Conservatives Confront Bush Aides - Anger boils over

[Dave Markowitz]

Now THAT'S the response I'd expect from a liberal administration.

We have a liberal administration.

Let's see, under W, we've had a major power grab by the Federal gov. after 9/11, heretofore unseen levels of Federal spending, and increased Federal meddling in state affairs like education.

Anybody who believes Bush is a conservative has his eyes closed.

 

[woerm]

qualified

Janice Rogers Brown,

Kozinski (9th circuit dissent to Silveira)

Priscella(?) Owens

that's my short list sex and race begone I just want the best of the best

ie people who interpret the constution not make up stuff as they go.

r

 

[RealGun]

...White House adviser Ed Gillespie suggested that some of the unease about Miers "has a whiff of sexism and a whiff of elitism."

Now THAT'S the response I'd expect from a liberal administration. Too bad Bush didn't nominate Judge Brown. Gillespie could have called conservatives "racist", too...

Never mind that Gillespie may be dead accurate.

...and the President who signed Campaign Finance Reform, Medicaid Prescription Drug Benefits, The Patriot Act, every liberal spending bill that reached his desk, and promised to sign a new Assault Weapons Ban wants us to trust him to find a CONSERVATIVE for SCOTUS?....

Libertarians don't participate in real government, so why should he care? If a Congress with a GOP majority sends him a bill, don't be surprised if he signs it.

Bush just put a shotgun to the head of the Republican's election chances in 2006 & 2008 and pulled the trigger...

No he didn't. If in effect he did, the Republicans deserve to lose, standing for the wrong issues and not moderate enough to sustain dominance of the government.

...and his next three years will consist of keeping the seat warm for President Hillary's arrival.

Especially with your help and lack of support.

 

[Dan from MI]

I have a wait and see attitude on Miers. I've seen good (carries a gun) and bad (likes that jackass Warren "fraud" Burger) so far.

I'll wait till the hearings before I make a judgement.

 

[Justin]

What everyone is missing is that Ms. Miers has practical experience; something sorely lacking in the other judges. She will be the little peasant boy who points out the emperor has no clothes.

Really? Like what? Has she started a business? Worked as a consultant for a high-tech firm? Held a crappy Joe Job working on a factory line or as a night auditor at a motel? Changed the oil in her car? Actually used Google, Napster, email, or an instant message chat program? Does she even know what blog, forum, and p2p mean? Run a TIG welder? Ridden horses? Recite the conservation of momentum principle? Have at least a layman's understanding of The Scientific Method? Purchased a firearm at Ye Locale Gonne Shoppe? Watched a recent movie, or God forbid, the nightly news?

One of the things that continually causes me to look askance at the Supreme Court, and judges in general, is that they seem to have a serious disconnect from reality because their perception of it seems to be 100% through the lens of legal texts and precedents, without the life experience to perceive the places where the law as written on paper bears zero resemblance to reality.

 

[bountyhunter]

I have yet to read or hear a good reason why Harriet Miers shouldn't serve on the Court.

And that's the problem.... not being able to find a paper trail proving she is not qualified is NOT a qualification......

How about a standard that a sane man would find logical: where is any reason she WOULD be a good justice?

I think Letterman said it best: Donald Trump has higher selection standards on the "Intern" show than the GOP senate has for supreme court justices....

 

[AirForceShooter]

Agrees with HawkMoon big time

AFS

 

[BigG]

One of the things that continually causes me to look askance at the Supreme Court, and judges in general, is that they seem to have a serious disconnect from reality because their perception of it seems to be 100% through the lens of legal texts and precedents, without the life experience to perceive the places where the law as written on paper bears zero resemblance to reality.

Your point, Justin, with a few minor changes could also apply to legislators.

 

[RealGun]

I checked the biographies on the Supreme Court website and found Clarence Thomas to be the closest match to the legal background of Harriet Miers.

Thomas had been a judge for barely a year before taking a seat on the SCOTUS.

Correct me if I am wrong, but Thomas has become the touted model of what is expected from a Supreme Court Justice.

Souter had been a state judge for several years but was a US District Judge for only about 6 weeks when nominated to SCOTUS.

All the rest are legal all stars, but remember that they are notorious for collectively doing the wrong thing.

 

[Gannet]

Conservatives have figured out that Bush isn't a conservative, he's a globalist-corporatist who bounces between commercialism and compassion. He never saw a spending bill he didn't like. He sat back and let McCain-Feingold shred the First Amendment. His vision of America is, well, Mexamerica, with himself or one of his clan as Moctezuma Redux. His war strategy looks befogged, compromised by unfathomable inhibitions. As for the High Court, the bases are loaded, he's thrown a fat one down the middle of the plate--and he bunts.

+1

Basta!

 

[Waitone]

Evidently Thomas is the one justice that goes out of his way staying exposed to the Great Fed Up. Seems he loads up the RV and does the tourist thingy during summer recess.

 

[kentucky_smith]

We have a liberal administration.

Let's see, under W, we've had a major power grab by the Federal gov. after 9/11, heretofore unseen levels of Federal spending, and increased Federal meddling in state affairs like education.

Anybody who believes Bush is a conservative has his eyes closed.

What's the old Vulcan saying, "Only Nixon could go to China"

 

[bjbarron]

Bush just put a shotgun to the head of the Republican's election chances in 2006 & 2008 and pulled the trigger...
...and his next three years will consist of keeping the seat warm for President Hillary's arrival.

Maybe, maybe not. The Dims still have to come up with some ideas that appeal to more people than moveon.org. That ain't happenin' soon.

We on this forum like to have gentlemanly (and gentlewomanly) arguments on the relative worths of various political screeds.

The great majority of Americans are not that involved, but still know what they want. I doubt they would run en mass to any Dim just because Bush wasn't as pure a conservative as they wanted...if they even wanted one.

A recent report (by Dims) says they are still losing demographically and need to come up with some real programs instead of always dumping on Bush. Bush dump does not a program make.

Personally I have been very disappointed with some (not all) of what this President has done, but I don't have to vote for him again...none of us do. The real question is...

Who's next?

You know, we might look back on this and see Bush as the (barely conservative) link between a half century of Democratic rule, and a half century of Conservative. From these pages to God's ear.