News The Impact of Alito's Nomination on Individual Rights and Government Power

[kat]

What she really should have said...

From a civil rights perspective (discrimination, etc.) women are included in the classification of "minority" in general. The fundamentalists want to take women back to the time of being barefoot, pregnant and in the kitchen. Dems have long exploited minorities better then the Repubs, so are trying to give Miers a full evaluation—that’s the irony.

 

[Astronuc]

Harriet Miers is a minority?

Anyone who thinks Bush is intelligent is in the minority.

 

[loseyourname]

It's because we don't have equality.
Historically this manifest in the lack of freedoms we had wrt marriage, employment, and of course we had no vote.

It seems whoever first used the term "minority" to refer to women flunked out of basic logic.

All minorities are discriminated against.
Women have been discriminated against.
Therefore, women are minorities.

That's an invalid syllogism. Maybe I'm being nitpicky, though. Technically speaking, I suppose a word can mean anything we say it means. Of course, it can get confusing when sometimes the word "minority" is used to refer to people who are actually part of a majority subpopulation.

 

[pattylou]

It seems whoever first used the term "minority" to refer to women flunked out of basic logic.
All minorities are discriminated against.
Women have been discriminated against.
Therefore, women are minorities.
That's an invalid syllogism. Maybe I'm being nitpicky, though. Technically speaking, I suppose a word can mean anything we say it means. Of course, it can get confusing when sometimes the word "minority" is used to refer to people who are actually part of a majority subpopulation.

I agree with you on the language angle. Maybe "Minority" was chosen because we were minorities in so many areas - government, the workplace, the polling booth.

We are still not represented accurately, in terms of numbers, in government. Women are a 'minority' in government. Maybe there is merit to the idea that the numbers in *population* are less important (in terms of representation/having interests met/etc) than numbers in the government.

But like you said, this is sort of tortured language.

 

[Informal Logic]

What she really should have said...

If you feel the Republicans do a better job of representing civil rights, why not make your case with a source instead of misquoting another member? Some of these people do not even want women to have access to birth control pills, including pharmacists. What party do you think they belong to?

Now it appears that Miers is flip flopping depending on the person she is speaking to. This kind of thing is what should concern people – not her religion or gender.

 

[Skyhunter]

Anyone who thinks Bush is intelligent is in the minority.

I think that in and of itself disqualifies her.

I mean the quality you want most in a Supreme Court Justice is a...judgement right?

 

[kat]

If you feel the Republicans do a better job of representing civil rights,

where did I say that? I'd be less inclined to say that they are better at representing then I would to say they are not as skilled at exploiting.

why not make your case with a source instead of misquoting another member?

presenting something she should have said and presenting something as what she said are two very different things. I did not misquote anyone.

Now it appears that Miers is flip flopping depending on the person she is speaking to. This kind of thing is what should concern people – not her religion or gender.

Oh..I find the possibility of her placement on the supreme court VERY disconcerting, but not for the same reasons others apparently have. *shrug*

 

[Skyhunter]

Oh..I find the possibility of her placement on the supreme court VERY disconcerting, but not for the same reasons others apparently have. *shrug*

Would you care to share your reasons?

 

[faust9]

Miers is really wowing the Senate Judiciary. Let's see, she has impressed the right wingnuts (Robertson and Dobbson), she has rankled the conservatives, she has delighted the dems by being, well we'll see but the dems are happy she was nominated for now. On top of everything to date you'd think she'd take the time to answer a few questions sent to here by the Judiciary committy. Nope. http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/19/miers.nomination.ap/index.html

 

[SOS2008]

She isn't wooing these people:

Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pa., and senior Democrat Patrick Leahy of Vermont agreed to open Miers' hearings on Nov. 7, but also jointly sent a letter to the White House counsel asking her to more fully answer a questionnaire she turned in Tuesday.

"The comments I have heard range from incomplete to insulting," Leahy said.

"Senator Leahy and I took a look at it and agreed that it was insufficient," Specter said.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/law/supreme_court/miers/index.html

 

[faust9]

Bork of all people is putting his 2 cents in: http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007424

I find it odd how the conservatives keep sloganeering "liberal courts" when 7 of 9 justices on the SC were appointed by conservative republican presidents. Odd don't you think?

 

[Informal Logic]

Bork of all people is putting his 2 cents in: http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007424

I find it odd how the conservatives keep sloganeering "liberal courts" when 7 of 9 justices on the SC were appointed by conservative republican presidents. Odd don't you think?

I suppose the liberal court is why Bush won the 2000 election, why we have new eminent domain laws, bankruptcy laws, etc. The same goes for fundamentalists preaching how freedom of religion is being taken away. Repeating it makes it true (old and reliable brain washing technique).

 

[Astronuc]

Miers' Firm Received Large Windfall From Bush Campaign
'I've Never Seen That Kind of Money Spent on a Campaign Lawyer'

By FRANK BASS, AP

WASHINGTON (Oct. 21) - George W. Bush's rising political fortunes provided a windfall for Harriet Miers' law firm.

Campaign records show Bush's Texas gubernatorial campaigns paid Miers a total of $163,000 in legal fees, most of it for work done during the future president's 1998 re-election bid.

Some senators are planning to explore Miers' legal work for Bush during her confirmation process to be the newest Supreme Court justice, but the White House says it won't release any memos detailing that work.

"I think people across the country recognize the importance of attorney-client privilege," said White House spokesman Scott McClellan.

Reports filed with the Texas Ethics Commission show that two payments of $70,000 were made to Miers' Locke, Purnell, Rain and Harrell firm in Dallas within a month of each other during the 1998 campaign. Another $16,000 in payments were made between March and December 1999.

The 1998 totals dwarfed the $7,000 Bush paid Miers' firm during his first run for governor in 1994, and are extremely large for campaign legal work in Texas, an expert said.

Oh, Bring in the Money!

 

[Astronuc]

Schumer: Miers Lacks Votes to Be Confirmed

WASHINGTON - A Democrat on the Senate committee that will consider Harriet Miers' nomination said Sunday that President Bush's Supreme Court choice lacks the votes now to be confirmed, saying there are too many questions about her qualifications.

"If you held the vote today, she would not get a majority either in the Judiciary Committee or the floor," said Sen. Charles Schumer (news, bio, voting record), D-New York. On the 18-member GOP-controlled committee, "there are one or two who said they'd support her as of now."

But the committee's chairman, Republican Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record) of Pennsylvania, rejected the notion that Miers' nomination was in trouble. Specter said most senators are waiting for the hearings before making up their minds "There are no votes one way or another," he said.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051023/ap_on_go_su_co/miers_59;_ylt=AkeZ8R8URT2BWtd92PwVyihuCM0A;_ylu=X3oDMTBiMW04NW9mBHNlYwMlJVRPUCUl

 

[Gokul43201]

I also heard that Miers' was one of the people that made a killing on the Rangers' sale...but I can't find anything (after 2 minutes with Google) to confirm or refute that.

 

[Skyhunter]

She isn't wooing these people:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/law/supreme_court/miers/index.html

I believe that this is the first time in history that a SC nominee has been asked to redo their answers on the http://www.jasoncoleman.com/MT/Content/MiersNomination/Miers-Senate-Questionaire.html

 

[rachmaninoff]

I believe that this is the first time in history that a SC nominee has been asked to redo their answers on the http://www.jasoncoleman.com/MT/Content/MiersNomination/Miers-Senate-Questionaire.html

What's the original source of those questionaire answers? If authentic, it's incredibly funny. Example:

I believe strongly in attorneys volunteering their time and giving back to their communities. While in private practice, I made the time to provide legal services pro bono, including work of a non-trial nature, such as contracts, family law, and wills. I pursued two such cases, one on behalf of a prisoner, and the other on behalf of a social security claimant, all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States, which denied certiorari.

 

[pattylou]

Hmmmm...

RedState is able to report this morning that, very quietly, certain third parties have begun going back through the list of potential judicial nominees at the behest of the White House.

http://www.redstate.org/story/2005/10/24/75037/326

 

[Gokul43201]

Miers is history

It's over now !

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=1255208

Miers Withdraws Supreme Court Nomination

WASHINGTON Oct 27, 2005 — Harriet Miers withdrew her nomination to be a Supreme Court justice Thursday in the face of stiff opposition and mounting criticism about her qualifications.

President Bush said he reluctantly accepted her decision to withdraw, after weeks of insisting that he did not want her to step down. He blamed her withdrawal on calls in the Senate for the release of internal White House documents that the administration has insisted were protected by executive privilege.

 

[Manchot]

She's gone.

You know, now that this is over, I feel bad for her. Though she certainly wasn't qualified for the Supreme Court, she seemed like a nice person. I feel bad that she just endured one of the worst public humiliations ever.

 

[faust9]

Miers withdraws

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/27/p...&en=31b38b4fcab4d910&ei=5094&partner=homepage

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/27/miers.nominations/index.html

 

[Curious3141]

It seems whoever first used the term "minority" to refer to women flunked out of basic logic.
All minorities are discriminated against.
Women have been discriminated against.
Therefore, women are minorities.
That's an invalid syllogism. Maybe I'm being nitpicky, though. Technically speaking, I suppose a word can mean anything we say it means. Of course, it can get confusing when sometimes the word "minority" is used to refer to people who are actually part of a majority subpopulation.

I think "Yes, Minister" said it better than you or I could.

Sir Humphrey Appleby, in speaking to someone else about minorities, includes women as a minority group, then in an attempt to clarify, says : (Paraphrasing a lot)"Well, women aren't actually a minority group. But they share the paranoia that characterises all minority groups."

And that's a perfect reason.

 

[BobG]

The Miers' nomination withdrawal.

(This poster is so right for so many things in the world - FEMA, the coming weeks in the Bush Whitehouse, corporations declaring bankruptcy and dumping their pension plans...)

 

[Gokul43201]

I like how Bush blames the withdrawal on belligerent democratic senators demanding White House documents.

But the more important issue..."Who next ?"

 

[Skyhunter]

I like how Bush blames the withdrawal on belligerent democratic senators demanding White House documents.

I would have guessed it was because the questionaire was just to difficult for her.

But the more important issue..."Who next ?"

I shudder to think about it.

Who else does he know that will cover for him?

 

[Echo 6 Sierra]

Gonzales probably. From the beginning I've thought that shrubbery was going to use her as the bait knowing that she would be rejected and then Gonzales as the switch which is what he wants in all actuality. Gonzales was the one that got his improprieties somewhat purged from public access when he was Guv and then gave him the Padilla Doctrine to use and the overall work-around for torture being acceptable because, after all, the Geneva Convention was "cute" but not conventional.

 

[Skyhunter]

Gonzales probably. From the beginning I've thought that shrubbery was going to use her as the bait knowing that she would be cast aside and then Gonzales as the switch which is what he wants in all actuality.

Could be Gonzales. He has been very close to Bush for a long time. Advocating torture may hurt his chances for confirmation, although he is very bright and articulate. That was enough for Roberts to be confirmed.

You give Shrub to much credit. Miers was his pick, and he was arrogant enough to believe that everyone would accept her on his say so.

 

[SOS2008]

I like how Bush blames the withdrawal on belligerent democratic senators demanding White House documents.

The documents would have shown how she helped with cover-up of all the scandals, that's why.

But the more important issue..."Who next ?"

The fundamentalists want an all-out war to overturn Roe v Wade. If the president pursues this course on behalf of this special interest, he will certainly go down as the greatest divider in our history.

 

[BobG]

The fundamentalists want an all-out war to overturn Roe v Wade. If the president pursues this course on behalf of this special interest, he will certainly go down as the greatest divider in our history.

The bigger problem for Bush is that the fundamentalists might not win. Bush can't afford to lose another nomination battle.

For the fundamentalist right, the philosophy is fight now, win or lose, because the line isn't holding. Their chances just get worse. The Gang of 14 compromise was a big blow to them. Frist defecting on stem cells hurt them. They need Bush to bring the fight now, before their position gets any weaker.

For Bush, it's got to be getting hard to bank on the fundamentalist right if it tanks his chances for succeeding at anything else. The idea that the entire Republican contingent of Senators will back him isn't quite so guaranteed (e.g. - the anti-torture amendment to the defense spending bill where only 9 Republican Senators held the line).

 

[Manchot]

I like how Bush blames the withdrawal on belligerent democratic senators demanding White House documents.

But the more important issue..."Who next ?"

Seriously, what is Bush's problem? Can he take responsibility for anything?