SwiftVets.com

[shawa]

I have had it with all these Conservatives hysterically crying "Bush betrayed us". Bill Kristol, Laura Ingraham, Michelle Malkin,Will and many others absolutely ranting and most of the conservative bloggers griping.
SHEESH!!
I figured after their initial anger they would use their brains and 'get it'.

BUSH WANTS A CONSERVATIVE MAJORITY ON THE COURT NOW!!

I was initially very disappointed with the nomination, but it only took me about an hour to figure out the reasoning of President Bush. EXPEDIENCY.

Look at the 'numbers' and follow the events.

Before the death of Rehnquist, we had only three solid conservative votes on the Court, and usually Kennedy and much too infrequently O'Connor.

Then Sandra Day O'Connor announces she is retiring. Good.

Bush picks Roberts who has a good probabability of confirmation.
That will give us four solid and hope Kennedy will vote with us for a majority.

Then Rehnquist dies, and Bush moves Roberts to be Chief.
We're still at only three solid possibly four with Kennedy. and the Liberal O'Connor is still there til she is replaced.

And now the new session of the Court has begun, with many very important cases that we want a CONSERVATIVE ruling on.
http://news.findlaw.com/wash/s/20050929/20050929113124.html

Bush wants to get O'Connor repaced as soon as possible to get another sure conservative vote to get the majority we need. He has a number of great conservative choices but all have a paper trail that would make for a long battle to get confirmed. We all know that the Dems would fight any of these nominees tooth and nail and could really drag out the nomination process.

And remember, we have a number of SPINELESS Repubs who could well vote against any of those nominees.

Thus, EXPEDIENCY is the reason for Miers nomination, not cronyism, not shrinking from a fight. It's just that we need to conservatize the court in short order.

Bush is a practical man with his eye on the prize of getting a known (to him) sure conservative in place NOW.

Numbers--FOUR solid votes and hopefully pulling Kennedy along=MAJORITY NOW!!
_________________
“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” (Thomas Paine, 1776)

[homesteader]

Good Summary Shawa,

With a majority in place under new leadership to establish a climate that will make it more comfortable for Kennedy to make that majority secure, I can not wait for the next nomination, if GWB has the opportunity to make one. My prediction is that it would be an "in your face" choice that would smoke out the liberals. They will either have to fight and get nuked or crawl back into their holes and behave like rapidly shrinking minority they are. It would really be fun if it happened before the reelection campaigns of those wussy Dems from red states.

In the meantime, now is not the time for that donneybrook. Get the majority nailed down first.

GWB may be in the process of pulling of one the great political coups of all time. He got Senator Reid to suggest H Miers. I can almost see the President's poker face as he very seriously responded "Well thank you Senator, I had not thought of that before and your suggestion is well worth consideration". (Chuckle Chuckle)

[shawa]

homesteader said

[USAFE5]

GWB plays like Doyle Brunson, who has ten of those pretty Championship braclets for poker.
_________________
"The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I’m here to help." Ronald Reagan

[witchywoman]

I will throw my 2 cents in. It is troubling for me to see the president choose his personal lawyer to take this weighty position.

A blind faith and a "trust me", when there are judges with records that the senate can examine and make educated decisions. It would have been nice to see Janice Rogers Brown be nominated, and accepted. He has chosen, there is nothing else to do but wait and see now.

[GM Strong]

After a week of assessing and digesting this whole thing, I still can't come to accept this nomination as the best. I'm not concerned about a hidden wisdom and Kristol/ Buchanan never impressed me. Sam Brownback, Mark Levin and many others are rightly critical and as is said, we have to wait and see. As Rush speculated, if it is made from a position of weakness, it will embolden the opposition. The McCain Caucus of the Gang of 14 is a CF that has co-opted the process and caused damage. I do basically believe a solid conservative jurist should have been put forth and let the fight begin. I do think there are too many squishy Conservatives and Republicans ( McCain is not Conservative and is a RINO). If the leadership had been forceful, the Liberal hold on the Dems might have weakened as it has too before it drifts off the the ultra left cliff. All that being said, the rest of us can just comment and watch.

Don't get into the trust thing. Here in Penna we have been screwed royally by a Republican legislature and a Sleazy Phila. Liberal Gov. Fast Eddy Rendell, both thinking they are wiser than we are. Next year they will calling each other crooks while claiming the high ground as both sides look up from the gutter.
_________________
8th Army Korea 68-69

[shawa]

Thank you, Dr. Sowell!!

Harriet who?
By Thomas Sowell

Oct 7, 2005

Syndicated columnist

Conservatives who have for years contributed time, money, and sweat to help elect Republicans have often been justifiably outraged at the way the Republicans have then let them down, wimped out, or even openly betrayed the promises on which they were elected.

Much of that frustration and anger is now being directed at President Bush for his nomination of White House counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court. Why not someone like Judge Janice Rogers Brown or any of a number of other identifiable judges with a proven history of upholding conservative judicial principles under fire?

Looming in the background is the specter of people like Justice Anthony Kennedy, who went on the High Court with a "conservative" label and then succumbed to the Washington liberal culture. But while the past is undeniable, it is also not predestination.

This administration needs to be held responsible for its own shortcomings but not those of previous Republican administrations.

Rush Limbaugh has aptly called this a nomination made from a position of weakness. But there are different kinds of weakness and sometimes the difference matters.

President Bush has taken on too many tough fights -- Social Security being a classic example -- to be regarded as a man who is personally weak. What is weak is the Republican majority in the Senate.

When it comes to taking on a tough fight with the Senate Democrats over judicial nominations, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist doesn't really have a majority to lead. Before the President nominated anybody, before he even took the oath of office for his second term, Senator Arlen Specter was already warning him not to nominate anyone who would rile up the Senate. Later, Senator John Warner issued a similar warning. It sounded like a familiar Republican strategy of pre-emptive surrender.

Before we can judge how the President played his hand, we have to consider what kind of hand he had to play. It was a weak hand -- and the weakness was in the Republican Senators.

Does this mean that Harriet Miers will not be a good Supreme Court justice if she is confirmed? It is hard to imagine her being worse than Sandra Day O'Connor -- or even as bad.

The very fact that Harriet Miers is a member of an evangelical church suggests that she is not dying to be accepted by the beautiful people, and is unlikely to sell out the Constitution of the United States in order to be the toast of Georgetown cocktail parties or praised in the New York Times. Considering some of the turkeys that Republicans have put on the Supreme Court in the past, she could be a big improvement.

We don't know. But President Bush says he has known Harriet Miers long enough that he feels sure.

For the rest of us, she is a stealth nominee. Not since The Invisible Man has there been so much stealth.

That's not ideal by a long shot. But ideal was probably never in the cards, given the weak sisters among the Republicans' Senate "majority."

There is another aspect of this. The Senate Democrats huffed and puffed when Judge John Roberts was nominated but, in the end, he faced them down and was confirmed by a very comfortable margin.

The Democrats cannot afford to huff and puff and then back down, or be beaten down, again. On the other hand, they cannot let a high-profile conservative get confirmed without putting up a dogfight to satisfy their left-wing special interest groups.

Perhaps that is why some Democrats seem to welcome this stealth nominee. Even if she turns out to vote consistently with Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas, the Democrats are off the hook with their base because they can always say that they had no idea and that she stonewalled them at the confirmation hearings.

The bottom line with any Supreme Court justice is how they vote on the issues before the High Court. It would be nice to have someone with ringing rhetoric and dazzling intellectual firepower. But the bottom line is how they vote. If the President is right about Harriet Miers, she may be the best choice he could make under the circumstances.

Thomas Sowell
_________________
“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” (Thomas Paine, 1776)

[Schadow]

This just in from ABC radio news. James Dobson announces that Karl Rove told him "things" about Miers. Schumer immediately found a microphone and proclaims that he wants both Rove and Dobson to testify to the Judiciary Committee.

Here we go again.

Schadow
_________________
Capt, 8th U.S. Army, Korea '53 - '54

[GM Strong]

Somebody needs to wrap a roll of duct tape around Schmucky Schumer's mouth. After they surgically remove the imbeded microphone however. YIKES!!!
_________________
8th Army Korea 68-69

[Anker-Klanker]

This may be considered by many to be irrelevant, but I think there is an interesting historical parallel that might be worth some consideration regarding this whole subject (especially with regards to what has been said elsewhere)...

Ever read a good study of Admiral Raymond Spruance and the Battle of Midway? Most historians I've read think that the Battle of Midway turned the tide in the Battle of the Pacific, and that it's success was in large part because of Admiral Spruance.

When Spruance was selected to lead the USN forces he was both "spot-selected" and "deep-selected" over a number of other candidates who were already Admirals (who, i.e., had that cherished "paper trail"). Spruance was a cruiser captain when selected - why! he was not an ex carrier pilot! (i.e., he absolutely came from the "wrong school" and "did not fit the mold" - which conventional "wisdom" said had to be a pilot who landed into the command of a carrier).

But Spruance was a quiet strategist, which was known only to a very few people who had the guts to entrust our future to him, and to withstand the criticism of those who didn't think he was qualified.

Most of the historical analysis I've read indicate that if any of the "qualified" candidates for command had been named at this vital and critical juncture, they would probably have lost the battle.

Now I'm in no way suggesting that Harriet Miers is a Raymond Spruance, but I am suggesting that we were most fortunate to have had superior officers who could make such unconventional choices and had the guts to stand up to the critics. If Spruance had had to pass someone's litmus test, he'd never have been selected.

Food for thought...

[Schadow]

On Chris Wallace's Fox show this afternoon, after Bill Kristoll had delivered his 'sky is falling' speech for the umpteenth time, Mara Liasson made a very interesting observation that would seem to back up Kristoll's angst: [Paraphrasing] "Conservatives had just gotten to the summit where they were ready to ensure continuous power for the next generation, and this [Miers] came along."

Does anyone seriously think that GWB, who obviously knows his party is poised to put a lid on liberals for a long, long time, would deliberately sabotage the whole thing just for a "crony"? I don't think so.

I may be wrong, but I still think there's a pony in there somewhere.

Schadow
_________________
Capt, 8th U.S. Army, Korea '53 - '54

[PhantomSgt]

The President is exercising his perogative to appoint who he wants to the SC. People can whine, moan or drink KoolAid if they want but the fact still remains:

As an American citizen not convicted of a crime she is qualified for the job that has no other requirements. At least she has a distingushed legal career, many past appointees to the SC did not and some had not even attended college.

The President took the Advice of the Senate minority leader and now he seeks the Consent of the Senate for the minority leader's pick. That is the Constitutional job of the Senate to Advise the President and Consent to nominees.

The Consent clause was thrown in by the Founding Fathers to prevent a Hitler or in our case a Pat Robertson from being appointed to the SC for life. It is not included to delay, disrupt or turn down a qualified candidate from being voted on by the full Senate.

President Bush stands solidly behind Ms. Miers and that is good enough for me and it should be good enough for the Senate who is made up of our employees. By the people and for the people says it all.

By the way Schumer is an insignificant boil on the butt of progress who must be lanced by New Yorkers in the next election. The only one who listens to Chuck is himself and Charlie Rangle.


_________________
Retired AF E-8

Independent that leans right of center.

[shawa]

I saw a short snip of an interview with Antonin Scalia on one of the Sunday morning shows, can't remember which one. It was just a short teaser--I think they said full interview is supposed to air tonight.

They asked Scalia about not being selected for Chief Justice and he said he didn't think he really wanted it anyway. THEN he was asked what he thought of the Miers nomination, he said she would be good for the Court with a perspective of experience that is not present on the court right now
since the passing of Rehnquist. He said he thinks it's a good thing to have people with all sorts of backgrounds.

Rehnquist was not a previously a judge either. He worked in a private law firm and then joined John Mitchell's Justice Department'as a legal counsel.

One of Rehnquist's principal functions in this job was to screen, along with Kleindienst and Attorney General John Mitchell, candidates for potential Supreme Court positions. When attempts to find a suitable candidate to replace retiring justice John Marshall Harlan had reached an impasse, Mitchell informed Rehnquist that they had settled on someone--Rehnquist himself.
_________________
“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” (Thomas Paine, 1776)

[Marine4life]

I see more parallels than the obvious expediency to place her in and Oconnor out. Delay the Hammer is being attacked in Texas by a political hack, Miers was the President of the Texas Bar Assoc. This nomination could be a genious plan to tap more than the conservative majority. Has anyone ever thought that the GOP just might be playing politics on this? You know that if we don't want it, the Dem's will vote for it!! Reverse psycology maybe. We are much more organized then the left. Playing her as a liberal, they will fight each other to vote for her. Hell they even suggested her. The bottom line is that Bush has done us right all along, I trust that he knows better than me. I hope her Texas influence burries Ronnie Earle!! Semper Fi.
_________________
Helicopter Marine Attack Squadron 169 which is now HMLA-169. They added Huey's to compliment the Cobra effectiveness. When I served we just had Snakes.

[GM Strong]

Unfortunately, whatever you think or don't for that matter, this nomination has now, in my opinion, been mismanaged and in trouble. I expected more than pulling in to defense and sounding like liberals. It's beginning to sound like the White House is afraid of liberals and cannot deal with the base that put it in office. Something is wrong in the advice Mr. Bush is getting and the Liberals are emboldened. This is troubling. I think what happened is that the needed and expected fight has to happen and the backing off, as perceived, cannot go on. The catharsis is at hand and we have to go ahead with it. We expected "Bring it on." and will take nothing less. The gang of 14 (McCain in particular) be damned.
_________________
8th Army Korea 68-69