[geekWithA.45]

http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2005_10_02-2005_10_08.shtml#1128378033

Quote:
-----------
The same liberties that ensure a free society make the innocent vulnerable to those who prevent rights and privileges and commit senseless and cruel acts. Those precious liberties include free speech, freedom to assemble, freedom of liberties, access to public places, the right to bear arms and freedom from constant surveillance. We are not willing to sacrifice these rights because of the acts of maniacs.
-----------


{Via Instapundit, who points to Kopel on Volokh}


Ding ding ding!

We have a winner.

[beerslurpy]

Yay for texas!

I dont want to go nuts with euphoria. I still think Bush took the coward's way out on this one and I still would have preferred Janice Rogers Brown.

[Lone_Gunman]

Well, thats nice, but actions speak louder than words, and we have no actions from her to make a judgement.

Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and John Kerry are also supporters of the 2nd Amendment, too.

[The Real Hawkeye]

It's not so much what her current persuasions are on those topics, but how she is able to handle constant pressure from the left to "moderate" her views. She has not demonstrated an ability to do that. Janice R. Brown has. She was the natural pick, and was passed over due to cowardice.

[Kingcreek]

worldnetdaily.com is reporting that, in the late 1980s, Ms. Miers contributed to The DNC, and Lloyd Benston's and Al Gore's campaign funds.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46635
Anybody else see reason for concern there? :scrutiny:

[Silver Bullet]

She was the natural pick, and was passed over due to cowardice.
Do you have evidence to support this accusation ?

[Standing Wolf]

She may be Bush's throw-away candidate: the one he assumes the leftist extremists will veto simply for the pleasure of hearing themselves rant and rave.

If I'd been president, I'd have chosen a real conservative.

[M-Rex]

Woot!

I hope this tree bears good fruit.

[beerslurpy]

Since when is JRB cowardly in the slightest? Have you heard her speak publicly? Have you read her opinions? She is intelligent and bold in forming and expressing her views. I never got the impression she cared the slightest what people thought of her views.

I hate Lloyd Bentsen. He is the prick that got the USAS and Striker12 declared Destructive Devices in the mid 90s when he was Sec of Treasury. That ruling is the main reason why no one will make 30 rd drums for the Saiga-12.

She may just have been slinging money around, but the fact that she has supported some obviously left-wing cases is worrysome. Then again, back when she contributed to Gore, I know he was viewed as one of the more conservative Dems. Bentsen isnt exactly left wing, and I wouldnt even remember him if it wasnt for the shotgun thing.

I will keep looking for information on her, as will everyone else, I'm sure.

[Hawkmoon]

Quote:
-----------
The same liberties that ensure a free society make the innocent vulnerable to those who prevent rights and privileges and commit senseless and cruel acts. Those precious liberties include free speech, freedom to assemble, freedom of liberties, access to public places, the right to bear arms and freedom from constant surveillance. We are not willing to sacrifice these rights because of the acts of maniacs.
This person works in the same White House that pushed so hard for the Patriot Act and Patriot Act 2?

[Hawkmoon]

Since when is JRB cowardly in the slightest? Have you heard her speak publicly? Have you read her opinions? She is intelligent and bold in forming and expressing her views. I never got the impression she cared the slightest what people thought of her views.
Slow down, Mate. Once again, our common language seems to not be so common.

I interprested that original statement to mean that GWB did not nominate JRB because GWB was afraid to take the heat for doing so, not that JRB is in any way a coward.

[beerslurpy]

Ah so. Sorry for misunderstanding. :D

When he said "woman or a minority" I immediately thought "wow awesome! It will be JRB fo shizzle!" When I woke up to talk of harriet miers, I was like "who the hell is that?" Then about half a second later I realized Bush had f****d us again.

Someone remind me why we bothered to vote republican for president? I realize Kerry "would have been worse" but I'm drawing a blank as to how. FDRs reanimated corpse wouldnt have been much worse. What is the national debt up to now? A jillion dollars? And now we have a 6-3 Souter majority. *golf clap* all your political base are staying home next election

[jeff-10]

Someone remind me why we bothered to vote republican for president?

With Kerry as President we would have just finished watcing Chief Justice Schumer being sworn in, after a 98-2 confirmation vote in the Senate. Now we would be waiting for Justice Boxer to be confirmed with a similar margin.

[beerslurpy]

Why are the Republicans so afraid of taking a stand? Are there really that many RINOs?

Even if Kerry had won, the republicans would still have both houses. Not that you would know it these days. I cant decide if I have been time-warped back to the carter administration (cronyism galore) or the roosevelt administration (pres channeling the ghost of John Maynard Keynes). Then again, maybe I am really in the Jackson administration, when the Republican party didnt exist. So hard to decide.

What happened to Newt Gingrich? Was he run out of town by the party of small government?

[DanS]

Quote:

Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and John Kerry are also supporters of the 2nd Amendment, too.



I heard them say that on TV when they ran for President, so it must be true. :)

[The Real Hawkeye]

Slow down, Mate. Once again, our common language seems to not be so common.

I interprested that original statement to mean that GWB did not nominate JRB because GWB was afraid to take the heat for doing so, not that JRB is in any way a coward.Thanks Hawkmoon. I guess we hawks have got to stick together, eh? :)

[Standing Wolf]

Why are the Republicans so afraid of taking a stand?

They're deathly afraid the representatives of the Democratic (sic) party might use the word "filibuster." They'd be no less terrified if they had a 90–10 majority.

[Bruce H]

Nomination isn't twenty four hours old yet and all everybody can do is complain about everything she has done. Just what makes everybody here an expert on everything. Her RBKA article should put that to rest. Lawyers of her caliber aren't noted for putting pen to paper with words that will come back to haunt them. You know we wouldn't have this bitch and moan over the supreme court nominations is everybody would stand on their congresscritters neck and make it plain that we aren't going to accept what they have been doing. If they won't change get rid of them. Oh and what are my qualifications, I'm a great keyboard commando. Better trained than most of you.

[bjbarron]

Bill Clinton, Al Gore, and John Kerry are also supporters of the 2nd Amendment, too.

Yep. Roberts even said that he wouldn't be a slave to the wording of the constitution.

I don't see this woman helpling us if a 2A case comes up. She's a 'consensus builder' where I would want someone who would rip your lungs out if you even looked cross-eyed at the constitution. That ain't what we got in either of them.

Bush took the easy way out. The Dims are already saying they like her. Mark my words....even that bloated murderer on the judiciary committee will have nice things to say about her.

Roberts and Miers....we're screwed. Bush'll get another one within the next three years...and you've just previewed his idea of a conservative.

And the worst of it is that we'll see another weak RINO in a couple of years and have to make the decision of voting for him or his socialist opponant. Hmmmmm...Hillary v. McCain. Boy, there's a choice.

[LAR-15]

She must not be conservative.

After all that RINO Bush jr nominated her. :rolleyes:

[Jim March]

First, let's clarify that in 1988, Al Gore was somewhere to the right of Attilla the Hun. Further right than ME, that's for damnsure.

His Kansas state campaign manager in 1988 (his first Presidential run) was a gent by the name of Fred Phelps Sr. Yes, the same twitchcase that was later known for his "GodHatesFags" protests at the funerals of dead gays. A creep of the first order.

Do you all understand that prior to FDR "Democrat" was basically RIGHT wing? The old Socialist Party basically merged in with the Dems and were embraced by FDR. Except in the deep south where Al Gore Sr. and Jr. were among the last of the old-school Dems. Gore Jr. turned away from all that in the Clinton years. By 1988 he had abandoned the racism common to the old-school southern Dems but was still highly bigoted towards gays, hence the Phelps connection. Look, even if you've got no use for gays, you have to admit Phelps is way past "over the top" into the realm of the insane.

Zell Miller is close to being the last old-school conservative Democrat, stripped of the racism of course.

Anyways. The indications are that Miers was another, and shifted to the GOP as the conservative wing of the Democrats collapsed around the time of Reagan through early Clinton and the rise of people like DiFi, Chuck Schumer, Kerry and Ted Kennedy to the ranks of Democrat party leaders.

This isn't a condemnation of Miers. On the contrary; to judge her past in the conservative Democratic movement is to judge her based on the highly polarized political environment of today. Which is flat-out crazy.

Folks: the political situation in the US today, with two sides locked in hatred this bitter, is NOT NORMAL. It's much more common for there to be a degree of mutual respect and for either side to be able to win over a sizable voting block in the middle who will pick a person rather than party/ideology. Today that "undecided middle" is so tiny it's unreal and the hate and anger is palpable. It wasn't this bad when Bush the First and Clinton (and Ross Perot!) were going at it...it wasn't even this bad in the Reagan years, although that's probably where it started.

Think back to the Carter/Reagan race. Carter lost, but not because anybody hated him. When Reagan died recently few had anything that bad to say about him. If Dubya died today, the DUers and the like would be dancing in the streets.

It's not normal. It's downright unAmerican.

[Bartholomew Roberts]

Well, all I can say is we have a candidate here who is famous for her discretion. She keeps such tight lips that even her close friends are in the Dallas Morning News this morning saying they don't know her position on abortion or gay marriage because she doesn't let her hair down even in private.

Despite this absolute silence on all these other issues, we know she has spoken up for RKBA. That seems like a pretty good omen to me

[GunGoBoom]

It's not so much what her current persuasions are on those topics, but how she is able to handle constant pressure from the left to "moderate" her views. She has not demonstrated an ability to do that. Janice R. Brown has. She was the natural pick, and was passed over due to cowardice.

+1. And as has been clarified, the cowardice is on the part of Bush. I'll believe it when I see it (support for the RKBA, and a vote to actually grant cert in an RKBA case). Still, the quote is good. One can hope that those are her ACTUAL views, and she merely supports the anti-American Patriot Acts due to her simply towing the company line as working in the White House.

[TexasRifleman]

A good chunk of this is idle speculation anyway, and we'll never likely find out.


The NRA and other pro 2A groups, as well as the Brady Bunch and all the anti groups, NEVER want a 2A case to go to SCOTUS.

A win or loss there can kill your movement and everything that goes with it.

There is a reason no 2A cases get that far. This is one thing that's usually seen as better to let lie with a little controversy than fight it out in an all or nothing battle. What if your side loses an all or nothing battle?
It's better to fight our fight in legislation and with votes, where we can actually have an impact on the outcome.

What was the last case to get there? Miller? That was such a train wreck in itself it's a joke.

I just don't see a 2A case going to that court, excepting perhaps the tort reform stuff, and that will impact a lot more than firearms manufacturers.

[Derek Zeanah]

The NRA and other pro 2A groups, as well as the Brady Bunch and all the anti groups, NEVER want a 2A case to go to SCOTUS.

A win or loss there can kill your movement and everything that goes with it.I'd like to get it over with.

Up until now we've been working with the assumption that the supreme court will have no choice but to support our interpretation, as the intent of the founders and the wording itself is clear.

But I don't see that happening. It no longer looks like the courts are a "check and balance" on oppression that originates in the executive or legislative branches of government. The courts are complicit in what's being done in this country.

And really, why should it be otherwise? The executive nominates the guy, and the legislature approves it. You really think we're going to get someone who would come down on the side of private ownership of 50-cal machine guns without government oversight, or elimination of the fed or the department of education because it's an assumption of rights that the constitution didn't explicitly grant, or anything like that?

You're kidding yourself. The supreme court is a supporter of the status quo. It'll remain so.

Get it overwith. Let's get to the point where everyone understands that no-one in government -- not even the supreme court -- is on the side of freedom any more.

[antarti]

A good chunk of this is idle speculation anyway, and we'll never likely find out.

... at least until its too late.

And thus lies the problem. Watching these confirmation hearings is utterly painful.

Why can't a question be asked of a nominee about how they might rule or how they feel the Constitution addresses a certain issue? What madness is that? I thought Supreme nominations were a "precious" commodity, and not to be handed over to somebody who won't even explain a simple view on the ultimate law to those who must consent to their appointment.

Even with the gagging of any question that might "reveal" anything about the nominee vis-a-vis the law, why not present questions like:

"Which of the founding fathers do you most identify with? Explain and provide quotations."
"Would you classify yourself in their terms as a Confederate/Anti-Federalist, Federalist, or Ultra-Federalist? Explain where you agree and disagree with each.."
etc, etc,

At least get a feel for what in blue blazes these people really belive where the Constitution is concerned. I think we are seeing the stagnant future of court nominees: Pick somebody with no public history, don't let anybody know anything (except what they look like and where they went to school), and shuffle them in. Must every appointee be a "stealth" candidate? I am expecting no less from now on.

Bush had an unprecedented 3 picks (2 justices, one chief appointment) and just squandered them all IMO.

The worst part is, we (and the senate) won't know (until rulings start coming down, when it's too late) just how badly this is going to turn out. I am not sanguine about any "pleasant surprises" from this latest crop.

[TheEgg]

The problem is we will not know the quality of these appointments until years later.

Right now the only one doing a Snoopy dance over the Mier appointment is Dirty Harry Reid. That worries me a lot!!!!!!! :eek:

[Jim March]

You know, I have to call BS on the whole idea that NRA/GOA/SAF/CCRKBA/JPFO/etc. don't want a "final win" as it'll put them out of their jobs.

First point: a serious RKBA win in court would radically increase the amount of shooting activity. That means more ranges, more shooting competition, lots more of the sort of stuff NRA does the most of - the political wings of the NRA (ILA and PVA) are well under half of the total budget now. The personell in the political sectors can easily switch to the non-political arm (the main NRA 501(c)(3)).

Second, there will still be lots of fights at the state level...and even some Fed. Example: the "pro-choice" folk won BIG with Roe v. Wade 30-something years ago...has that ended the debate? Hardly. (For that matter the gays lost big about 15 years ago at the USSC, fought on and got the earlier rulings reversed in...2003 was it? So even a flat-out win can't be called definitive.)

Third: even if there was a win big enough to shut down orgs like SAF/GOA/etc. completely (which I doubt), I guarantee you ALL of the people in those orgs have political interests outside of guns they can switch to. The people behind GOA are *big* in the "pro-life" movement. Alan Gottlieb at CCRKBA/SAF and his people are deeply concerned about smaller-government economics. In my case it's electronic voting. There's lots to do to fix this country, OK? The "it'll put 'em out of a job" thing is crazy...the reality is, a big shared win on RKBA that let's them walk away from the issue victorious puts 'em in GREAT shape to tackle the next project, by energizing cash contributors to scaring junk politicians.

-------------

We have friends on the Supreme Court now. Clarence Thomas is rumored to be our STRONG ally. As near as we can tell, the pro-RKBA faction on the Supremes such as Thomas have been keeping RKBA cases off the docket because they didn't have the votes. Hence the USSC's lack of interest to date, despite conflicting circuits.

With Miers and (probably) Roberts, we may finally have what we need.

Had Kerry won, we damned well wouldn't!

[Hawkmoon]

Way back when I took "Social Studies" in the 8th and 9th grades (I have no idea what such classes are called today) we were taught that to influence the direction of government, citizens should write to their elected representatives.

We have arrived at a time when our elected representatives increasingly represent only themselves, and secondarily whichever special interests contribute most to their financial coffers. And judges are increasingly legislating from the bench.

So I am going to propose that, beginning right now, we begin writing to the Supreme Court. I don't think they should be allowed the luxery of living their entire lives insulated from the opinions of the people whose lives hang on their rulings. If they think it's okay to rule based on what courts in Europe think, they damned well need to know what THE PEOPLE in their own country think. I believe they need to be constantly reminded that they are the ones out in left field, that they were sworn in to uphold the Constitution, not to find creative ways to dismantle it.

[Sergeant Bob]

You know, I have to call BS on the whole idea that NRA/GOA/SAF/CCRKBA/JPFO/etc. don't want a "final win" as it'll put them out of their jobs.
I'm with ya on that Jim. The idea that the <insert name> is going to be out of a job is silly. There will always be a fight for RKBA. Just because we win some case in court is not going to change that fact one iota.

It's just like alot of people saying that once Clinton was out of office, <insert conservative talk show host> would be out of a job. Balderdash.

I sure hope these generic SCOTUS appointments turn out for the good.

[Oleg Volk]

If Dubya died today, the DUers and the like would be dancing in the streets.


Deaths of most politicians would elicit such a reaction, though most people would prefer to celebrate in private. I can think of one member of congress I don't want to die painfully. The knowledge that they'd be replaced with others of not much improved quality would not prevent me from relishing the news of their misfortunes.

[ceetee]

It's not normal. It's downright unAmerican.

I couldn't agree more. But that's the way the citizens have voted, and let the system become. Candidates smearing each other is nothing new. In this day and age, though, people want instant gratification. They don't want to have to actually read a candidate's speeches, or read his biography. They want to learn everything there is to know about him between 6:00 and 6:05, so they can get on to the NFL scores...

People want someone else to do their homework for them, then tell them how to vote. I even heard Rush tell his listeners, "You don't have to read the papers, you don't have to watch the news... I'm here to do those things for you! Don't worry about what to think... I'll tell you what to think!"

Insanity.

If Dubya died today, the DUers and the like would be dancing in the streets.

And if Bill Clinton died today, how many Republicans would be cheering like Dallas just won the Superbowl? Despite being out of office for nearly five years? And how many of those cheers would be posted right here in this forum?

[DRZinn]

I even heard Rush tell his listeners, "You don't have to read the papers, you don't have to watch the news... I'm here to do those things for you! Don't worry about what to think... I'll tell you what to think!"Said, of course, with tongue firmly planted in cheek.

[xd9fan]

talk is cheap......blahblahblah......should have picked someone with a walk the walk trackrecord of fighting the good fight then this silent sneeking around crap.

[swampsniper]

HARRIET MIERS OUTSHINES BORK

Judge Robert H. Bork has come to represent in many conservative minds the gold standard of legal sagacity against which provincial upstarts such as Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers must be weighed. In truth, however, Bork provides a poor example of conservative jurisprudence. Even as simple a phrase as, "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" has long confounded Judge Bork. Harriet Miers suffers no such confusion.

http://moonbatcentral.com/wordpress/?p=1487

[Langenator]

With regards to Ms Miers contributions to various Dems back in the late 80s, some things to consider:

-she was working,maybe a partner, IIRC, at a major law firm at the time. Oftentimes those times of folks are pressured by management to contribute one way or another, or even both ways (in that case it's all about access.)

Therefore, before making any hasty judgements, you'd be well advised to look at donations patterns for empolyees of her firm in those same elections, as well as her own patterns (i.e. maybe she gave money to AlGore, Jr, but apparently she didn't give any to Dukakis).

Also, IIRC, she was a Democrat at the time. As has been noted, swtiching to the GOP is very common among conservative Southern (ex)Democrats. (see Thurmond, Strom)