Reply With Quote
Manny took my response.
Hypothetical:
President Bush: "I hereby nominate this ham sandwich to serve on the Supreme Court."
Yonivore: "I love it! This will give the President an opportunity to shed light on the nomination process and I am confident Ham Sandwich will be a reliable conservative. Great choice!"
Nbadan: "From Blackhelicopter.org:"Insider sources reveal that Ham Sandwich has longstanding ties to the Bush/Cheney/Halliburton neocon cabal and that Ham Sandwich may be implicated in the torture of prisoners...
mookie2001: "sounds about right
probably smarter than most bush supporters"
JohnnyMarzetti: "Bush thinks he can put the spin on this and give as another stealth nominee but we know he's a dumb stupid idiot."
Clandestino: "It's his prerogative -- he can pick anybody or anything he wants and if you don't like it you're a traitor."
jochhejaam: "What do you have against ham? Don't you know the passage where Peter has a vision and Jesus tells him all foods are clean?"
boutons: "Yet another example of the greed of the Bush rich boy corporate Repug circle handout to the sandwich industry getting their very own crony on the Court..."
MannyIsGod: ""
Marcus Bryant: "People vote on cultural issues. Ham and pork meats are popular among Republican voters. Ham Sandwich will get confirmed, blah blah"
Extra Stout: "I think I'm going to hang myself now."
FromWayDowntown: "I guess I'll be arguing my next case in front of a Happy Meal at McDonald's."
Manny took my response.
Genius!Hypothetical:
President Bush: "I hereby nominate this ham sandwich to serve on the Supreme Court."
Yonivore: "I love it! This will give the President an opportunity to shed light on the nomination process and I am confident Ham Sandwich will be a reliable conservative. Great choice!"
Nbadan: "From Blackhelicopter.org: "
mookie2001: "sounds about right
probably smarter than most bush supporters"
JohnnyMarzetti: "Bush thinks he can put the spin on this and give as another stealth nominee but we know he's a dumb stupid idiot."
Clandestino: "It's his prerogative -- he can pick anybody or anything he wants and if you don't like it you're a traitor."
jochhejaam: "What do you have against ham? Don't you know the passage where Peter has a vision and Jesus tells him all foods are clean?"
boutons: "Yet another example of the greed of the Bush rich boy corporate Repug circle handout to the sandwich industry getting their very own crony on the Court..."
MannyIsGod: "
Marcus Bryant: "People vote on cultural issues. Ham and pork meats are popular among Republican voters. Ham Sandwich will get confirmed, blah blah"
Extra Stout: "I think I'm going to hang myself now."
FromWayDowntown: "I guess I'll be arguing my next case in front of a Happy Meal at McDonald's."
Fact is.. he is installing a second Justice.. period.. so get the over it.
Worry about 08 or we are going to install at least 1 more.
Actually manny would say "From what i hear she seems qualified"Hypothetical:
President Bush: "I hereby nominate this ham sandwich to serve on the Supreme Court."
Yonivore: "I love it! This will give the President an opportunity to shed light on the nomination process and I am confident Ham Sandwich will be a reliable conservative. Great choice!"
Nbadan: "From Blackhelicopter.org: "
mookie2001: "sounds about right
probably smarter than most bush supporters"
JohnnyMarzetti: "Bush thinks he can put the spin on this and give as another stealth nominee but we know he's a dumb stupid idiot."
Clandestino: "It's his prerogative -- he can pick anybody or anything he wants and if you don't like it you're a traitor."
jochhejaam: "What do you have against ham? Don't you know the passage where Peter has a vision and Jesus tells him all foods are clean?"
boutons: "Yet another example of the greed of the Bush rich boy corporate Repug circle handout to the sandwich industry getting their very own crony on the Court..."
MannyIsGod: "
Marcus Bryant: "People vote on cultural issues. Ham and pork meats are popular among Republican voters. Ham Sandwich will get confirmed, blah blah"
Extra Stout: "I think I'm going to hang myself now."
FromWayDowntown: "I guess I'll be arguing my next case in front of a Happy Meal at McDonald's."
LOL
That was pretty funny though
So i take it you thought she wasn't qualified either?
hey mannys INDEPENDENT! asshole
he doesnt care what you are any other blind partisans think
Simply another stunning example of the Presidents inability to think things through.
I am seriously beginning to believe over time that the President is suffering from pre-senile dementia.
I saw a video the other day of GW in the gubanatorial (sp?) debates in the early nineties and then GW in the 2004 debates. The degradation in mental ability was very very clearly demarked, and somewhat alarming.
I think the general pattern of behavior Bush throughout his presidency really points to this conclusion.
Nicely done!Hypothetical:
President Bush: "I hereby nominate this ham sandwich to serve on the Supreme Court."
Yonivore: "I love it! This will give the President an opportunity to shed light on the nomination process and I am confident Ham Sandwich will be a reliable conservative. Great choice!"
Nbadan: "From Blackhelicopter.org: "
mookie2001: "sounds about right
probably smarter than most bush supporters"
JohnnyMarzetti: "Bush thinks he can put the spin on this and give as another stealth nominee but we know he's a dumb stupid idiot."
Clandestino: "It's his prerogative -- he can pick anybody or anything he wants and if you don't like it you're a traitor."
jochhejaam: "What do you have against ham? Don't you know the passage where Peter has a vision and Jesus tells him all foods are clean?"
boutons: "Yet another example of the greed of the Bush rich boy corporate Repug circle handout to the sandwich industry getting their very own crony on the Court..."
MannyIsGod: "
Marcus Bryant: "People vote on cultural issues. Ham and pork meats are popular among Republican voters. Ham Sandwich will get confirmed, blah blah"
Extra Stout: "I think I'm going to hang myself now."
FromWayDowntown: "I guess I'll be arguing my next case in front of a Happy Meal at McDonald's."
All I know is that the Libs in Washington are doing their normal crap. They are in a storm worrying who he is going to nominate. This is going to be more fun that a barrel of mokeys. Cause they may have to go the filbuster route and it is not going to work this time round. I wished he would re-nominate Bork and watch all you dimm-o-craps go ape........lol
Thank you, I consider that some of my finest work.
In fact, I have heard that Mr. Sandwich is imminently qualified for the court.
I'm concerned, because I've heard that Mr. Sandwich prefers a liberal application of mus .
It's from AOL News, so I don't know if the link will work...
Frist spoke with White House chief of staff Andy Card Wednesday night and offered a "frank assessment of the situation," Frist spokesman Bob Stevenson said. Coincidentally or not, Miers told Bush of her plans the same night.
"Somebody probably pulled her aside and said, 'Harriet, it's going to be a terrible experience and why go through with it, because they've already made up their minds,"' said Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, who blasted conservative groups for undermining the nominee. Other lawmakers welcomed the move.
Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., a potential 2008 presidential nominee who is courting conservative activists, said he had been "feeling less comfortable all along" about the nomination.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., one of 14 women in the Senate, had challenged Miers' nomination yet criticized Republicans for derailing it: "I don't believe they would have attacked a man the way she was attacked."
James Joyner: "Let me be clear about something, though: While I am glad this is over, this controversy reflects badly on President Bush, not Harriet Miers. From all indications, Miers is a decent, honorable woman. The fact that she did not meet the incredibly high threshold of being qualified to sit on the Supreme Court is no shame. Unfortunately, the president put her in a position to become the target of public ridicule. She did nothing to deserve that."
Last edited by SpursWoman; 10-27-2005 at 03:29 PM.
As long as Mr. Sandwich keeps his mayo out of it ... I'd consider him.
Your source is outdated. Of recent, Ham has shown a preference for a very conservative smidgen of mayonnaise or, indeed, a completely dry blanket of stone-crushed wheat bread and a pickle spear.
Better to get all the bad news done now.
Good move by Bush..since it is raining let it pour now and hope the sun shines next week.
Good strategery on his part.
I, for one, would like to know a bit more about Mr. Sandwich's background.
Did his bread come from a prestigious bakery? Has he ever been the Special at the local deli? If not, is there any evidence that Sandwich could have developed a consistent philosophy regarding the use and other nuances of mayonnaise and other condiments?
I agree...it also opens the door for him to nominate a female justice to the right of Sandra Day O'Connor and to the left of Janice Rogers Brown.
Does the nominee have to be a woman? I don't think so.
Choose the right person with an open mind with a nice strong conservative liberal American mind.
Well, I've heard him speak of condiment use but, he reassured me it did not mean he flavored girth control. In fact, I'm sure he's pro-choice when it comes to condiment selection.
How bad was she?
Ya gotta admit, dubya does have a clue .... how to it all up. The incompetence starts "at the top". America will be forever indebted to the Repubs for putting this jerk into office, the perfect example of how not to be President.
=========================
washingtonpost.com
Nomination Was Plagued By Missteps From the Start
By Peter Baker and Amy Goldstein
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, October 28, 2005; A01
For Harriet Miers, the "murder boards" were aptly named. Day after day in a room in the Justice Department, colleagues from the Bush administration grilled her on cons utional law, her legal background and her past speeches in practice sessions meant to mimic Senate hearings.
Her uncertain, underwhelming responses left her confirmation managers so disturbed they decided not to open up the sessions to the friendly outside lawyers they usually invite to participate in prepping key nominees.
It was clear that Miers was going to need to "hit a grand slam homer" before the Senate Judiciary Committee to win confirmation to the Supreme Court, as one adviser to the White House put it. "Her performance at the murder boards meant that people weren't confident she'd get the grand slam."
By nearly all accounts, the 24 days of the Miers nomination was hobbled by a succession of miscalculations. President Bush bypassed his own selection process to pick Miers, his onetime personal lawyer and White House counsel since February. His aides ignored warnings by some of the administration's closest conservative allies that she would prove difficult to confirm, and took for granted that its base would ultimately stick with the president.
And in perhaps the biggest misjudgment, Bush assumed that Miers would somehow shine in a Washington klieg light she had never before faced.
It did not take a call from Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.) to convince the White House that Miers's nomination was in trouble. By the time Miers withdrew her name from consideration yesterday morning, her own colleagues had all but despaired of rescuing her nomination. With top Bush aides facing possible indictment as early as today, the White House concluded that it was time to move on and brace for the more threatening crisis.
"This thing never got off the launching pad very well," said a senior administration official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because public airing of self-criticism is not encouraged in the White House.
"What we ran up against may be a different bar and maybe discomfort with the unfamiliar," another official said. "Did we learn anything? I don't know."
'This Isn't a Cakewalk'
On Sept. 23, the same day the Senate Judiciary Committee was voting to support John G. Roberts Jr. as the new chief justice, a conservative activist involved in the confirmation process got a call from the White House about Miers. "It was 'We'd like you to take the temperature,' " the activist recalled. How would fellow conservatives react if the little-known White House staff member became the next court nominee?
This conservative, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to share a confidential conversation, spent that night thinking hard about what to say. The next morning, a Saturday, he had a 2 1/2 -hour meeting at the White House. "My short answer," he said, "was this is a heavy lift. It was going to be, at least preliminarily a bloodbath -- probably for a week or maybe slightly more." But he also said that if the White House handled it right, "you'd probably get people to a wait-and-see mode," and she could be confirmed. "I was obviously proven wrong."
"All of us who were supporting the White House on this expressed that we have a job here; this isn't a cakewalk," said Jay Sekulow, another lawyer advising the Bush team on the Miers nomination. Others flatly protested and warned against naming her.
Miers had not been prominent on anyone's short list but Bush's. As a longtime confidante from his home state of Texas, Miers had won Bush's trust and affection. She had run the judicial selection process, and impressed Bush and Vice President Cheney in private sessions by pressing to make sure candidates were conservative enough.
As Bush thought about the next opening he would have to fill, he focused increasingly on Miers. He had already settled on three criteria, according to a Republican lawyer close to the selection process: He wanted a conservative, a woman and a nominee who would be confirmed as successfully as Roberts was. The next nominee needed to be someone who would follow Roberts's lead as part of a new voting bloc that would steer the court to the right, not necessarily an independent figure with a long track record.
But as other possible female candidates either asked not to be considered or were ruled out for various reasons, Miers looked better and better. "There was one person left standing," the Republican lawyer said. It was a back-channel process. Since Miers was in charge of the selection apparatus, White House Chief of Staff Andrew H. Card Jr. instructed Miers's deputy, William Kelley, to secretly vet her. She was not told she was a candidate until two weeks before her nomination, and no one had done a thorough search of her background to turn up past writings and speeches that would later become public.
Recognizing that conservatives might not find Miers exciting, Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove tried to lock up a few important figures who would back her, mainly James C. Dobson, head of the evangelical Focus on the Family. As Dobson later recalled it, Rove assured him "that Harriet Miers is an evangelical Christian [and] that she is from a very conservative church, which is almost universally pro-life."
That was enough for Dobson, and Dobson's blessing was enough for Rove.
Dismay on the Right
The morning of Oct. 3, Manuel A. Miranda, leader of a group called the Third Branch Conference that pushes for conservative judges, woke up before dawn. He flipped on his computer and found an e-mail that a friend had sent at 6:06 a.m. with an Associated Press headline reporting that Bush would nominate Miers to the court.
A lawyer who had worked on judicial nominations for Frist before stepping down two years ago while under investigation for reading Democratic do ents, Miranda had by this time heard Miers's name mentioned as a possible choice for about a week. "I thought it was a joke," he recalls. "I dismissed it as some sycophant floating her name just to get their own nomination some day."
By 7:32 a.m., half an hour before Bush would go on television to announce his choice, Miranda tapped out a quick note to his e-mail list that said, "I fear the president has made the worse [sic] choice I could have imagined." At 8:12, two minutes before Bush would finish introducing his nominee, Miranda sent out a second dispatch: "The reaction of many conservatives today will be that the president has made possibly the most unqualified choice since Abe Fortas, who had been the president's lawyer."
By happenstance, William Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard, was already scheduled to appear on Fox News Channel, and he did not hold back. "I think it's politically risky and I think it sends a bad signal," he declared. After returning to his office, he posted a more stinging assessment on the magazine's Web site, pronouncing himself "disappointed, depressed and demoralized."
Others followed, including former Bush speechwriter David Frum, columnists Charles Krauthammer and George Will, former judge Robert H. Bork, radio host Rush Limbaugh, and a coterie of activists. "Things started to run out of control," said a Republican strategist working for her nomination.
In the past, the White House had been able to tamp down conservative unrest over Bush policies on federal spending, Medicare and immigration. But Rove, the president's chief enforcer and ambassador to the right, was recalled to appear before the grand jury investigating the leaking of CIA operative Valerie Plame's name, and insiders differ over how involved he really was able to be.
Other aides were occupied with matters related to the leak case as well, including Miers deputy Kelley. Former senator Fred D. Thompson (R-Tenn.), who helped shepherd Roberts to confirmation, bowed out for Miers because of work commitments, and Steve Schmidt, a White House counselor who also worked on Roberts, left for Iraq for several weeks.
With Bush at a low ebb in the polls and conservatives itching for a champion on the court, years of frustration boiled over public view. "The White House didn't understand the independence of the conservative movement," Kristol said. Usually, he said, "the White House rolls out the big guns and everyone pretty much falls in line." But a call from Rove left him unpersuaded this time. "What this shows is that for conservatives, the Supreme Court is so central" they were unwilling to stay silent.
"The expectations were so high," said Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, a conservative activist group, "this nomination left people scratching their heads -- and in some cases stamping their feet and pounding their fists -- because they were disappointed."
Reaching an Impasse
For a time, the White House dismissed the punditocracy and activists, focusing on the only people who had a vote -- the senators. But a series of missteps left some of them alienated as well, including Judiciary Chairman Arlen Specter (R-Pa.), who was miffed that Miers publicly disagreed with his account of their conversation on privacy rights. Ultimately, Specter rejected Miers's answers to a committee questionnaire as sloppy and incomplete, ordering her to redo them.
"Her one-on-one meetings didn't go as well as hoped," said Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.), who told the White House that she "needed to step it up a notch."
As Miranda and other activists used Web sites and television advertisements to pressure Bush to withdraw Miers, Graham and Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) joined Democrats in demanding that the White House turn over papers from her work there. Because it was bipartisan, the request was harder for the White House to dismiss, and aides convening on Monday fretted over what they saw as an irreconcilable impasse.
"That was the day things really went down," said the GOP strategist working for Miers.
Fueling the discontent were fresh reports on Miers's history on issues such as affirmative action that had escaped White House vetters. Most damaging to her among Republicans was a Washington Post article on Wednesday recounting a speech Miers gave in 1993, in which she suggested that "self-determination" should guide decisions about abortion and warning against "legislating religion or morality."
That was enough for Concerned Women for America, one of the nation's largest evangelical groups. As White House envoy Dan Coats, a former Republican senator from Indiana, met with the group's chief counsel, Jan LaRue, seeking support on Wednesday, LaRue was suddenly called out of the room. The group's chairwoman, Beverly LaHaye, had confirmed a decision to oppose Miers. "I went back in to the senator," LaRue said, "and informed him that we were calling for her withdrawal."
That was not the only ominous sign Wednesday. Frist met with Bush and other top lawmakers at the White House in the morning to talk about budget issues, but privately, sources close to him said, he informed the president that Miers was in deep trouble. Using the vice president's office just off the Senate floor, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) met with Ed Gillespie and Leonard A. Leo, strategists working on behalf of Miers.
But Cornyn, a close Bush ally, emerged discouraged. At 6 p.m., he ran into Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), who tried to buck him up. Cornyn thanked Grassley but then mused in an interview about the negative reaction to Miers. "I mean, I don't know what people were expecting. She's kind of shy and reserved," he said, and then he paused. "But this isn't a place that smiles with favor on shy, retiring personalities. Everyone here is used to big egos."
More conservatives were preparing to abandon Miers. Even Dobson, the most prominent activist on her side, said yesterday that "based on what we now know about Miss Miers, it appears that we would not have been able to support her candidacy."
The clash over her White House do ents loomed large. To some Bush aides, it appeared to be the deal-breaker: The president, in defense of executive privilege, would never hand them over, and the senators, with nothing else to go on, were insistent they had to have them.
Miers called Bush in the White House residence at 8:30 p.m. Wednesday. She said she would withdraw her nomination. Bush agreed. "It was a growing ac ulation of things that resulted in her finally coming to the decision that there was probably one thing that she could not overcome, and that was the production of do ents," Coats said.
The two kept the decision secret from nearly everyone else. Frist called Card at 9:30 p.m. to emphasize his concerns. White House aides finished Miers's second response to the Senate questionnaire and delivered it at 11:40 p.m., more than three hours after she decided to abandon her nomination. The 59-page do ent makes it clear that the struggle to learn about her advice to Bush would have continued had she stayed in the fray. Asked for details about her work, she submitted 135 boilerplate, publicly available fact sheets on White House policies and 67 policy statements the administration has sent Congress on legislation.
Her advocates continued working on her behalf as well. Sekulow was on C-SPAN at 6:45 a.m. yesterday touting her. But at 8:30 a.m., Miers walked into the Oval Office to hand Bush her official letter withdrawing. The White House announced it at 9 a.m.
And Miers went back to her office as White House counsel to begin the search for a new nominee.
Staff writers Charles Babington, Jo Becker and Juliet Eilperin contributed to this report.
© 2005 The Washington Post Company
washingtonpost.com
A Departure's Lasting Damage
By E. J. Dionne Jr.
Friday, October 28, 2005; A23
The damage President Bush and the conservative movement have inflicted on their drive to pack the Supreme Court with allies will not be undone by Harriet Miers's decision to withdraw her nomination.
In picking such a vulnerable nominee, Bush single-handedly undercut the conservatives' long-standing claim that the Senate and the rest of us owed great deference to a president's choice for the court. Conservatives displayed absolutely no deference to Bush when he picked someone they didn't like. The actual conservative "principle" was that the Senate should defer to the president's choice -- as long as that choice was acceptable to conservatives. Some principle.
Republicans had railed against Democratic efforts to press court nominees (including Chief Justice John Roberts) for their views on legal issues. Back in July The Post disclosed a planning do ent circulated among Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee. The do ent said nominees for the Supreme Court should avoid disclosing "personal political views or legal thinking on any issue." Liberals were terribly gauche and inappropriate for wanting to know someone's opinions before awarding that person life tenure on the nation's most powerful court.
But it was neither gauche nor inappropriate for conservatives to de mand that Miers clarify her views on a slew of issues, notably Roe v. Wade . When liberals asked for clarity, they were committing a sin. When conservatives asked for clarity, they were engaged in a virtuous act. Thus are conservatives permitted to alter their principles to suit their own political situation.
There was also that small matter of a nominee's religious views. Conservatives condemned liberals who suggested it was worth knowing how Roberts's religious convictions might affect his judging. But when Miers started running into trouble with conservatives, the Bush administration encouraged its allies to talk up Miers's deep religious convictions to curry favor among social conservatives. I guess it's okay for conservatives to bring up religion whenever they want, but never appropriate for liberals to speak of spiritual things.
Even the manner of Miers's exit was disingenuous, not to mention derivative. In announcing her withdrawal, the White House said that "it is clear that senators would not be satisfied until they gained access to internal do ents concerning advice provided during her tenure at the White House -- disclosures that would undermine a president's ability to receive candid counsel." Miers's decision, the statement said, "demonstrates her deep respect for this essential aspect of the cons utional separation of powers."
The White House was following, almost to the letter, the exit strategy outlined last week by my conservative colleague Charles Krauthammer. But Krauthammer was honest enough to admit what the White House could not: that all this verbiage was about saving face. The president had to know when he named Miers that her lack of a judicial paper trail would make her advice as White House counsel all the more important for the Senate to know. Bush figured that conservatives would do what they have so often done before: roll over, back him up, resist requests for do ents and help him force Miers through. Bad call.
Bush and the conservatives would now like to pretend that none of this happened. The idea on the right is that Bush should nominate a staunch conservative with an ample judicial record and pick a big fight with Democrats that would unite the conservative movement. It's hard to escape the idea that with special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald breathing down the administration's neck, the president decided he could not afford any further fractures in his own political coalition. So he threw Miers over the side.
This has been a powerfully instructive moment. The willingness of conservatives to abandon what they had once held up as high and unbending principles reveals that this battle over the Supreme Court is, for them, a simple struggle for power. It is thus an unfortunate reminder of the highly unprincipled Supreme Court decision in 2000 that helped put Bush in the White House. Conservatives who had long insisted on deference to states' rights put those commitments aside when doing so would advance the political fortunes of one of their own.
Miers will recover from all this in a way Bush and the conservatives will not. She has suffered collateral damage caused by a president who did not understand the degree to which his power has eroded and did not grasp the nature of the movement that elected him. And conservatives will come to regret making their willingness to contradict their own principles plain for all to see.
[email protected]
© 2005 The Washington Post Company
How fast things turn in Washington:
White House counsel Harriet Miers goes under a rope line as she returns to the White House on the Marine One helicopter after spending the weekend with President Bush at Camp David, Sunday, Oct. 30, 2005 in Washington.
SNL did a funny little skit about the Harriet Miers nomination being sandbagged because of a little "qualification" problem.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
