Harriet Miers withdraws

[Todd33]

Damn obstructionist Demo.. Republicans.

 

[imported_Condor]

Yeah, looks like the pedantic speaking elitists from the right won this round. Not the right schools! Yeah, we have them too!

 

[daniel49]

Originally posted by: BBond

Originally posted by: Frackal

Originally posted by: BBond

Originally posted by: Frackal

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk

Originally posted by: Frackal
Is there any person that you lefties around here can avoid insulting on the basis of their appearance?

WHO IN THE HELL DO YOU THINK YOU ARE CALLING EVEYONE 'LEFTIES'

You need to learn who and what you are dealing with, and not just fling out some drivel when people don't walk your narrowminded path.

Many of us are from the 'Old School' of Republican Conservatism - Pre Bushites.

Think you can get that to sink into your dense cranium ?

You're acting like an irrational angry leftist.

And you still are insulting her appearance which is a habit of many liberals on here as well

The woman is uglier than words can describe and incompetent enough to qualify as a Bush crony. The way Bush looks at her makes me want to throw up. After the debacles involving myriad Bush cronies how can you possibly have the nerve to refer to anyone as irrational?

Wait a week or so until the rest of Bush's regime comes crashing down and then we'll see who is irrational.

If Bush's 'regime comes crashing down' it will be be of their own doing, and thus will be as it should be. I don't think it will happen at this point personally.

Precisely, Bush will come crashing down because he is a lifetime incompetent moron surrounded by liars and cheap shot artists.

The seeds of his destruction were sewn at his birth and nurtured throughout his life by unearned privilege and complete unnacountability. Now that the walls are crashing in on this farce, Bush is left utterly unprepared.

He's already back on the Jim Beam. He's on his way to a total and well deserved collapse.

*****************************************************

geeze bond you are starting to sound like cindy shehan ok on the count of 3 lets all symbolicaly die in front of our computers.
1...2....3...arrrrggggg

 

[imported_Condor]

Originally posted by: Medicine Bear
This is going to be fun. Now a much more conservative choice will be nominated and all the Libs will really be crying.

I hope Bush nominates the most liberal tree hugging, abortion loving, gun grabbing bitch he can find just to punish them!

 

[Medicine Bear]

Originally posted by: Condor

Originally posted by: Medicine Bear
This is going to be fun. Now a much more conservative choice will be nominated and all the Libs will really be crying.

I hope Bush nominates the most liberal tree hugging, abortion loving, gun grabbing bitch he can find just to punish them!

Leave Hillary out of this.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: daniel49

Originally posted by: BBond

Originally posted by: Frackal

Originally posted by: BBond

Originally posted by: Frackal

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk

Originally posted by: Frackal
Is there any person that you lefties around here can avoid insulting on the basis of their appearance?

WHO IN THE HELL DO YOU THINK YOU ARE CALLING EVEYONE 'LEFTIES'

You need to learn who and what you are dealing with, and not just fling out some drivel when people don't walk your narrowminded path.

Many of us are from the 'Old School' of Republican Conservatism - Pre Bushites.

Think you can get that to sink into your dense cranium ?

You're acting like an irrational angry leftist.

And you still are insulting her appearance which is a habit of many liberals on here as well

The woman is uglier than words can describe and incompetent enough to qualify as a Bush crony. The way Bush looks at her makes me want to throw up. After the debacles involving myriad Bush cronies how can you possibly have the nerve to refer to anyone as irrational?

Wait a week or so until the rest of Bush's regime comes crashing down and then we'll see who is irrational.

If Bush's 'regime comes crashing down' it will be be of their own doing, and thus will be as it should be. I don't think it will happen at this point personally.

Precisely, Bush will come crashing down because he is a lifetime incompetent moron surrounded by liars and cheap shot artists.

The seeds of his destruction were sewn at his birth and nurtured throughout his life by unearned privilege and complete unnacountability. Now that the walls are crashing in on this farce, Bush is left utterly unprepared.

He's already back on the Jim Beam. He's on his way to a total and well deserved collapse.

88888888****************************


geeze bond you are starting to sound like cindy shehan ok on the count of 3 lets all symbolicaly die in front of our computers.
1...2....3...arrrrggggg

LOL, but seriously Bond brings up an interesting point. With all the crap GDumb has put up with lately, how can that NOT drive him back towards drinking? Unless he is relying on the Lord more now than ever before..which is even scarier.

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: Medicine Bear

You really need help.

Wasn't a Bush supporter in 2000, I wanted McCain.

In 04 what was my other choice? Kerry? Yeah right. Maybe if the Dems would put up someone worth voting for they might actually win the White House. Forget Kerry, or Hillary, Gore, etc. Give me someone who isn't a total asshat. Someone I could vote for like Breaux or Richardson.
[/quote]

Using complete conjecture you ask for someone who in your slanted, ridiculous view isn't a "total asshat" while you support a "total asshat" based on fact.

And you have the nerve to tell me that I need help?

:laugh:

[/quote]You assume I support Bush without question. I don't. However it is obvious that he could resuce a baby out of a burning building and you would still find fault in his action. Guy can't win with people like you.

[/quote]

You're so FOS your eyes are brown. You support and defend anything and everything Bush or his cronies do, then you say you're not a Bush supporter. :roll:

You remind me of a certain liberal meteorologist who makes the same sort of ridiculous claims.

As for Bush and burning buildings, if and when Bush does do anything positive I'll be among the first to congratulate him. From your posts the same can't be said of you. You use conjecture to attack Democrats yet you ignore damning facts about Bush.

I'm interested in the facts, not your conjecture, and that's why Bush gets the treatment he does from me. They guy is nothing more than a first class fvck-up dressing himself up like a cowboy while in truth he's on a lifetime patrician entitlement.

Just look at what has become of our nation after only five years of this idiot and his henchmen at the helm. How can anyone continue to defend these fools? And how can you defend them then tell an outright lie claiming otherwise?

 

[CaptnKirk]

Originally posted by: Condor

Originally posted by: Medicine Bear
This is going to be fun. Now a much more conservative choice will be nominated and all the Libs will really be crying.

I hope Bush nominates the most liberal tree hugging, abortion loving, gun grabbing bitch he can find just to punish them!

I forgot about her !

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: totalcommand

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: feralkid
Ann Coulter is on CNN blaming it on"The Democrats"; invoking vague Clinton references, etc.


Now THAT was unexpected!

More like hypocritical. Ann has been one of the most outspoken opponents of Miers.

I'm still not so sure this isn't another head fake by Dubbya. He put her out there as a far right, pro life, constructionist, evangelical, conservative. I almost think he was testing the waters to see how that kind of profile would fare with the left in the senate. For the most part, she seemed to have their approval.

Now if he puts up a REAL nominee with the same profile, one that the right will approve of, he'll have a leg up on any Dem who cries about another nom who has the same philosophy we were TOLD that Miers had.

This could be interesting.

I don't think he is testing the waters, I think he honestly wanted her on the bench.

He spent so much political capital on Miers, there will not be much left for the next nominee. If he appeases the ultra-conservatives, Democrats will have a reason to filibuster. If he appeases the Democrats, ultra-conservatives will start whining even louder this time.

She may very well have been his first choice. That's always a possibility.

But I think this opens the door for him to nominate a true conservative. Like I said earlier, he presented Miers as a conservative, constructionist, pro-life, evangelical nominee and Harry Reid and other Dems said "cool!". If he nominates someone else (an actual judge with actual qualifications) with the same profile how do the Dems jump on him without having every Republican jump all over them by pointing out how it didn't matter with Miers?

If they filibuster the next one then not only do they come off as obstructionist again but hypocritical to boot. Not a good look heading into the '06 election season.

 

[BBond]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: totalcommand

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: feralkid
Ann Coulter is on CNN blaming it on"The Democrats"; invoking vague Clinton references, etc.


Now THAT was unexpected!

More like hypocritical. Ann has been one of the most outspoken opponents of Miers.

I'm still not so sure this isn't another head fake by Dubbya. He put her out there as a far right, pro life, constructionist, evangelical, conservative. I almost think he was testing the waters to see how that kind of profile would fare with the left in the senate. For the most part, she seemed to have their approval.

Now if he puts up a REAL nominee with the same profile, one that the right will approve of, he'll have a leg up on any Dem who cries about another nom who has the same philosophy we were TOLD that Miers had.

This could be interesting.

I don't think he is testing the waters, I think he honestly wanted her on the bench.

He spent so much political capital on Miers, there will not be much left for the next nominee. If he appeases the ultra-conservatives, Democrats will have a reason to filibuster. If he appeases the Democrats, ultra-conservatives will start whining even louder this time.

She may very well have been his first choice. That's always a possibility.

But I think this opens the door for him to nominate a true conservative. Like I said earlier, he presented Miers as a conservative, constructionist, pro-life, evangelical nominee and Harry Reid and other Dems said "cool!". If he nominates someone else (an actual judge with actual qualifications) with the same profile how do the Dems jump on him without having every Republican jump all over them by pointing out how it didn't matter with Miers?

If they filibuster the next one then not only do they come off as obstructionist again but hypocritical to boot. Not a good look heading into the '06 election season.

At this point, being obstructionist against Bush is a plus.

 

[Bitek]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: totalcommand

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: feralkid
Ann Coulter is on CNN blaming it on"The Democrats"; invoking vague Clinton references, etc.


Now THAT was unexpected!

More like hypocritical. Ann has been one of the most outspoken opponents of Miers.

I'm still not so sure this isn't another head fake by Dubbya. He put her out there as a far right, pro life, constructionist, evangelical, conservative. I almost think he was testing the waters to see how that kind of profile would fare with the left in the senate. For the most part, she seemed to have their approval.

Now if he puts up a REAL nominee with the same profile, one that the right will approve of, he'll have a leg up on any Dem who cries about another nom who has the same philosophy we were TOLD that Miers had.

This could be interesting.

I don't think he is testing the waters, I think he honestly wanted her on the bench.

He spent so much political capital on Miers, there will not be much left for the next nominee. If he appeases the ultra-conservatives, Democrats will have a reason to filibuster. If he appeases the Democrats, ultra-conservatives will start whining even louder this time.

She may very well have been his first choice. That's always a possibility.

But I think this opens the door for him to nominate a true conservative. Like I said earlier, he presented Miers as a conservative, constructionist, pro-life, evangelical nominee and Harry Reid and other Dems said "cool!". If he nominates someone else (an actual judge with actual qualifications) with the same profile how do the Dems jump on him without having every Republican jump all over them by pointing out how it didn't matter with Miers?

If they filibuster the next one then not only do they come off as obstructionist again but hypocritical to boot. Not a good look heading into the '06 election season.

What ever happened to giving judges a fair up or down vote? W creates a civil war in his own party, and is forced to withdraw his pick amid harsh criticism from ultra-conservatives (who began running commercials against him) yet it this will all result in Dems looking bad?

Bush will have to choose between the Far-Righties and the moderates in his next pick. Go with the far Right and Dems have lots of ammo to fire as Bush is beholden to right wing extremists, etc etc. alienating moderates who are already not happy with him; or, W has to go with a moderate and pissing off his far-rigth base again (and Dems get their hopes of a moderate.)

Its too late, Bush pooched this one pretty bad already. He will not have the strong position to scare off a filabuster and be able to easily maintain moral highground. People are already skeptical of what his administration is doing (f'ups and indictments abound) so they will not be so quick to rally to his side (excluding the sheep of course.)

They may look for a fight, but both sides will come out bloody and its not guaranteed who would come out on top.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: Hafen

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: totalcommand

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: feralkid
Ann Coulter is on CNN blaming it on"The Democrats"; invoking vague Clinton references, etc.


Now THAT was unexpected!

More like hypocritical. Ann has been one of the most outspoken opponents of Miers.

I'm still not so sure this isn't another head fake by Dubbya. He put her out there as a far right, pro life, constructionist, evangelical, conservative. I almost think he was testing the waters to see how that kind of profile would fare with the left in the senate. For the most part, she seemed to have their approval.

Now if he puts up a REAL nominee with the same profile, one that the right will approve of, he'll have a leg up on any Dem who cries about another nom who has the same philosophy we were TOLD that Miers had.

This could be interesting.

I don't think he is testing the waters, I think he honestly wanted her on the bench.

He spent so much political capital on Miers, there will not be much left for the next nominee. If he appeases the ultra-conservatives, Democrats will have a reason to filibuster. If he appeases the Democrats, ultra-conservatives will start whining even louder this time.

She may very well have been his first choice. That's always a possibility.

But I think this opens the door for him to nominate a true conservative. Like I said earlier, he presented Miers as a conservative, constructionist, pro-life, evangelical nominee and Harry Reid and other Dems said "cool!". If he nominates someone else (an actual judge with actual qualifications) with the same profile how do the Dems jump on him without having every Republican jump all over them by pointing out how it didn't matter with Miers?

If they filibuster the next one then not only do they come off as obstructionist again but hypocritical to boot. Not a good look heading into the '06 election season.

What ever happened to giving judges a fair up or down vote? W creates a civil war in his own party, and is forced to withdraw his pick amid harsh criticism from ultra-conservatives (who began running commercials against him) yet it this will all result in Dems looking bad?

Bush will have to choose between the Far-Righties and the moderates in his next pick. Go with the far Right and Dems have lots of ammo to fire as Bush is beholden to right wing extremists, etc etc. alienating moderates who are already not happy with him; or, W has to go with a moderate and pissing off his far-rigth base again (and Dems get their hopes of a moderate.)

Its too late, Bush pooched this one pretty bad already. He will not have the strong position to scare off a filabuster and be able to easily maintain moral highground. People are already skeptical of what his administration is doing (f'ups and indictments abound) so they will not be so quick to rally to his side (excluding the sheep of course.)

They may look for a fight, but both sides will come out bloody and its not guaranteed who would come out on top.

:beer: well said. Its all so interesting to witness.

 

[CaptnKirk]

Pandering only goes so far in a door to door campaign to sell fruitcakes . . .

80% of the customes ain't buying it, 10% don't want it, and 10% will eat it up . . no questions asked.

 

[CellarDoor]

Was anybody elses initial thought, "why did they decide to do this right now?" Anybody wondering about the timing of this? I don't see how it would work, but it's still pretty interesting.

whoops, just saw that there is a thead on this...

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: Hafen

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: totalcommand

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy

Originally posted by: feralkid
Ann Coulter is on CNN blaming it on"The Democrats"; invoking vague Clinton references, etc.


Now THAT was unexpected!

More like hypocritical. Ann has been one of the most outspoken opponents of Miers.

I'm still not so sure this isn't another head fake by Dubbya. He put her out there as a far right, pro life, constructionist, evangelical, conservative. I almost think he was testing the waters to see how that kind of profile would fare with the left in the senate. For the most part, she seemed to have their approval.

Now if he puts up a REAL nominee with the same profile, one that the right will approve of, he'll have a leg up on any Dem who cries about another nom who has the same philosophy we were TOLD that Miers had.

This could be interesting.

I don't think he is testing the waters, I think he honestly wanted her on the bench.

He spent so much political capital on Miers, there will not be much left for the next nominee. If he appeases the ultra-conservatives, Democrats will have a reason to filibuster. If he appeases the Democrats, ultra-conservatives will start whining even louder this time.

She may very well have been his first choice. That's always a possibility.

But I think this opens the door for him to nominate a true conservative. Like I said earlier, he presented Miers as a conservative, constructionist, pro-life, evangelical nominee and Harry Reid and other Dems said "cool!". If he nominates someone else (an actual judge with actual qualifications) with the same profile how do the Dems jump on him without having every Republican jump all over them by pointing out how it didn't matter with Miers?

If they filibuster the next one then not only do they come off as obstructionist again but hypocritical to boot. Not a good look heading into the '06 election season.

What ever happened to giving judges a fair up or down vote? W creates a civil war in his own party, and is forced to withdraw his pick amid harsh criticism from ultra-conservatives (who began running commercials against him) yet it this will all result in Dems looking bad?

Bush will have to choose between the Far-Righties and the moderates in his next pick. Go with the far Right and Dems have lots of ammo to fire as Bush is beholden to right wing extremists, etc etc. alienating moderates who are already not happy with him; or, W has to go with a moderate and pissing off his far-rigth base again (and Dems get their hopes of a moderate.)

Its too late, Bush pooched this one pretty bad already. He will not have the strong position to scare off a filabuster and be able to easily maintain moral highground. People are already skeptical of what his administration is doing (f'ups and indictments abound) so they will not be so quick to rally to his side (excluding the sheep of course.)

They may look for a fight, but both sides will come out bloody and its not guaranteed who would come out on top.

You might be right on the money.

My observation was based on the fact that Miers was such an off-the-wall pick that you really had to wonder if the admin had lost its mind or if they really did it on purpose knowing that this would likely be the eventual result.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Thank goodness she's gone. Now maybe they will put forward someone qualified and have real debate/flames.

 

[DealMonkey]

One can only imagine the sort of unflinchingly vapid and smarmy "thank you" card that Harriet left on Georgie's desk last night.

Dear Master Bush,

It is with great sadness that I step down as nominee for the US Supreme Court. Those senators and conservatives are just so darn mean. Well, be sure to keep your spirits up and I left an apple pie cooling on the sill for you and Laura. You are the best President ever!

BFF!
-Harriet

 

[Medicine Bear]

Originally posted by: BBond

Originally posted by: Medicine Bear

You really need help.

Wasn't a Bush supporter in 2000, I wanted McCain.

In 04 what was my other choice? Kerry? Yeah right. Maybe if the Dems would put up someone worth voting for they might actually win the White House. Forget Kerry, or Hillary, Gore, etc. Give me someone who isn't a total asshat. Someone I could vote for like Breaux or Richardson.

Using complete conjecture you ask for someone who in your slanted, ridiculous view isn't a "total asshat" while you support a "total asshat" based on fact.

And you have the nerve to tell me that I need help?

:laugh:

[/quote]You assume I support Bush without question. I don't. However it is obvious that he could resuce a baby out of a burning building and you would still find fault in his action. Guy can't win with people like you.

[/quote]

You're so FOS your eyes are brown. You support and defend anything and everything Bush or his cronies do, then you say you're not a Bush supporter. :roll:

You remind me of a certain liberal meteorologist who makes the same sort of ridiculous claims.

As for Bush and burning buildings, if and when Bush does do anything positive I'll be among the first to congratulate him. From your posts the same can't be said of you. You use conjecture to attack Democrats yet you ignore damning facts about Bush.

I'm interested in the facts, not your conjecture, and that's why Bush gets the treatment he does from me. They guy is nothing more than a first class fvck-up dressing himself up like a cowboy while in truth he's on a lifetime patrician entitlement.

Just look at what has become of our nation after only five years of this idiot and his henchmen at the helm. How can anyone continue to defend these fools? And how can you defend them then tell an outright lie claiming otherwise?
[/quote]
My eyes are brown, thanks for noticing. Not because I am "FOS" but probably because I'm one of those fast afro-Americans the Air Force coach was talking about.

Let me get this straight. So in your eyes nothing that Bush has done while he has been in office has been positive?

 

[zendari]

Excellent!

Originally posted by: Strk

Originally posted by: Pepsei
i'll take alberto gonzales.

He wouldn't get nominated. While he is extremely qualified, he is pro-choice.

I wouldn't count on that. He could be a later nominee in 07.

Being AG really gives him problems in judging what are his own cases.

 

[zendari]

Originally posted by: Hafen

What ever happened to giving judges a fair up or down vote? W creates a civil war in his own party, and is forced to withdraw his pick amid harsh criticism from ultra-conservatives (who began running commercials against him) yet it this will all result in Dems looking bad?

A fair vote is obviously dependent on there being a nominee to vote on.

 

[CellarDoor]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
One can only imagine the sort of unflinchingly vapid and smarmy "thank you" card that Harriet left on Georgie's desk last night.

Dear Master Bush,

It is with great sadness that I step down as nominee for the US Supreme Court. Those senators and conservatives are just so darn mean. Well, be sure to keep your spirits up and I left an apple pie cooling on the sill for you and Laura. You are the best President ever!

BFF!
-Harriet

http://i.a.cnn.net/cnn/2005/images/10/27/miers.letter.pdf

That's the official letter if anybody cares.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Condor
Yeah, looks like the pedantic speaking elitists from the right won this round. Not the right schools! Yeah, we have them too!

:roll:

If you listen carefully, you might hear me playing the world's smallest violin for your pain.

Miers was regarded by essentially everyone, regardless of political bent, as very ill-qualified, and even the President's base fought her nomination tooth and nail. What, exactly, is your point? Do you think a nominee's credentials simply don't matter, or what?

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: Medicine Bear
Manufacturing is dying in this country. Why? Because it is cheaper to build things overseas than it is to pay the over inflated salaries of factory workers here. Buddy of mine's dad worked up at the GM truck plant in Oklahoma City. He drives a forklift. What do you think he makes? No, higher. Guess again. How does $64 dollars an hour strike you? Bit much if you ask me for someone who drives a forklift.

Does he get paid that much? 62/hr *8hour/1day *5day/1week=~10,000 if you do some approximations...Are you sure about that? Driving a fork lift nets you 120,000 a year(obviously b4 taxes)! Why aren't all the manufactoring workers the one with massive housing! I know MANY professors who make around that range (even a little under that!) and work on much more complicated things...

If wages really are that high, than Auto worker's unions need to roll over and die...otherwise it sounds like you might be exaggerating, or this is is some extreme circumstance not seen in 99% of the other situations...

 

[OrByte]

SO, does she go back to being GWBs lawyer?

 

[Medicine Bear]

Originally posted by: magomago

Originally posted by: Medicine Bear
Manufacturing is dying in this country. Why? Because it is cheaper to build things overseas than it is to pay the over inflated salaries of factory workers here. Buddy of mine's dad worked up at the GM truck plant in Oklahoma City. He drives a forklift. What do you think he makes? No, higher. Guess again. How does $64 dollars an hour strike you? Bit much if you ask me for someone who drives a forklift.

Does he get paid that much? 62/hr *8hour/1day *5day/1week=~10,000 if you do some approximations...Are you sure about that? Driving a fork lift nets you 120,000 a year(obviously b4 taxes)! Why aren't all the manufactoring workers the one with massive housing! I know MANY professors who make around that range (even a little under that!) and work on much more complicated things...

If wages really are that high, than Auto worker's unions need to roll over and die...otherwise it sounds like you might be exaggerating, or this is is some extreme circumstance not seen in 99% of the other situations...

That is what he makes. Brags about it. Don't know about elsewhere, but that is the way it is at the plant he works at. Drives back and forth every day and has for years. Wife doesn't work and they live in what must be about a 4000 sq ft house. Good guy and all, I've just always thought his pay was out of whack with reality.