If another USSC justice goes, best nominee? Harriet Miers!

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Little-Acorn, Jan 16, 2007.

  1. Little-Acorn
    Offline

    Little-Acorn Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2006
    Messages:
    8,328
    Thanks Received:
    2,018
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Ratings:
    +5,821
    I hear she's looking for work now.

    Miers was nominated by W a few years ago, but was shot down mostly by conservatives who were worried that her complete lack of any judicial record, gave us no evidence she'd be a law-abiding conservative instead of being another Souter. Though W swore up and down she'd be an excellent conservative, one who would rule according to what the Constitution actually says, his word was all we had, and that wasn't enough. There was nothing you could really get a handle on.

    Now, with Dems in a slight majority in the Senate, that lack of a record could actually work to Repubs' advantage. IF, of course, she really is a conservative who will obey the Constitution. That's still a big IF, we don't know any more about her now that we did then.

    But her total lack of a record also prevents Dems from pointing to anything in her background suggesting she might - horrors - rule that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided... or the McCain-Fiengold law case... or even US v. Miller. There's just no evidence there, either. IF she'd actually be a law-abiding judge as W says, the Dems would have a hard time shooting her down.

    Sure, I wish we had something more solid than that. But anything more solid, might just let the Dem majority eliminate a candidate completely. Miers might be the best thing we've got left, all in all.

    Comment?
     
  2. glockmail
    Offline

    glockmail BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    7,700
    Thanks Received:
    433
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The beautiful Yadkin Valley
    Ratings:
    +438
    Bush should nominate the most conservative candidate possible, with a long record to show for it, then make the GOP senator minority fight for the guy, all the while pointing out the Democrat's hypocrisy at not giving the guy a vote.
     
  3. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,537
    Thanks Received:
    8,161
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,153
    I agree. but then i think more tactical. make the Democrats fight over them put it all over the news. and if the guy fails, nominate someone else just as conservative. Eventually the public is going to get tired. Democrats will cave
     
  4. Little-Acorn
    Offline

    Little-Acorn Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2006
    Messages:
    8,328
    Thanks Received:
    2,018
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Ratings:
    +5,821
    You mean, he should do what he's been doing for the last six years? Resulting in every really law-abiding candidate, getting filibustered until they withdraw?

    GREAT idea.

    And now the Dems wouldn't even have to filibuster, since they are in the majority now.

    If W couldn't defeat a filibuster when his party was in the majority, what makes you think these tactics would suddenly succeed for a Repub minority?

    The time to bang on Democrats and show them for the anti-constitutional fanatics they are, was when Repubs were in the majority. They mostly failed in that quest, mostly through lack of Repbulcain huevos, and now you want to try it again from an even weaker position?

    W has two years left. If a vacancy opens any time soon, the goal will be to get a law-abiding justice in there, not to make Democrats look bad. And he doesn't have a huge long time to do it.
     
  5. glockmail
    Offline

    glockmail BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    7,700
    Thanks Received:
    433
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The beautiful Yadkin Valley
    Ratings:
    +438
    It ain't Bush's fault, but the GOP senators. They should make the Dems filibuster for real, by bringing in cots and such until they eventually run out of gas.
     
  6. Little-Acorn
    Offline

    Little-Acorn Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2006
    Messages:
    8,328
    Thanks Received:
    2,018
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    San Diego, CA
    Ratings:
    +5,821
    The current "silent filibuster" is the result of a Senate rule passed years ago, saying they didn't actually have to talk continuously to filibuster. I agree it's an abonination, no matter which party is in power. But the chance to change it, was when Repubs were in the majority. They didn't. It's pretty unlikely to change now that they are in the minority. THough I wish they would try.

    As I said, though, the goal now (if a vacancy opens up) is to get a law-abiding judge on the Supremes' bench in place of the anti-constitutional one leaving. Not to make Democrats to look bad. If the GOP tries to do the latter, it will screw it up as usual and accomplish nothing. They must concentrate on the former. And Miers seems the best pick, for the reasons (non-reasons, actually) that I gave earlier.
     
  7. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
  8. glockmail
    Offline

    glockmail BANNED

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2006
    Messages:
    7,700
    Thanks Received:
    433
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The beautiful Yadkin Valley
    Ratings:
    +438
    With the rules so far out of whack maybe the best we can hope for is a suicidal Japenese pilot with a 747 ala a Tom Clancy novel. I'm sick of this.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  9. Avatar4321
    Offline

    Avatar4321 Diamond Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2004
    Messages:
    70,537
    Thanks Received:
    8,161
    Trophy Points:
    2,070
    Location:
    Minnesota
    Ratings:
    +12,153
    Alittle late to do it now
     
  10. trobinett
    Offline

    trobinett Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2004
    Messages:
    1,832
    Thanks Received:
    162
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Arkansas, The Ozarks
    Ratings:
    +162
    Yea, Avatar is right, the right would only be doing what the left was doing, only, as history has proven, its anti-productive.

    Too be disruptive, for the sake of being disruptive, is stupid, and solves nothing.

    A fact, that the Democrats never understood.:eusa_wall:
     

Share This Page