Miers Withdraws...

[PastorSBC1303]

Miers Withdraws Supreme Court Nomination
Oct 27 9:36 AM US/Eastern
By TERENCE HUNT
AP White House Correspondent

Harriet Miers withdrew her nomination to be a Supreme Court justice Thursday in the face of stiff opposition and mounting criticism about her qualifications.

President Bush said he reluctantly accepted her decision to withdraw, after weeks of insisting that he did not want her to step down. He blamed her withdrawal on calls in the Senate for the release of internal White House documents that the administration has insisted were protected by executive privilege.

"It is clear that senators would not be satisfied until they gained access to internal documents concerning advice provided during her tenure at the White House _ disclosures that would undermine a president's ability to receive candid counsel," Bush said. "Harriet Miers' decision demonstrates her deep respect for this essential aspect of the constitutional separation of powers _ and confirms my deep respect and admiration for her."


http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/10/27/D8DGDFR00.html

 

[carpro]

I've been expecting this.

The nomination process has become an abomination.

Some folks even made fun of the way John Robert's kids were dressed.

We never really got a chance to know her with all the noise surrounding her nomination.

 

[Brother Ian]

I agree, the nomination and confirmation process needs to be reined in.

 

[John Ellwood Taylor]

Can we say that Miers 'aborted' her nomination?

Notice how nicely they couched this in terms of protecting Excutive branch confidentiality protection rather than say, "we didn't have the votes from our parties base so we withdrew rather than lose."

Which thread has the office pool for the next nominee?

 

[just-want-peace]

Notice how nicely they couched this in terms of protecting Excutive branch confidentiality protection rather than say, "we didn't have the votes from our parties base so we withdrew rather than lose."

Speculation only at this point! However, now we'll never know.

I was not overjoyed at her nomination, wishing that Pres Bush would pick a stronger (Was she or wasn't she?) conservative, but I'm even less overjoyed that the process has taken such a turn.

I would have far more liked to have seen her face acceptance or rejection, and proceeded from there.

The real tragedy of this is the "legitimization" of the witch hunt tactics that the senate is using, and the "filibuster" (HA!!) threats from the dems.

The whole process has become not much more than a comedy of errors, with the country paying the price of power hungry politicians' ambitions.

MARANATHA!!!

 

[Magnetic Poles]

The confirmation SHOULD be very rigorous. These are lifetime appointments that affect the lives of all Americans. Nobody, regardless of politics, should be a "shoe in".

 

[just-want-peace]

The confirmation SHOULD be very rigorous.

So who's arguing against this idea?

 

[carpro]

Originally posted by Magnetic Poles:
The confirmation SHOULD be very rigorous. These are lifetime appointments that affect the lives of all Americans. Nobody, regardless of politics, should be a "shoe in".

Rigorous is not the word for what currently takes place.IMO

 

[mcdirector]

Originally posted by carpro:
Rigorous is not the word for what currently takes place.IMO

Agreed.

 

[TCassidy]

I can't believe the "religious right" can be so stupid! The Democrats knew that Miers was a conservative Christian and a strict constructionist. They knew she would overturn Roe v Wade if given the opportunity. They knew she would be confirmed by the Republican dominated Senate. So, they cooked up a diabolical plan to put one over on the stupid "religious right." A few of the Democratic leaders came out in favor of Miers nomination and the incredibly stupid "religious right" thought, "if the Democrats are for her, we must be against her" and forced her to withdraw. How stupid can these people be?

 

[LadyEagle]

T. Cassidy, the Texas lottery scandal was sure to come up during Senate hearings. So maybe some people weren't so stupid after all. Just a thought.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/1154AP_Miers_Texas_Lottery.html

 

[TCassidy]

Oh Pul-eeeeeese!

 

[LadyEagle]

What can I say? You know how liberals make mountains out of mole hills. Or invent stuff.

 

[nate]

Originally posted by TCassidy:
I can't believe the "religious right" can be so stupid! The Democrats knew that Miers was a conservative Christian and a strict constructionist. They knew she would overturn Roe v Wade if given the opportunity. They knew she would be confirmed by the Republican dominated Senate. So, they cooked up a diabolical plan to put one over on the stupid "religious right." A few of the Democratic leaders came out in favor of Miers nomination and the incredibly stupid "religious right" thought, "if the Democrats are for her, we must be against her" and forced her to withdraw. How stupid can these people be?

I agree. People on the right were to against Meirs. They accepted Roberts who is Catholic but rejected Meirs who was a member of an Evangelical Church for 25 yrs. Doesn't make much sense. IMO

Nate

 

[Bro. James Reed]

Church membership is no determination of someone's political philosophy.

 

[Daisy]

I don't think the religious right were stupid at all. They managed to sink her nomination which the Democrats probably would not have been able to do.

There were legitimate questions about her suitablity for the office - that she had no judicial experience, little experience with constitutional law, that she made an error of fact in citing a constitutional issue, that she failed to answer her senate questionaire adequately, that she considers Bush to be the most brilliant man she ever met.

Bush may kowtow to the religious righties now that they kicked his behind or he could try a well-qualified moderate similar to Roberts. I suspect it will be the former.

 

[TexasSky]

Okay,

Now lets appoint Sam Cummings.

Conservative, Christian, Baptist - - has already taken pro Christian stances in rulings.

 

[Daisy]

Originally posted by TexasSky:
Okay,

Now lets appoint Sam Cummings.

Conservative, Christian, Baptist - - has already taken pro Christian stances in rulings.

Link to Judge Cummings re Constitution (Second Amendment Foundation):

Judge Cummings then utilized his skilled reasoning to conclude that the federal unlawful possession law (18 U.S.C. §922(g)(8)), "is unconstitutional because it allows a state court divorce proceeding, without particularized findings of the threat of future violence, to automatically deprive a citizen of his Second Amendment rights. The statute allows, but does not require, that the restraining order include a finding that the person under the order represents a credible threat to the physical safety of the intimate partner or child….Therefore, by criminalizing protected Second Amendment activity based upon a civil state court order with no particularized findings, the statute is over-broad and in direct violation of an individual's Second Amendment rights."

 

[LadyEagle]

I still want John Ashcroft.

 

[Johnv]

Originally posted by Daisy:
I don't think the religious right were stupid at all. They managed to sink her nomination which the Democrats probably would not have been able to do.

I thinkyou have a point here. There were two things at play here:

1 - John Roberts ws a very good nominee, so much so that any nominee after him would have big shoes to fill. Meiers simply wasn't as solid of a nominee, not remotely close.

2 - Bush should have stayed on track by sticking to his beliefs of her perspective judicial philosophy. There would arise every now and then a tangent on her religion, or her abortion writings, or lottery actions, etc. All sideissues, really. But nominees often get tanked because of side issues. This one tanked before confirmation hearings were an issue.

Bush needs to find another Roberts. Then again, the next nomineee may appear quite astute when following the Meiers nomination.