that's what I always said, but with 1 correction: Replace 'Islamist'
Posted By: .- on 2009-05-26
In Reply to: How about this - Agreed
with:
Radical, Militant Fundamentalist
because 'Islamist' is a recently coined expression.
Complete Discussion Below:  marks the location of current message within thread
The messages you are viewing
are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select
the boards given in left menu
Other related messages found in our database
Replace all your dems with you. Do not group all...sm
the posts on this board to one party or the other. Whenever a lone person posts something that you don't agree with, you attribute it to all democrats. We do not all think alike. That is the wonderful thing about us, we do not march in step, we march to different drummers to a common cause.
Replace Republican with Jewish and think...
Germany. Do you really hate a group of people that much? Really?? That you want to go down the marxist path of quashing or belitting any kind of dissent or disagreement? I thought liberals were all about the right to dissent! Oh...what on earth am I thinking? They are for THEIR right to dissent and dam* anyone who doesn't agree with them.
Bush Nominates Harriet Miers to replace O'Connor
I'll be very interested to hear more about her. So far, I've learned that she contributed to Al Gore's campaign and was also involved with Legal Aid in the past. Either Bush is coming to his senses or this is merely another example of his ongoing cronyism. In this case, his cronyism just might actually finally benefit the American people this time.
Bush picks White House counsel for Supreme Court
If confirmed, Harriet Miers would succeed O'Connor
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush nominated White House counsel Harriet Miers on Monday to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor.
Miers, 60, was the first woman to head the State Bar of Texas. She has never been a judge.
An outspoken supporter of the Bush administration, she was a leader of its search for potential candidates to fill Supreme Court posts. A White House official said that at the same time, Bush considered her as a nominee without her knowledge.
In a televised announcement from the White House, Bush called Miers exceptionally well-suited for the high court. Miers has devoted her life to the rule of law and the cause of justice, he said.
He called on the Senate to review her qualifications thoroughly and fairly and to vote on her nomination promptly.
Miers said she was grateful and humbled by the nomination. ( Watch: Miers has no judicial experience -- 2:30)
It is the responsibility of every generation to be true to the founders' vision of the proper role of the courts in our society, she said.
If confirmed, I recognize that I will have a tremendous responsibility to keep our judicial system strong and to help ensure that the courts meet their obligations to strictly apply the laws and the Constitution. ( Watch Bush nominate Miers to the Supreme Court -- 9:09)
If the Senate confirms Miers, she would join Ruth Bader Ginsburg as the second sitting female justice on the bench. O'Connor became the court's first female justice in 1981.
Dinner offer
Bush offered her the job Sunday night over dinner in the White House residence, White House sources said.
During the summer, a vetting process for Miers took place once the president began considering her.
Bush took seriously suggestions by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, R-Pennsylvania, and ranking Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vermont, that the president consider candidates from outside the appellate courts, the sources said.
Miers, 60, who has never been a judge, was the first woman to serve as president of the State Bar of Texas and Dallas Bar Association. She also was a member of the Dallas City Council. ( Profile)
More recently, Miers helped lead the administration's search for potential candidates to fill Supreme Court posts.
At the same time, a White House official said that Bush considered her as a nominee without her knowledge.
Reacting with caution
Initial reaction to Miers' nomination was cautious. ( Watch senators react to Miers' nomination -- 3:49)
Harriet Miers is an intelligent lawyer who shares the president's judicial philosophy, said Leonard Leo of the conservative Federalist Society.
She has demonstrated that in her capacity as White House counsel and a senior administration official as well as an active member of the organized bar.
Quietly, some conservatives involved in the White House's nominee selection consultation process said they are concerned with Bush's pick.
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, said conservative activist Manuel Miranda of the Third Branch Conference, referring to President Lyndon B. Johnson's pick to the high court in 1965.
The nomination of a nominee with no judicial record is a significant failure for the advisers that the White House gathered around it. However, the president deserves the benefit of a doubt, the nominee deserves the benefit of hearings, and every nominee deserves an up-or-down vote.
The Concerned Women for America, another conservative group, also took a wait-and-see approach on Miers.
We give Harriet Miers the benefit of the doubt because thus far, President Bush has selected nominees to the federal courts who are committed to the written Constitution, said Jan LaRue, chief counsel of the group. Whether we can support her will depend on what we learn from her record and the hearing process.
One Republican official said that many had expectations that Bush's pick would be a known conservative, adding that he was surprised by the president's choice.
Republicans were hoping for a clear conservative, the official said. It's going to be heavy lifting for us and the White House.
Another conservative source who was involved in the selection consultation process said Miers was not a big surprise and that she had always been someone under serious consideration.
She's a good conservative, the source said. She does share the president's views about law and public policy. But she is not well-known, which is going to be part of the challenge.
Democrats on the the Senate Judiciary Committee reacted cautiously to Miers' nomination, but they did not immediately oppose it.
It is too early to reach any firm judgment about such an important nomination, Leahy said in a statement, noting Miers long ties to President Bush. It is important to know whether she would enter this key post with the judicial independence necessary when the Supreme Court considers isues of interest to this Administration.
My first reaction is a simple one: It could have been a lot worst, Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, one of the Demcrats on the committee, said. ... The president has not sent us a nominee that we've rejected already.
Schumer continued, There's hope that Harriet Miers is a mainstream nominee. ... Given the fact that the extreme wing of the president's party was demanding someone of fealty to their views, this is a good first day in the process that begins to fill the seat of Sandra Day O'Connor.
Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, another Democratic committee member and its only woman, said she was happy that a woman was nominated to replace the outgoing O'Connor but wanted to know more about Miers' views on privacy and other issues.
This new justice will be critical in the balance with respect to rulings on congressional authority, as well as a woman's right to privacy, environmental protections, and many other aspects of constitutional law in the United States, Feinstein said.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, was complimentary of Miers.
I like Harriet Miers, Reid said in a statement. As White House counsel, she has worked with me in a courteous and professional manner. I am also impressed with the fact that she was a trailblazer for women as managing partner of a major Dallas law firm and as the first woman president of the Texas Bar Association.
Pivotal replacement
The choice to replace O'Connor, a key swing vote, could be pivotal. ( Full story)
The announcement came shortly before justices were to begin a new term with new Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, who is the youngest member of the high court.
The term is expected to include rulings on several controversial cases, said Edward Lazarus, a Supreme Court legal analyst. ( Case list)
This is a situation where, from the very moment the justices start back up in October, they're going to be very divided, said Lazarus, who authored Closed Chambers, a book on the justices. It's going to be a lot of friction inside the building.
O'Connor announced her retirement in July. Bush initially chose Roberts for her seat, but the September 3 death of Chief Justice William Rehnquist changed the White House's strategy.
O'Connor has said she will stay on until she is replaced, making her role in the upcoming term unclear. Under court rules, a justice's vote does not count until a ruling is issued, a process that can take weeks or months.
Many legal scholars question whether O'Connor would want to continue hearing cases if her replacement takes over before rulings are issued, thereby negating her vote.
CNN's Dana Bash contributed to this report. |
|
|
|
|
|
Find this article at:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/10/03/scotus.miers |
Correction!
I copied the wrong link. THIS is the link that includes the clip of him saying what he denied saying. Sorry!
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/11/10.html#a5796
correction, *believe OR think* and *put this out there for you to THINK about.* sm
Excuse my misspellings, I'm typing too fast.
Correction
Yet, he goes on business as usual Iraq speeches, guitar playing, and everything *under the sun in response to Katrina* and not until he is criticized that he shows up for photo ops. In my mind this is criminal as well.
Correction.
Re: #4 and #22. Commas where inserted where numbers should appear. Total = 54.
Correction: Don't come here looking for you.
nm
correction
George HW Bush IV is the global head of investment management for now-bankrupt Lehman Brothers, not ML. Got my bankrupt companies mixed up...
Correction to above
I did find the US Code on another site. I don't know why it won't pull up on the US Code search. However, the fact is that the whole issue in the original post was regarding Obama's appearance on "Meet the Press" September 7, 2008. He has not been on there in months and the supposed author of the article does not appear to be a real person, certainly not a writer for The Washington Post, or googling his name would have pulled up an abundance of articles he had written.
Correction.
I wrote previously that you responded to my response to GP. I see now that you responded to my response to Chele.
I'm still confused by "OP," though.
Correction.
I accidentally posted the wrong link above the Norwegian MD video. It should be as it appears below. I am posting the warning again in case anyone views this without having read my other post.
WARNING. These videos are extremely graphic and quite disturbing. If you are faint at heart, have just eaten or if there are children in the room, DO NOT VIEW THESE ACCOUNTS. However, if you are interested in an unsanitized report of this conflict as seen by everybody else outside the US, take a deep breath and a long, hard look at our tax dollars at work.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ev6ojm62qwA
Norweigian MD says he has only treated ONE Hamas military among the other hundreds of injured and dead.
Correction...(sm)
Here's what you said:
*Like it or not nations are formed through civil war. There are winners and there are losers. It's really very simple. The process has not changed for centuries and it will never change. The strong prevail. The righteous prevail. The minute we take a liberal viewpoint, that's the exact minute we become weak. *
So, the question I had was whether or not you thought Hitler was righteous, since he did prevail. (notice the lack of the word Jews in your statement above).
And yes, I did bring Hitler into the conversation. He systematically tied to wipe out a group of people, which is exactly what Israel is doing right now.
*there is a very fine line between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism, a line that was very clearly crossed when just the big bag posted her Hitler remark, a line many have crossed in this discussion by likening the Gaza Strip to a concentration camp. When you say these things you have become an anti-Semitic.*
And that should mean what to me? If Israel's actions right now are indicative of Jews in general, then please by all means, call me an anti-semitic.
However, to me this really has nothing to do with Jews in general. It has everything to do with a government (Israel's) that is simply in the wrong.
How many schools have they bombed now?
Correction...(sm)
Clinton tried to kill Osama and failed. He then passed all information on to Bush, who simply ignored it for 9 months.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L2513JFJsY
Correction, I should have said
middle school.
Correction...(sm)
*do not have TVs* should have been -- do not have compatible TVs
Correction...
guy singing with his friends...and freecreditreport.com.
Correction.....(sm)
Technically, we are not in a war.
correction
it is not just republicans. there is hate on both sides.
Correction.....(sm)
It's not that we can't talk to Iranian leaders, it's that we haven't been able to talk to them in the past. You're right that the supreme leader pretty much controls everything; however, I think with what is going on right now, it's not just the president who is in jeopardy, but also the supreme leader. I don't know if you caught any interviews of Moosavi backers before the election, but they were saying what they wanted was to be more in tune with the rest of the world. They are tired of being cut off financially and socially from everyone else. If the people of Iran get their way with this election (which is iffy at best), then perhaps we could wind up with someone we could talk to.
The thing about the US getting involved is that it has to be because we were invited. If they ask for help, then I would help them. If they don't ask for help, then if we did butt in, it would again to them look like we are trying to control their govt, which is about the last thing we need right now.
correction: 90 %...................nm
nm
Correction, Roe, not *Rowe*
//
Correction - This..."If you are not with me, you are against me."
is Bush's motto.
Correction -- *College* (nm)
//
Correction...about 22 debates....nm
Correction, that should be Indonesian man by
Lolo Soetoro, M.A., an Indonesian citizen.
Slight correction
His exact words, "we can change the world." From where I sit the world could use a little improvement. It's amazing how changing 1 little word can change the whole meaning.
correction -- YOUR imagination.
nm
A correction to my post
Ok, now thinking about it I agree with Backwards typist and LA difference. I do believe in the death penalty for exactly the reasons they gave. When I first wrote I didn't believe in it I was thinking that I would not want an innocent person wrongly put to death. However, we do need the death penalty to deter others from doing heanous (sp?) crimes (even though it still is not enough of a deterrance for others. But I do agree that if someone takes the life, kidnap, rapes, or murders children and the innocent, those remnants of human debris do not deserve to live and sit in a jail, have a bed to sleep in, get to eat 3 meals a day, watch TV, lift weights, etc for the rest of their lives. I believe that if they are found guilty they should be brought to the back of a building, stand in front of a firing squad blindfolded and put an end to their miserable excuse of a life.
What got to me most about this post was your statement about gun control. Still does when I read it again. That actual audacity spoken about nobody needing more than a hunting rifle. As though you actually know what people need or don't need to protect themself. But then again, that is why I'm not a liberal. Not saying all liberals believe that way but most do, and most of them will be the first to enter your home and remove your guns if they had their way.
The constitution may be slowly being eroded away, but luckily nobody had taken away the second ammendment.
Correction. 2928.
Guess you still haven't thought over that obstacle the GOP has to overcome, lest they cancel themselves out of 2012.
Correction. 2928.
x
correction to my post
Tonight I heard on the news there were around 700,000 people who participated. Last night I heard it was around a million. Tonight I heard it was around 700,000.
But does not change that this was a huge grass roots movement and I hope to be seeing more peaceful protests like this one.
Correction - see message
I meant "not" based on color, size, sex, or religion.
and, I meant husband "can" see marriage should be allowed for all.
Correction, he is called DUBYA sm.
His nick name is "Dubya" not shrub. I saw a post on here the other day actually wishing him, "Happy Birthday, Mr. President". Do some of you people actually think Dubya as incompetent as he is, comes on this board to see your high school fantasies?
Correction... *un* classified document.
Correction: I posted it because I know what Rush said
Clarifying the subject line. It's been a long day.
Correction: Ring any bells?
x
Correction - .he's a completely inexperienced
!!
Slight correction on your post.
He did say "I will change the world" at some of his earlier rallies. He changed it to say "We will change the world" just last week. FYI, I've been watching all the rallies for both sides. Just wish I could hear more of Biden.
correction - I don't think it is a bigger problem than it has always been -
I needed to correct my statement. I do think it is a problem that people do not vote on the issues, just do not think it is a new problem. Just brought out more prominently this time because Obama is black.
Lets all get our correction tape out......nm
X
Correction. 2929 days.
Let's keep it real.
correction to above, http://kathleensings.com/
xx
correction: not liberal on all issues, but
definitely not conservative, somewhere in between, like lots of people.
correction: Christian rights should NOT be trampled...I mean to say..nm
Correction...enough...really most days I know how to spell...sigh nm
nm
Correction of typo - "It" happened.
Correction. 2930 days until the 3rd Tue in 2017.
Let's be real. GOP chances of burying the Bush legacy, coming up with a 21st century platform and choosing a viable candidate by 2012, infinitesimal.
Correction. 2928 days. What excites me is
the idea that by the time another pub has a chance to sit on top, I'll be getting too senile to care anymore.
Torture memos update/correction...(sm)
First, please note that I never said that pics would be released in the OP, only redacted portions of the memos. (Presumably testimonies of the prisoners) The previous thread about this turned into a debate about releasing pics, and I erroneously didn't catch and correct that. My bad.
Update:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#31334053
Correction: The cost to cover Montana kids.
.
|
