New Supreme Court Nominee. Feelings?
aegis
261 Posts
Zero paper trail and very close to Bush. I'm not excited. ???
Comments
if she gets tanked we will probably get the appointment of darth sidious
For real. What has she done lately? Organized dubya's desk?
Uggghhh!!
Yeah, as soon as I heard that she was from Texas, the red flag went up...Quite .
Co sign in a big way. She looks like all the rich white ladys that are always yelling at waiters in West End Richmond Restaurants.
as hell
"Her eyes were like two piss-holes in the snow...."
Another zombie....
"Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., had urged the president to consider Miers".
And that some church groups aren't happy by this pick.
Someone plz explain...
ewwwwwwwwww. maybe thats why he's looking out for her.
clinton got in a lot of trouble for stunts like that
Whatever one might think of Roberts' politics, his qualifications were impeccable.
This person is just a partisan hack.
I am not sure either, but I don't see Bush picking her if she did not assure him she was anti-aborton. Whether or not she was honest with him on all her views, we'll see. Bush is real big on making his daddy proud of his dumbest son by not following his "mistakes" (iraq, re-election, etc.), so I imagine he is being careful to not pull a Souter.
Plus, Reid ain't exactly my favorite senator and church groups only would be happy with someone who very publicly has stated their opposition to abortion, which probably would be a strong enough statement to alarm the pushover Dem senators.
Cocaine is a hell of a drug....
Meanwhile, others say he should've nominated somebody as right-wing extreme as humanly possible, forced a filibuster, then triggered the nuclear option. Right-wingers are a funny lot.
So I wouldn't hold out any hope of her being 'cool'
http://harrietmiers.blogspot.com/2005/10/as-hire-as-and-bush-hired-me.html
those eyes!!!
I was debating whether I should copy/paste this, verbatim - but why not? Maybe it'll be of some use:
"Who's Bush going to nominate next? His fucking PERSONAL COUNSEL?"
Has she even been practicing law on a regular basis since 2000? Or was running the Texas State Lotto too taxing? This is really a slap in the face of qualified judges (right-, left- and centrist-leaning) the country over.
On the negative side: She seems to be a traditional conservative like Roberts. Anti-abortion, etc. Has basically no paper trail which means she'll be confirmed because people won't be able to find anything against her. She also lacks experience as a judge.
On NPR it said a noted conservative posted a note on the National Review website that called her a Bush crony with no experience, and degraded her because she said that George Bush was the most brilliant man she ever met. And hey, that's from someone on the Right!
Overall, I think things could've been worse. But she also may not know what she's doing once appointed. Chief Justice Roberts doesn't seem that bad big picture and was a judge and lawyer with decisions to look at. All of Bush's cronies have sucked donkey dick whether it be Iraq, Katrina, etc.
so true.
also keep in mind that she will probably be a very big ally for corporate rights (and deregulation) since she seems to have background in corporate law.
but how does bush keep pulling these people from out his ass? shouldnt EVERYBODY be very leary of anyone from his innercircle or do we still give him the benefit of the doubt? jesus christ. and bushes shtick of unknowns that fly only on his word has got to be wearing thin.
i want to know more about harry reid's endorsement
southern methodist law degree...dont expect joan baez up on the bench
This should be a big red flag.
she said that George Bush was the most brilliant man she ever met.[/b]
She needs to get out more. That ought to disqualify her from the git go....
So far the loudest voices decrying this decision is the hard-core conservative base that Bush has been pissing off for a while now with his spending, fear of veto and foriegn policy over-reaching. They are finally calling bullshit on his overt cronyism, even if it is from the perspective of not getting an arch-conservative, certified anti-abortion, hardline candidate nominated.
It figures that Bush would try to nominate someone that fights for corporate interests.
obnoxious that roe v wade and gay marriage always seem to be the central issues of debate. i think corporate control, and the legislators and judgres that allow it is a much more pressing concern.