Miers, Give her a chance.

[smack Down]

Why do I keep hearing the talking heads on the right saying give Miers a chance and to let her talk. Why the hell are they telling us. Tell Miers to start talking and she would be listened to.

 

[Aegeon]

Originally posted by: smack Down
Why do I keep hearing the talking heads on the right saying give Miers a chance and to let her talk. Why the hell are they telling us. Tell Miers to start talking and she would be listened to.

For that matter, what Miers has written so far, doesn't always increase confidence in her qualifications for the position!

Meanwhile, several constitutional law scholars said they were surprised and puzzled by Miers's response to the committee's request for information on cases she has handled dealing with constitutional issues. In describing one matter on the Dallas City Council, Miers referred to "the proportional representation requirement of the Equal Protection Clause" as it relates to the Voting Rights Act.

"There is no proportional representation requirement in the Equal Protection Clause," said Cass R. Sunstein, a constitutional law professor at the University of Chicago. He and several other scholars said it appeared that Miers was confusing proportional representation -- which typically deals with ethnic groups having members on elected bodies -- with the one-man, one-vote Supreme Court ruling that requires, for example, legislative districts to have equal populations.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co...icle/2005/10/19/AR2005101902402_2.html

Maybe its just me, but I find evidence of a lack of familiarity with the US Constitution a bit worrysome for someone seeking to be made a US Supreme Court Justice...:roll:

 

[MadRat]

She looks as unintelligent on paper as she sounds in real life. I heard some comment about something in size 6 shoes. Must of been hearsay because so far she look, smells, sounds and acts like a duck. It all screams of simple cronyism and the prez needs to just withdraw her candidacy.

 

[Witling]

Me olde constitutional law professor (we were still writing with quill pens then) always said that by the time a case gets to the Supreme Court, it's not about law, it's about policy! Chief Justice John Marshall was the first guy to make the Supreme Court a big deal. It's said of him that he would tell the court's scholarly judge, Joseph Story, what result he wanted and Joseph would craft it. For most of our history, Supreme Court Justices have not been judges. Consider two famous guys who may have happened in your historical horizon. The dreaded Earl Warren (Miranda warning). Never a judge. He had been a prosecutor and then the governor of California (Justice Schwarzenegger?). Hugo Black, very liberal, many voting rights cases. Formerly a member of the KKK, then a Senator. Then a Supreme Court justice. I'd rather see someone with common sense on the court.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: Witling
Me olde constitutional law professor (we were still writing with quill pens then) always said that by the time a case gets to the Supreme Court, it's not about law, it's about policy! Chief Justice John Marshall was the first guy to make the Supreme Court a big deal. It's said of him that he would tell the court's scholarly judge, Joseph Story, what result he wanted and Joseph would craft it. For most of our history, Supreme Court Justices have not been judges. Consider two famous guys who may have happened in your historical horizon. The dreaded Earl Warren (Miranda warning). Never a judge. He had been a prosecutor and then the governor of California (Justice Schwarzenegger?). Hugo Black, very liberal, many voting rights cases. Formerly a member of the KKK, then a Senator. Then a Supreme Court justice. I'd rather see someone with common sense on the court.

I have to agree. How about Pat Robertson?

 

[Witling]

Lemme hit that talking point that Smack Down originally mentioned. Smack, there's a ton of evidence to show that, much as with talking with cops, there's no point in it. Everything you say can and will be held against you. Roberts was a wonderful demonstration of that. He was just more skilled at talking while saying nothing. I'm from what you would think of as Berkeley California. I flame way to the left, but on this issue, I think the Democrats should take the Justice and run to the bank. This woman may (or may not) be a Bush psychofant, but she does think for herself too.

 

[Witling]

Techs, Pat Robertson is too socially extreme, but he's probably just as qualified to make social evaluations as the current justices. Wasn't it Pat who wanted to assisinate the Columbian President?

 

[Pabster]

Actually there's plenty of talking heads on the left saying the same thing.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: Pabster
Actually there's plenty of talking heads on the left saying the same thing.

Are they saying, "give her a chance," or "she's unqualified so why bother?"

 

[judasmachine]

i still think she's a nutjob in disquise, and she's just acting moderate to get the appointment and confirmation.

 

[Boxxcar]

Anyone who can make a statement such as, "Pres Bush is the most intelligent man she's ever known" has go to be a few bricks short of a load!!!!!!

 

[CaptnKirk]

The two things that I see that set off warning bells are:

1) Her adoration of Bush, anything and everything that she does may be from the 'What woud George want' mindset.

2) She is a staunch Pro-Cororation Lawyer, all of her leanings will be for Big Business
ans not for the private citizen.

I am less worried about her Evangelical Aspect, she is self limiting on that since she will suffer from her own 'bait and switch' and 'hidden agendas' during the hearings.

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: Witling
Techs, Pat Robertson is too socially extreme, but he's probably just as qualified to make social evaluations as the current justices. Wasn't it Pat who wanted to assisinate the Columbian President?

Er, sarcasm? From Techs, I mean.

 

[Harvey]

ABC News and others report:

WASHINGTON Oct 20, 2005 ? Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers said she would try to give more information about herself to senators in charge of her confirmation after one said what she has submitted so far was "incomplete to insulting."

I'm beginning to think Miers is a red herring. Bush may be trotting her out there in all her ineptitude hoping whoever he nominates next looks better.

She's so unsuited for the SC that any discussion her nomination could just be side fluff launched as an attempt to distract attention from the investigations of Rove, Libby, Cheney, and possibly even his own involvement in covering up Rove's involvement in outing of Valerie Plame's identity as a covert CIA agent.

 

[Thump553]

Give her a chance?? You do realize this is a permanent, lifetime appointment, don't you? Once she's in, she's in for good. Supreme Court appointees should CERTAINLY be subject to the strictest scrutiny possible in the confirmation process, with no exceptions.

 

[NeoV]

give her a chance? Ok, lets let her be a federal judge for a bit.....so at least she has some experience as a judge before landing on the supreme court?

 

[CKent]

She had her chance. She claimed Bush to be intelligent & lost all credibility.

 

[HomeBrewerDude]

While I do not think that Meirs will turn out to be a good candidate for the Supreme Court, I firmly believe that the process for reviewing her nomination must be taken very seriously. In that sense, she SHOULD be given the same 'chance' to go through her nomination process without pre-concieved bias and stereotype. Of course, Senators from both sides must be willing to evaluate her nomination free from party influence.

 

[redhatlinux]

Judge Judy made the best comment IMHO, 'In Europe they have actual schools for Judges, with examinations'. I believe that I qualify for a Brain Surgeon, I have about the same experience as Miers has as a Judge. To think that she is nominated to replace Sandra Day O'Connor makes me sick, I thought that she deserved the job as Chief.

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: Thump553
Give her a chance?? You do realize this is a permanent, lifetime appointment, don't you? Once she's in, she's in for good. Supreme Court appointees should CERTAINLY be subject to the strictest scrutiny possible in the confirmation process, with no exceptions.

I think the "give her a chance" message references her testimony and writing to the Senate, not the idea that we ought to just throw her in the SC and "give her a chance".

 

[Pabster]

Originally posted by: redhatlinux
Judge Judy made the best comment IMHO, 'In Europe they have actual schools for Judges, with examinations'. I believe that I qualify for a Brain Surgeon, I have about the same experience as Miers has as a Judge. To think that she is nominated to replace Sandra Day O'Connor makes me sick, I thought that she deserved the job as Chief.

I vote Judy for the SC :laugh:

She's quite the character.

 

[CellarDoor]

I have a question for the conservatives on this board who don't support Miers. Does it have anything to do with her being single and never being married?

I heard this argument on TV yesterday and it never occured to me.

 

[Boxxcar]

Originally posted by: mribnik1
I have a question for the conservatives on this board who don't support Miers. Does it have anything to do with her being single and never being married?

I heard this argument on TV yesterday and it never occured to me.

Absolutely not! It has everything to do with tha fact she considers Pres Bush a very intelligent person. Which leaves me completely confused and frustrated - I don't know whether I should laugh or cry.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: Boxxcar

Originally posted by: mribnik1
I have a question for the conservatives on this board who don't support Miers. Does it have anything to do with her being single and never being married?

I heard this argument on TV yesterday and it never occured to me.

Absolutely not! It has everything to do with tha fact she considers Pres Bush a very intelligent person. Which leaves me completely confused and frustrated - I don't know whether I should laugh or cry.

Are you a real conservative or a Bush voter?

 

[Boxxcar]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc

Originally posted by: Boxxcar

Originally posted by: mribnik1
I have a question for the conservatives on this board who don't support Miers. Does it have anything to do with her being single and never being married?

I heard this argument on TV yesterday and it never occured to me.

Absolutely not! It has everything to do with tha fact she considers Pres Bush a very intelligent person. Which leaves me completely confused and frustrated - I don't know whether I should laugh or cry.

Are you a real conservative or a Bush voter?

I really don't stand for one party or the other. I concentrate more on what the policies are that an individual promotes or lobbies for.
As for a Bush voter? No F!@#$%g Way!!!!! He's such a dork!