At least according to Luara Bush you are.
news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20051011/pl_nm/usa_court_bush_dc

First lady     Laura Bush joined her husband in defending his nominee to the     U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday and said it was possible some critics were being sexist in their opposition to Harriet Miers.

Boy the Bush family is pulling out all stops trying to get their friend that no one knows anything about appointed to the highest court in the land.  I've heard all sorts of complaints against Miers and even with all the men that have poor attitudes towards women here I haven't heard a single person say she isn't qualified because she is a woman.  Laura is really reaching with this one...and in my opinion it only makes the Bushs look weak.


Then we have this little gem from GW.

"I'm convinced she won't change. The person I know is not the kind of person who is going to change her philosophy, and her philosophy is she is not going to legislate from the bench," he said.

OK, what the heck does "not legislating from the bench" have to do with her being a strong conservative judge that is not going to change?

I hate to say it but I will, I think Bush has some type of mental disorder that is affecting his ability to reason.  It seems like each year he is getting worse and worse, losing touch with his base and reality.  Compare the "cowboy" GW with an approval rating of 80+ percent to the "kinder gentler, I know I'm doing the right thing" GW with an approval rating that just dropped below 40%...and he still doesn't get it.  Something has happend to him.

Did you just call me sexy?

And I thought Bush's arguments for Miers were weak before.

Quoted: img428.imageshack.us/img428/6459/kitty7uk0ze.jpg

SOME PEOPLE might very well be sexist about Miers.

Notice the 1st lady said 'SOME PEOPLE'.

Quoted: SOME PEOPLE might very well be sexist about Miers. Notice the 1st lady said 'SOME PEOPLE'.

If so it's in reverse, in the insistence that the next SCOTUS Justice must be a woman.

I'm betting those sexist folk are on the Democratic side of the aisle.

OK.

I suspect this is nothing new.  I'm sure Roosevelt was convinced he was saving the world too with all his SC appointments, all 8 of them.

I think we are re-living some history here.  At least it is not Caligula appointing his horse as consul.

This type of "deny and make counter-accusations" has worked with mostly good results for groups like NAACP, ACLU, United Nations, NOW, etc.....

Some probably are sexist.  Seems fairly accurate.

I don't really like this nomination based on what is being said about her, but that might all be smoke and mirrors.

Remember, Rehnquist was never a judge either.  He served admirably well.

Quoted: Some probably are sexist.  Seems fairly accurate.

I'm sure there are "some" people living under a rock somewhere but what percentage of those who oppose Miers are doing it simply because they are sexist and don't want to a female to hold the position?  I would say it is such a tiny portion of the "critics" that it's not even worth mentioning.  I know there are more people that don't like her because of her age than there are who don't like her because she just happens to be female.

Sure the "deny and make counter-accusations" has served the whiney liberal groups well...that's why it pathetic that the Bush family is stooping down to that level...I expected a leader when I voted for GW Bush...not a whiney pussy.

What does a damn librarian know about sexism anyway. She is a big dofus like her mom in law. People only like them because they are not Hitlery. She needs to go back in the kitchen and fire the cook, saving us taxpayers money.

Sounds a bit like what a libtard would say in trying to guild you into accepting their argument.  

They might actually have to legislate from the bench, in order to UN-DO some things that they have legislated from the bench.

I'm not a sexist, Alice Batchelder, from the 6th Circuit is actually qualified and CONSERVATIVE.

"I'm convinced she won't change. The person I know is not the kind of person who is going to change her philosophy, and her philosophy is she is not going to legislate from the bench," he said.

WTF?  Wasnt she a democrat in the 80s?