Harriet Miers

Bogus Gold--October 12, 2005
http://bogusgold.com/posts/1129163186.shtml

We now have some data around the size of this elitist fringe who isn't as warm about Harriet Miers as Hugh Hewitt. According to a Pew poll this marginal group is a mere 46% of the Republican Party.

Apparently the Ivy League has grown a bit since I last checked.

Also just in... Hugh likes the Ohio Buckeyes chances at winning the college football championship this year. He warns opposing teams that trying to defeat them only risk injury to their own side.

CORRECTION:

The 46% mentioned above accounts for only conservative Republicans. The moderate and liberal Republicans number for those not yet on board the Miers bandwagon is 57%.

Bogus Gold--October 12, 2005
http://bogusgold.com/posts/1129173968.shtml

What is the basis upon which we can conclude Harriet Miers will be a reliable conservative Justice?

This is complicated a bit. In my opinion it's not enough to favor conservative policy outcomes.

For example, we've been told Miers opposes abortion. And I have little trouble believing this to be true. But would she oppose Roe v. Wade out of a proper understanding of interpreting the constitution, or because she just personally doesn't like it? This makes a HUGE difference when it comes to my support. And so far I've seen nothing addressing this distinction.

Bogus Gold--October 13, 2005
http://bogusgold.com/posts/1129255410.shtml

By casting this point as “keep[ing] a person from having her day in court,” you have already shut your ears to many of the principal objections. Let’s examine why.

Let’s forget about Harriet Miers for a moment. Let’s pretend the president chose someone else. Let’s pretend that person was his daughter Jenna.

Absurd? Of course. Sometimes absurdity helps illustrate a point. The point in this case is that we wouldn’t have to wait for Jenna’s hearings to know we objected to her nomination. Saying so would not be keeping Jenna from having her day in court, because our acceptance wouldn’t be affected by her performance in her official hearings. Our objection would be more fundamental than such a thing could possibly address.

First challenge to those of the Anchoress’ mindset who truly want to understand: Have you honestly examined why Harriet Miers strikes so many people (and regardless of your own opinion, it’s undeniable this is not an isolated reaction) as being unacceptable regardless of her hearings?

Bogus Gold--October 22, 2005
http://bogusgold.com/posts/1129991717.shtml
Essentially...because of her positions she should not be permitted to go through the process.

John Adams Blog--October 9, 2005
http://johnadamsblog.blogspot.com/2005/10/why-miers-wont-drift-left.html

In my opinion on of the best ways to judge whether a Justice may "drift" after being appointed is the examine their lifestyle. The older people get, the less apt they are to change. If Miers were to go left on the Court, that would mean abandoning the circles of friends and church that are the mainstay of her life. In contrast, Justice Souter was a loner...

John Adams Blog--October 10, 2005
http://johnadamsblog.blogspot.com/2005/10/miers-unimpressive.html

I heard on Bill Bennett this morning that Senators are unimpressed with Miers following her one- on-one meetings with them. It sounds pretty dismal for Miers. She has no conservative record so her nomination is completely dependent on such meetings.....

The Washington Times is also reporting that Miers support is weak:

Nearly half of Senate Republicans say they remain unconvinced that Harriet Miers is worthy of being confirmed to the Supreme Court, according to a survey conducted by The Washington Times.

Although I think some of the criticism of Miers has been unfair and "leftist" in tone, the fact that there were many many others more qualified candidates than Miers is enough to be dissappointed and unsupportive of her nomination. As such, I am hoping for a Miers withdrawl soon, and a quick repick.

John Adams Blog--October 27, 2006
http://johnadamsblog.blogspot.com/2005/10/miers-nomination-exposes-elitist.html

I am glad that Harriet Miers has withdrawn from the nomination process. I hope President Bush now nominates a principled conservative with a track record demonstrating commitment to judicial conservatism -- like my former law professor Michael McConnell.

But, I do think the Harriet Miers' nomination was useful to remind conservative populists of how elitist many of their friends on the right are. There are two types of people that ruin conservativism when it is put into action: ideologues and hacks. Ideologues are so committed to their ideas of America that that they begin to commit treason to conservatism -- which in the end is a people-based and values-based pragmatism. Hacks are so committed to their own self-centered agenda that they use the brand "conservatism" for their own political ends -- of course, damaging the brand "consevatism" as they go along.

Many conseservative elitists were exposed in the bashing of Miers. Not so much in their opposition to Miers -- but their reasons for being opposed to Miers. Now, we know that many of these elitists are ideologues and/or hacks. This is useful information in the next round of politics.

Query: if Alberto Gonzalez is nominated, how will the snobby elitists (or is it elitist snobs) react?

SD63--October 10, 2006
http://sd63.blogspot.com/2005/10/kvm-on-miers-must-read.html

The posting at KvM was light the end of last week due to a little R & R by Gary, but early this morning he delivered an excellent post. You may not agree with his post, but one can certainly cannot argue with the way it was delivered. Much like Gary, I am frequent consumer of "pro-family" items myself, but I found myself agreeing with the following statements in his post.
...
Some may disagree with Gary and I on making and supporting such statements, however I do not think this is a problem. I worked for and supported the President in '04 and I still will and do, but if I cannot respectfully disagree with a President or person I support then we have other issues to talk about. The difference of course is the word "repectfully", most people who disagree with President Bush fail miserably on that standard and therefore are not worth our time.

KvM--October 10, 2005
http://www.kennedyvmachine.com/?p=771
Such lofty assumptions about Miers decision making process without any hearings.

We do not want a Justice Miers overturning Roe because she (correctly) believes abortion is the dismembering of innocent human life. We would want her to do so because the plain text of the Constitution is entirely silent on the matter and, thus, should be left up to the people in their respective state legislatures.

We do not want a Justice Miers voting in favor of gun rights because she herself carries and enjoys the kick of a revolver and the protection it provides. We would want her to do so because the plain text of the Second Amendment says “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.”

We do not want a Justice Miers voting to overturn McCain-Feingold because as a Dallas city councilperson she herself had to abide by cumbersome campaign finance laws on the books in 1989. We would want her to do so because the First Amendment clearly prohibits Congress from “abridging the freedom of speech”.

We do not want a Justice Miers overturning last years wrongly decided Lawrence decision on sodomy because she believes it to be a sin. We would want her to do so because, once again, the plain text of the Constitution is entirely silent on homosexual — or heterosexual — conduct and its practice is therefore left to the people under the auspices of their state legislatures.

We do not want a Justice Miers period because it is clear that she lacks any coherent worldview outside her obviously heartfelt religious transformation. Evidence shows she would be every bit the conservative activist we have correctly been taught to fear from decades of watching liberals make law based on whim and whimsey. Should evangelicals or devout Catholics be prohibited from serving on the highest tribunal? By no means. But they must be able to render and articulate a decision based not on scripture but on another inspired text — the Constitution of the United States. As we opined a week ago, the Administration’s defense of Miers because she is “one of us” to evangelicals is the most insulting affront to people of faith in many, many years. Simply put, the nomination must be stopped.

Andy Aplikowski background

Attacking Jeffers, supporting unabashedly Pawlenty
http://www.residualforces.com/http:/residualforces.com/index.php/2006/06/24/what-would-jeffers-do/

The overwhelming message of her campaign is she is pissed off about everything. Welcome to the club. But what is she going to do to fix the things she is most upset with?

Like she is complaining about how the crosstown isn’t getting built due to lack of funding. She said that if only they’d have taken that billion dollars used on Hiawatha and used it for that. Um, Hiawatha was funded and paid for before Pawlenty was Governor. That was Ventura’s baby.

I think I see why some people like her so much. She can run down a list of all the things that people can and should be upset with government for doing or not doing better than most. But she offers nothing as a solution.

She just said that LRT lines are not the role of government, and if you want to have a line, you need to find a private company (industry) to build it. She also said that with the largest transportation bill, under Pawlenty we have fixed no roads. Congesstion is not any better. (They are still building roads. Hell go drive by 694/35E. Maybe I’m wrong, but I think she is misleading people here. Is it as good as it could be? By no means, but is it as bad as she says, no.)

Education: Here we have 44% of the blacks that can’t graduate, and they want to teach kids in chinese. This was regarding a Stillwater referendum. OK, she’s got a great list of complaints, but what is her solution?

She is now complaining about the deficit. The only way to fix it is to cut spending.

She’d send those 203 people a bill under her administration. (Sorry, but the Governor can’t do that.) This is why I said and believe she has no clue what she is doing, let alone even knows what she can legally do.)

--June 24, 2006

And his criticism of Jeffers for blaming Pawlenty for train project costs is double-talk. http://www.residualforces.com/http:/residualforces.com/index.php/2006/06/23/oh-gee-next-lrt-price-tag-jumps/

Please, please someone stop this monster before it is too late.

With the estimated price tag for a new light-rail transit line now ballooning to $930 million, Metropolitan Council members are exploring ways to put the Central Corridor project on a “diet.”

This thing will not be built for under a billion dollars! It will destroy University Ave, and make commuting BY CAR in the area a nightmare.

--June 23, 2006

Andy's "give up some to get most" blabber
http://www.residualforces.com/http:/residualforces.com/index.php/2006/06/21/why-i-am-this-way/

So I hitched my wagon to the GOP elephant because I think it will give me more of what I want than that ‘Ass’ ever will. Would I like the GOP to be the Euphoria that Conservatives and some Libertarians would? Hell yeah! Will those ideas ever be majority? Hell no!

So I made a choice. Give up some to get most. No I’m not happy with everything the GOP has done. Have I voiced all that concern on the blogs? No. But I do still let them know it. I send of emails to them just like other people do letting them know how I feel.

Cheap Shot at me (with no link, btw, which he blasted me later for)
http://www.residualforces.com/http:/residualforces.com/index.php/2006/05/16/hey-you-yeah-you-the-wingnut-get-on-board/

I hate to do this, but there are some of my brethren on the center ride side of the blogosphere that are getting on my nerves. The newest fad around the MOB is to pick apart every single press release from our fellow Republicans running for office, and call them all publicity stunts or politically motivated.

Now I’m not saying that they don’t have the right to do it, but I do question the motives. Let’s take for instance the recent Kennedy press release where he announced he will return any pay for days of work missed. Some people have jumped at the chance to poo poo the idea. But they completely ignore the fact that Kennedy’s opponent, Klobuchar, through her nose up in the air and said bug off, she’s taking the pay checks.

My post...where he sent an e-mail demanding a link
http://alwaysrightusuallycorrect.blogspot.com/2006/07/andys-crossthere-is-another-side-to.html

This came from him 5 minutes ago:

"Either link to me or leave me alone. Have the principle to give people the opportunity to read my original words."

--July 13, 2006

His response, again, demanding a link (that little traffic whore)
http://www.residualforces.com/http:/residualforces.com/index.php/2006/07/13/many-thanks-and-what-cheney-said/
--July 13, 2006.

Andy's angst against "as long as they have an (R) after their name, all is well" types
http://www.residualforces.com/http:/residualforces.com/index.php/2006/02/13/big-tent-gop-seating-available/

I have been livid over the ballooning budgets both locally and Federally under Republican leadership. Some of you moderate, as long as they have an (R) after their name, all is well, spineless moderate GOPers better wake up, and do it soon. I ain’t alone.

The 2006 midterm election may be the first real test of conservative resolve since the 1994 GOP revolution as declining polls for the Bush administration and Republican candidates mean GOP backers must stick together more than ever, participants in the 33rd annual Conservative Political Action Conference said last week.

What, I thought the moderate big tent, spend all you want, cause other wise people will never like us members of the Party formerly known for fiscal constraint, kept telling me that they didn’t need us. We were unreliable, and expendable. I even remember one person who was offended that I was considering the fiscal conservatives as the base of the party. This same person must be shaking in their moderate boots that it may actually end up being MY base that makes or breaks the 06 midterms.

But even with political nemesis and potential Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton uniting participants at the Washington, D.C., conference, many conservatives in attendance told FOXNews.com that policy differences with the White House, particularly over illegal immigration and federal spending, are major concerns siphoning off the GOP’s electoral base.

OK Elected Republicans? Get it yet?

* Stop the Spending (Yes, I mean you with the (R) behind your name)
* Protect the Borders (Yes, illegal immigration is in fact illegal and should be stopped)
* Fight the damn War (Yes, stop the terrorists from killing any more Americans or our friends)
* Stop all the stupid investigations! (No, no one actually cares to see you ask Rafael Palmerio questions)

Pretty simple, huh?

“It is important for the Republican Party to realize that … we have a public safety issue here,” said Simcox, who warned that conservatives could turn to third party candidates who make opposition to illegal immigration a cornerstone of their campaigns.

Our votes can be taken by those who offer not to do what we oppose.

Discussion thread where Andy claims I am making stuff up (sweeping defense by him against the overall junta charges I made regarding the MN GOP). Also, his response to my posting about Bachmann things I observed that he ALSO observed.
http://www.residualforces.com/http:/residualforces.com/index.php/2006/04/30/phil-krinkie-is-my-guy/

Are there any other people you care to falsely claim wrong doing of? Why not just throw around more false allegations? Come one Tony, I know you are just trying to draw attention to yourself. Pull the Rove card, come one. Say Rove is running our party. You are getting about that fringe now.

I see your list is growing more and more. Do we eventually have to make sure that when ever we Republican faithful breath that you give us permission?

Andy's plea to prevent challengers against Pawlenty
http://www.residualforces.com/http:/residualforces.com/index.php/2005/12/12/pawlenty-challenger-from-the-right/

I hope that this person takes into consideration the conciquesnce of their decision. If this person manages to gather a meaningless 2% of the vote in the general election, that may be enough to cost Pawlenty, the Republicans, and yes even conservatives the Governor’s office. If they truly feel that they can get 25% of the vote, it is all over for the people on the right side of politics in Minnesota.

Elections are not the place to fight personal grievances, especially when the lives of 5 million Minnesotans are at hand. Our state is on the way to what you and and I want, but it can’t come all at once. And it will never come if the Liberal, big spending, Tax raising DFLers are in control on Summit Ave.

And then this beauty closed it out...

Please realize that you will be handing the Governor’s mansion over to the liberals. Pawlenty can be worked with. He could be convinced and persuaded to see it your way.

I am tired of reading the pulp that makes up Andy's blog so I cannot find where he bent over for Pawlenty's casue. THAT post would be very nice to present to Andy now that he is "taking on" the GOP leadership.