| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Judicial Nomination Withdrawal Yields Nothing but benefits |
| 2005-10-28 |
| This editorial says what I had been saying about the Miers nomination. Ms. Miers was too much an unknown quantity. Conservatives didn't want to get hosed by a Souter 10 years hence. As to charges of 'sexism (whatever the f*ck that means ), conservatives ain't your Daddy's rightwinger Critical summary: In choosing Ms. Miers, Mr. Bush tried to avoid such a debate, perhaps because he thought he had enough other fights on his hands. But the avoidance cost him much more than had he lost after a pitched battle on principle. The biggest lesson of the Miers nomination is that Mr. Bush can't avoid the battle for control of the Supreme Court that he promised Americans he would make in two elections. Amen to that, baby! Bring it on! |
| Posted by:badanov |
| #9 The best quote I have heard is "I may not be a judge but I stayed in a Holiday Inn last night." There has to have been other better qualified nominees. I'm don't know what George was thinking on that one. One pundit said the recommendation to select a non-judicial nominee was a recommendation of the Supreme Court justices. |
| Posted by: John Q. Citizen 2005-10-28 20:37 |
| #8 Sorry badanov, but you don't have the numbers. The RINOs are not going to give the president any more respect than the 'base' has. You either live with a RINO or a Dem will just pick up the seat from that state. We have the numbers. and we have them now. Even if the Gang of 14 decide to welsh on their deal, we still have the nuclear option. We have the numbers and we have the options. But, let's set this thing on its head. If a state has a choice between a republican and a dino, which would they take, the republican everytime. Why? Because of the different philosophies. Republicans, even those in name only, still believe in the basic values, God, country, rule of law, smaller government and a strong defense. If folks in a state have a choice they will vote for the RINO, and coversely the republican everytime, because the right will take care of the country, while the left just wants to surrender it to their socialist buddies in Euroland and elsewhere. That's not going to change, It is changing... its the nature of the demographics of the state. The Dems have no need to give a nominee a 'fair hearing' or a 'floor vote' anymore than the conservatives gave Meirs. No, they just have a constitutional obligation as witnessed by their oath of office to support and defend the constitution (which in judicial hearing they have shirked that obligation repeatedly )and that means giving all political appointees, including judges a fair hearing. And in the passed several years the left has created this unconstitutional method which obsructs their own roles and makes their role even larger than constitutionally permitted. But the left doesn't do that. They place in front of themsevles for all the world to see this strawman of a rightwinger 'turning the clock back' and then knocking it down as though they really accomplished something. I liken it to cutting a fart in a crowded room and blaming someone else for it. The left has an obligation to the constitution, and it is one they have repeated shat on for their own agenda. |
| Posted by: badanov 2005-10-28 18:36 |
| #7 Thank goodness you got the last in on that DepotGuy. That's important. No rollers, no faith based |
| Posted by: Shipman 2005-10-28 18:00 |
| #6 Oh and BTW... If the Holy Rollers start squawking, cordially tell them to STFU as well. |
| Posted by: DepotGuy 2005-10-28 13:39 |
| #5 How bout this? Choose the most qualified candidate for the job whether they be a man, woman, minority, or a white-bread Ivy Leager. And let the chips fall where they may. If the Dems threaten a fillibuster expose them for the obstructionist grand-standers that they are. If the RINO's in the Senate aren't on board...tough shit. It's long overdue they get their noses bloodied. Sure it's a simplistic idea. But I pretty much resemble that remark. |
| Posted by: DepotGuy 2005-10-28 11:15 |
| #4 Sorry badanov, but you don't have the numbers. The RINOs are not going to give the president any more respect than the 'base' has. You either live with a RINO or a Dem will just pick up the seat from that state. That's not going to change, its the nature of the demographics of the state. The Dems have no need to give a nominee a 'fair hearing' or a 'floor vote' anymore than the conservatives gave Meirs. The Reps can bleat all they want, the Dems will only point out this behavior of the party to justify their actions. Wise commanders pick fights they know they can win. Picking a fight just to have a fight reminds me of the old say - don't wrestle with a pig, you only get dirty and you make the pig happy. The Dems are eager to paint the conservatives as radicals in the view of the middle swing voters, who determine who controls Congress or the White House. The conservatives are going to make the Dems job just that much easier in the very fight you want. |
| Posted by: Phiter Fling7346 2005-10-28 10:32 |
| #3 I sorta look at it as the 'Pubs picking up the veto pen when Dubya refused to use it... |
| Posted by: Seafarious 2005-10-28 09:30 |
| #2 And before the choir chimes in to educate me on the Rantburg Way, let's just say that I've been a contributor here for a good long while. But between the Schiavo mess and now this, I've about had it with people who cannot see beyond their pet issues - no matter how important and strongly felt - to see what it takes to actually govern during a difficult, protracted war which will extend well beyond Iraq and take many years to win. At a time like this, dividing the country over abortion or whatever is just WRONG. |
| Posted by: anon 2005-10-28 07:36 |
| #1 No - the biggest lesson of the Miers brouhaha is that social conservatives have their heads up their posteriors and are not looking at the bigger picture which includes, at the moment, places like Iran. Where Bush needs Dem support for any moves we end up taking. Shortsighted idiocy - not to oppose Miers, but how it was done. |
| Posted by: anon 2005-10-28 07:32 |