Harriet Miers - Bush's newest *faith-based initiative*
Posted By: Anon on 2005-10-04
In Reply to:
At first I thought this was just an example of cronyism, considering that Bush paid Miers $19,000 in 1998 to assist in his National Guard AWOL debacle/scandal.
But after painfully watching his press conference this morning, I realized he was speaking in code about the fact that she isn't going to change her views on abortion. It's no secret she's pro-life. It's also no secret that so-called pro-lifers in the past have resorted to murdering abortion doctors in an attempt to stop abortion.
They will stop at nothing.
Including a faith-based Supreme Court Justice.
Kiss America GOODBYE.
P.S. to gt: Hi! 
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Falsified Bush Bio approved by Harriet Miers?
From http://www.send2press.com/newswire/2005-10-1017-006.shtml
Opinion & Commentary
Falsified Bush Biography Found on State Department Website (Approved by Harriet Miers?)
Edited by Carly Zander
Mon, 17 Oct 2005, 03:58 EDT
LOS ANGELES, Calif. (SEND2PRESS NEWSWIRE) -- On September 29, 2005, investigative journalist Hugh E. Scott found a White House biography on the Internet that claimed President Bush had flown Texas Air National Guard F102 interceptors almost six years when the actual time was 27 months. The text contained other exaggerations as well, says Scott.
Scott discovered the falsified document on a website maintained by the U.S. Embassy in Hanoi. On October 6, when he accessed the website again, Bush's biography had been deleted. Scott believes emails he sent two days before to newspapers in Washington, DC, alerted the White House and it sanitized the Hanoi website. However, the corrective action came too late. During his first visit, Scott made a printout of the 3,900-word document and mailed copies to friends for safekeeping.
Previously, in February 2004, he found an identical phony Bush history on another State Department website. To validate the smoking-gun evidence of White House skullduggery, Scott called the Boston Globe. Impressed, it reported his discovery the next morning, on 02/28/04, under the headline, Bush Bio on Web Inflates Guard Service, and gave him credit as the source.
Based on research for a forthcoming book about the president, Scott contends that Bush's longtime legal advisor, Supreme Court nominee Harriet Miers, helped write the bogus bio for use in his 2000 primary campaign against Arizona Senator John McCain. For certain, charges Scott, Miers approved George W.'s 1999 autobiography, A Charge to Keep, which covered up missed Guard drills in 1972 and his grounding that same year for failing to take a mandatory pilot medical exam.
Miers also approved the official White House biography posted on its website after the 2001 inauguration. The text claimed President Bush had operated ANG interceptors from 1968 to 1973, even though he was grounded on August 1, 1972.
Following publication of contradicting information by the print media, the White House changed the bio to read George W. served as an F102 pilot in the Texas Air National Guard.
Scott uncovered the Hanoi embassy bio while searching the Internet for other erroneous Bush histories. So far, he has found 12 biographical sources, ranging from InfoPlease to The Book of Knowledge and Encyclopedia Americana, that falsely state the president flew F102 jets in 1973.
For more information about the Hanoi embassy bio and to see a copy, visit Scott's website, www.King-George.biz or contact Hugh E. Scott at 805-498-8249.
Bush Nominates Harriet Miers to replace O'Connor
I'll be very interested to hear more about her. So far, I've learned that she contributed to Al Gore's campaign and was also involved with Legal Aid in the past. Either Bush is coming to his senses or this is merely another example of his ongoing cronyism. In this case, his cronyism just might actually finally benefit the American people this time.
Bush picks White House counsel for Supreme Court
If confirmed, Harriet Miers would succeed O'Connor
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush nominated White House counsel Harriet Miers on Monday to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.
Miers, 60, was the first woman to head the State Bar of Texas. She has never been a judge.
An outspoken supporter of the Bush administration, she was a leader of its search for potential candidates to fill Supreme Court posts. A White House official said that at the same time, Bush considered her as a nominee without her knowledge.
In a televised announcement from the White House, Bush called Miers exceptionally well-suited for the high court. Miers has devoted her life to the rule of law and the cause of justice, he said.
He called on the Senate to review her qualifications thoroughly and fairly and to vote on her nomination promptly.
Miers said she was grateful and humbled by the nomination. ( Watch: Miers has no judicial experience -- 2:30)
It is the responsibility of every generation to be true to the founders' vision of the proper role of the courts in our society, she said.
If confirmed, I recognize that I will have a tremendous responsibility to keep our judicial system strong and to help ensure that the courts meet their obligations to strictly apply the laws and the Constitution. ( Watch Bush nominate Miers to the Supreme Court -- 9:09)
If the Senate confirms Miers, she would join Ruth Bader Ginsburg as the second sitting female justice on the bench. O'Connor became the court's first female justice in 1981.
Dinner offer
Bush offered her the job Sunday night over dinner in the White House residence, White House sources said.
During the summer, a vetting process for Miers took place once the president began considering her.
Bush took seriously suggestions by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania, and ranking Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, that the president consider candidates from outside the appellate courts, the sources said.
Miers, 60, who has never been a judge, was the first woman to serve as president of the State Bar of Texas and Dallas Bar Association. She also was a member of the Dallas City Council. ( Profile)
More recently, Miers helped lead the administration's search for potential candidates to fill Supreme Court posts.
At the same time, a White House official said that Bush considered her as a nominee without her knowledge.
Reacting with caution
Initial reaction to Miers' nomination was cautious. ( Watch senators react to Miers' nomination -- 3:49)
Harriet Miers is an intelligent lawyer who shares the president's judicial philosophy, said Leonard Leo of the conservative Federalist Society.
She has demonstrated that in her capacity as White House counsel and a senior administration official as well as an active member of the organized bar.
Quietly, some conservatives involved in the White House's nominee selection consultation process said they are concerned with Bush's pick.
The reaction of many conservatives today will be that the president has made possibly the most unqualified choice since Abe Fortas who had been the president's lawyer, said conservative activist Manuel Miranda of the Third Branch Conference, referring to President Lyndon B. Johnson's pick to the high court in 1965.
The nomination of a nominee with no judicial record is a significant failure for the advisers that the White House gathered around it. However, the president deserves the benefit of a doubt, the nominee deserves the benefit of hearings, and every nominee deserves an up-or-down vote.
The Concerned Women for America, another conservative group, also took a wait-and-see approach on Miers.
We give Harriet Miers the benefit of the doubt because thus far, President Bush has selected nominees to the federal courts who are committed to the written Constitution, said Jan LaRue, chief counsel of the group. Whether we can support her will depend on what we learn from her record and the hearing process.
One Republican official said that many had expectations that Bush's pick would be a known conservative, adding that he was surprised by the president's choice.
Republicans were hoping for a clear conservative, the official said. It's going to be heavy lifting for us and the White House.
Another conservative source who was involved in the selection consultation process said Miers was not a big surprise and that she had always been someone under serious consideration.
She's a good conservative, the source said. She does share the president's views about law and public policy. But she is not well-known, which is going to be part of the challenge.
Democrats on the the Senate Judiciary Committee reacted cautiously to Miers' nomination, but they did not immediately oppose it.
It is too early to reach any firm judgment about such an important nomination, Leahy said in a statement, noting Miers long ties to President Bush. It is important to know whether she would enter this key post with the judicial independence necessary when the Supreme Court considers isues of interest to this Administration.
My first reaction is a simple one: It could have been a lot worst, Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, one of the Demcrats on the committee, said. ... The president has not sent us a nominee that we've rejected already.
Schumer continued, There's hope that Harriet Miers is a mainstream nominee. ... Given the fact that the extreme wing of the president's party was demanding someone of fealty to their views, this is a good first day in the process that begins to fill the seat of Sandra Day O'Connor.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, another Democratic committee member and its only woman, said she was happy that a woman was nominated to replace the outgoing O'Connor but wanted to know more about Miers' views on privacy and other issues.
This new justice will be critical in the balance with respect to rulings on congressional authority, as well as a woman's right to privacy, environmental protections, and many other aspects of constitutional law in the United States, Feinstein said.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, was complimentary of Miers.
I like Harriet Miers, Reid said in a statement. As White House counsel, she has worked with me in a courteous and professional manner. I am also impressed with the fact that she was a trailblazer for women as managing partner of a major Dallas law firm and as the first woman president of the Texas Bar Association.
Pivotal replacement
The choice to replace O'Connor, a key swing vote, could be pivotal. ( Full story)
The announcement came shortly before justices were to begin a new term with new Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, who is the youngest member of the high court.
The term is expected to include rulings on several controversial cases, said Edward Lazarus, a Supreme Court legal analyst. ( Case list)
This is a situation where, from the very moment the justices start back up in October, they're going to be very divided, said Lazarus, who authored Closed Chambers, a book on the justices. It's going to be a lot of friction inside the building.
O'Connor announced her retirement in July. Bush initially chose Roberts for her seat, but the September 3 death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist changed the White House's strategy.
O'Connor has said she will stay on until she is replaced, making her role in the upcoming term unclear. Under court rules, a justice's vote does not count until a ruling is issued, a process that can take weeks or months.
Many legal scholars question whether O'Connor would want to continue hearing cases if her replacement takes over before rulings are issued, thereby negating her vote.
CNN's Dana Bash contributed to this report. |
|
|
|
|
|
Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/03/scotus.miers |
Harriet Miers withdraws nomination...
Harriet Miers: Antonin Scalia in sheep's clothing
Harriet Miers: Antonin Scalia in sheep's clothing
October 11, 2005
By nominating Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, President Bush has put forth a total unknown. A blank slate. A cipher. Not even the president knows where she stands on the issues because he never asked her.
That's what the White House wants you to think. Don't you believe it.
Of course, if you listen to most conservatives, Harriet Miers is as dangerous as a card-carrying member of the ACLU. I'm disappointed, depressed and demoralized, huffed the Weekly Standard's Bill Kristol. Her qualifications for the Supreme Court are nonexistent, puffed former presidential candidate Pat Buchanan.
Nonsense.
Make no mistake about it. This decision is too important. Replacing William Rehnquist with John Roberts was a wash. It's this appointment, to fill the shoes of swing-vote Sandra Day O'Connor, that will determine the future direction of the Supreme Court. Karl Rove never would have let George Bush nominate Miers if he didn't know she agreed with Bush on every issue.
It's not hard to figure out how Bush decided on Miers. If elected president, he promised in 2000, he would appoint to the Supreme Court justices like extreme conservatives Antonin Scalia or Clarence Thomas. John Roberts didn't fit the bill, so Bush knew he had to deliver this time around. But he also knew any one of the names on the conservatives' wish list -- Michael Luttig, Edith Jones or Janice Rogers Brown -- would stir up a firestorm in the Senate, which Bush wanted to avoid.
So Bush came up with Plan B, as brilliant as it is diabolical: Nominate someone who is every bit as conservative as Luttig, Jones or Brown, privately, but who is a complete mystery, publicly. And that's Harriet Ellan Miers. The perfect stealth candidate. Antonin Scalia in sheep's clothing.
In case you still harbor any doubts about her right-wing credentials, here's final proof. After four days of complaints from the far right, Karl Rove got on the phone to leading conservatives, starting with James Dobson, head of Focus on the Family. Rove convinced him to support Miers, Dobson confirmed, by giving him confidential information on her religious beliefs. Miers, like Bush, is an evangelical Christian.
Notice how the White House plays the religion card both ways. It was wrong for Democrats to raise the fact John Roberts is a Catholic, they argued, just one month ago.
Notice also what their doing so tells us about Harriet Miers. She's a soul mate of James Dobson, Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. She's anti-choice, anti-stem cell research, anti-separation of church and state, pro-school prayer and pro-teaching intelligent design in public-school science classes. She's way out of the mainstream.
So what are Democrats waiting for? They know enough about Miers already to merit all-out opposition -- including the filibuster, if necessary. And they'd better act fast.
If Harriet Miers is confirmed, we'll be yearning for the good old days of moderate William Rehnquist.
Bill Press is host of the nationally syndicated Bill Press Show. His e-mail address is: bill@billpress.com.
Special Offer: Get 2 Weeks of Daily sunday delivery Free when you buy 13 weeks.
©The Shreveport Times
October 11, 2005
Fact Based or Faith Based Policies...sm
Click watch video in the link.
Most impressive statement is how the Bush administration has gotten away from fact based policy making.
I was not talking about tithes...I am taking about faith-based...
organizations independent of a particular church. One I support is Feed the Children. Generally tithes are used to pay the bills of the church.
Bush paid Harriet $19,000 in 1998 re his Guard AWOL status
Guess he owes her big time, huh?
I happened to find this link, which provides a LOT of interesting facts about Bush.
http://www.angelfire.com/ca3/jphuck/Book4Ch.3.html
Bush first became concerned about his alleged AWOL status in 1998, when he was running for a second term as governor, about allegations that he was given preferential treatment to land a slot in the Air National Guard. So he retained an attorney, Harriet Miers who was paid $19,000 to investigate the issue. She and her aides concluded that Barnes had helped Bush land a slot in the Air National Guard in 1968 after being lobbied by Adger. Miers spoke with Barnes who acknowledged that he had never talked to Bush’s father about asking for the favor. Adger was already deceased, and since that time Barnes passed away. Bush knew that he was off the hook.
Miers: Margaret Carlson & James Dobson know. Why doesn't Bush?
http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000039&refer=columnist_carlson&sid=ajuZsQQbuwl4#
With Miers, Bush Gets Fifth Vote Against Roe: Margaret Carlson
Oct. 5 (Bloomberg) -- What if former President Bill Clinton had nominated his White House counsel, Bernie Nussbaum, to the Supreme Court? I can hear Bill Frist now. What does Slick Willy think he's doing -- filling a job at FEMA?
At first glance, there seems to be no other reason for Harriet Miers's nomination to the Supreme Court other than that she is President George W. Bush's Bernie Nussbaum. The notion that a careerist corporate lawyer would have risen to the top of Bush's list if she weren't down the hall is preposterous.
Unlike famous self-selector Dick Cheney, no one suspects the modest Miers looked in the mirror and saw the best replacement for Justice Sandra Day O'Connor staring back at her. Only Bush could see the ``heart'' and ``character'' in Miers that made her the perfect selection. She's been his consigliore, fixer and confidante for more than two decades, and she thinks the way he does.
The fact that Miers is a woman helps enormously. It looks as if Bush listened to wife Laura, who publicly suggested he should replace a woman with a woman. It's far more likely that Laura publicly suggested it because he already had decided to do so. The choice prompts automatic praise from some liberals, excites Democratic Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid and placates Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein.
Bush's Wants
And notice how tongue-tied a potential critic, Senator Edward Kennedy, was two days ago trying to criticize her.
Miers satisfies a number of Bush's proclivities: his inability to distinguish an insider job from an outside one (White House counsel is the most partisan legal job in government), his desire to reward loyalty and his love of surprise.
Ambitious Republicans should be on notice that the best way to get ahead in the Bush years is to work anonymously inside. It was only because the White House floated Miers's name that she was on anyone's list.
This is not to say that Miers isn't a decent, competent (she may be a crony, but she's no Michael Brown) and respected person. She's devoted to her mother and brothers, a regular churchgoer, an early riser, an avid celebrator of birthdays.
Up the Ladder
In Dallas, she broke the glass ceiling for female lawyers (although she lived the life of a nun to get there). After meeting Bush in 1989, she represented him in matters ranging from his purchase of a fishing cottage in East Texas to questions about his National Guard service.
At the same time, she climbed a steep corporate ladder, becoming co-manager of a huge Dallas firm and chairwoman of the Texas Bar Association, specializing in commercial transactions for large corporations.
She served on the Dallas City Council and headed the Texas Lottery, where, some say, she cleaned up Powerball. She moved with the president to the White House, where the only complaint against her was that she lingered over paperwork too long.
She became counsel to the president when Alberto Gonzales was promoted to attorney general. Gonzales is another loyalist who proved himself to Governor Bush by speed-reading through death row appeals in Texas and redefining torture in the White House for purposes of allowing more of it in Iraq. With her nomination, Miers has gotten an even bigger promotion than her predecessor.
Shocked Conservatives
Some conservatives are loudly shocked that Bush ignored the long list of known quantities among conservative jurists in the mold of his favorites, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas. It depressed Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol. Rush Limbaugh was so agitated Cheney gave him an interview to calm his listeners.
What those conservatives are missing is what Dr. James Dobson, chairman of Focus on the Family, and Jay Sekulow, chief counsel to the American Center for Law & Justice, see in Miers: a fifth vote for overturning Roe v. Wade. Bush even got Dobson's approval beforehand.
Like Bush, Miers had a late-in-life born-again moment, joining a conservative evangelical church in Dallas where she taught Sunday School.
In an interview in yesterday's Dallas Morning News, Miers's former campaign manager, Lorlee Bartos, said Miers told her when running for city council in 1989 that she had been ``pro-choice in her youth.'' Then, according to Bartos, Miers said she underwent ``a born-again, profound experience'' that caused her to change her mind and oppose abortion.
Keeping the Promise
That conversion fits with her $150 contribution to Texans United for Life in 1989 and her successful effort to get the American Bar Association to move from support for abortion rights to neutral in 1991. After the ABA switched back to a pro- abortion-rights position, Miers in 1993 failed in a bid to have the endorsement put to a vote of the full membership.
At his press conference yesterday, Bush claimed that in all the years he's known Miers he never learned her view on abortion. Dobson and Sekulow will have their hands full reassuring the base about that comment. It's one thing for Chuck Schumer to be left in the dark, quite another for Bush to say he purposely kept himself there.
Didn't he promise the base he'd turn the light on and give them a selection sure to reverse Roe?
I think he has. This time he's tricking Harry Reid.
I used to think the younger Bush was like his dad on abortion -- pro-life for purposes of getting elected, pro-choice otherwise. But I now see him as a victim of Stockholm syndrome, adopting as his own view that of his right-wing captors. My money is on Dobson knowing what Bush claims not to. Assuming Miers is confirmed, it won't be long before we all know.
To contact the writer of this column:
Margaret Carlson at mcarlson3@bloomberg.net
Last Updated: October 5, 2005 00:16 EDT
Newest memo..(sm)
I'm sure there will be many more to come.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/vp/30395296#30395296
In other words, they knew it was torture, they knew it was illegal and were warned that it was illegal, but went on with their plans anyway.
It is the Clinton Global Initiative and it does...
great work. I have to give Clinton due credit on that.
That being said...Obama is speaking at that forum too. Just by satellite. He is going back to Washington long enough to meet at the President's request. How hard would it be to hang around and try to hammer out some legislation to deal with this mess? What does it matter if the debate is friday or next week? I just don't get the logic. Don't get it.
3 words: Clinton Global Initiative.
That overshadows anything sexual he has done in my book. He is helping to save the world. You pointed out 1 or 2 dumb things Clinton said, but Bush has said 100s if not thousands. What people do sexually is there own business. It was a very dumb mistake on his part, but we all make mistakes, and he is obviously doing a lot of good in the world now. I don't feel like Bush cares about anyone other than himself. I think his soul is black and he just does what he wants when he wants and doesn't plan ahead. He disgusts me, and I cannot wait until January 2009! I would welcome ANY Republican or Democrat in his place.
True to their newest stand, right wing blogger smears family of murdered soldier.
Predictably, falling right in line with Tony Snow and his *2,500 is a number* statement on June 15, followed one day later by the fiercely *patriotic* Rush *I'dLoveToServeMyCountryButCan'tBecauseOfThisPimpleOnMyButt* Limbaugh, reminding them that aborted fetuses are more important than murdered American soldiers (as was posted on the *other* board on June 16), all the while publicly declaring that all liberals who post on this board don't care about our troops. *Profound* indeed.
http://www.prospect.org/horsesmouth/2006/06/post_134.html#002858
The Horse's Mouth
A blog about the reporting of politics -- and the politics of reporting. By Greg Sargent
« | Main | »
WINGNUT JOHN HINDERAKER SMEARS DEAD SOLDIER'S UNCLE. A couple of minutes ago I came across this Associated Press story saying that the uncle of Kristian Menchaca -- one of the U.S. soldiers who was missing and is now said to be dead -- criticized the United States for Menchaca's disappearance and death. My first thought was to do a post asking how long it would take before the wingnuts started smearing the grief-stricken uncle.
Alas, I'm too late. Over at Powerline Blog, John Hinderaker has already cranked up the slime machine and let fly:
In a sick coda, Menchaca's uncle, Ken MacKenzie, appeared on the Today show and recited weirdly inapplicable Democratic Party talking points in relation to his own nephew's death...No shame.
I've asked this before, but what is it about the relatives of people killed by terrorists that these wingnuts hate so much? Recall that Ann Coulter smeared the widows of 9/11 victims and that many righty bloggers smeared the father of Nick Berg, who was beheaded in Iraq. Their sin, of course, was that they criticized America and George Bush.
Let me put this as clearly as I can: To the likes of Hinderaker, the pain of those who lost loved ones to this war only matters to the extent that the bereaved allow their grief to be used to prop up the war effort and Bush himself. If the bereaved relatives don't allow their grief to be used in this fashion, their sacrifice and loss no longer matter a whit -- they're not to be pitied or empathized with, but scorned and humiliated as brutally as possible. Despicable.
--Greg Sargent
I didn't talk down your faith but your faith
Get over yourself already. He shows the kindness and tolerance of a true Christian and not all the hating and intolerance like you and a lot of people here. Just because you are a Christian doesn't make you any better than anyone else
Miers
Hmmm..I have had a problem since seeing the notes Miers wrote Bush and the cute birthday cards..I have worked for many, IMHO, powerful doctors and I have adored/has crushes on a few..I have given them gifts and cards for holidays and birthdays, however, I never would have given a card such as Miers gave Bush, nor written notes like she wrote..You must keep a separation between boss and employee, especially if the boss is married..This is cronyism at its best. However, I am looking forward to the hearings on her nomination as I want to see what she is all about and what she has to offer for a life time job..
Miers was the bestest choice.
If Bush nominated someone like, uh, Pat Robertson, dem dare dumb liberals mighta caughted on more quicker. This way, evangelicals rule and everyone else can go to... well... you know where.
A new strike aginst Harriet
It seems that Mier's family made quite a profit on some real estate deal in Texas but did not pay fees and taxes and owe the state of Texas about $26,000. So we have Harriet in trouble with Texas and with the neocons, we have DeLay and Frist with insider trading and money laundering. We have Rove and Libby on outing CIA personnel and we have Cheney and Libby for pushing a war they had decided to fight before 2000 on trumped up intelligence and forged documents. Have I missed anyone?? The weeks to come will be very interesting. If any of this is true (the war part) it will be the biggest thing to hit our government ever. The Watergate coverup was bad but the actual event they were covering up was not that big a deal. And with Clinton, 1 man having sex in the oval office isn't anything to write home about either, again the coverup much worse than the actual event, nor was Whitewater which was investigated ad nauseum with no results whatsoever. But this Iraq thing, thousands and thousands of people have died needlessly. Thousands have been tortured needlessly. If, and I say if, the Iraq charges prove to be grounded in fact, we are in for a bumpy ride. If they are not, and the outing, insider trading, money laundering, unqualified cronyism are true, the shakedown will destroy this administration.
Yeah, he should have appointed Harriet Myers! nm
x
Based on what?
Your wishful thinking? I find it hard to believe you're a moderate conservative. 2008 is still a long way off. The liberals better find an agenda other than hating Bush before they'll have any chance in hades of electing more of them to congress much less to the White House.
BASED ON...???
You want to back up that comment?
Or are you just talking out of your backside?
Based on what? (nm)
x
Based on Cat 3. When NWS warning came out,
nm
It is based on income . . .
not on grades. You have to keep your grades up to keep receiving it, BUT the primary requirement to receive it is low income. So do you thing those who have done well for themselves should be required to give money to those who are below them if they are trying to do better? Because that is what is sounds like. As long as it is benefiting you, it is okay because you are trying to do better?
No matter how you slice it, you are still taking from those who have and giving it to havenots. Just stay consistent with your argument. Who is to say who HONESTLY deserves aid?
Yup. The one's that's based in reality.
As in the real deal.
Based on your response...
Your moniker is a misnomer...it should be Christian with hate!
Whether or not this is religiously based or not
I just cannot condone late-term abortions. For that to be legal.....I just think that would be horrible. If a child can survive outside of the womb even though it hasn't been born yet and then it is aborted.....that is just plain and simple murder and if we allow that....what does that say about us? I think abortion should be legal with some guidelines.
Right, not something based on facts but on a fixation
Based on what is going on right now with Russia and georgia...
I would say looking in his eyes and seeing KGB is pretty much on the mark. McCain knows who and what Russian "management" are. You can see what they think about negotiations. Basically told the world up yours, if we want Georgia back we are going to take it. Why doesn't Obama go visit them like he did Germany and give a speech about how he is a citizen of the world and see how far it gets him. Sigh....Careful what YOU ask for.
Based on what? Genitalia over issues?
She is not exactly champion of feminist issues. Not to worry. We're better than that. She's no Hillary and most of her supporters will not hesitate to point that out.
also based on a combination of bias
nm
The math is based on Sam's claim
If Sam is talking 80% approval rating in Alaska, that would imply that she is talking about people who actually are familiar with her policies, programs, credibility, how she conducts herself and soforth...in other words, approval rating among those who actually know her/voted for her. That is what a governor's approval rating is.
The math shows us how much of an overall approval rating of these same factors she has nationwide. SP was only in the governor's office for 20 months. She is still an unknown quantity here and will remain so. The only people who can rate her job performance are the one from her state, since she is not known in the lower 48. The math merely points out exactly what that means within the context of a national approval rating of job performance, since the rest of the 49 cannot possibly be included in that figure. Thus on a national level, that 0.182% means next to nothing.
Do you vote strictly based on what your
nm
My opinion is based on what Obama says and does...
not some anonymous right-wing wacko on a silly medical transcription site, who thinks fear mongering is the way to scare people into voting Republican. I get a good chuckle from your silly posts, and they prove wihtout a doubt that I have made the right choice in supporting Barack Omaba for President of these great United States.
You could stand on your head and spit fire, and all that would prove is that you are eligible for the circus!
Barack Obama for President 2008!
I have never seen welfare based on your color -
Where would you live that welfare would be based on your color? That seems like a crock to me!
Obama's plan is not based on
The government will not be "in charge" of anything excep ACCESS to a healthcare coverage plan. It will still be private companies and if you don't want the national plan, you do not have to join it....keep your own if you like. Read the plan. All he is proposing is to open up the current plan that now covers Congress, Senate and federal employees to citizens. That plan is like any other. It has several different deductible schemes, choices of levels of coverage (PPO/HMO) and a range of premium amounts. All O is trying to do is make health care available to all Americans at affordable prices.
So your political acumen is based on
Tarot cards, crystal balls, mystic revelations, fortune telling, dye casting and Voo-doo-doo?
Our 'economy' SHOULD collapse - it was based
even richer at our expense. Everything about the last 8 years was a lie and a travesty. They finally pushed the middle class to the brink of extinction. Now that the middle class finally couldn't support the Rich anymore, they voted someone into office who's calling them out. Sure they're mad as he11. I think this is only the beginning. Will it hurt everyone? Including those of us that voted for a democratic president. You bet. This near-depression has gone on for so long that it likely will continue for years, not just months. You can blame the dems all you want, but next time you cant pay your rent or your heating bill, just remember that the ones who are keeping you down are all those in the Rich Boys' Club (including your current employers) because for all these years our government was giving them a free ride to do whatever they wanted. Our top-heavy, 'trickle-down', step-on-the-little-guy economy was way overdue for a major correction. It DESERVES to fail.
I don't judge people based on religion.
Observations based in truth are not smears
Go gourdpainter.
You're just prejudiced. That is not based in fact...
Just because you say that's what he'll do, doesn't make it so.
You just wish he was as bad as you think he is.
Fact is that he's kept you safe in your own country for over 7 years.
But you'll never admit it.
Another argument based on false premise.
underpinnings of our democracy? Here's a clue just for you. What is the function of the Supreme Court? Since when do the 3 branches of our govt NOT interpret the constitution? This has absolutely nothing to do with Obama and everything to do with the ignorance you seem to feel compelled to display, and dern proudly, I might add.
Before you try to tell the rest of us how we should be thinking and such, perhaps you should be addressing your own severe afflictions, starting with your blind hatred.
Much scarier would be government decisions based on God.
Keep religion out of government and leave it in the churches where it belongs!
It is a sound document based in fact.
As we can see in the archives of this very board.
What exactly do you find alarming about it? What do you think is not truthful? Do you think that domestic terrorism does not exist? Do you think that nothing should be done to monitor potential threats to our safety within our own borders? Would you object so vocally if the report pertained to extremist liberals?
Or did you not read the actual document and simply read Malkin's piece?
She could teach a class on it solely based on what she learned
from CONS here. You people provide a wealth of knowledge.
Not deep, issue-based political discourse, is it?
It can be entertaining if you don't take it seriously though.
My vote is based on issues, -include character.nm
nm
Alaskans do get a check based on oil profit taxes that are...sm,
charged by the Alaskan government. That is why the poor Alaskans support her and agree to the rape of their land. A few thousand dollars is a lot of money to them.
Full coverage based on income for people whose...sm
employers do not offer insurance.
sam, weak argument based on semantics, that reporter's
implication was all too clear, and just another stupid accusation in order to mislead yet more uneducated, misinformed voters.
employer based-programs subsidize insurance...
not just make it available--and therein lies my problem.
My confidence in Obama is based on his brilliant intellect,
his ability to bring people together, his leadership capacity, his calm demeanor, his form of thinking, the multi-tasking problem-solving skills he has demonstrated, his world view, his plans and policies, his voting record, his biography, his focus on the middle class, his accomplishments, his instincts (especially when assessing that the country was "ready" to elect a black president), his confidence, his judgment, his desire to seek a broad-based, wide variety of opinions, his decisiveness, his vision, his orientation toward the future, his multicultural global outlook, his global appeal, his compassion, his family orientation and, above all, his love for his country. He will make an extraordinary leader for America and we are lucky and blessed to have him.
Feminists were just as silent about the disgusting gender-based
When that happened, as far as I was concerned the feminists lost any moral authority they might have ever had and revealed themselves not to be a feminist movement, but an arm of the liberal movement.
|
