Comments on: A PYRRIC VICTORY FOR OPPONENTS OF MIERS http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2005/10/28/a-pyrric-victory-for-opponents-of-miers/ Politics served up with a smile... And a stilletto. Wed, 22 Apr 2026 09:11:15 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7 hourly 1 By: ScottAln http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2005/10/28/a-pyrric-victory-for-opponents-of-miers/comment-page-1/#comment-87242 ScottAln Tue, 01 Nov 2005 04:59:18 +0000 http://rightwingnuthouse.com/?p=858#comment-87242 Depleted Uranium is an apt name (and I mean this in a good way) to apply to our situation. Uranium is dangerous, radioactive stuff but if we deplete it a bit we lose lots of radioactivity but keep some solid penetrating power. So, too, with losing Miers. We will not irradiate ourselves as we attack, instead we now launch a hardened Alito round. This will draw out the Dems to state in public that they believe parental notification for abortion (and other positions held by the majority of Americans) are disqualifiers for SCOTUS. If they choose to go "Nuclear" (daring us to use the Constitutional Option to change Senate Filibuster rules for advise & consent) they themselves will be irradiated. As has been observed by others, Dems are successful as long as they use catch phrases like "Women's Rights" and "Right to Choose" instead of specifics like "we oppose parental notification" and "we like partial birth abortion as an option." I, too, want a real judge and not someone who legislates from the bench. I have no idea how Roberts or Alito would vote if Roe came up today. But if they are strict constructionists there is no way they could back the penumbra on which Roe is based. Legislatures and executives pass laws, judges should interpret them accurately and in good faith. Let us hope that even the most extreme of judges can see that the trend to legislate from the bench has undermined the "rule of law" itself, and in order to restore respect for law that the judges themselves must respect the law, as written. Depleted Uranium is an apt name (and I mean this in a good way) to apply to our situation. Uranium is dangerous, radioactive stuff but if we deplete it a bit we lose lots of radioactivity but keep some solid penetrating power. So, too, with losing Miers. We will not irradiate ourselves as we attack, instead we now launch a hardened Alito round. This will draw out the Dems to state in public that they believe parental notification for abortion (and other positions held by the majority of Americans) are disqualifiers for SCOTUS. If they choose to go “Nuclear” (daring us to use the Constitutional Option to change Senate Filibuster rules for advise & consent) they themselves will be irradiated. As has been observed by others, Dems are successful as long as they use catch phrases like “Women’s Rights” and “Right to Choose” instead of specifics like “we oppose parental notification” and “we like partial birth abortion as an option.” I, too, want a real judge and not someone who legislates from the bench. I have no idea how Roberts or Alito would vote if Roe came up today. But if they are strict constructionists there is no way they could back the penumbra on which Roe is based. Legislatures and executives pass laws, judges should interpret them accurately and in good faith. Let us hope that even the most extreme of judges can see that the trend to legislate from the bench has undermined the “rule of law” itself, and in order to restore respect for law that the judges themselves must respect the law, as written.

]]> By: Depleted Uranium http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2005/10/28/a-pyrric-victory-for-opponents-of-miers/comment-page-1/#comment-86671 Depleted Uranium Mon, 31 Oct 2005 00:09:25 +0000 http://rightwingnuthouse.com/?p=858#comment-86671 levotb, I guess name calling is where we're at. My guess is I was a registered, mouth breathing Republican many years before you had the opportunity. No matter. I don't mind discourse, but to assume those who disagree with your point of view are "Freepers" and Neocons, is condescending and presumptive. I agreed with more of your post than you might think. The problem is,I think there are problems equally as pressing as who the next member of the SCOTUS will be. None of the people you name would make a bad Justice. Problem is that is where our focus will be until Christmas or longer. We'll go through the filibuster, the Nuclear Option and in the end, probably lose another nominee, all in the name of marking our territory. I want a competent Justice. I can see your point that Ms. Miers was not making a compelling case to become the next Justice. However, I think you want much more than competence and clear thinking on the bench. You want legislation from the bench and that sounds like you don't mind playing the Liberal game. I want Judges. The Congress is about all the legislation I can take on a day to day basis. Please don't tell me what a "good" Conervative/Republican/Thinkingman you are because the future is so much more important than the present. As for you, Scott et al, I disagree with your line of thinking. However, to pull off what you want now, in 2006 and especially 2008, you're going to need the help of those in the party who feel the way I do. Was Bush elected by a slim margin because of who he was or because that's as many votes as the party could muster? Is your message going to generate the votes needed in future elections, or are you just going to feel better knowing you fought the good fight? Hack all of us "Freepers" off and carry on. Never thought John McCain would look good to me. levotb,
I guess name calling is where we’re at. My guess is I was a registered, mouth breathing Republican many years before you had the opportunity. No matter. I don’t mind discourse, but to assume those who disagree with your point of view are “Freepers” and Neocons, is condescending and presumptive. I agreed with more of your post than you might think. The problem is,I think there are problems equally as pressing as who the next member of the SCOTUS will be. None of the people you name would make a bad Justice. Problem is that is where our focus will be until Christmas or longer. We’ll go through the filibuster, the Nuclear Option and in the end, probably lose another nominee, all in the name of marking our territory. I want a competent Justice. I can see your point that Ms. Miers was not making a compelling case to become the next Justice. However, I think you want much more than competence and clear thinking on the bench. You want legislation from the bench and that sounds like you don’t mind playing the Liberal game. I want Judges. The Congress is about all the legislation I can take on a day to day basis. Please don’t tell me what a “good” Conervative/Republican/Thinkingman you are because the future is so much more important than the present. As for you, Scott et al, I disagree with your line of thinking. However, to pull off what you want now, in 2006 and especially 2008, you’re going to need the help of those in the party who feel the way I do. Was Bush elected by a slim margin because of who he was or because that’s as many votes as the party could muster? Is your message going to generate the votes needed in future elections, or are you just going to feel better knowing you fought the good fight? Hack all of us “Freepers” off and carry on. Never thought John McCain would look good to me.

]]> By: levotb http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2005/10/28/a-pyrric-victory-for-opponents-of-miers/comment-page-1/#comment-86235 levotb Sun, 30 Oct 2005 07:21:58 +0000 http://rightwingnuthouse.com/?p=858#comment-86235 Flagwaver and ScottAln have it right. Miers was a joke, a deer in the headlights--like the man who selected her. From what many of the Senators said who interviewed her, her answers, WHEN AUDIBLE, didn't make a whole lot of sense to where even liberal Arlen Specter said her answers (in the first questionnaire) were unacceptable. She was/is a lightweight, like the man who nominated her. Her judicial experience and political positions held were next to nil. Tonight, ironically, SHE will be helping a man who shouldn't need one iota of help to select her replacement!! While I can tell who the freepers are in this blog and who the true conservatives are, I don't deny the freepers/RINOs/liberal GOPers their "sense of loss". They are correct; Bush HAS been weakened, but then, Americans (as we saw with the philandering and woman-abusing Bill Clinton) were and are very forgiving. Replacing Miers with Luttig, Alito, Owens or Rogers Brown would I'm sure bring back some of the Base. After all, it was his promise to select strict constructionists that got Bush relected. Many conservatives voted for him holding their noses ONLY because of that promise. What none of you mention in this blog are Bush's other problems than the Miers disaster and the aides' legal troubles--illegal immigration. While nominating a Luttig would definitely help Bush IN THE SHORT RUN, he has failed so miserably at the Southern Border that many conservatives (like me) left the party years ago knowing he was going to do next to nothing to anger his big business friends. However, The Minutemen and others who want the President to fulfill his oath of office and stop the Invasion from Mexico have forced the issue into the public eye. Anger towards the neo-cons, RINOs and Libertarian consevatives on illegal immigration is stronger than any other issue, except perhaps the swing vote on SCOTUS. It is clear to this conservative that Bush needs to clean house and bring in some real conservatives. Reagan did it in 88-89 and so have other presidents. But if Bush fails to recognize that the Base--including many Independent conservatives like me who once voted for him--he will find that the hubbub over Miers from the Right was awalk in the park compared to what is coming if he continues to push amnesty for illegal aliens on the country. I do not, by the way, disagree with my disenters here that A weakened Bush is good for Demos and band for the GOP. The GOP has controlled all three houses of power in the country for some time now, and has had at one time event SCOTUS making conservative-minded decisions. The party out of power is bound to make some inraods in a mid-term election--you should expect that. I didn't vote for Bush this last go-round; I have no dog in the hunt if he fails and becomes a 3-year lame duck. I want the COUNTRY to succeed, and I believe it can do so with or without Bush leading the way. He is simply oout of touch with Americans. He's a president who is clearly in big business' pocket. However, I hear that he is quietly nominating conservative District Court judges to try to fix what Clinton had broken with so many liberal appointments in his last 4 years. Even if the GOP loses the House or the Senate, which is unlikely, we MUST get the COURTS away from the Left--for that is where the Left has destroyed so much in our country. In closing, let me say that Bush therefore has a chance to win MANY of us over if he proceeds in two areas he was remiss in during his first 4 years--sealing our Southern Border with the National Guard or Army and nominating a brilliant conservative like Alito or Luttig or Owens or Rogers Brown aling with continuing to nominate the lower Disctrict Court conservaitve judges. If he wants his legacy sealed in the hearts of conservatives, the people who barely got him elected in both elections, he needs to take charge, abandon his amnesty-for-illegal-aliens plan and do what he was sworn in to do--protect and defend the United States of America from invasion and all enemies. It wouldn't hurt his chances of regaining our support if he also went after the ACLU, slapping them in every state with RICO. Flagwaver and ScottAln have it right. Miers was a joke, a deer in the headlights–like the man who selected her. From what many of the Senators said who interviewed her, her answers, WHEN AUDIBLE, didn’t make a whole lot of sense to where even liberal Arlen Specter said her answers (in the first questionnaire) were unacceptable. She was/is a lightweight, like the man who nominated her. Her judicial experience and political positions held were next to nil. Tonight, ironically, SHE will be helping a man who shouldn’t need one iota of help to select her replacement!! While I can tell who the freepers are in this blog and who the true conservatives are, I don’t deny the freepers/RINOs/liberal GOPers their “sense of loss”. They are correct; Bush HAS been weakened, but then, Americans (as we saw with the philandering and woman-abusing Bill Clinton) were and are very forgiving. Replacing Miers with Luttig, Alito, Owens or Rogers Brown would I’m sure bring back some of the Base. After all, it was his promise to select strict constructionists that got Bush relected. Many conservatives voted for him holding their noses ONLY because of that promise. What none of you mention in this blog are Bush’s other problems than the Miers disaster and the aides’ legal troubles–illegal immigration. While nominating a Luttig would definitely help Bush IN THE SHORT RUN, he has failed so miserably at the Southern Border that many conservatives (like me) left the party years ago knowing he was going to do next to nothing to anger his big business friends. However, The Minutemen and others who want the President to fulfill his oath of office and stop the Invasion from Mexico have forced the issue into the public eye. Anger towards the neo-cons, RINOs and Libertarian consevatives on illegal immigration is stronger than any other issue, except perhaps the swing vote on SCOTUS. It is clear to this conservative that Bush needs to clean house and bring in some real conservatives. Reagan did it in 88-89 and so have other presidents. But if Bush fails to recognize that the Base–including many Independent conservatives like me who once voted for him–he will find that the hubbub over Miers from the Right was awalk in the park compared to what is coming if he continues to push amnesty for illegal aliens on the country. I do not, by the way, disagree with my disenters here that A weakened Bush is good for Demos and band for the GOP. The GOP has controlled all three houses of power in the country for some time now, and has had at one time event SCOTUS making conservative-minded decisions. The party out of power is bound to make some inraods in a mid-term election–you should expect that. I didn’t vote for Bush this last go-round; I have no dog in the hunt if he fails and becomes a 3-year lame duck. I want the COUNTRY to succeed, and I believe it can do so with or without Bush leading the way. He is simply oout of touch with Americans. He’s a president who is clearly in big business’ pocket. However, I hear that he is quietly nominating conservative District Court judges to try to fix what Clinton had broken with so many liberal appointments in his last 4 years. Even if the GOP loses the House or the Senate, which is unlikely, we MUST get the COURTS away from the Left–for that is where the Left has destroyed so much in our country. In closing, let me say that Bush therefore has a chance to win MANY of us over if he proceeds in two areas he was remiss in during his first 4 years–sealing our Southern Border with the National Guard or Army and nominating a brilliant conservative like Alito or Luttig or Owens or Rogers Brown aling with continuing to nominate the lower Disctrict Court conservaitve judges. If he wants his legacy sealed in the hearts of conservatives, the people who barely got him elected in both elections, he needs to take charge, abandon his amnesty-for-illegal-aliens plan and do what he was sworn in to do–protect and defend the United States of America from invasion and all enemies. It wouldn’t hurt his chances of regaining our support if he also went after the ACLU, slapping them in every state with RICO.

]]> By: Depleted Uranium http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2005/10/28/a-pyrric-victory-for-opponents-of-miers/comment-page-1/#comment-86114 Depleted Uranium Sun, 30 Oct 2005 03:38:14 +0000 http://rightwingnuthouse.com/?p=858#comment-86114 By the way. Scott. Is it going to be the party line that when a Republican President is in his fifth year, he's a lame duck and we're moving on to three years from now, thanks alot for your service but we have bigger fishes to fry here? Hell, let's just impeach the SOB now and get on with it...something's lame but I don't think it's the duck. By the way. Scott. Is it going to be the party line that when a Republican President is in his fifth year, he’s a lame duck and we’re moving on to three years from now, thanks alot for your service but we have bigger fishes to fry here? Hell, let’s just impeach the SOB now and get on with it…something’s lame but I don’t think it’s the duck.

]]> By: Stop The ACLU http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2005/10/28/a-pyrric-victory-for-opponents-of-miers/comment-page-1/#comment-86067 Stop The ACLU Sun, 30 Oct 2005 01:54:31 +0000 http://rightwingnuthouse.com/?p=858#comment-86067 <strong>Bush Between A Rock And A Hard Place In Replacing O’Connor</strong> President Bush is mulling a short list of prospective Supreme Court nominees this weekend at the Camp David presidential retreat. Liberals fear Bush will nominate someone to please the GOP’s right flank, which opposed the failed nomination of H... Bush Between A Rock And A Hard Place In Replacing O’Connor

President Bush is mulling a short list of prospective Supreme Court nominees this weekend at the Camp David presidential retreat.
Liberals fear Bush will nominate someone to please the GOP’s right flank, which opposed the failed nomination of H…

]]> By: Der Fuersprecher http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2005/10/28/a-pyrric-victory-for-opponents-of-miers/comment-page-1/#comment-86056 Der Fuersprecher Sat, 29 Oct 2005 05:52:16 +0000 http://rightwingnuthouse.com/?p=858#comment-86056 What have we gained?! How about keeping a potentially damaging candidate off of the court?! http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/25/AR2005102502038.html I can't believe you haven't addressed this thus far. What have we gained?! How about keeping a potentially damaging candidate off of the court?!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/25/AR2005102502038.html

I can’t believe you haven’t addressed this thus far.

]]> By: Depleted Uranium http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2005/10/28/a-pyrric-victory-for-opponents-of-miers/comment-page-1/#comment-86053 Depleted Uranium Sat, 29 Oct 2005 01:44:40 +0000 http://rightwingnuthouse.com/?p=858#comment-86053 Well, maybe so ScottAln, you may be right, I may be crazy (sorry,I stole that). What I do know is that the Democrats and the MSM have been licking their chops for weeks over the possibilty that Ms. Miers would bow to pressure from "Mainstream" Conservatives and darned if the prophecy didn't come true. So now we're a party in disarray, we've "lost our focus", and the Red Meat Democrats are back again. I just don't think this was the fight, the battle, or the war, but we disagree. Just be wary of what we face with the "Nuclear" Nominee. I'm not sure the political capital is worth it. Obviously, we disagree. You can hope more agree with you than with me. Well, maybe so ScottAln, you may be right, I may be crazy (sorry,I stole that). What I do know is that the Democrats and the MSM have been licking their chops for weeks over the possibilty that Ms. Miers would bow to pressure from “Mainstream” Conservatives and darned if the prophecy didn’t come true. So now we’re a party in disarray, we’ve “lost our focus”, and the Red Meat Democrats are back again. I just don’t think this was the fight, the battle, or the war, but we disagree. Just be wary of what we face with the “Nuclear” Nominee. I’m not sure the political capital is worth it. Obviously, we disagree. You can hope more agree with you than with me.

]]> By: stackja http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2005/10/28/a-pyrric-victory-for-opponents-of-miers/comment-page-1/#comment-86052 stackja Sat, 29 Oct 2005 01:13:36 +0000 http://rightwingnuthouse.com/?p=858#comment-86052 We must forgive the opponents of Harriet Miers for they not know not what they do. We must forgive the opponents of Harriet Miers for they not know not what they do.

]]> By: ScottAln http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2005/10/28/a-pyrric-victory-for-opponents-of-miers/comment-page-1/#comment-86051 ScottAln Sat, 29 Oct 2005 00:46:35 +0000 http://rightwingnuthouse.com/?p=858#comment-86051 Mr. Moran, Depleted Uranium, and others: did you really think Miers was a good nominee? As Bugs Bunny would say, "Honest and for true?" Particularly after the revelation of her 1993 speech in the Washington Post? I could care less if Bush is weakened at this point. His authority is waning, anyway -- he will be a lame duck soon and completely gone in 3 years. Conversely, we'd be stuck with Miers for decades. Bush can hardly do worse than mominate this blank slate of a stealth candidate who looks more and more liberal with each revelation of her past decisions and speeches. Moreover, it is quite bold of you to categorize Miers opponents as Eastern elitists. From my born-and-bred chair here in the Midwest, I believe you go to war with a warrior. Ms. Miers is not a proven warrior, period. Prediction: Bush will nominate a strict constructionist and we will successfully fight the ideological battle during confirmation. Former Democrats can sit back and learn. Right? Mr. Moran, Depleted Uranium, and others: did you really think Miers was a good nominee? As Bugs Bunny would say, “Honest and for true?” Particularly after the revelation of her 1993 speech in the Washington Post?
I could care less if Bush is weakened at this point. His authority is waning, anyway — he will be a lame duck soon and completely gone in 3 years. Conversely, we’d be stuck with Miers for decades. Bush can hardly do worse than mominate this blank slate of a stealth candidate who looks more and more liberal with each revelation of her past decisions and speeches.
Moreover, it is quite bold of you to categorize Miers opponents as Eastern elitists. From my born-and-bred chair here in the Midwest, I believe you go to war with a warrior. Ms. Miers is not a proven warrior, period.
Prediction: Bush will nominate a strict constructionist and we will successfully fight the ideological battle during confirmation.
Former Democrats can sit back and learn. Right?

]]> By: Depleted Uranium http://rightwingnuthouse.com/archives/2005/10/28/a-pyrric-victory-for-opponents-of-miers/comment-page-1/#comment-86049 Depleted Uranium Fri, 28 Oct 2005 23:55:21 +0000 http://rightwingnuthouse.com/?p=858#comment-86049 I am constantly amazed by folks like FastNed, Bill Bennett, Ann Coulter, on and on , ad nauseum, who wish to inform my ignorant out-of-the-beltway Midwest Red State Ass that I should bow down to their representation on my behalf with the "true" conservatives. With friends like you, I sure don't need those Democrat enemies! I'm happy your smugnissess have interevened on my behalf, lest I go and let someone have her day in "court" as it were. So from now on, you as the arbiters of what is right (pun intended) and what is wrong with Conservatives, just tell me what to think, and I'll go along. Gosh, it seems that's why I didn't remain a Democrat. Anyway, FastNed, we're right here for you, buddy. You lead on and we'll be right there. After all, all good Conservatives think alike. Right? I am constantly amazed by folks like FastNed, Bill Bennett, Ann Coulter, on and on , ad nauseum, who wish to inform my ignorant out-of-the-beltway Midwest Red State Ass that I should bow down to their representation on my behalf with the “true” conservatives. With friends like you, I sure don’t need those Democrat enemies! I’m happy your smugnissess have interevened on my behalf, lest I go and let someone have her day in “court” as it were. So from now on, you as the arbiters of what is right (pun intended) and what is wrong with Conservatives, just tell me what to think, and I’ll go along. Gosh, it seems that’s why I didn’t remain a Democrat. Anyway, FastNed, we’re right here for you, buddy. You lead on and we’ll be right there. After all, all good Conservatives think alike. Right?

]]>