Author Topic: Miers.. Constitutionalist?  (Read 1765 times)

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Miers.. Constitutionalist?
« Reply #45 on: October 04, 2005, 12:31:30 AM »
Okay spill it. What book are you into that has ya saying "short view/long view" way out of context?

"Instant gratification"..... heh, spare it for your kids.

Offline oboe

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9778
Miers.. Constitutionalist?
« Reply #46 on: October 04, 2005, 06:41:29 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Toad
...OTOH, the Constitution is the Nation. The Nation is the Constitution. The SC Justices are the Guardians of the Constitution...


Given your views on the importance of the SC Justices to the Nation, and after having expressed reservations about Roberts due to his sparse record of judicial decisions (only 40 IIRC), it surprises me how comfortable you seem with Ms Miers.

Here are what her critics said about her in the Law.com review:
"meticulous to a fault"
"can't see the forest for the trees"
"unable to make a decision"

Granted, her supporters said good things about her too, and she may well grow into the job and become everyone's darling SC justice.   Who knows.   But on the surface it appears she got the nod because as you say, she is a 'stealth' candidate with unknown views and no track record, and a Bush loyalist.    Given the importance of the SC, doesn't that drive you nuts?    Do you really trust Bush's judgement that much?     And most of all, does the ringing endorsement of her by D-Sen Harry Reid concern you?

Just kinda surprised you aren't more critical of her; I thought my views would be more in line with your thinking on this one.

« Last Edit: October 04, 2005, 07:44:20 AM by oboe »

Offline Captain Virgil Hilts

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6125
Miers.. Constitutionalist?
« Reply #47 on: October 04, 2005, 07:11:40 AM »
Actually, Nash, this may come as a complete surprise to you, but probably not a surprise at all to many of us. You are WRONG.

The legislative branch is NOT supposed to ask potential justices how they would vote on ANYTHING. Until recently, it was frowned upon and almost completely forbidden.

Only when it became obvious that the voting public refused to support the incredible swing to the left that the liberals want did THEY decide that it was acceptable to legislate from the bench, and that it was in fact an absolute necessity if they were to be able to further their agenda.
"I haven't seen Berlin yet, from the ground or the air, and I plan on doing both, BEFORE the war is over."

SaVaGe


Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Miers.. Constitutionalist?
« Reply #48 on: October 04, 2005, 08:22:44 AM »
no surprise here but... nash is wrong and shortsighted... as toad points out..

We can survive any war debt... they go away... no social program ever goes away... it just gets more expensive and oppressive.

as for the supremes.... much more important than the pres.. it is one of the main reasons I voted for bush.

The second amendment and the slowing of the slide toward socialism are the most important things to me and my ilk...

we have faith that Bush will stack the SC deck for us with two or three candidates... outright or by stealth... I don't really care..

Can you imagine the candidates hillary would be nominating?

lazs

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Miers.. Constitutionalist?
« Reply #49 on: October 04, 2005, 08:47:06 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by oboe
it surprises me how comfortable you seem with Ms Miers.

 


Are you suprised because I haven't come out an posted a blast of superheated rhetoric against her?

I'll leave that to others; as I've pointed out... and you've pointed out... we don't know anything about her really. And, given the lessons of the Bork confirmation hearings that have apparently finally evolved into a method of getting confirmed.... we probably never will know much about her until she gets on the bench.

Am I comfortable with that. Not really.

Am I more comfortable with Bush picking Miers than I am with Kerry picking someone? Yes, I am. I figure the Constitution is probably still far better off with someone like Miers than someone Kerry would pick. I just have this feeling Bush isn't going to pick a Barbra Boxer type woman for the Court. I think that would have been likely with Kerry.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
Miers.. Constitutionalist?
« Reply #50 on: October 04, 2005, 08:48:37 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Nash
"Instant gratification"..... heh, spare it for your kids.


But... tu es mi hijo, Luke!

Re-read your locked Iraq thread.... if that isn't a prime example than we're not speaking the same language.
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Miers.. Constitutionalist?
« Reply #51 on: October 04, 2005, 08:55:02 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Toad
But... tu es mi hijo, Luke!


Say it aint so. :)

Offline oboe

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9778
Miers.. Constitutionalist?
« Reply #52 on: October 04, 2005, 09:50:20 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Toad
Are you suprised because I haven't come out an posted a blast of superheated rhetoric against her?

I'll leave that to others; as I've pointed out... and you've pointed out... we don't know anything about her really. And, given the lessons of the Bork confirmation hearings that have apparently finally evolved into a method of getting confirmed.... we probably never will know much about her until she gets on the bench.

Am I comfortable with that. Not really.

Am I more comfortable with Bush picking Miers than I am with Kerry picking someone? Yes, I am. I figure the Constitution is probably still far better off with someone like Miers than someone Kerry would pick. I just have this feeling Bush isn't going to pick a Barbra Boxer type woman for the Court. I think that would have been likely with Kerry.


Superheated rhetoric?  No,  but a lack of thoughtful criticism and concern surprised me, until this last post.   Before that your attitude struck me as, " if Bush picked her, she must be OK--it could be worse."    I note your own Sen Brownback seems pretty perturbed at the choice.

What I would've liked to see is a well-credentialled (significant judicial experience and record implied here) moderate who would offend neither extreme so much as to be denied confirmation.   I think that was the original intent of the "Senate giving advice and consent" clause-- to ensure radicals aren't stacked on the bench. Had Kerry picked a Barbara Boxer type woman, odds are she wouldn't have made it through the Senate confirmation vote, what with the Republican majority.

I think you are right that the confirmation process has devolved into sneaky gamesmanship and that is too bad, considering the gravity of what is at stake.    Its seems doubtful that is what the founding fathers had in mind, anyway.

Something Laz said earlier concerns me, too - about our Nation's ability to survive "any" war debt.   I think that is a reckless, fiscally irresponsible attitude to take.   It is NOT a Conservative belief, IMO.   Debts matter, and someday that fiscal recklessness may come down on top of us and bury us.

Offline Hangtime

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10148
Miers.. Constitutionalist?
« Reply #53 on: October 04, 2005, 12:28:04 PM »
henh.

President just called her a 'pit bull in size 6 shoes'.

*woof*

Apparently, I got the the dog comparison right last night.. just missed a bit on the breed.

Scotch is a heluva drug.
The price of Freedom is the willingness to do sudden battle, anywhere, any time and with utter recklessness...

...at home, or abroad.

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Miers.. Constitutionalist?
« Reply #54 on: October 04, 2005, 02:19:31 PM »
oboe... war debts get paid off.... social programs never get paid off they just grow bigger and bigger and bigger and bigger and...

lazs

Offline Seagoon

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2396
      • http://www.providencepca.com
Miers.. Constitutionalist?
« Reply #55 on: October 04, 2005, 05:10:35 PM »
Hi Guys,

After the Miers nomination, what has me somewhat confused is why the left still hates Bush so much. What is it that makes this man seem conservative anyway?

Perhaps its because he's a member of the Republican party? So are Lincoln Chafee and Arlen Specter, and no one has ever accused them of being particularly conservative (incidently Bush supported both of them and AGAINST their conservative oponents - in fact I can't think of a single case where a liberal Republican incumbent has come up against a conservative challenger and the President hasn't backed the liberal).

Ok, so he invaded Afghanistan and Iraq and hasn't raised taxes or been in favor of gun control. So far that qualifies him to be about as conservative as JFK was.  

On the other hand though, he's socially moderate, never picks ideological fights with liberals on anything, has grown the government at a rate greater than both Carter and Clinton and spends like a drunken sailor. And now, given a Republican Senate and a Republican Congress and the opportunity to replace two Supreme Court judges - one a relatively Conservative positivist and the other a Moderate positivist judge, he nominates two cyphers whom almost every conservative in America rightly fears will revert to David Souter mode immediately after the President leaves office if not sooner.

Given that Clinton nominated two liberal positivists (including Ruth Bader Ginsberg, probably the most liberal judge ever to sit on the Court) and they both sailed through the Senate with nearly unanimous votes (both also applied the "keep your trap shut" methodology during questioning, this is hardly what one would expect a conservative to do. When a man picks a candidate even Chuck Schumer and Harry Reid are happy with, and almost every conservative leader [with the exception of those in the government who are prevented from speaking out against the President] in America is dismayed, how conservative can he be?

Is it that liberals have become so liberal that Bush, a moderate at best, seems conservative? If so, what would happen if America ever elected a real conservative? Civil War?

Just curious...
SEAGOON aka Pastor Andy Webb
"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion... Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams

Offline Hangtime

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10148
Miers.. Constitutionalist?
« Reply #56 on: October 04, 2005, 07:06:48 PM »
yah.. but is she a constructionist or a constitutionalist?
The price of Freedom is the willingness to do sudden battle, anywhere, any time and with utter recklessness...

...at home, or abroad.

Offline Nash

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11705
      • http://sbm.boomzoom.org/
Miers.. Constitutionalist?
« Reply #57 on: October 05, 2005, 12:27:25 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Seagoon
Hi Guys,

After the Miers nomination, what has me somewhat confused is why the left still hates Bush so much. What is it that makes this man seem conservative anyway?


I don't think you understand...

I consider myself "left" and really don't have a big problem with Conservatism. Personally, if folks want guns, let them have 'em. Smaller government and fiscal responsibility? Well that's great.  I mean, there's gonna be some disagreements along the way, but ultimately it's going to be on the margins.

I've never considered Bush to be a Conservative, however. I consider him a buffoon.... or... a drunk driver at the wheel. You see it in everything he does. Man, it'd be great if all he were was just a Conservative.

Offline oboe

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9778
Miers.. Constitutionalist?
« Reply #58 on: October 05, 2005, 06:56:36 AM »
I'm trying to recall his role in the Terry Schiavo case - were those the actions of a social moderate?

I am both left and right of center depending in the issue.   Bush has always seemed disingenuous to me.    Just my opinion, but he seems reckless, arrogant, and shortsighted, with a self-confidence that seems completely underserved.   I've been more or less politically aware since Pres Carter, and GW is the first President I recall not respecting as an individual.   Unlike Nash, I don't sense buffoonery in him apart from his speaking and grammar - I always thought of him as 'user friendly' to his power base.

I often wonder the converse of Seagoon - why does the Right love Bush so much?    Cue Ripsnort :)

btw I'm really interested in the Harry Reid angle.   What does he know about her that made him even recommend her to Bush?   That's really a surprising situation to me...
« Last Edit: October 05, 2005, 07:02:12 AM by oboe »

Offline SkyWolf

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 599
Miers.. Constitutionalist?
« Reply #59 on: October 05, 2005, 07:27:30 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Toad
As I said, it's that long view thing.



The poor ye always have with you and everybody dies.


The US averages losing ~110 per day in motor vehicle accidents; about half of those are alcohol related.

Do something, quick.



Man....that's cold...even for you Toad. Soldiers dying has nothing in common with motor vehicle accidents.