profe51
|
posted on October 4, 2005 08:15:28 PM new
Seems like with this latest Supreme Court nominee, nobody knows what to think. It bothers me that she's a crony, it's funny that her nomination has pissed off some arch conservatives...beyond that, I don't know what to think....
____________________________________________
Habla siempre que debas y calla siempre que puedas....
|
replaymedia
|
posted on October 4, 2005 08:33:58 PM new
Agreed. He should have nominated Jerry Falwell. Then everyone would know what to think 
--------------------------------------
Quidquid Latine dictum sit altum sonatur.
|
fenix03
|
posted on October 4, 2005 10:02:38 PM new
Right now I'm not impessed. There is nothing in her history that would demonstrate any ability to hold the job. She not only has never been a judge, but has never even clerked for one. I'm not quite sure I am comfortable with a Supreme Court Justice that will have less experience at her job than her clerks.
It also bothers me that never having held judicial responsibilities that Bush is so steadfastly confident that he knows exactly how she will decide things with no chance of waivering. (I also find it humorous that he holds this steadfast confidence considering that she was once a democrat and contributed to Gore).
I'll hold making a decision until the hearings, but I'm not leaning towards the positive.
Gotta say that I think from a conservative point of view there are a couple things that would probably be irritating about the choice. Not only does she have no experience to inspire confidence in her but if they don't rush her thru confirmation, she will not be on the court in time to hear arguements on the abortion cases slated to be argued at the end of November.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
An intelligent deaf-mute is better than an ignorant person who can speak.
|
bunnicula
|
posted on October 4, 2005 10:13:00 PM new
How on earth can someone be a supreme court justice with no prior judicial experience?!? That's the part that makes her nomination by Bush so insane.
As to her leanings, I don't care if a nominee is conservative or liberal. What counts is that, once on the Supreme Court, those leanings take a backseat to the Constitution and the law of the land.
____________________
"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." -- George W. Bush
|
Helenjw
|
posted on October 5, 2005 05:39:04 AM new
On the heels of the Fema failure and with Sunni-Shiite tensions escalating in Iraq, Bush has made yet another blunder. It appears, that loyalty is the only requirement considered by Bush in this nomination of his friend to the Supreme Court.
[ edited by Helenjw on Oct 5, 2005 05:40 AM ]
|
cblev65252
|
posted on October 5, 2005 05:39:37 AM new
From conservatives and liberals alike, I've been hearing words like cronyism and conflict of interest. It's akin to a boss hiring a son-in-law with no experience to be in a high position of authority. I have my worries. How versed is she in Constitutional law? And, IMO, she needs to lose the eyeliner or something. It's so 1960's and makes her look like she hasn't slept in days. Hey, some of you have made comments on Hillary's looks, so I'm just joining in.
Edited to add: She was a clerk for District Judge Joe E. Estes from 1970 to 1972. Still not impressive.
Cheryl
[ edited by cblev65252 on Oct 5, 2005 05:45 AM ]
|
dblfugger9
|
posted on October 5, 2005 06:25:12 AM new
lol@cheryl: ..she needs to lose the eyeliner or something. It's so 1960's.. hahaha!! Maybe she got the permanent one put on? If so they did a bad job! 
And I agree it is a concern that she has no "judgeship" under her belt but she's been in the legal system forever..its not like he's appointing a grocery stocker to be a judge.
Think I will reserve my opinion for when more about her is presented.
|
WashingtoneBayer
|
posted on October 5, 2005 06:26:19 AM new
How long had Rehnquist been a judge before being selected?
I think what bothers people the most is she is an unknown and therefore can't dig the dirt on her.
She is a good selection and will be a good addition to the court.
Ron
|
Helenjw
|
posted on October 5, 2005 06:32:49 AM new
Another perspective...
Thomas Lifson of the American Thinker has pointed out her superior work ethic and suggests that the law clerks will educate the new Supreme Court Justice...."These same law clerks interact with their bosses in private, and their influence intellectual and emotional may be more profound than some Justices might like to admit."
He also believes that she will be useful in maintaining group solidarity.
"According to a source in her Dallas church quoted by Marvin Olasky, Harriet Miers is someone who taught children in Sunday School, made coffee, brought donuts: "Nothing she's asked to do in church is beneath her."
"As the court’s new junior member, the 60 year old lady Harriet Miers will finally give a break to Stephen Breyer, who has been relegated to closing and opening the door of the conference room, and fetching beverages for his more senior Justices. Her ability to do this type of work with no resentment, no discomfort, and no regrets will at the least endear her to the others. It will also confirm her as the person who cheerfully keeps the group on an even keel, more comfortable than otherwise might be the case with a level of emotional solidarity."
|
WashingtoneBayer
|
posted on October 5, 2005 06:52:22 AM new
Thanks Helen,
Sounds like even better person than I first thought.
Ron
|
Helenjw
|
posted on October 5, 2005 07:11:26 AM new
I just knew that you would like that kind of woman, Ron --- "inferior in most respects" but willing to fetch and serve.
|
fenix03
|
posted on October 5, 2005 07:37:50 AM new
Ron - why is she a good selection? What information is it that you have that enables you to say that she is a good selection? The only people I have heard say that so far are friends of hers. Everyone else admits that they simply don't know enough about her. Spill, do you believe that she is a "good selection" because she used to babysit you, just because Bush selected her, or do you have inside info that no one else seems to have?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
An intelligent deaf-mute is better than an ignorant person who can speak.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on October 5, 2005 07:45:48 AM new
I believe the President has nominated her because he respects her character but more importantly he has stated he believes she will be another Constitutionist/Constructionist. And to me, that is most important.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
|
fenix03
|
posted on October 5, 2005 07:58:03 AM new
Considering that he also believed that Iraq was part of the 9/11 attacks, that he knew exactly where the WOMD were in Iraq and that Michael Brown was an individual that was capable of leading FEMA, I'd prefer that we had some type of proof. "Trust Me" just isn't going to cut it.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
An intelligent deaf-mute is better than an ignorant person who can speak.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on October 5, 2005 07:59:15 AM new
For anyone interested....a little glimpse into former USSC justices' previous experience before being seated on the court. I found it an interesting insight to their experience.
[Written by Justice Rehnquist.]
http://66.102.7.104/search?q=cache:5zS4xjbXaW4J:www.supremecourtus.gov/publicinfo/speeches/sp_04-13-02.html+Rehnquist%0D%0A%27s+experience+before+he+sat+on+the+USSC&hl=en&start=4&ie=UTF-8
|
Linda_K
|
posted on October 5, 2005 08:04:29 AM new
Well...THAT, my dear, is one of the advantages of winning a Presidential election....THEY get to choose. And unless the left can somehow find something out about her that would disqualify her....HIS decision will be confirmed.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
|
NearTheSea
|
posted on October 5, 2005 08:08:44 AM new
I hardly know anything about her to have an opinion. I know she has never married. But if she gets as far as the Democrats inquistion, they will have found, by then, a lot on her, and she'll go through hell week with Teddy Kennedy scrutinizing her.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on October 5, 2005 08:24:39 AM new
NearTheSea - For you or anyone else who might like to gain further insight about Ms. Meirs....you might find this op-ed informative.
And the article also mentions that there have been 41 justices seated who had no prior experience, as a judge, before being confirmed.....out of a total of 109.
I also appreciated how this journalist speaks to the issue that not having prior judicial experience might just be a very good thing.
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007361
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
|
mingotree
|
posted on October 5, 2005 08:31:23 AM new
This woman only needs to be a loyal parrot of the Bush administration which she is. Bush repeats that her best quality is that she never changes so he won't have to worry about her not following the political party line.
Ha! He says 20 years from now she'll still be the same, and think the same and never change.....(keep to the party line, never learn anything, never changing with the times, stagnating, never growing, never adapting to a changing world, brain frozen in time.....etc.,etc.....goood choice!
|
fenix03
|
posted on October 5, 2005 08:35:46 AM new
You can start tossing dirt at dems as quickly as you want Linda but by far, the most complaints I have heard have been coming from the conservatives.
As for the President getting to nominatwe - you are right, he does... but he also has to get a majority of congress to agree with him and right now, it does not seem that he does that... unless of course you are expecting them to just rubber stamp what the president does as opposed to actually doing theitr duty to confirm that she truly is qualified and the best person for the job.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
An intelligent deaf-mute is better than an ignorant person who can speak.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on October 5, 2005 08:43:27 AM new
From everything I've read....both the dems and the republicans in congress have very high regard for her, fenix.
I don't see there being any issue with her not being seated.
I know the radical left will do their best....but her qualifications are right there. I seriously doubt she won't be confirmed. The left knows the President could have named a very conservative judge, one who does have experience....and that we then would have returned to WWIII and threats of filibusters, etc. I don't think they want to go there.
And for crying out loud....even Reid acted on camera like she was the best nominee Bush could have chosen. Many Congressional leaders were surprised that he chose Ms. Miers....and what the general public, the radical left want doesn't really make one bit of difference.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
|
Helenjw
|
posted on October 5, 2005 09:13:38 AM new
"I know the radical left will do their best....but her qualifications are right there"
The truth is that no one knows what qualifies her to become a Supreme Court Justice, Linda. Bush apparently "trusts" her but then he has trusted other friends and look what happened.
|
fenix03
|
posted on October 5, 2005 09:52:05 AM new
LInda -is there some reason that you seem to be ignoring that it was CONSERVATIVES that came out the strongest against her? You keep saying the "radical Left" but unless you count half of the Fox News Contributors and Rush Limbaugh as members of the "Radical Left" you are ignoring the largest group that is questioning her.
Are you paying selective attention or do you just now consider anyone that does not fall into lock-step part of the left?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
An intelligent deaf-mute is better than an ignorant person who can speak.
|
WashingtoneBayer
|
posted on October 5, 2005 10:17:23 AM new
Unlike the demeaning untruthfull things helen has to say about her.
She was the first woman president of the Dallas Bar association, Has been an actual trial lawyer, she has been on both sides of the politcal spectrum and just listening to her speak, I just like how she comes across.
Ron
|
bigpeepa
|
posted on October 5, 2005 11:10:13 AM new
I listened to yet another Bush lie when he said he couldn't remember if he ever spoke with Ms. Meirs about the abortion issue.
If anyone believes that Bush lie. Those people are also the type to believe Linda_K.
SO FAR I HAVE NOT HEARD ONE CON-SERVATIVE LAW MAKER SAY TAX BRAKES TO THE RICH SHOULD BE CUT BACK TO HELP PAY FOR HURRICANE DAMAGE.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on October 5, 2005 12:07:48 PM new
LOL helen, as usual you just choose to ignore her qualifications. No surprise there. Since 41 other USSC justices also had no judicial experience under their belts before they were seated on the USSC.......this is no different. And having her seated might just be a pleasant surprise for both sides of the aisle.
There's no point in arguing about this with you helen. No matter who he had nominated YOU'D be unhappy. No doubt in my mind about that one. 
"The truth is that no one knows what qualifies her to become a Supreme Court Justice, Linda. Bush apparently "trusts" her but then he has trusted other friends and look what happened." Yea, like other 'thought to be' conservatives like Souter huh? LOL LOL
----------------
"LInda -is there some reason that you seem to be ignoring that it was CONSERVATIVES that came out the strongest against her?
Nope haven't at all ignored there are some who wanted an activist judge who would most assuredly change the political leaning of the court.
What makes me laugh is that this choice has given the radical left very little to #*!@ about with her....so the only thing they have to mention, at this point, is what they see as her lack of judicial experience. LOL Could be a reason this President also chose her. And since many of the dems in Congress highly respect her, they're stumped on where to argue against her confirmation. LOL
Are you paying selective attention or do you just now consider anyone that does not fall into lock-step part of the left?
Nope....I see and understand the reasons those on the right are showing some concern....they were hoping for someone to be nominated that's even more right than Ms. Miers.
I'd think since both sides are both happy and disappointed with his choice....she'll probably make a perfect Justice.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
[ edited by Linda_K on Oct 5, 2005 12:13 PM ]
|
Helenjw
|
posted on October 5, 2005 12:56:33 PM new
As usual, you laugh like a hyenna while you are unable to answer one question. What are her qualifications?
Instead, you point to qualifications of other judges in order to justify the fact that she has none?
How ludicrous.
|
Linda_K
|
posted on October 5, 2005 01:25:30 PM new
helen....don't go acting all crazy again....it's your choice to click on links provided or to not do so. You obviously chose not to or you wouldn't be asking this stupid question.
A list of some of her achievements and qualifications are on the WSJ link I have already provided.
Get with it woman....there's lots out there on her qualifications.....and we all know you could choose to read them. Does it surprise me that you won't/don't? Not one bit.
"Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy. This is their essence." --Ann Coulter
And why the American Voters chose to RE-elect President Bush to four more years. YES!!!
|
Helenjw
|
posted on October 5, 2005 01:34:15 PM new
Linda, it's not a stupid question.
We all know that if this woman had credentials to become a Supreme Court Justice that you would be listing them right here.
Does it surprise me that you can't answer the question? No it does not.
|
