›

New Supreme Court Nominee. Feelings?

aegisaegis 261 Posts
edited October 2005 in Strut Central
Zero paper trail and very close to Bush. I'm not excited. ???
«1

  Comments

  • Jonny_PaycheckJonny_Paycheck 17,825 Posts
    I hope the democrats try to sink the nomination. Bush can't just continue to appoint cronies with no experience into positions of consequence.

  • tripledoubletripledouble 7,636 Posts
    for real. in a way its touching that motherfucking george didnt appoint some evangelical witch hunter...but hasnt the world caught on to his habit of appointing obscenely under qualified people who toe the administration line?

    if she gets tanked we will probably get the appointment of darth sidious
  • ariel_calmerariel_calmer 3,762 Posts
    Bush can't just continue to appoint cronies with no experience into positions of consequence.

    For real. What has she done lately? Organized dubya's desk?
  • Mike_BellMike_Bell 5,736 Posts
    suicide is my first reaction after homicide

    look at that thing's face








    runs away screaming in horror
    ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhrrrrrrreeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee






    Uggghhh!!
    Yeah, as soon as I heard that she was from Texas, the red flag went up...Quite .
  • CousinLarryCousinLarry 4,618 Posts
    Zero paper trail and very close to Bush. I'm not excited.




    ???


    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
  • funky16cornersfunky16corners 7,175 Posts
    Zero paper trail and very close to Bush. I'm not excited.




    ???

    "Her eyes were like two piss-holes in the snow...."


    Another zombie....
  • DORDOR Two Ron Toe 9,903 Posts
    I'm a bit confused tho. I'm reading somewhere,

    "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...
  • tripledoubletripledouble 7,636 Posts
    not sure about harry reid, but the church groups who were a big push behind the bush/cheyney campaign wanted someone who was definitely antiabortion
  • tripledoubletripledouble 7,636 Posts
    yahoo headline: "Bush taps W. House counsel Miers for court"

    ewwwwwwwwww. maybe thats why he's looking out for her.
    clinton got in a lot of trouble for stunts like that
  • faux_rillzfaux_rillz 14,343 Posts
    This is bizarre--though not, I suppose, shocking.

    Whatever one might think of Roberts' politics, his qualifications were impeccable.

    This person is just a partisan hack.
  • aegisaegis 261 Posts
    I'm a bit confused tho. I'm reading somewhere,

    "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...

    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.
  • Mike_BellMike_Bell 5,736 Posts
    yahoo headline: "Bush taps W. House counsel Miers for court"

    ewwwwwwwwww. maybe thats why he's looking out for her.

    Cocaine is a hell of a drug....
  • DJ_EnkiDJ_Enki 6,473 Posts
    On the plus side, it's kinda funny how all the militant right-wingers are all pissed off that Bush didn't nominate somebody to the right of, say, Strom Thurmond. Some of them are even being forced to wake up, smell the coffee, and write things like this:

    It appears, for what it is worth, that George W. Bush was the ultimate stealth nominee. He has acted like a true-blue conservative, talking the talk and walking the tax cut walk. But, he has expanded government, spent the future, and now nominated she who has the potential to be a female Souter.

    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.
  • bull_oxbull_ox 5,056 Posts
    B*tch was the head of the committee to help select the next Supreme Court justice and this committee also included the likes of Cheney, Rove, etc

    So I wouldn't hold out any hope of her being 'cool'
  • CosmoCosmo 9,768 Posts
    She will be confirmed.
  • z_illaz_illa 867 Posts
    dogs, check out her blog.

    http://harrietmiers.blogspot.com/2005/10/as-hire-as-and-bush-hired-me.html
  • edubedub 715 Posts







    those eyes!!!

  • dig_thisdig_this 279 Posts
    Zero paper trail and very close to Bush. I'm not excited.




    ???


    perhaps she should get her very own graemlin?

  • Mike_BellMike_Bell 5,736 Posts


    perhaps she should get her very own graemlin?

  • Funky_McVayFunky_McVay 121 Posts


  • Mike_BellMike_Bell 5,736 Posts
    What are we doing here? Trying to make each other nauseous?
  • edubedub 715 Posts
    Hard to have feeling about someone who is as unknown as this woman.

    I was debating whether I should copy/paste this, verbatim - but why not? Maybe it'll be of some use:



    Dear MoveOn member,

    This morning, President Bush nominated Harriet Miers to replace retiring Justice Sandra Day O'Connor on the Supreme Court. Miers is a long-time political appointee, campaign counsel, personal lawyer and Bush loyalist who has never served as a judge.

    Ex-FEMA Director Michael Brown taught us that vital national positions must be filled with qualified candidates, not political friends with limited experience. With such a thin public record, how can Americans know Harriet Miers' approach to critical issues like corporate power, privacy and civil rights?

    Right now we urgently need more information, and we need your help to get it. In the next few hours the Internet will fill with facts, anecdotes and rumors about Harriet Miers. We need your help to sort through it all, select the relevant and important details, and let us know what you find???decentralized, grassroots research.

    We've set up a simple web form where you can post facts and sources that will fill out the picture on what kind of Supreme Court justice Miers would be. We'll get your research to the media, the Senate and our partner groups. This info will also be crucial in setting MoveOn's course for this nomination. Even if you just have a few minutes to spare, it could help a lot at this crucial time.

    You can post facts right now at:

    http://www.political.moveon.org/judgefacts?id=6078-6092368-rQettTTKpafttDaeq_T7Zw&t=3

    Here is a quick chronology of Harriet Miers' career, courtesy of the Coalition for a Fair and Independent Judiciary, to help jump start your research.

    1970???Graduated from Southern Methodist University Law School
    1970-1972???Clerked for U.S. District Court Judge Joe Estes
    1972-2001???Joined Texas law firm, Locke, Purnell
    1985???Elected president of the Dallas Bar Association
    1986-1989???Member of the State Bar board of directors
    1989-1991???Elected and served one term on the Dallas City Council
    1992???Elected president of the Texas State Bar
    1993-1994???Worked as counsel for Bush's gubernatorial campaign
    1995-2000???Appointed chairwoman of Texas Lottery Commission by Gov. George Bush
    1996???Became president of Locke, Purnell, and the first woman to lead a major Texas law firm
    1998???Presided over the merger of Locke, Purnell with another big Texas firm, Liddell, Sapp, Zivley, Hill & LaBoon, and became co-managing partner of the resulting megafirm, Locke Liddell & Sapp
    2000???Represented Bush and Cheney in a lawsuit stemming from their dual residency in Texas while running in the Presidential primary
    2001???Selected as staff secretary for President Bush
    2003???Promoted to Deputy Chief of Staff for Policy
    2004???Selected as White House Counsel

    There are many important questions that need to be addressed, including:

    What policies did she advocate for on the Dallas City Council?
    What was her record at the head of the scandal-ridden Texas Lottery Commission?
    What cases did she take on while working as a corporate lawyer in private practice, and what positions did she fight for?
    What has she written or said in and outside of her law practice about her views on constitutional issues like privacy, the "commerce clause" or equal protection
    As White House councel Alberto Gonzales played a pivotal role in softening America's stance on torture. What positions has Harriet Miers advocated for in the same role?
    Has she ever publicly distanced herself from George W. Bush?
    It's important that we move quickly in answering these questions. The Bush spin machine has been prepared for this nomination for some time and is already cranking at full speed. The strategy is to move Miers through as an enigma. We need to make sure the facts about her views are known.
    [/b]
    This kind of decentralized research may never have been tried before at this scale. But a Supreme Court nominee with a record only the president really knows is a new national challenge. If we act quickly, we can meet that challenge together.

    Please pitch in by taking some time to research today, and post what you find at:

    http://www.political.moveon.org/judgefacts?id=6078-6092368-rQettTTKpafttDaeq_T7Zw&t=4

    Thanks for all that you do,

    ???Ben, Marika, Rosalyn, Joan and the MoveOn.org Political Action Team
    Monday, October 3rd, 2005

    PAID FOR BY MOVEON.ORG POLITICAL ACTION
    Not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee.


  • luckluck 4,077 Posts
    The nomination sounds like a joke:

    "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.
  • motown67motown67 4,513 Posts
    On the plus side of the nomination: She's not what's called a strict constructionist or originalist or whatever they call the Justice Thomas and Scalias of the world that try to interpret the exact meaning of the law makers when they originally wrote the law or Constitution, which is what the Right wanted Bush to do.

    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.
  • tripledoubletripledouble 7,636 Posts

    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
  • davesrecordsdavesrecords 1,802 Posts
    i think it's kind of lame to just make fun of the way she looks. i mean get some facts at least before you make fun of her.

    What was her record at the head of the scandal-ridden Texas Lottery Commission?





    This should be a big red flag.
  • funky16cornersfunky16corners 7,175 Posts
    On the plus side of the nomination: She's not what's called a strict constructionist or originalist or whatever they call the Justice Thomas and Scalias of the world that try to interpret the exact meaning of the law makers when they originally wrote the law or Constitution, which is what the Right wanted Bush to do.

    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.


    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....
  • Birdman9Birdman9 5,417 Posts

    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

    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.
  • billbradleybillbradley You want BBQ sauce? Get the fuck out of my house. 2,906 Posts
    "Bush's most recent Supreme Court nominee, Harriet Miers, successfully argued that people who were sold defective software by Microsoft weren't "injured," and couldn't participate in a class action against the company. The case involved unstable compression features in MS DOS 6.0, which were corrected by a $9.95 update, MS DOS 6.2. Plaintiffs wanted Microsoft to offer the updates for free, but eventually lost to Miers' arguments."[/b]

    It figures that Bush would try to nominate someone that fights for corporate interests.
  • tripledoubletripledouble 7,636 Posts
    complete corporate law bitch

    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.
Sign In or Register to comment.