Drudge
By on Oct 13th, 2005 at 11:54 am
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
I hope he’s not sucessful. Miers is the best nominee liberals could hope for. For a variety of reasons.
October 13th, 2005 at 12:04 pm#1
Please list the reasons
October 13th, 2005 at 12:06 pm1. Seems fairly moderate
2. Causing right-wing implosion
3. Makes Bush look bad
October 13th, 2005 at 12:09 pmI’m sorry. What about Harriet Miers “seems fairly moderate?”
Truth is we know absolutely nothing about Miers’ current views, except that she was nominated by Bush. That alone is a huge strike against her.
That said, it is fun watching the right-wing implode over her, and she probably is the best we could get out of Bush for two reasons:
1) She’s old, which means she won’t be on the Court as long as a younger conservative.
2) She lacks the constitutional training to convince other Justices to join her opinions.
October 13th, 2005 at 12:11 pmWell, If Matt Drudge is against her she must be just Awfull…
October 13th, 2005 at 12:12 pmThis is unbelievable… From what I can tell, Drudge is saying is that the wingers are upset because Miers has batted for ethnic minority causes… WHILST refusing to go the Federalist Society route for her career advancement. As if THAT disqualifies you from the SCOTUS.
You know, I’ve been thinking about this a while, and now I really want Miers to go before the Senate Committee. Even if she is flayed on her competence as a jurist, if we get some wingnut racism out in the open and on the record, this will be a very, very good outcome for progressives.
And by the way, I think we should all acknowledge that Harry Reid has taken Dubya to school on this nomination. It’s pretty obvious now that, by p*ssing off everyone he could, Chimpy’s just taken a big dump down his flightsuit – and friggin’ marvellous it’s because of the laxatives the Dem-leader put in his humble-pie.
October 13th, 2005 at 12:23 pmI thought the Supreme Court was suppose to be for all American. Maybe we should give Meiers a chance if these right wingers are against her. She might be the lesser of two evils. It is funny to hear the RIGHT WING RELIGIOUS NUTS bicker beween themselves.
October 13th, 2005 at 12:34 pmI just have the feeling that Harry Reid is tricking the repubs by backing miers,which turns them against her. Very clever I must say.
October 13th, 2005 at 12:48 pmReading the Drudge post I am truly impressed by the way he presents relevant facts and reports in a totally unbiased manner.
In 1987 the NAACP campaigned against someone they considered to be racist.
In late August 1989 they campaigned against some supreme court decisions that they felt promoted racism.
On September 11 1989 Harriet Miers was asked if she thought the NAACP was a politically charged organisation and she said no.
In 2004 (15 years later) the IRS investigates whether they have become a political organisation.
Which of these things might have caused her to answer differently? Which happened long after she made that statement?
I guess Drudge thinks that as he can see into the future, everyone else should be able to.
Z.
October 13th, 2005 at 12:51 pmDrudge panders to his right-wing-nut-base that Miers acted independent from the conservative party in the past. It is shameful to deviate from the party line. Nonetheless, she has since come “to her senses” according to Dobson, Hecht, and there-is-no-litmus-test Bush, and will toe the party line according to her religion no matter what the law or the Constitution states.
October 13th, 2005 at 2:18 pmWHO CARES!
October 13th, 2005 at 2:55 pmYou’re right, Brian. We shouldn’t care what Drudge says – he is an extremist, but I confess to reading him for entertainment.
October 13th, 2005 at 2:59 pm