Yeah, he should have appointed Harriet Myers! nm
Posted By: sm on 2009-02-11
In Reply to: I am sick and tired of exceptions being - MTfromLA
x
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
And who appointed you the "Posting Police?" sm
Everybody is entitled to an opinion just as you are. You should be able to get a pretty good idea of what the posts will say from the subject line. If you are so thin-skinned that you have to take offense at somebody elses posting, then either leave the board and go elsewhere or just don't open the thread. Easy as that.
Oh, put a sock in your piehole, willya? Or are YOU our self-appointed savior? NM
NM
didnt say bush appointed him. said paulson did. besides that post wasnt for you n e way.
s
Chene Thompson -- the wife of state Rep. Nicholas Thompson, R-Fort Myers -- sm
That being said, I have to agree...how DOES a homeless black woman, living in her truck to boot, get into the front row of an Obama event, etc. etc? Something is rotten in Denmark...or Florida as the case may be.
I told my mortgage company that I was going to quit my job and would they please call the White House to get their payment. Not really, but I sure did think about it after I saw that clip on my local news last night.
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.
Harriet Miers withdraws nomination...
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: 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
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.
Harriet Miers - Bush's newest *faith-based initiative*
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! 
Yeah, yeah, yeah. You've said before that you're leaving, but you and your goons can't sta
yeah, yeah, yeah.....what he failed to mention...
is that the Dems are responsible for the mortgage meltdown which is responsible for the wall street meltdown. Chris Dodd, Barney Frank...totally to blame. Blocked every attemmpt by Bush Admin and yes, McCain, to regulate fannie/freddie. Dems certainly have selective memories...convenient bouts of amnesia. lol.
Oh, yeah yeah, whatever. There's plenty of satan here, that is for sure!
Yeah, yeah, everything is funny. Wont
nm
Yeah, yeah, yeah....still protesting too much. (nm)
nm
Oh yeah. It says a lot.
Yeah, you are probably right. sm
After all, everyone must be lying. Everyone on the right, all liars. Al Franken says so, so it must be true. You know what is wrong with you guys. You cannot handle confrontation or anyone who doesn't agree with you at all!
Well, yeah.....nm
nm.
Yeah really.nm
x
yeah, you are sure right about that.
Almost every single post on that board is like it was written by a bunch of annoying, redneck teenage boys!!!!
Yeah.
Whatever.
Yeah? So what?
That's exactly what I said. Scarborough has always supported Bush. There is a difference between supporting and blindly following. For example, you see nothing wrong with how this case was handled. You see nothing wrong with Bush lying every time he opens his mouth. That's blind faith.
Scarborough is an objective Republican who believes in honesty. I realize this is a difficult concept for some CONS to understand. Once upon a time, honesty was considered a good thing in the United States. People who were honest were considered to have moral character and integrity. Scarborough is one of those rare of Republicans, totally foreign to you, I'm sure.
To blindly follow (which I'm sure you're quite familiar with) means worshiping a man as if he's some kind of god, believing every single word he says, even when you see evidence to the contrary right before your eyes. He lies every day; those who follow blindly believe him every day. And when it becomes common knowledge that he's lied and when they can't twist and manipulate the lie out of recognition any more, then his blind followers make excuses for him, usually blaming democrats or anyone else who is handy but never blaming the liar himself. And they justify all the lying because they have that special *connection* with God. They can lie all they want and God just winks at them and says it's okay because their place in heaven has already been guaranteed, unlike the rest of us poor slobs out there without that special connection.
The only thing that scares me more than Bush having the same credibility as Al Qaeda is the fact that there are so many morons who blindly follow him, who just aren't smart enough to figure out that Bush was never on their side - he's only on the side of big money. He even joked about his *base* - the *haves* and the *have nots.*
By the way, you are on the liberal board. If you don't care for the liberal point of view, the CON board is ---->
Yeah.
Whatever.
Yeah, whatever!!! ....nm
Yeah probably, but it's only okay when you do it?
Right? The rest of us should be ashamed.
Yeah. Whatever you say.
I was responding to this: *And know a lot PK. I know A LOT about your posting habits more than you could ever imagine.* I was accused of doing something I simply didn't do, so that just shows me how much you people really DO know, and, yes, I can *imagine* a LOT when faced with this kind of ominous post.
Those of your ilk have dark histories of murdering people of different beliefs (for example, personnel at abortion clinics), and the latest tactic of the Neocons is intimidation and retribution. Just ask Valerie Plame, who used to have a career before her husband spoke the truth.
If someone said that to you on your board, you'd be accusing them of threatening to assassinate you and contacting the FBI. Who are you KIDDING? Typical neocon double standard and hypocrisy at work again.
Yeah, so did LBJ.
but the point is, the far left hates Cheney as much or more than Bush, so impeach Bush, get Cheney, then what? Impeach Cheney? Then you get Hastert. I know the far left doesn't like him. Impeach him and get Ted Stevens. He's a Republican, too. (President pro tempore of the Senate). Impeach him and get...Condi Rice...if she isn't buying shoes. What have you gained. Absolutely nothing. Well...maybe some payback for Clinton, which is what this is all about anyway. Why not just wait until 2008 and vote the bums out.
Yeah...I know...sm
And I didn't agree with Pat Roberson calling for his death, and in the wake of Katrina Bush could have accepted his olive branch for fuel.
However, I think Chavez's speech was disrespectful being how the UN is hosted by the US. We can't think Dem vs Rep. He disrespected the US.
Yeah, yeah, yeah...
Two posters identifying themselves as liberals stated it was more important to investigate Bush than to concentrate on terrorism. That does not stem from anything but hatred and revenge. Fact, ma'am. No bumper sticker talk. Nancy Pelosi yelled impeachment right up until two weeks before the election and how it was first on her list when they got power. Had they not filled the seats with conservative Democrats rather than liberal ones I am pretty darn sure that would have gone forward. And that also stems from hatred of conservatism first, George Bush second, and a desire for revenge. She talks about ridding Washington of corruption on the one hand, and then supports Murtha (I will not go into his corruption) and Hastings (a Federal judge who was impeached and who she voted to impeach) for a chairmanship. She has absolutely no credibility in my eyes, and apparently the new conservative Democrats in the house don't think so either, as they did not goose step in line and vote in her choice. Good for them! Also had another liberal post that aborting a child was like removing a wart or a cancer. That is not hate, that is completely morally bankrupt. Somewhere along the line the liberal morality meter has gone wonky, and in my humble opinion it is BECAUSE of rational and analytical thought devoid of emotion, and stopping listening to that small still voice inside you, that soul that God put in you when he created you. Yes, I am emotional, because I believe it was leading to the decay of the American soul. I will fight it the best way I know how, and that is to stand for what I believe in, and kneeling to pray for this country and EVERYone in it. God bless, Lurker.
Yeah, I know.....
you would think I would stop trying. However, I keep thinking that maybe, somehow, somewhere, something might sink in....sighhh.
Yeah, it goes like that. SM
Teddy says they all communicate by e-mail or are related, so it's not surprising since they all kind of show up at one time. It's been that way so long. Anyhoo, we can take and they can't!
Yeah, you are right. SM
And you guys stalk people, wish them to die, and wished the president and his family burn in hell. That's so much better.
Yeah!!!
Gave me goose bumps! His wife must be beside herself ~ Thanks for the heads up
yeah
nn
Yeah, right. We can all see just how
nm
Yeah...right. LOL. nm
nm
Oh yeah.....
Michael Moore's INfamous quotes:
"Should such an ignorant people lead the world? How did it come to this in the first place? 82 percent of us don't even have a passport! Just a handful can speak a language other than English."
He thinks you are ignorant.
"I like America to some extent." Yeah, that's patriotic.
"There's a gullible side to the American people. They can be easily misled. Religion is the best device used to mislead them."
He thinks you are gullible. Although I disagree about religion. I think political parties are the best way.
"white people scare the crap out of me."
I don't EVEN know where to go with that statement. lol.
"Clinton was a pretty good president for a Republican."
ROFL. He really is up on American politics.
"The Iraqis who have risen up against the occupation are not 'insurgents' or 'terrorists' or 'The Enemy.' They are the revolution, the Minutemen, and their numbers will grow - and they will win."
'Nuff said.
Yeah!!!!
nm
Yeah I'm an MT. What does that
have to do with anything? Have heard it all, can transcribe it all. Palin gets on my last nerve....what's it to ya?
oh yeah? and just how are you going to do that?
nm
Oh yeah?
PFBBBLLLTTT!!!
yeah right, like her
BIL who self-admittedly tazed his own kid, and who abused his wife, etc. I applaud Sara Palin on every level including this one!
Yeah!
Laws? We don't need no stinkin' laws.
yeah and if...sm
they would have chosen Fox for the first interview, boy, what the outcry from the left would have been then.
They were actually quite wise to choose ABC, in my opinion. She walked into the lion's den, and came out virtually unscathed.
IMHO.
Yeah, that is what they would like you to believe...
but the last line seems to pretty much describe the democrats nowadays...a cycle of hatred and intolerance.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.......
.
yeah, right
I remember the last 2 elections when Barbra Streisand and Rose McDonnell said if Bush won they were leaving the country. They're both still here (darn it). Even with all the problems, you are going to be hard pressed to find anything better.
Yeah, sure you do, right
x
yeah, I do, with you, lol!
blah!!
Yeah, but
At least Pelosi seems somewhat intelligent. Watching Palin talk, it is hard to believe she graduated college or even high school some days.
|
