Let Your Voice Be Heard
Many of you have shared in our disappointment over the Harriet Mier's nomination. Most people have expressed the sentiment that there is nothing which can be done as it just seems clear she would get confirmed no matter what. Well, as more and more well-recognized people are voicing their concerns, there is a growing movement for this nomination to be withdrawn. It is possible, but we cannot stand idly by.
I encourage everyone who does not support this nomination to: Sign this petition from David Frum and National Review and encourage everyone else you know to do so as well.
I encourage everyone who does not support this nomination to: Sign this petition from David Frum and National Review and encourage everyone else you know to do so as well.
posted by Crystal Paine at 3:21 PM
7 Comments:
I am about as conservative as you get. I am firmly of the opinion that Harriet Miers is an excellent choice for the bench. The reason? Because someone whose opinion I trust has known her from childhood and says that Miers will be pro-life, non-activist (which we sorely need on the bench!), and a conservative in general. She will be much closer to Scalia, Thomas, and Rehnquist than many think.
What are you going to trust, may I ask? Someone who doesn't know her (which is most people discussing this matter!), or someone who has known her from childhood? I'll go with the latter. My friend who knows Harriet Miers is Hannah Mowrey, and you can read her comments on my brother's blog:
http://brahmsgreenglove.blogspot.com.
The entry you want is the Harriet Miers entry (not Harriet Miers 2). Read the comments on that entry, and you'll see why I support Miers.
In Christ.
I tend to agree with you, Adrian, but I understand why a lot of concervatives are upset. I read the the post on your brother's blog and it made me feel a lot better about the whole nomination. I am very mixed about the whole thing. I also don't think Bush will care how many petitions are signed. He just seems pretty set in his ways. The media portrays him as weak but I think he has a very strong character that is pretty unmovable.Some say this is bad and saome say it is good. Depends what side you are on.
-Zan
I also read the post on your brother's blog, Adrian, and it did make me feel better about the nomination. I still do not support a woman sitting on the bench (an issue already much-discussed :) ), but it is good to hear some positive, conservative feedback on Miers. I have been mixed from the getgo concerning Miers.
We've heard Democrat's and Republican's alike say time and time again that we can' ask how candidates would rule on certain issues, that it is unfair and scoping, and now it seems that many have abandoned that sentiment now that they want to know something. I was told this over and over again while John Robert's dodged questions, and now it's the same group who wants too know this information on Miers.
So here's my take. WAIT. The hearings haven't started, and we know as much as everyone else. While you may find out her personal take on Roe, that doesn't mean she'll vote against it, it's a well established precedent. My only observation is that she so far seems to be pretty fair, and has donated to both the Democrats and the Republicans. I'm not crazy about her lack of experience, or her close ties to Bush, but this isn't the first case, and some of the best justices were those with the fewest ties and less experience.
Just wait and see.
If she were a judge already or even just had constitutional law experience, I'd take a wait and see attitude, too. But that's not the case. Her personal papers, as released last week, are a joke. Much of her work falls under attorney-client privilege. I will watch the hearings, but I feel comfortable saying right now that I don't support her nomination. Thanks for the links, Crystal.
Well she's not my ultimate choice either...but there are too many contradicting stories to know where to begin.
The overriding thought is that Bush nominated her, which has proven many times before that she is most likely a flunkie-groupie Evangelical that Bush most likely met when he was trying to quit drinking.
Jessica: I don't think that is a fair or founded statement. If you are going to comment, please post things which are based upon true facts. I've read and studied a lot about Miers from a lot of different sources and have never heard of that accusation, so it is definitely not the "overriding thought." In addition, to say someone is a "flunkie-groupie Evangelical" is an oxymoron. A true Evangelical cannot also be a "flunkie" and a "groupie" as both terms are diametrically opposed to true Christianity.
Post a Comment
<< Home