1911Forum banner

1 - 20 of 76 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
949 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Anyone know about the new SCOTUS nominee Harriet Miers? I'm not sure I like what I've heard about her so far. Has she ever been vocal about the RKBA?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
949 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Same here.

She donated money to some fairly heavy anti-gun folks a while back.

Why has Bush done this? What does he have to gain? Or perhaps the question is - what does he have to lose? :grumble:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
589 Posts
I don't like it . . . it has the ring of cronyism at it's worst. Let's see now . . . hmmm. . . head of the texas lottery commission . . . oh yes don't forget her stint on the Dallas city council, probably the most disfunctional government in the US. Tremendous qualifications.

Seriously, she has been a loyal and sincere Bush supporter for a long time. But, can she think independently instead just cheering for the boss? Who knows?

Hankster
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
hankster said:
I don't like it . . . it has the ring of cronyism at it's worst. Let's see now . . . hmmm. . . head of the texas lottery commission . . . oh yes don't forget her stint on the Dallas city council, probably the most disfunctional government in the US. Tremendous qualifications.

Seriously, she has been a loyal and sincere Bush supporter for a long time. But, can she think independently instead just cheering for the boss? Who knows?

Hankster

I don't like the pick as much as I would have liked others. I think any mention of cronyism is off base. If you were to believe that you would have to believe that the President puts more stock in his friends than he does in the importance of that persons role on the bench. He knows well how important the justices on the Supreme Court are. The right justices on the bench are likely to ensure that his legacy last long after he is out of public life. Why muck it up just because someone is your firend unless of course their ideaology is right in line with yours?

She is also an unabashidly a original intentist which bodes well for gun owners. The fact that he knows her so well bodes well IMHO. The other people from his inner circle who have been elevated to positions of authority have served him well (Rice, Cheaney, Rove and Fleisher). Hopefully she will follow in those foot steps. I just wish we were looking at a Justice Luttig, Wilkinson, Rogers-Bown, Owens, etc...


BTW Cheaney who has his finger on the pulse of the conservative base seems to like the pick.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
589 Posts
Maybe so . . . time will tell. It's hard for me to visualize the president's thought process without getting into the twilight zone: "Gee, you've been such a great staff secretary and later a great White House Council, I think I'll nominate you to the supreme court." That's obviously absurd. This is partly fueled by lack of knowledge of Miers' beliefs & abilities.

What do you mean by "original intentist" ?


magilla gorilla said:
. . . I just wish we were looking at a Justice Luttig, Wilkinson, Rogers-Bown, Owens, etc...
Because you have a feeling for their positions based on past history. With Miers there is little or none.


Hankster
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
949 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
hankster said:
What do you mean by "original intentist" ?
The term is typically written as "originalist", and it refers to someone who interprets the constitution in the context of what the framers wrote and believed in rather than trimming and fattening certain sections based upon other nations laws, "current events", and personal (or populace) opinion. An originalist would also prefer to ignore a precedent if s/he feels that the precedent is blatantly contradictory to the original intent of the constitution.

Examples of "originalists" are Scalia and Thomas. Roberts might be too - I can only hope.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,832 Posts
The Big D said:
Details, anyone?
According to this, she donated $1000 to Al Gore :barf: .

Federal Election Commission records show Miers contributed $1,000 to Bush when he first ran for the White House in 2000 and $5,000 to the Bush-Cheney Recount Fund in the post-election struggle that finally sealed his victory over Al Gore.

Ironically, she had donated $1,000 to Gore a dozen years earlier, when he first sought the White House.
(my emphasis)

On the other hand, Barbara Boxer isn't happy about the nomination, which kind of pleases me just on general principles. :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
Xori Ruscuv said:
Examples of "originalists" are Scalia and Thomas. Roberts might be too - I can only hope.
From what little we have heard about Mier's she falls in that group. Strict contructionist/originalists almost always interpret the 2nd amendment to be an individual right and are loath to allow restrictions on that right. If what is said about her is true and Roberts holds up his side of the of the bargin with Scalia, Thomas and Kennedy we migh just see a ruling that settles the issue in our favor for good. At least we can hope.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,933 Posts
hankster: I you're having trouble visualizing the Prez's thought processes, why don't you see how well you do getting an undergrad degree at Yale and an MBA from Harvard, and find out for yourself? :D
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,656 Posts
That is good news

kjhof said:
On the other hand, Barbara Boxer isn't happy about the nomination, which kind of pleases me just on general principles. :D
However, Harry Reid has come out saying he supports her. Actually, they were standing next to each other (saw it on CNN). The only thing we know for sure is her Roe v Wade stance. She petitioned the Bar Association to change its stance. I don't know if that's good or bad (and discussing it would be off topic) but I mention it because it is at least some indication that she is willing to upset the apple cart for what she believes. The critical question now is, how does she feel about the right of the people to keep and bear arms?

Robert
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,832 Posts
I know--I have a tendency to dig pretty deep through the dark clouds, looking for the silver lining. Truth be told, it seems just about impossible to know how she'll turn out. I've never been much of a dice roller, so this isn't especially pleasing to me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
949 Posts
Discussion Starter #14 (Edited)
So the topic: we know Bush isn't pure on the RKBA, but many of us (as did I :() still voted for him because he was the only shot we had at beating Kerry. He nominates Roberts - who by what I've seen looks like a very qualified person for the job. And then he nominates Miers - someone who gave money to Gore; Gore being someone who is fairly strongly against the RKBA.

Why did she give money to Gore, and what is she doing working for Bush?
This feels like the nexus of the universe or something... everything here contradicts what I thought I knew.

SCARY!!!!!! :mummy:

PS. Was it the pressure to pick a woman? Then why didn't he just pick Condi? OK, so maybe she isn't a lawyer, but she still appears more qualified to me! :rofl:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
773 Posts
Xori Ruscuv said:
So the topic: we know Bush isn't pure on the RKBA, but many of us (as did I :() still voted for him because he was the only shot we had at beating Kerry. He nominates Roberts - who by what I've seen looks like a very qualified person for the job. And then he nominates Miers - someone who gave money to Gore; Gore being someone who is fairly strongly against the RKBA.

Why did she give money to Gore, and what is she doing working for Bush?
This feels like the nexus of the universe or something... everything here contradicts what I thought I knew.

SCARY!!!!!! :mummy:

PS. Was it the pressure to pick a woman? Then why didn't he just pick Condi? OK, so maybe she isn't a lawyer, but she still appears more qualified to me! :rofl:
He could have picked Brown, and had a woman AND an outspoken conservative.

The federalist society likes her. That's a good sign on the RKBA front I suppose.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
Xori Ruscuv said:
So the topic: we know Bush isn't pure on the RKBA, but many of us (as did I :() still voted for him because he was the only shot we had at beating Kerry. He nominates Roberts - who by what I've seen looks like a very qualified person for the job. And then he nominates Miers - someone who gave money to Gore; Gore being someone who is fairly strongly against the RKBA.

Why did she give money to Gore, and what is she doing working for Bush?
This feels like the nexus of the universe or something... everything here contradicts what I thought I knew.

SCARY!!!!!! :mummy:

PS. Was it the pressure to pick a woman? Then why didn't he just pick Condi? OK, so maybe she isn't a lawyer, but she still appears more qualified to me! :rofl:
What makes you think the President isn't pure on the 2nd amendment? While Governor he signed the States CCW into law. As President he has championed tort reform that helps to protect firearm manufacturers. In fact he is the only President in my lifetime that has actually seen the number of gun laws reduced during his term. While he made politcally motivated comments about the sunset AWB, Rove and his underlings actively worked with the members of the house and senate to ensure that that abomination never made it to the floor for a vote.

Also I would take it easy on the whole Gore donation thing. She donated $1000 to Gore's 1988 Presidential campaign thru her law firm. You are to young to remember the Al Gore of 1988 but he was nothing like the Al Gore that ran in 2000. At the time he was pro life, pro gun and didn't care about the environment. In short he was a conservative southern Democrat. After getting pounced by uber liberal Mike Dukakis he realized that he had to tack to the left if he ever wanted to gain the WH.

One final thing about Ms Mier's is that she is an evangelical born again christian. Maybe the idea of being a Democrat in the 80's didn't jive well with her new found faith in her religion. I am almost ashamed to admit that I came within a hairs breath of voting for Dukakis. I am glad I didn't but as we grow older our views on the world tend to change. I doubt Ms Mier's is the same woman she was 17 years ago.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,167 Posts
I just wonder how many conservative federal judges, presently on the bench, having "paid their dues", "been around the block", etc,etc, are just a little pissed off right now for having been passed over for someone with no judicial experience ? I would assume there are a number of federal judges whose occupational goal is to, at some point in time, to be nominated and maybe approved for the Supreme Court. This appointment is purely political and I don't like it at all.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,832 Posts
magilla gorilla said:
What makes you think the President isn't pure on the 2nd amendment?
One of the reasons I consider Bush to be a lukewarm, at best, ally of 2nd Amendment advocates is his appointment of Gonzales as AG (the same Alberto Gonzales who has stated what a big fan he is of the AWB). I think Bush supports gun rights as long as he thinks it's to his advantage to do so. If that situation changes, I'm not counting on him for anything.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
173abn said:
I just wonder how many conservative federal judges, presently on the bench, having "paid their dues", "been around the block", etc,etc, are just a little pissed off right now for having been passed over for someone with no judicial experience ? I would assume there are a number of federal judges whose occupational goal is to, at some point in time, to be nominated and maybe approved for the Supreme Court. This appointment is purely political and I don't like it at all.

The late Chief Justice never sat on the bench before his appointment. Seems to me he turned out to be a pretty damn good Justice. Justice Stevens was a federal judge before being nominated and he has turned out to be a pile of horse manure as a jurist. Only time will tell if Mier will be a good justice.
 
1 - 20 of 76 Posts
Top