Miers’s Statements Revealing a Judicial Activist?

[Terri]

Miers’s Statements Revealing a Judicial Activist?

Bobby Eberle
The Loft at GOPUSA

Following the initial uproar by many conservatives regarding the nomination of Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court, the questions being asked by her detractors began to solidify around a central theme: given no judicial experience whatsoever, what is her judicial philosophy? The information is slowly beginning to come out, and it doesn’t seem to jibe with President Bush’s assertion that Miss Miers won’t be a judicial activist.

In a story in today’s Washington Post titled In Speeches From 1990s, Clues About Miers Views — Nominee Defended Social Activism, several of Miss Miers’s previous speeches were analyzed, and as the reporter notes, “Miers also defended judges who order lawmakers to address social concerns.”

More (http://www.gopusa.com/theloft/?p=96)

[Froufrou]

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr class="standard"><td>Quote </td></tr><tr class="standard"><td class="QUOTE">Sen. Trent Lott (R-MS) told the Times that there was “not much enthusiasm for the nomination among Senate Republicans, although most had ‘held their fire.’”
[/QUOTE]

What a load of mish-mash! Self-determination: what does she really mean!

RE: Trent Lott, I heard him on Hannity's radio program. When he met Miers, she did not engage in conversation as readily as he expected.

I think that's why he has 'not much enthusiasm' over her nomination. He's a bombastic Southerner; she's not.

It's too bad judges are always attorneys first, since 75% of 'em are social Liberals.

All things considered, based on what I've gleaned thus far, I don't think she can keep her personality aside from her ajudications. If I'm right, that's the biggest reason she's not a good nominee, IMHO.

[pRIMrose]

And this is exactly why it is imperative for the process to play out. *No one has a crystal ball and until there is an rhetorical audit trail from which to base opinion, it is purely speculation and conversation. *Something in which politicians and pundits excel. *If only they could/would apply this excellence to unbiased performance.

These players didn't just meet each other yesterday. *Most are well aware of Ms Miers' characteristics and demeanor. *I don't, for one minute, think that they are at all surprised at her guarded responses. *Lawyers, above all others, know it is imperative to choose your words very carefully. *If this is interpreted as &quot;lack lustre&quot; or &quot;evasive&quot; it certainly has not hampered others who have been confirmed.

I'm still waiting, watching and listening.

[Speedway]

pRIM, were you rummaging around in my brain this morning? http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/rock.gif *I'll just &quot;DITTO&quot; what you said.

******************** *******************
This is not a criticism. *This is a question. *Do we as conservatives really rely on news sources like the New York Times for our information?

<table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tr class="standard"><td>Quote </td></tr><tr class="standard"><td class="QUOTE">On a related note, the New York Times is reporting that as more information is becoming available about Miss Miers, more senators are growing leery of the nominee.[/QUOTE]

My thought is that the New York Times would be reporting this whether it is true or not. http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/ne_nau.gif *I just don't trust them as a source of information --- even for the weather.

[Froufrou]

Speedy, I'm fairly certain that the NYT along with WaPo are not big names in honesty portrayals around here! *The same is true for one of the LA rags (Times again?) which is rarely quoted here. *World Net Daily gets the biggest http://www.gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/nahna.gif