Why the fuss over Harriet?
 

On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 17:12:22 -0400, Harry Krause wrote:


I guess I'm getting more cynical. The worse the choices Bush makes, and
the more harm those choices cause, the more I'm beginning to believe
Americans deserve it. America is just reaping what it has sown, eh?

If I was cynical, and I am, I'd be thinking Miers might be a throw-away
nomination. There appears to be enough doubts from all sides to make this
nomination a real dogfight. Stir up the bad blood, now. It might make
the true nominee's confirmation a little easier. Hey, I did say I was
cynical.

Why the fuss over Harriet?
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 09 Oct 2005 17:12:22 -0400, Harry Krause wrote:


I guess I'm getting more cynical. The worse the choices Bush makes, and
the more harm those choices cause, the more I'm beginning to believe
Americans deserve it. America is just reaping what it has sown, eh?

If I was cynical, and I am, I'd be thinking Miers might be a throw-away
nomination. There appears to be enough doubts from all sides to make this
nomination a real dogfight. Stir up the bad blood, now. It might make
the true nominee's confirmation a little easier. Hey, I did say I was
cynical.

The funny thing is, some news article I read expressed the ***OPINION***
that Bush chose her as a nominee because he did NOT want to stir up the
muck.

Oops.

Why the fuss over Harriet?
 

This may have a bigger stink than anyone first imagined:

October 10, 2005
Endorsement of Nominee Draws Committee's Interest
By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

WASHINGTON, Oct. 9 - Senator Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican who
is chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and several Democrats on the
committee said Sunday that they were considering calling the evangelical
conservative James C. Dobson to testify on what he has been told about
Harriet E. Miers, the president's Supreme Court nominee.

"If Dr. Dobson knows something that he shouldn't know or something that I
ought to know, I'm going to find out," Mr. Specter said Sunday in an
interview with George Stephanopoulos on the ABC News program "This Week."

In response to a later question, Mr. Specter added, "If there are back-room
assurances and if there are back-room deals and if there is something which
bears upon a precondition as to how a nominee is going to vote, I think
that's a matter that ought to be known by the Judiciary Committee and the
American people."

Mr. Dobson, the influential founder of the conservative evangelical group
Focus on the Family, has said he is supporting Ms. Miers's nomination in
part because of something he has been told but cannot divulge. He has not
disclosed the source of the information, but he has acknowledged speaking
with Karl Rove, President Bush's top political adviser, about the
president's pick before it was announced.

On his radio program last Wednesday, Mr. Dobson said, "When you know some of
the things that I know - that I probably shouldn't know - you will
understand why I have said, with fear and trepidation, that I believe
Harriet Miers will be a good justice." He added, in a reference to aborted
fetuses, "if I have made a mistake here, I will never forget the blood of
those babies that will die will be on my hands to some degree."

Dana Perino, a spokeswoman for the White House, said Sunday that Mr. Rove
did not provide Mr. Dobson "any insight into how Ms. Miers may rule on any
particular case." But the attention to the private reasons for Mr. Dobson's
endorsement underscores the delicate problem the White House faces in trying
to quell conservative dissatisfaction with Ms. Miers without arousing the
ire of liberals or, for that matter, the handful of Senate Republicans like
Mr. Specter who support abortion rights.

Even as liberal groups were raising questions last week about Mr. Dobson's
sources, the White House put him on a conference call with conservative
activists around the country to try to reassure them that Ms. Miers shared
their views of the law.

Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary
Committee, said Sunday on the same program as Mr. Specter that he, too,
would consider calling Mr. Dobson to testify. Senator Charles E. Schumer of
New York, another Democrat on the committee, said in an interview on the CBS
News program "Face the Nation" that he already believed the committee should
call Mr. Dobson as a witness. "This is not a game of wink and whisper," Mr.
Schumer said. "This is serious business."

Senator Richard J. Durbin, an Illinois Democrat on the committee, said
Sunday on the CNN program "Late Edition" that the possibility that the White
House might have given "inside information" about Ms. Miers to Mr. Dobson
was "reprehensible." Senator Ken Salazar, Democrat of Colorado, has called
on Mr. Dobson to disclose whatever he knows.

Mr. Dobson has not been invited by the Senate to testify and will wait to
respond until he does, his spokesman, Paul Hetrick, said Sunday.

Conservatives continued to debate over Ms. Miers's legal qualifications and
conservative credentials. Robert H. Bork, the former Supreme Court nominee
who is a hero to many on the right, said in an interview on MSNBC on Friday
that her nomination was "a disaster," and some conservative publications and
columnists are calling for her withdrawal or rejection.

But on CNN on Sunday, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican
whip, called her "an outstanding lawyer" and predicted, "at the end of the
day, the support in the Senate for Harriet Miers in the Republican
conference in the Senate is going to be rock solid."

On Fox News, Justice Nathan L. Hecht of the Texas Supreme Court, a friend of
Ms. Miers who has become her de facto spokesman, said there was "no chance
at all" that she would withdraw her nomination. Although he said he had not
heard it from her, he said, "it's outside the bounds of possibility."

* Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

Why the fuss over Harriet?
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 14:21:59 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

This may have a bigger stink than anyone first imagined:

What I find really curious is that there is no individual with the
stature of former Senator Thompson "guiding" her through the process.
At least publicly.

My own opinion is that, unfortunately for her, Ms. Miers is a stalking
horse for another nominee waiting in the wings.

My second opinion is that, despite what you may think about the
President's intellectual prowess, he is being absolutely Machiavellian
in this.

Perhaps, but when he uses a fake clergyman to do his bidding, one has to
wonder if he understands the word "conservative", the label for the people
who seem most concerned about his choice of Miers.

Why the fuss over Harriet?
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 15:30:38 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
. ..
On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 14:21:59 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

This may have a bigger stink than anyone first imagined:

What I find really curious is that there is no individual with the
stature of former Senator Thompson "guiding" her through the process.
At least publicly.

My own opinion is that, unfortunately for her, Ms. Miers is a stalking
horse for another nominee waiting in the wings.

My second opinion is that, despite what you may think about the
President's intellectual prowess, he is being absolutely Machiavellian
in this.

Perhaps, but when he uses a fake clergyman to do his bidding, one has to
wonder if he understands the word "conservative", the label for the people
who seem most concerned about his choice of Miers.

Exactly my point.

Yeah...I realized that about 8 seconds after I sent it. Zzzzzzzzz........

Why the fuss over Harriet?
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Okay, guys, someone explain to me why the extreme conservatives are
"upset" with Maid Harriet.

Because as uncomfortable as they are with Nookular Boy at times, they're
even more so with extremist ******s like Dobson manipulating the judicial
system. What the hell is this nut case talking about? :

"On his radio program last Wednesday, Mr. Dobson said, "When you know some
of
the things that I know - that I probably shouldn't know - you will
understand why I have said, with fear and trepidation, that I believe
Harriet Miers will be a good justice." He added, in a reference to aborted
fetuses, "if I have made a mistake here, I will never forget the blood of
those babies that will die will be on my hands to some degree."


Imagine if William F. Buckley was asked to comment on that paragraph
tomorrow. He'd rip Dobson to shreds. I'm sure there are a few influential
conservative representatives who would do the same.

Why the fuss over Harriet?
 

On Mon, 10 Oct 2005 12:09:31 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:


And I still wonder why the conservacrooks are upset with Maid Harriet.
She seems to be their cup of tea.

I think its a ploy. If the conservacrooks don't like her, there must
be some good about her we don't know about. Just a ruse to get some
moderates to support her.

bb

Why the fuss over Harriet?
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Doug Kanter wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

Okay, guys, someone explain to me why the extreme conservatives are
"upset" with Maid Harriet.

Because as uncomfortable as they are with Nookular Boy at times, they're
even more so with extremist ******s like Dobson manipulating the judicial
system. What the hell is this nut case talking about? :

"On his radio program last Wednesday, Mr. Dobson said, "When you know
some of
the things that I know - that I probably shouldn't know - you will
understand why I have said, with fear and trepidation, that I believe
Harriet Miers will be a good justice." He added, in a reference to
aborted
fetuses, "if I have made a mistake here, I will never forget the blood of
those babies that will die will be on my hands to some degree."


Imagine if William F. Buckley was asked to comment on that paragraph
tomorrow. He'd rip Dobson to shreds. I'm sure there are a few influential
conservative representatives who would do the same.


My take is that some conservatives only play lip service with being upset
about President Idiot. He's their boy, and they will support him no matter
what.

Be that is it may, it still doesn't explain why the cons don't like Maid
Harriet. She fits their agenda to a T.


Did you read the entire article?

Why the fuss over Harriet?
 

Sen. Spector is an idiot. He owes retaining his seat in the Senate to Bush.

With friends like Spector who needs enemies?

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
This may have a bigger stink than anyone first imagined:

October 10, 2005
Endorsement of Nominee Draws Committee's Interest
By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

WASHINGTON, Oct. 9 - Senator Arlen Specter, the Pennsylvania Republican
who is chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and several Democrats on the
committee said Sunday that they were considering calling the evangelical
conservative James C. Dobson to testify on what he has been told about
Harriet E. Miers, the president's Supreme Court nominee.

"If Dr. Dobson knows something that he shouldn't know or something that I
ought to know, I'm going to find out," Mr. Specter said Sunday in an
interview with George Stephanopoulos on the ABC News program "This Week."

In response to a later question, Mr. Specter added, "If there are
back-room assurances and if there are back-room deals and if there is
something which bears upon a precondition as to how a nominee is going to
vote, I think that's a matter that ought to be known by the Judiciary
Committee and the American people."

Mr. Dobson, the influential founder of the conservative evangelical group
Focus on the Family, has said he is supporting Ms. Miers's nomination in
part because of something he has been told but cannot divulge. He has not
disclosed the source of the information, but he has acknowledged speaking
with Karl Rove, President Bush's top political adviser, about the
president's pick before it was announced.

On his radio program last Wednesday, Mr. Dobson said, "When you know some
of the things that I know - that I probably shouldn't know - you will
understand why I have said, with fear and trepidation, that I believe
Harriet Miers will be a good justice." He added, in a reference to aborted
fetuses, "if I have made a mistake here, I will never forget the blood of
those babies that will die will be on my hands to some degree."

Dana Perino, a spokeswoman for the White House, said Sunday that Mr. Rove
did not provide Mr. Dobson "any insight into how Ms. Miers may rule on any
particular case." But the attention to the private reasons for Mr.
Dobson's endorsement underscores the delicate problem the White House
faces in trying to quell conservative dissatisfaction with Ms. Miers
without arousing the ire of liberals or, for that matter, the handful of
Senate Republicans like Mr. Specter who support abortion rights.

Even as liberal groups were raising questions last week about Mr. Dobson's
sources, the White House put him on a conference call with conservative
activists around the country to try to reassure them that Ms. Miers shared
their views of the law.

Senator Patrick J. Leahy of Vermont, the ranking Democrat on the Judiciary
Committee, said Sunday on the same program as Mr. Specter that he, too,
would consider calling Mr. Dobson to testify. Senator Charles E. Schumer
of New York, another Democrat on the committee, said in an interview on
the CBS News program "Face the Nation" that he already believed the
committee should call Mr. Dobson as a witness. "This is not a game of wink
and whisper," Mr. Schumer said. "This is serious business."

Senator Richard J. Durbin, an Illinois Democrat on the committee, said
Sunday on the CNN program "Late Edition" that the possibility that the
White House might have given "inside information" about Ms. Miers to Mr.
Dobson was "reprehensible." Senator Ken Salazar, Democrat of Colorado, has
called on Mr. Dobson to disclose whatever he knows.

Mr. Dobson has not been invited by the Senate to testify and will wait to
respond until he does, his spokesman, Paul Hetrick, said Sunday.

Conservatives continued to debate over Ms. Miers's legal qualifications
and conservative credentials. Robert H. Bork, the former Supreme Court
nominee who is a hero to many on the right, said in an interview on MSNBC
on Friday that her nomination was "a disaster," and some conservative
publications and columnists are calling for her withdrawal or rejection.

But on CNN on Sunday, Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican
whip, called her "an outstanding lawyer" and predicted, "at the end of the
day, the support in the Senate for Harriet Miers in the Republican
conference in the Senate is going to be rock solid."

On Fox News, Justice Nathan L. Hecht of the Texas Supreme Court, a friend
of Ms. Miers who has become her de facto spokesman, said there was "no
chance at all" that she would withdraw her nomination. Although he said he
had not heard it from her, he said, "it's outside the bounds of
possibility."

* Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company

Why the fuss over Harriet?
 

But, hey...America wants and deserves incompetency at the top...


if that be the case, then 49% just about achieved their dream in the
last election