Bush nominates a WOMAN for the court

[Hmm]

All I have to say is amen Celumnaz, amen.

\/ well I guess not all I have to say \/

Edited October 13, 2005 by Hmm

[Hmm]

Kinda of like how he appointed Mr.Brown as FEMA director even though he had no experience in that field. She seems like a good person but Fluffy bunny is right appointing someone as a Supreme Court Judge of the country when she's never even been a judge doesnt seem like a very logical decision. Would you want a med school student performing brain surgery on you without any experience. If she does get elected I hope she is a strong enough women to make her own decisions and not get influenced by others. I am glad he picked another women though they need at least 1 female POV in the court.

There have been many supreme court judges that were not judges prior to being appointed. The late Cheif Justice Rehnquist was not a judge prior to being appointed.

That said I don't support her. There are many many more options, women included, that have a real track record for conservative constitutionalist ideals who I'd feel better about.

[Mekorig]

Not to mention he accelerated moral decay in society,

Since when you have "the moral authority", mister Reverend Father?

[Babs]

Kinda of like how he appointed Mr.Brown as FEMA director even though he had no experience in that field. She seems like a good person but Fluffy bunny is right appointing someone as a Supreme Court Judge of the country when she's never even been a judge doesnt seem like a very logical decision. Would you want a med school student performing brain surgery on you without any experience. If she does get elected I hope she is a strong enough women to make her own decisions and not get influenced by others. I am glad he picked another women though they need at least 1 female POV in the court.

What you wrote struck me. You said, "I am glad he picked another woman though they need at least 1 female POV in the court."

How fair is that? Why not as many women as men?

We are still a society that has a long way to go before women become equal. And, everybody including the gals on here, shout that's not true, women 'are' equal! Here is an example of your equality. Sad.

[Celumnaz]

Since when you have "the moral authority", mister Reverend Father?

Who said I did? This might start to dovetail with the post about that lady wearing F- Bush that got kicked off a plane...

How fair is that? Why not as many women as men?

That strikes me as sexist. What does gender have to do with it at all?

[Babs]

Go Miers! Go Miers! Yea, team!

Hillary will be the next president!.....or Condi Rice. Hey, sounds real good to me, can't lose either way. Women Women Women!!!!!!!

Yes, America needs a woman.

Edited October 17, 2005 by Babs

[Babs]

That strikes me as sexist. What does gender have to do with it at all?

Sexist= all men and one woman, or no woman at all.

Edited October 17, 2005 by Babs

[wunarmdscissor]

Hillary will be the next president!.....or Condi Rice. Hey, sounds real good to me, can't lose either way. Women Women Women!!!!!!!

so even tho theyre politics are polar opposites you dont care as long as theyre female. hmm

[Celumnaz]

Sexist= all men and one woman, or no woman at all.

You're still being sexist.

so even tho theyre politics are polar opposites you dont care as long as theyre female. hmm

and people like this make my vote null and void. I mean, I might as well be a sexist and vote for a man, any man, because he's a man.

It's insane. If a woman was running on the platform "all women should be barefoot and pregnant stay at home moms and not argue with the other wives" Babs would probably vote for her just because she's a woman...

[twpdyp]

Babs Posted Yesterday, 08:43 PM

Hillary will be the next president!.....or Condi Rice. Hey, sounds real good to me, can't lose either way. Women Women Women!!!!!!!

Before I will even acknowledge that Hillary Clinton is a woman I would have to see some form of proof. Just because she has breasts does not make her a good candidate for the highest office in the land. Your gender should never open doors for you nor should your race, or religion. The person you are inside should be the deciding factor in your life.

[Hmm]

I'm sure you all know that there is still a woman on the Court. O'Connor wasn't the only one. There is also Ginsburg. So all this talk about the need for a woman on the Supreme Court isn't just sexist affirmative action, it is also misinformed.

[Babs]

You're still being sexist.

and people like this make my vote null and void. I mean, I might as well be a sexist and vote for a man, any man, because he's a man.

It's insane. If a woman was running on the platform "all women should be barefoot and pregnant stay at home moms and not argue with the other wives" Babs would probably vote for her just because she's a woman...

No, I wouldn't. You guys just don't get it.

[metacast]

That's opinion disguised behind the word "fact". The fact is, he didn't, no matter how much Bush haters want it to be true or how often they repeat the lie that he lied it doesn't make it true.

We want to be in the strongest position... just in case... if history has taught anything...

Is laughable. Seriously. Laughable.

he manipulated public opinion to support his cause. He will continue to do so. He might be right in the end. But i hate to see the collective people of america not have any say and be tap danced on. thats all.

with that mindset, war is unavoidable. the things important to us, family will die. Humanity will suffer huge loss for political dominance.

[Babs]

Meirs will have surprises, like I said before, for all of us. I heard she is for equal pay for women! ...but for a ban on abortion unless the mother's life is at stake.

That means RAPE doesn't matter, girls.

....OR FORCED SEX and pregnacy in marriage. There goes 'your control' of your own body, ladies. So many married women struggle with this stuff everyday. (They can't control the husband: he controls her through strength and sex)....so many forced pregnacies and now the government wants to take complete control out of the woman's hands.

.....sad. Sad for the ladies.

P.S.....What would Ms. Meirs know about men and marriage (or pregnacy); she has been single all her life.

Edited October 19, 2005 by Babs

[wunarmdscissor]

but shes a woman so she must be right , about everything.

[Babs]

but shes a woman so she must be right , about everything.

No, of course not.

..... This is a little off-topic, but "TAKE THE BIG ONE".

If you took a dump, now and then, you might stop dumpin' on me!

[Babs]

I guess what Miers does for equal pay in the work force for women won't matter much....Or not a whole lot of women will be able to take advantage of it, because they will be bare foot and pregnant most of the time.

[Babs]

An update on Miers.

here

You can go into CNN and get a biography on Miers too. You know, I was looking at it and the fact that she is single and without children will be a plus for the job, as she will work indefatiqably for the court. And, of course, this will have a positive effect for women on the equal pay issue, as she has been a career woman all her life and that is where her sympathies lie. But then, the fact that she has been single and without children all her life makes her a poor candidate for comprehending womens' plight. And.... judging, those laws, that women desperately need.

Edited October 25, 2005 by Babs

[Fluffybunny]

I guess what Miers does for equal pay in the work force for women won't matter much....Or not a whole lot of women will be able to take advantage of it, because they will be bare foot and pregnant most of the time.

So women do not have the ability to take birth control? That comment seems a bit melodramatic.

The "choices" that women have in regards to birth control go a bit further than just abortions. What happens before the conception should be considered part of the "Pro Choice" agenda too.

After working in a city that has more than its fair share of single moms who made a conscious decision to have a baby without any plans for caring for a baby and ending up living off of my taxes, and another unhealthy portion of young girls that are having sex without concerns for the results and using abortion as their own form of birth control, I get the feeling that the "choice" that women have should be thought of outside the scope of abortion.

So what is the opinion of your dear leader in regards to abortion?

[Babs]

So women do not have the ability to take birth control? That comment seems a bit melodramatic.

The "choices" that women have in regards to birth control go a bit further than just abortions. What happens before the conception should be considered part of the "Pro Choice" agenda too.

After working in a city that has more than its fair share of single moms who made a conscious decision to have a baby without any plans for caring for a baby and ending up living off of my taxes, and another unhealthy portion of young girls that are having sex without concerns for the results and using abortion as their own form of birth control, I get the feeling that the "choice" that women have should be thought of outside the scope of abortion.

So what is the opinion of your dear leader in regards to abortion?

Some of what you say is true. Hey, life is screwed up in all areas, fluffybunny... (even in your neck of the woods). The problem with just giving women a choice with contraceptives assumes she is in control of her sex life. And as you know, I have stated again and again, that many women don't have control of the sexual act --they don't have control of when they have sex or if they can even take contraception at the time of sex. Many women, unfortunately, are dominated by their boyfriends and husbands...not to mention incestuous family relationships and not so distant relatives and can be forced into sex by strangers (sexual assault and rape). But as you say there are these other problems with women doing the things you have stated. But if we stop their activities with a ban on abortion, we destroy all the many women that are in desperate need of an abortion --of a choice to own their own bodies and have a life. Many women don't have lives, literally don't have lives, because their reproduction rights have been taken from them. Because of the male in their lives, having total control over them and their bodies. And, now, if the government wants to take away this basic right to choose, they will be left with desperation and back-alley abortions, claiming the lives of millions of women.

So I guess you would like to take the 'right to choose' away from a few... in so doing, punish the rest of womankind?

[Babs]

I'd like to add: there are always people that abuse a privilege, a rule or a law... that doesn't mean you scrap the rules or laws --that would hurt the rest of humanity. The women, you speak of, need to learn responsibility and self-discipline and, of course, they have other problems. This is a mental health issue. We need to get these gals help and need to put energy and money into the mental health area, NOT take away rights.

[Celumnaz]

The "choices" that women have in regards to birth control go a bit further than just abortions. What happens before the conception should be considered part of the "Pro Choice" agenda too.

After working in a city that has more than its fair share of single moms who made a conscious decision to have a baby without any plans for caring for a baby and ending up living off of my taxes, and another unhealthy portion of young girls that are having sex without concerns for the results and using abortion as their own form of birth control, I get the feeling that the "choice" that women have should be thought of outside the scope of abortion.

Many women, unfortunately, are dominated by their boyfriends and husbands...not to mention incestuous family relationships and not so distant relatives and can be forced into sex by strangers (sexual assault and rape).

Sounds like getting an abortion is the least of her problems. Actually, sounds like abortion would allow that behaviour to continue, perpetuating it. Abortion isn't the solution to criminal problems. Got her pregnant? Send her off for another abortion. Case by case you've got to get to the Criminal or she'll just wind up pregnant again. I'm Not Against Abortion. I just think it should be emergency situations, last possible option, not the First choice.

Condom? nah. Diaphram? nah. Should I take the pill? nah. How about just plain not having sex? nah. Lets kill a baby, yeah, that's how I'll do it, sounds fun. I didn't want a kid with blue eyes anyway. She's gonna have a cleft pallet, lets not give her a chance to live because it would be an inconvienince for me, I'm supposed to be a socialite!

And if it matters, if you've never talked to a guy that's been raped by women, twice...

Hello.

Just so I don't hear that I don't know what it's like to be held down, clothes ripped off, and have something done to me against my will. I don't think that's the Majority of cases where abortion is needed.

If a husband or father is raping a family member he needs to go to jail, abortion in my opinion can be done just fine in those cases but it'll just happen again if the man can just send the woman to get "fixed" so he can do it again, and again, and again. And then there's the whole parental concent thing, 14 yr old sally having sex with 16 yr. old rick gets pregnant, screws up her studies, has an abortion and mom asks her every day how things are and has no clue how much her daughter is screwing up her life... stupid "planned parenthood". And then we wonder why our society is screwed up, little things like this add up with so many other variables to create a big problem positioned as something "only gov't can fix".

[Babs]

Miers steps down. Now who!

Celumnaz, it would be wonderful if you were president, you could fix all those nasty and evil men that commit most of crime. Almost all crime against women is perpetrated by a man. By men, Celumnaz!

And, yes, I do indeed know about men who are raped by women, and there are not many of them! And the fear is not there. It is less devastating for a man to be raped by a woman because it isn't a bigger stronger person raping you_ that you are naturally terrified by, that you could lose your life by. Can you see how a man wouldn't be terrified of losing his life or beaten up or tortured by a woman (while she was raping him?)....or just the terrifying psychological trauma and damage a man wreaks upon a woman that lasts most of her lifetime, the man wouldn't experience this. I'll put it this way so you can identify: "What if there was a third sex, bigger and stronger than you, always after you, raping, beating, and killing you??"

And, fluffy, you say, I am being a little melodramatic? I dare say, to fluffybunny, I am.

Celumnaz, you really did address the problem here: 'men committing crimes against the female'. MEN haven't stopped MEN from committing crimes against women, so women need abortion rights.

Edited October 27, 2005 by Babs

[Talon]

Miers debacle hits struggling president

By Matthew Davis

BBC News, Washington

President Bush has suffered one of the biggest embarrassments of his presidency at a time when he faces a mountain of other problems.

Harriet Miers' lack of experience as a judge and allegations that she was not conservative enough had led to growing criticism of Mr Bush's Supreme Court choice, most notably from right-wing Republicans.

It had been clear for weeks that the nomination was in trouble; groups had been lobbying hard against her, allegations of cronyism were biting, meetings on Capitol Hill had gone badly.

Yet the timing of Ms Miers' withdrawal caught observers by surprise, coming at a time when all eyes were on impending developments in a CIA leak scandal that threatens to engulf two senior Bush administration aides.

Democrats have not had to lift a finger to create the turmoil that now surrounds the Bush presidency.

Ms Miers' decision to step aside is being seen as an attempt to save face, amid the realisation that support for her candidacy simply was not there - even from the president's conservative base.

'No paper trail'

In a letter to the president, Ms Miers said she was concerned about senators' plans to seek documents from her service as legal counsel to Mr Bush, in order to gain insights into her judicial philosophy.

MIERS' CAREER PATH

1985: First female president of the Dallas Bar Association

1992: First woman to head the Texas State Bar

1995-2000: Chairwoman of the Texas Lottery Commission

2001: Joins White House staff as president's staff secretary

2003: Appointed Deputy Chief of Staff

2004: Named White House counsel

Mr Bush agreed that publication of such internal documents would undermine a president's ability to receive candid advice and "reluctantly" accepted her decision.

Ever since Ms Miers' nomination was announced, Republicans looking forward to supporting a tough-minded social conservative with an anti-abortion, anti-gay rights track record had felt betrayed, according to some observers.

As Eugene Robinson of the Washington Post told the BBC earlier this month, the lack of hard evidence of her positions on issues like abortion, capital punishment and gay rights helped undermine her candidacy.

"The conservative base said, OK well we can take [John] Roberts, he's bright, we can tell he is conservative," Robinson said.

"Then to come up with Harriet Miers, the fact is that we don't know where she stands, she is not identified with any particular philosophy, she has left no paper trail."

'Defining moment'

Harriet Miers was a very personal choice by the president. She has been a close member of his staff for many years, and her withdrawal will be seen as a personal blow to Mr Bush.

Coupled with the flagging support for the war on Iraq and the record lows in Mr Bush's personal approval ratings, some are viewing this setback as a "defining moment" for the president.

Political commentators have suggested that his presidency has been weakened, and that he can expect challenges on future controversial measures.

Yet the withdrawal provides Mr Bush with an opportunity - and a problem.

If he nominates a strong conservative with a judicial track record, to help mend fences within his party, he risks all-out war with the Democrats.

But if he fails to pull Republicans back together, Mr Bush may hasten the eventual fate of all second-term presidents - becoming a lame duck leader.

Story from BBC NEWS:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/worl...cas/4382464.stm

[Babs]

Yeah, Bush is suffering for the Katrina hurricane response. Things went down hill after that. It wasn't the Iraq war as this article states, but the out and out lack of response for hurricane Katrina. It left a bad taste in our mouths. I don't think, as I said after the hurricane, that the Bush administration can come back. After what seemed so long a delay in getting help to those poor people. (Many people, myself included, thought because we are stretched so thin with our soldiers in Iraq, that the military didn't have enough soldiers to rescue the hurricane survivors.)

This article is spot on about Bush's position right now...he's 'dammed if he does and dammed if he doesn't'. And what a fight it will be if he picks some stiff, stuffed conservative!

Edited October 30, 2005 by Babs