| Welcome to Campfire Soapbox. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Laura Bush, Sexism, And Liberal Left-wingers | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Oct 12 2005, 04:57 AM (121 Views) | |
| cmoehle | Oct 12 2005, 04:57 AM Post #1 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
Laura has said some Miers critics may be motivated by sexism. A Bush adviser, Ed Gillespie, raised the sexism issue in a private meeting last week. Neocon William Kristol says Laura suggestion is "obviously ridiculous" and indicative of a flailing White House strategy. "It is striking to me they are spending less time explaining the merits of Harriet Miers and more time . . . using liberal talking points to criticize the critics," he said. "I think it is going to backfire." Fiscal conservative Jonah Goldberg says her sexism charge "is horribly disappointing and the sort of thing I normally expect from left-wingers." (sources) This raises some interesting questions. Is Laura right? Is some of the right-wing criticism motivated by sexism? Or are George and Laura liberal left-wingers? Or has the epithet taken on new meaning? Or should Laura just shut up and like a good wife keep her place behind George? |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| corky52 | Oct 12 2005, 05:05 AM Post #2 |
|
Member
|
Lack of valid reasons for support of the candidate? Emotional appeal? |
![]() |
|
| roz | Oct 12 2005, 05:42 AM Post #3 |
|
Roz - Texas
|
Criticism of Miers has nothing to do with sexism and everything to do with competence..............just this Left Winger's opinion |
![]() |
|
| cmoehle | Oct 12 2005, 11:23 AM Post #4 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
In what ways is she incompetent? |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| 5thwheeler | Oct 12 2005, 12:34 PM Post #5 |
|
Get the message?
|
Lets start with the fact that she never was a Judge, but that being said, not one first term president was ever president.
|
|
History 101: When a popular myth is believed to be factual, teach the myth. Its not possible to underestimate the intelligence of the voting populous. Hummm, after seeing the results of the 06 election, I may have to modify my perception of the voting populous and refer to them as "Late Bloomers".
| |
![]() |
|
| MDPD6320 | Oct 12 2005, 01:58 PM Post #6 |
![]()
Frank - Gainesville, Florida
|
The fact she has a limited history available for examination, is part of the problem. Un-educated perceptions that all supreme court justice have to have been judges prior to their supreme court appointments are another problem. (Just not true as many including Earl Warren were never judges, and others weren't even lawyers) Disappointment on the right than someone with more conservative credentials wasn't choosen yet another. I wasn't happy about her nomination, but I would like to hear her before the committee, and even better I would like to hear the questions asked because they will be more revealing than her answers. |
|
" The government big enough to give you everything you want it is big enough to take everything you have." "Extremism in the pursuit of liberty is no vice, and moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue" All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. | |
![]() |
|
| roz | Oct 12 2005, 02:25 PM Post #7 |
|
Roz - Texas
|
Miers may be competent as Bush's personal lawyer but not for the SC. She has no experience as a judge (of ANY kind). Bush's defense of his nomination is "Trust Me". "Trust Me" from Bush won't cut it. Just the fact that she is close to Bush and has been his attorney for 20 years makes her a poor choice. There should be a separation of powers there, alto I'm aware that "should be" with this administration means nothing. It just seems to me that her main qualification is that she is a Bush insider and her nomination is nothing more than Bush stacking SC for the far right and his agenda. She lacks the professional qualifications for SC. Just another Bush crony.... |
![]() |
|
| cmoehle | Oct 12 2005, 06:16 PM Post #8 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
roz, having been a judge is not a qualification, as Frank points out, many a great Supreme Court Justice was neither judge nor lawyer prior to sitting on the bench. The "Trust me" is to the socio- and theo-cons. Most presidents nominate those close enough to them to know their judicual philosophy. Sometimes that turns out to be a mistake like LBJ nominating his buddy Fortas. Her having worked long with Bush is not a disqualification. I think you judge her on the merit of pundits and partisans. |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| tomdrobin | Oct 12 2005, 09:40 PM Post #9 |
|
Member
|
I think the sexism comment was inappropriate. May have been a political ploy to shame the opposition, but I don't think anyone takes it seriously. It seems to me the right and left wingers who would have SC justices in their corner are complaining the loudest. I think she will be a minimalist (per previous survey thread), and that IMO is a good thing. |
![]() |
|
| campingken | Oct 13 2005, 12:37 PM Post #10 |
|
Member
|
Anybody who says that Bush is the smartest man she ever met doesn't get out much...... Ken |
![]() |
|
| 5thwheeler | Oct 13 2005, 01:00 PM Post #11 |
|
Get the message?
|
Good point! Sounds like she is just kissing the bosses ass. Maybe she's just like Monica Lewinsky and would do or say anything to keep her job. Just what we need on the SC. |
|
History 101: When a popular myth is believed to be factual, teach the myth. Its not possible to underestimate the intelligence of the voting populous. Hummm, after seeing the results of the 06 election, I may have to modify my perception of the voting populous and refer to them as "Late Bloomers".
| |
![]() |
|
| cmoehle | Oct 14 2005, 03:56 AM Post #12 |
|
Chris - San Antonio TX
|
TOm, Peggy Noonan says similar in Fasten Your Beltway: It's going to be a bumpy ride.:
It was a mistake she argues:
She offers some solutions:
Problem is Bush is not known to admit his mistakes. Republican stalwarts have always admired this, now they will find fault with it. |
|
Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater | |
![]() |
|
| roscoe | Oct 14 2005, 12:04 PM Post #13 |
|
Member
|
Sounds like the old sinking ship trick. These Bozo's want to get re-elected and their captain is watering his palm plant too much. |
![]() |
|
| bikemanb | Oct 14 2005, 08:26 PM Post #14 |
|
Liberal Conservative
|
These are the politicians that are morally superior to those Democrats who wold do anything to stay in office, could not possibly be true. For the record, I have disdain for most Reps and Dems that fall into the professional politicians classification. |
|
Bill, Rita and Chloe the Terror Cat For having lived long, I have experienced many instances of being obliged, by better information or fuller consideration, to change opinions, even on important subjects, which I once thought right but found to be otherwise. Benjamin Franklin | |
![]() |
|
| « Previous Topic · Soapbox · Next Topic » |








10:38 AM Jul 13