2
   

Give Miers a Supreme Chance!

 
 
Reply Fri 7 Oct, 2005 05:48 am
Some say Miers' qualifications are paper-thin. They ignore the fact that she has held numerous leadership positions. The liberals forget that for years she has broke through numerous corporate glass ceilings with hard work, sound moral convictions & absolute integrity. A lifetime devoted to the law and applying it to everyday situations. Now the left wing democrats do not even want to give her a chance. The liberals are only anti - Harriet Miers because she was recommended by President Bush. Liberal House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi would be singing the praises of Miers, from the House floor she would be talking about how Miers blazed a path for others to follow. Pelosi would be shaming anyone that came against Harriet, claiming that the establishment was trying to keep the "Old Boy Network' intact and hold qualified women down. Yes Nancy would, except she can't be objective. Pelosi can only be a Bush hater. The Senate should give Miers an Up or Down vote. The Judiciary Committee is only going to be wasted partisan politics.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 2 • Views: 2,761 • Replies: 21
No top replies

 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Oct, 2005 08:17 am
Re: Give Miers a Supreme Chance!
thefederalistusa wrote:
Now the left wing democrats do not even want to give her a chance.

As Dubya might say, this is revisionist history -- except that it's really revisionist current events. The bulk of the opposition to Miers so far has come from the right, not the left. Up to now, the Democrats on Capitol Hill have contented themselves with sitting back and enjoying the show.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Oct, 2005 09:59 am
"Give her a chance" sounds like letting her try out the job and see if it's a good fit. You do understand, federalist, that this is a lifetime appointment, don't you.
0 Replies
 
Bob Lablob
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Oct, 2005 01:50 pm
Christ Almighty. Can't you people tell this women is a drunken Texas bar fly? I mean just look at her. Those tired, baggy, tequla-worn eyes tell me she's started her share of bar fights. Does she have tattoos? Yes, it's my damn business. You can bet your sweet asses that Ginsberg doesn't have tatoos. I mean, she's uglier than a box of poop but at least she's not a drunken Texas bar fly. Ginsberg looks more like a closet acid dropper if you ask me. I mean, she's an ultra-liberal and don't all ultra-liberals drop acid? If not, they damn well should. I do and I'm not an ultra-liberal but I'm not on the USSc either. I'm ugly but I'm not a woman. At any rate, if this Miers broad isn't a first class gin sewer, I'll eat my hat. now if you'll excuse me, it's Friday and I'm due for a Xanax Martini.

Ciao.
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Oct, 2005 01:50 pm
A Self-Inflicted Wound
Bush's nomination of Harriet Miers is a miscalculation that could cost him dearly. Can she still win confirmation?

By Eleanor Clift
Newsweek

Oct. 7, 2005 - A good makeup artist could have erased those dark circles under Harriet Miers's eyes as she appeared before the cameras to accept President Bush's nomination to the Supreme Court last Monday. Described by White House aides as Bush's "work wife," she spent so many hours toiling in the West Wing that colleagues once thought her red Mercedes had been abandoned in the parking lot.

Dutiful she is, but Supreme Court material she is not. Before taking over as White House counsel earlier this year, she was staff secretary, a position of so little consequence it's not even depicted on "The West Wing," the fictional TV drama about White House life. Miers put in long hours and was the last person to put paper on the president's desk, but she wasn't mulling over constitutional issues.

With his presidency spinning out of control, Bush needed to reach high with this appointment. Instead he made the easiest decision possible. He reached for the person he knows best, a miscalculation that could cost him dearly. "This is a meltdown?-this is what a Republican meltdown looks like," says a Republican strategist with ties to the conservative wing of the party. At meetings on Capitol Hill and all over Washington, conservatives were in an uproar while party regulars were dumbfounded by Bush's latest self-inflicted wound. "When you have economic difficulties, people dying in a war, political corruption and a government that is seen as unresponsive, in this ugly, harsh political environment, he needed to go above and beyond," says the strategist. "He needed to pick someone who is potentially more conservative, but certainly more qualified."

Conservatives gagged and liberals gasped when Bush said with a straight face in the Rose Garden that Miers was the most qualified person he could find. More evidence they're drinking Kool-Aid in the White House: David Frum, a former White House speechwriter, reported on his blog that Miers once told him that Bush was "the most brilliant man she'd ever met." What will happen when she has a conversation with Justice Antonin Scalia? Will her head explode?
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9622025/site/newsweek/
0 Replies
 
Bob Lablob
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Oct, 2005 01:53 pm
Blueflame1, I'm gonna laugh my vodka-sodden ass off when the Senate repubs dish out more "no" votes for this hideous Texas Shed Lizard than democrats. Man, the right is howling over this beast.
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Oct, 2005 02:08 pm
Bob, you're right about that. This one's a kneeslapper. "THIS IS WHAT 'ADVICE AND CONSENT' MEANS"
by Ann Coulter
October 5, 2005

I eagerly await the announcement of President Bush's real nominee to the Supreme Court. If the president meant Harriet Miers seriously, I have to assume Bush wants to go back to Crawford and let Dick Cheney run the country.

Unfortunately for Bush, he could nominate his Scottish terrier Barney, and some conservatives would rush to defend him, claiming to be in possession of secret information convincing them that the pooch is a true conservative and listing Barney's many virtues ?- loyalty, courage, never jumps on the furniture ...
http://www.anncoulter.org/cgi-local/printer_friendly.cgi?article=79
0 Replies
 
Bob Lablob
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Oct, 2005 02:12 pm
Coulter? He's a beautiful lady.
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Oct, 2005 02:14 pm
She has a lovely Adam's Apple.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Oct, 2005 02:27 pm
There is absolutely no reason for liberals to beat up on Miers...the conservatives are doing an bang-up job on their own.

Even George Will has taken time off from his baseball pontificating to savage the woman.

Except for the fact that this is probably the first step in cronyizing the Supreme Court...this whole situation would be hysterical.
0 Replies
 
Bob Lablob
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Oct, 2005 02:30 pm
There's one bright side of the Miers nomination. Ginsberg will no longer have to look at herself in the ladie's USSC locker room mirror and say, "Boy, am I ugly."

She's been replaced.
0 Replies
 
Bob Lablob
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Oct, 2005 02:39 pm
Hey bartender!

http://us.news3.yimg.com/us.i2.yimg.com/p/afp/20051004/capt.sge.nyy37.041005223826.photo00.photo.default-280x363.jpg
0 Replies
 
Bob Lablob
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Oct, 2005 02:40 pm
Teeth...does this woman own teeth? We should check. She is from Texas, after all.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Oct, 2005 03:10 pm
Bob Lablob: OK, we get it: you don't think Harriet Miers is attractive. Something that wasn't funny initially doesn't get funnier the more times you try to tell it. Now give it a rest.
0 Replies
 
Bob Lablob
 
  1  
Reply Fri 7 Oct, 2005 03:11 pm
Hey Joe, chill out. Damn, you Chicagoans are a testy bunch aren't ya? Go Bears.
0 Replies
 
thefederalistusa
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Oct, 2005 07:21 am
roger wrote:
"Give her a chance" sounds like letting her try out the job and see if it's a good fit. You do understand, federalist, that this is a lifetime appointment, don't you.



Yes I understand it is a lifetime appointment. What I mean by give her a chance is get the nomination out to the Senate floor. The Judiciary Committee is only going to be wasted partisan politics. Even though Nancy does not get a vote, she will be in full outrage before the Senate vote. Make sure your Senator has heard from you.
0 Replies
 
Bob Lablob
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Oct, 2005 07:28 am
When is Nancy not full of outrage?
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Oct, 2005 07:36 am
How Bush made his selection.

The story: President Bush defends naming old pal Harriet Miers for a seat on the Supreme Court, saying, "I picked the best person I could find."
In other words: I looked around and I saw Max, my gardener, who can really trim a hedge, and I said, okay, you're on the short list. Then Sal the chef came in with my lunch, beef stew. It was so good I was like yeah, now you're my man. But after lunch I nearly tripped over Harriet and it hit me like a thunderbolt! Whoa, she even went to college. . . . I think. So she got the nod. Sorry, Max. Sorry, Sal. Maybe next time. Embarrassed
0 Replies
 
Bob Lablob
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Oct, 2005 07:39 am
Holy sh*t! It's a good thing his dog wasn't in the room.

Then again.....
0 Replies
 
kelticwizard
 
  1  
Reply Sat 8 Oct, 2005 09:40 am
Re: Give Miers a Supreme Chance!
thefederalistusa wrote:
The liberals forget that for years she has broke through numerous corporate glass ceilings with hard work, sound moral convictions & absolute integrity.

She might have gotten a few appointments that men occupied before. Nice in a minor way, but there are so many women who can make the same claim.

Question is, did she argue a case which went a long way toward knocking down glass ceilings for everybody? No, she didn't. If she had, you might actually have a claim for her being something special. But you don't.


thefederalistusa wrote:
A lifetime devoted to the law and applying it to everyday situations.

You can say that about most any lawyer.


thefederalistusa wrote:
Now the left wing democrats do not even want to give her a chance.
Isn't "giving someone a chance" a little misplaced here? We're not talking about giving a guy a job running a punch press right after he gets released from jail. We're talking about the Supreme Couort.


thefederalistusa wrote:
The Judiciary Committee is only going to be wasted partisan politics.
It should be noted that the Judiciary Committee, like every House and Senate committee, has a Republican majority and a Republican chairman. How can you blam whatever problems Miers might have on the Democrats?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Give Miers a Supreme Chance!
Copyright © 2026 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 03/20/2026 at 11:58:53