Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 10/4/2005 11:16:16 AM EDT
First, it should be someone you know VERY very well. Someone you are SURE you know their judicial philosophy. NOT the veneer, but the real person.

Second, given the political climate where a true conservativce would NEVER get confirmed, or even make it thru the Judiciary Committee, you'd pick someone no one else knows.

Third, you pick a minority or a woman, that the Dems would look like hypocrites for opposting, given they've painted you as anti-minority and anti-woman.

_____________________

Now, who fits that profile?

<­BR>
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 11:17:59 AM EDT
Ru Paul?
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 11:18:15 AM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:
First, it should be someone you know VERY very well. Someone you are SURE you know their judicial philosophy. NOT the veneer, but the real person.

Second, given the political climate where a true conservativce would NEVER get confirmed, or even make it thru the Judiciary Committee, you'd pick someone no one else knows.

Third, you pick a minority or a woman, that the Dems would look like hypocrites for opposting, given they've painted you as anti-minority and anti-woman.

_____________________

Now, who fits that profile?

<­BR>



Harriet Miers.

What did I win.
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 11:18:56 AM EDT

Originally Posted By mjohn3006:
Ru Paul?



Works for me....EXCEPT the part I forgot to add.....

Assume you are Geroge Bush.



Link Posted: 10/4/2005 11:30:09 AM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:
First, it should be someone you know VERY very well. Someone you are SURE you know their judicial philosophy. NOT the veneer, but the real person.

Second, given the political climate where a true conservativce would NEVER get confirmed, or even make it thru the Judiciary Committee, you'd pick someone no one else knows.

Third, you pick a minority or a woman, that the Dems would look like hypocrites for opposting, given they've painted you as anti-minority and anti-woman.

_____________________

Now, who fits that profile?

<­BR>




1st. you should grow a pair and nominate the best person for the job regardless.
2nd you should not act like a total fucking pussy trying to appease the libs/MSM who lost the last 2 elections.
3rd you should do what your base wants instead of taking a shit on them otherwise you're going to get your ass handed to you in the midterms.
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 11:31:00 AM EDT
Condi for SCOTUS?
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 11:41:18 AM EDT
I find it amazing that so many people are crying about his pick. The important thing is not weather she is Conservative or Liberal but rather this person sees the Constitution as the Founding Father wrote it. Also that she does legislate from the bench.

I would say the President has an Iron pair, because he does pick who he wants..

Personally, I want to hear what she has to say first before I condemn the President, who has a very good track record of putting Conservatives on the lower courts.
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 11:43:20 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Fourays2:
1st. you should grow a pair and nominate the best person for the job regardless.
2nd you should not act like a total fucking pussy trying to appease the libs/MSM who lost the last 2 elections.
3rd you should do what your base wants instead of taking a shit on them otherwise you're going to get your ass handed to you in the midterms.



I don't disagree with you, in principle.

But then, I'm not being called a racist murderer mental midget draft dodger baby killer and the million other allegations made daily against Bush by the people with the microphone on a daily basis.

YES, I beleive in principles. No, I will not condemn the soldier in the middle of the battle if he buckles at the knees once in a while.



Link Posted: 10/4/2005 11:46:05 AM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By mjohn3006:
Ru Paul?



Works for me....EXCEPT the part I forgot to add.....

Assume you are Geroge Bush.






Well you have to admit Ru Paul does look better in a dress than Harriet Miers does.......
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 11:49:04 AM EDT

Originally Posted By StonerStudent:

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By mjohn3006:
Ru Paul?



Works for me....EXCEPT the part I forgot to add.....

Assume you are Geroge Bush.






Well you have to admit Ru Paul does look better in a dress than Harriet Miers does.......



Hey - who doesn't???

Link Posted: 10/4/2005 11:53:13 AM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By StonerStudent:

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By mjohn3006:
Ru Paul?



Works for me....EXCEPT the part I forgot to add.....

Assume you are Geroge Bush.






Well you have to admit Ru Paul does look better in a dress than Harriet Miers does.......



Hey - who doesn't???




Janet Reno....always remember things could be worse.
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 12:13:53 PM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:
Second, given the political climate where a true conservative would NEVER get confirmed, or even make it thru the Judiciary Committee, you'd pick someone no one else knows.



Why do you say that? We have a majority in the House and the Senate, and we have enough senators to vote for the Constitutional option (no filibusters when approving judicial nominees). We've been winning more and more major elections for the last 5-6 years at least. I'd say the political climate makes it dangerous to NOT appoint conservatives.
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 12:19:09 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mace:

Originally Posted By garandman:
Second, given the political climate where a true conservative would NEVER get confirmed, or even make it thru the Judiciary Committee, you'd pick someone no one else knows.



Why do you say that? We have a majority in the House and the Senate, and we have enough senators to vote for the Constitutional option (no filibusters when approving judicial nominees). We've been winning more and more major elections for the last 5-6 years at least. I'd say the political climate makes it dangerous to NOT appoint conservatives.



You are confounding Republican with Conservative. These are not always the same thing.

Polls show about 1/3rd of Americans identify themselves as conservatives. About 20% call themselves liberals, and 40% moderates. The proportion that considers themselves conservative has actually DECLINED 7% in the past ten years.
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 12:20:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By mace:

Originally Posted By garandman:
Second, given the political climate where a true conservative would NEVER get confirmed, or even make it thru the Judiciary Committee, you'd pick someone no one else knows.



Why do you say that? We have a majority in the House and the Senate, and we have enough senators to vote for the Constitutional option (no filibusters when approving judicial nominees). We've been winning more and more major elections for the last 5-6 years at least. I'd say the political climate makes it dangerous to NOT appoint conservatives.



Committe Chair, Arlen Specter R-Pa

Pat Leahy D VT
Chappaquiddick Kennedy D MA
Joe Biden D DE
Herb Kohl D WI
DI FIdo D CA
Russ Feingold D WI
CHucky Schmucker D NY
Richard Turban D IL



Link Posted: 10/4/2005 12:30:03 PM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By mace:

Originally Posted By garandman:
Second, given the political climate where a true conservative would NEVER get confirmed, or even make it thru the Judiciary Committee, you'd pick someone no one else knows.



Why do you say that? We have a majority in the House and the Senate, and we have enough senators to vote for the Constitutional option (no filibusters when approving judicial nominees). We've been winning more and more major elections for the last 5-6 years at least. I'd say the political climate makes it dangerous to NOT appoint conservatives.



Committe Chair, Arlen Specter R-Pa

Pat Leahy D VT
Chappaquiddick Kennedy D MA
Joe Biden D DE
Herb Kohl D WI
DI FIdo D CA
Russ Feingold D WI
CHucky Schmucker D NY
Richard Turban D IL






That only 9/18 members.
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 12:46:27 PM EDT

Originally Posted By TacticalMan:
That only 9/18 members.



Which is 50%.

Deadlocked.

And I can't say for sure the other 9 are strict constructionist.
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 12:51:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:

Originally Posted By Fourays2:
1st. you should grow a pair and nominate the best person for the job regardless.
2nd you should not act like a total fucking pussy trying to appease the libs/MSM who lost the last 2 elections.
3rd you should do what your base wants instead of taking a shit on them otherwise you're going to get your ass handed to you in the midterms.



I don't disagree with you, in principle.

But then, I'm not being called a racist murderer mental midget draft dodger baby killer and the million other allegations made daily against Bush by the people with the microphone on a daily basis.

YES, I beleive in principles. No, I will not condemn the soldier in the middle of the battle if he buckles at the knees once in a while.






do you seriously think the MSM is ever going to praise him?
Link Posted: 10/4/2005 1:01:56 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Fourays2:

do you seriously think the MSM is ever going to praise him?



I'm not looking for that.

I'm saying day after day after day Bush is getting seriously attacked. Bitter personal vicious attacks.

Can you fault him (as I'm sure he sees it) for trying to accomplished his promised goals of strict constructionist judges via the stealth method, and NOT going looking for a fight?

Walk a mile in his shoes. Have YOU been blamed lately for the death of 2,000 soldierss? Do you think that DOESN'T hurt? Have YOU been blamed lately for the deaths of hundreds of blacks, and had it said about you that you WANTED them to die? DO you think that doesn't hurt? DO you realize its NOT just DUhers saying it, but US Congressmen? With TV cameras to broadcast teh charges to to litterally BILLIONS of people.

He's NOT a friggen robot, ya know. He's a human being that wears out from time to time. SHeesh....

I guess Bush just doesn't have your huge, titanium stones....

Link Posted: 10/4/2005 1:06:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By garandman:
First, it should be someone you know VERY very well. Someone you are SURE you know their judicial philosophy. NOT the veneer, but the real person. Generally agreed

Second, given the political climate where a true conservativce would NEVER get confirmed, or even make it thru the Judiciary Committee, you'd pick someone no one else knows.Yes they could easily however the G.O.P. lacks balls and resolve to do so, furthermore you do not want an idealog which is what someone with the mindset of overturning Roe would be.

Third, you pick a minority or a woman, that the Dems would look like hypocrites for opposting, given they've painted you as anti-minority and anti-woman.Pick a black woman just so their hipocrasy shows, janice Rogers Brown was a better pick

_____________________

Now, who fits that profile?

<­BR>

Top Top