• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Did Christian conservatives receive assurances that Miers would oppose Roe v. Wade?

Madacapa

New member
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Messages
45
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
I read this article on the Wall Street Journal web site. I copied the title of the article for this title. Here is the link:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110007415

What I read assured me that the Bush Administration is a neo-theocracy. He had his "hit-man" Karl Rove call this cabal of 13 to let them know that Miers was one of them. Isn't anyone out there bothered by this? Do the citizens of the Red States want a theocracy? Miers will vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, before she has seen the case. Stop voting for right wing idiots like Bush. STOP IT!
 

tryreading

Steve
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 8, 2005
Messages
4,809
Reaction score
764
Location
Central Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Madacapa said:
I read this article on the Wall Street Journal web site. I copied the title of the article for this title. Here is the link:

http://www.opinionjournal.com/diary/?id=110007415

What I read assured me that the Bush Administration is a neo-theocracy. He had his "hit-man" Karl Rove call this cabal of 13 to let them know that Miers was one of them. Isn't anyone out there bothered by this? Do the citizens of the Red States want a theocracy? Miers will vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, before she has seen the case. Stop voting for right wing idiots like Bush. STOP IT!
This is a transcript of the radio interview with James Dobson about the Karl Rove meeting in case you haven't seen it yet.

http://www.family.org/welcome/press/a0038214.cfm
 
Last edited:

Madacapa

New member
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Messages
45
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Yes, Tryreading, it was very enlightening reading that. It amazes me that a majority of Americans voted for Mr. Bush in 2004. Rove has used religion to divide America just to get Bush reelected. Thomas Jefferson assued us in that letter that there was a separation of church and state in the constitution. The Bush Administration does not see it that way. They need to get the approval of this religious cabal of 13 organizations before announcing to everyone else their Supreme Court nominee. Apparently the Religious Right wants the USA to model itself after Iran. They have a president, but he answers to the religious leaders of that country. That is what the Religious Right wants in this country.

Think about it and everyone should read the transcript.
 

aquapub

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 16, 2005
Messages
7,317
Reaction score
344
Location
America (A.K.A., a red state)
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
She unequivocally has anti-abortion views (+). She is pro-business, which means she is anti-labor union (+), and pro-free enterprise (+). She didn't go to an elite school like Harvard (+), which means she likely got something vaguely resembling an objective (instead of left-wing) education.


The only down side to this woman that I can see with the available information is that she managed to have these views and still contribute to the campaign of such a stooge like Al Gore.


And, as far as her qualifications go, around 40% of all Supreme Court justices have been lawyers with no judicial experience. (All a judge is is a promoted lawyer).
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,320
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Re: Did Christian conservatives receive assurances that Miers would oppose Roe v. Wad

aquapub said:
She unequivocally has anti-abortion views (+). She is pro-business, which means she is anti-labor union (+), and pro-free enterprise (+). She didn't go to an elite school like Harvard (+), which means she likely got something vaguely resembling an objective (instead of left-wing) education.
The point isn't her views. The point is that since everyone knows them (and in many cases are basing their support/opposition on them), there is no way she can be objective on the cases that come before her. Also, the mere fact that she worked directly for the White House (often a participant in SCOTUS cases) means that she can't be objective on those cases.

Stephen Breyer recuses himself for any case where his brother (a district court judge) made a ruling. Clarence Thomas recused himself during a case involving a school that his son formerly attended. Sandra Day O'Connor often recuses herself from cases involving corporations she has invested money in. Will Harriet Miers be recusing herself every time the Bush Administration comes before the SCOTUS? If so, she's only a part-time judge and therefore isn't qualified. If not, she isn't objective and therefore isn't qualified.

aquapub said:
And, as far as her qualifications go, around 40% of all Supreme Court justices have been lawyers with no judicial experience. (All a judge is is a promoted lawyer).
Other justices generally have had other impressive qualifications to make up for their lack of judicial experience. Harriet Miers has very little on her resume to suggest she's qualified for this position, and she reportedly hasn't even thought about constitutional issues since law school.
 
Last edited:

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
The only down side to this woman that I can see with the available information is that she managed to have these views and still contribute to the campaign of such a stooge like Al Gore.
I believe that contribution was yo ALgore in 1988 when he was still pro life and relatively conservative until he did a 180 and turned liberal in 2000 to placate his left wing base........

There were very few Republicans in power in Texas in 1988 and a lot of the democrats in power were conservative ao that explains why she allied with them.....

Listening to the left you would think that it would be a disqualifier for her because she is pro life........

I am very excited about her nomination and think she will be confirmed easily and that should be the first step in overturning the murderous law that kills innocent, defenseless babies in the womb and reverts the abortion issue back to the states where it belongs..........
 

tryreading

Steve
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 8, 2005
Messages
4,809
Reaction score
764
Location
Central Florida
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Madacapa said:
Thomas Jefferson assued us in that letter that there was a separation of church and state in the constitution. The Bush Administration does not see it that way. They need to get the approval of this religious cabal of 13 organizations before announcing to everyone else their Supreme Court nominee. Apparently the Religious Right wants the USA to model itself after Iran. They have a president, but he answers to the religious leaders of that country. That is what the Religious Right wants in this country.
There is another problem that I haven't heard anybody bring up.

In Florida, we have legislation called 'Sunshine Laws'. All lawmaking must be conducted with the awareness of the Florida public through open sessions, televised sessions, etc. Private meetings between legislators that result in an agreement on future state business or legislation are illegal.

Since before this nomination was made public, there was at least one top secret meeting between Karl Rove and Dr. James Dobson. Dr James Dobson then conducted a conference call which, if the Wall Street Journal story is true, included the participation of a Texas Supreme Court Justice and a Dallas based Federal Justice, who both said Miers would vote to overturn Roe v Wade.

This will all be brought into the open during the hearings, thankfully. But we need to be alert to the fact that anything that can be hidden from us will be. The press is not perfect. Right now, they are driving me crazy about this Hurricane Wilma hitting Florida that may not even hit Florida. But they are the only watchdog we have.
 

Madacapa

New member
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Messages
45
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
aquapub said:
She unequivocally has anti-abortion views (+). She is pro-business, which means she is anti-labor union (+), and pro-free enterprise (+). She didn't go to an elite school like Harvard (+), which means she likely got something vaguely resembling an objective (instead of left-wing) education.


The only down side to this woman that I can see with the available information is that she managed to have these views and still contribute to the campaign of such a stooge like Al Gore.


And, as far as her qualifications go, around 40% of all Supreme Court justices have been lawyers with no judicial experience. (All a judge is is a promoted lawyer).
By pro business you mean she is in favor of exporting American jobs to other countries. By anti-labor you mean she is favor of getting rid of the 40 hour work week, overtime, and the minimum wage. By anti-abortion, you mean over turning Roe v. Wade, which will turn it back to the States, which would divide this country between Red and Blue (and it would only help the Democrats). I hope she is confirmed.
 

Madacapa

New member
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Messages
45
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Navy Pride said:
I believe that contribution was yo ALgore in 1988 when he was still pro life and relatively conservative until he did a 180 and turned liberal in 2000 to placate his left wing base........

There were very few Republicans in power in Texas in 1988 and a lot of the democrats in power were conservative ao that explains why she allied with them.....

Listening to the left you would think that it would be a disqualifier for her because she is pro life........

I am very excited about her nomination and think she will be confirmed easily and that should be the first step in overturning the murderous law that kills innocent, defenseless babies in the womb and reverts the abortion issue back to the states where it belongs..........
Oh, I hope that happens Navy Pride. It will show to this country the difference between the Red and Blue States. Are you going to prevent women from leaving a Red state to travel to a Blue state for an abortion? Are you going to prevent the sale of RU-486 in the Red States? Will the Red States be forced to open packages from Blue States that may contain RU-486 pills? Personally, I hope that happens, because the Democrats can blame the Republicans for all the chaos, and it will insure generations of pro-choice Democratic presidents. Thank you!
 
Top Bottom