Joined
·
949 Posts
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?
Harriet Miers on the RKBA?
1 - 20 of 76 Posts
Joined
·
949 Posts
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:
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:
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
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
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
hankster said:
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.
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" ?
Hankster
What do you mean by "original intentist" ?
Because you have a feeling for their positions based on past history. With Miers there is little or none.magilla gorilla said:
Hankster
Joined
·
949 Posts
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.hankster said:
Examples of "originalists" are Scalia and Thomas. Roberts might be too - I can only hope.
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
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.Xori Ruscuv said:
Joined
·
9,656 Posts
That is good news
Robert
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?kjhof said:On the other hand, Barbara Boxer isn't happy about the nomination, which kind of pleases me just on general principles.
Robert
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.
Joined
·
949 Posts
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:
) 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.Xori Ruscuv said:So the topic: we know Bush isn't pure on the RKBA, but many of us (as did I
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:
The federalist society likes her. That's a good sign on the RKBA front I suppose.
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
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.Xori Ruscuv said:So the topic: we know Bush isn't pure on the RKBA, but many of us (as did I
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:
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.
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.
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.magilla gorilla said:
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
173abn said:
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
Join the discussion
Join now to ask and comment!