhl.” are victims of Democrats’ determination “not to allow any more conservative African-Americans, Hispanics, women or Catholics to be groomed for nomination to the High Court with court of appeals appointments.”

http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/kirsanow200505030805.asp

If you've "heard" that she's pro-abortion, it would seem to me that she might be the target of an early whispering campaign designed to reignite conservative backlash against JRB as a questionable candidate. Just my $0.02.


3,308 posted on 10/28/2005 7:32:33 AM PDT by WorkingClassFilth (The problem with being a 'big tent' Party is that the clowns are seated with the paying customers.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3305 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt
Good stuff. Thanks!

Can you give me the origin and nature of the SC blog (who are Goldstein and Howe?), and who is writing the analysis of her there? (I love her references to Hogwarts and Gandalf!)

Thanks for the help.

3,309 posted on 10/28/2005 7:34:17 AM PDT by ohioWfan (Take comfort, Friend George, God is with thee!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3307 | View Replies]

To: WorkingClassFilth

No apologies necessary. I want all the info I can get. Thanks!


3,310 posted on 10/28/2005 7:35:20 AM PDT by ohioWfan (Take comfort, Friend George, God is with thee!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3308 | View Replies]

To: DC Ripper
Yes, he did....just within the past couple days.

It would appear the '93 speech affected him too.

I will try to find the Thread with the link for you.

3,311 posted on 10/28/2005 7:36:59 AM PDT by Guenevere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3306 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan
Can you give me the origin and nature of the SC blog (who are Goldstein and Howe?), and who is writing the analysis of her there?

That information I do not have.

3,312 posted on 10/28/2005 7:41:20 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3309 | View Replies]

To: ohioWfan

Kinda off topic, but season 1 of Hart to Hart was released Tuesday on DVD!!! Watched the pilot movie with commentary from RJ and Stefanie and it was priceless. Worth the $40!


3,313 posted on 10/28/2005 7:53:24 AM PDT by rintense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3309 | View Replies]

To: rintense
WAY off topic, but where did you get it?? Amazon??

(Just watched 3 episodes the other night and our tapes are wretched! Well worn. :)

3,314 posted on 10/28/2005 7:55:56 AM PDT by ohioWfan (Take comfort, Friend George, God is with thee!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3313 | View Replies]

To: DC Ripper; Guenevere
They read (or played) a quote from Dobson last night on Special Report.

He definitely withdrew his support after reading the '93 speech.

3,315 posted on 10/28/2005 7:57:26 AM PDT by ohioWfan (Take comfort, Friend George, God is with thee!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3306 | View Replies]

To: Cboldt

OK.....thanks anyway.


3,316 posted on 10/28/2005 7:57:48 AM PDT by ohioWfan (Take comfort, Friend George, God is with thee!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3312 | View Replies]

To: Cold Heat

You are wrong to thing that a Reagan Democrat likes RINO's. As evidenced my Reagan's success, they like straight shooters.

All of the 'Reagan Democrats' I know are and have been union workers that are as conservative as Ann Coulter, have NRA stickers on their trucks, right next to the Union Yes stickers.

McCain will fail as miserably as Gerald Ford did in the 70's.


3,317 posted on 10/28/2005 8:38:54 AM PDT by SFC Chromey (We are at war with Islamofascism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3202 | View Replies]

To: Cold Heat; Maximus_Ridiculousness

You folks never have understood who your true enemy is.

It is not the center!

It is your counterparts on the left.



My enemy is anyone to my left. That happens to include all RINO's. I paint you with the same tar and feather brush that I paint Commies with.

As stated previously there isn't much difference between a 'big-government' republican and the Socialist Democrats like Chuckie Schumer.


3,318 posted on 10/28/2005 8:47:04 AM PDT by SFC Chromey (We are at war with Islamofascism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3221 | View Replies]

To: SFC Chromey
Jerry Ford was a putz!

He had nothing to offer, and he never did!

I have never voted for anyone who was a Senator and goes directly into the presidency without going back to the real world for retraining in any case.

Wait till McCain asks for a vote from me.....:-)
3,319 posted on 10/28/2005 8:50:11 AM PDT by Cold Heat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3317 | View Replies]

To: DC Ripper
Did Dr. Dobson make a statement lately that reflected a change of heart?

Focus on the Family Action - October 27, 2005

Colorado Springs, Colo. -- Focus on the Family Action founder and chairman Dr. James C. Dobson issued the following statement today in response to Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers' decision to withdraw her name from consideration:

"I believe the president has made a wise decision in accepting Harriet Miers' withdrawal as a nominee to the Supreme Court.

"In recent days I have grown increasingly concerned about her conservative credentials, and I was dismayed to learn this week about her speech in 1993, in which she sounded pro-abortion themes, and expressed so much praise for left-wing feminist leaders.

"When the president announced this nominee, I expressed my tentative support, based on what I was able to discover about her. But I also said I would await the hearings to learn more about her judicial philosophy. Based on what we now know about Miss Miers, it appears that we would not have been able to support her candidacy. Thankfully, that difficult evaluation is no longer necessary."

http://focusaction.org/press/a0000118.cfm


3,320 posted on 10/28/2005 8:51:28 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3306 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 3,281-3,3003,301-3,3203,321-3,340 ... 3,421-3,436 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